How I Will Spend My Summer Vacation - 615 Words

How I will Spend My Summer Vacation There is an old proverb that goes, all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. I agree. For me, the summer vacation will provide me with a rare opportunity to take a well-deserved rest after a year of hard work. Last summer, I chose to engage in activities that would help me relax my mind and recoup not only my health but also my vitality. This summer will be no different. Towards this end, I plan to tour a number of amazing locations, read at least two interesting and/or informative books, and reflect on my accomplishments and failures so far. The relevance of visiting places or locations one has never visited before cannot be overstated. In addition to helping relax the mind, travelling also carries with it some educational value. This summer, I plan to visit two major locations. These include the Niagara Falls and the National Mall and Memorial Parks. It is important to note that I settled on these two major travel destinations after undertaking a laborious research on the key attractions on-site. The National Mall and Memorial Parks is an amazing place to visit. According to the National Park Foundation (2012), the National Mall is Americas front yard where the Washington Monument, WWII and Lincoln Memorials stand. I have to admit that part of my desire to visit the National Mall and Memorial Parks stems from the great respect I have for Abraham Lincoln. In that regard, the Lincoln Memorial remains one of the places I plan toShow MoreRelatedWhy Year Round School Is More Harm Than Good978 Words   |  4 PagesChildren N eed Summer Break Students look forward to getting out of school for summer. They count down the last few days until the bell rings on that last day and they are out for summer break. They get so excited to be able to go on vacations, spend more time reading, visiting family, and of course, sleeping in. Children also look forward to going back to school after summer break. They are so excited for the first day of class that they have to get all new school supplies. They wake up extraRead More Vacation In Myrtle Beach Essay examples958 Words   |  4 PagesLast summer my friends and I packed up and took a trip to Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The excitement of the strip and the relaxation of the beach allured me to this particular vacation spot. If you are looking for an entertaining and relaxing way to spend the hot days of summer, Myrtle Beach has plenty to offer. Myrtle Beach stretches up the coast of South Carolina and North Carolina. The drive takes approximately six hours from East Tennessee State University. Our trip during the summer madeRead MorePersonal Narrative : My Vacation Spots1209 Words   |  5 PagesTwo Vacation Spots Adventure! Everyone probably has an adventurous moment they will remember. When I explain my adventurous moment to friends, I never forget the scenarios that happen between 2010 and 2012. I visited two different cities in two different States during this time doing the same activity, carrying out the same fun experience from an internship, but had different results and likes. It was the summer of 2010 I had to visit Folly Beach, and then summer 2011 was Pensacola Beach, and nextRead MoreGraduation Speech : Year Round Schooling1478 Words   |  6 PagesYear-Round Schooling Why were schools traditionally set up to give students the summer off? When schools started, most of the students came from a farming family and they needed to be out of school to help on the farm. Many people know that there are not as many students coming from farming families today, so why do most schools still operate on this schedule? While some parents believe that year-round schooling decreases family time and causes student burn out, in reality, frequent breaks providedRead MoreUnderstanding My Communication Skills At My School840 Words   |  4 Pages Assignment 2 To better understand my communication skills, I conducted brief conversations with various employees at my school. Because school is out for the summer, I had to meet with a bus driver and cafeteria worker from another school that is currently having summer school. Each individual was asked the following questions: What do you like best about the summer vacation? Is this your favorite time of the year? Why or Why not? Here are the descriptions from each interaction.Read MoreReflection Paper805 Words   |  4 PagesLesson I learned from facing obstacles. It was 23rd april, 2016, When me and my family came to this country. In starting me and my family started living with my dad’s sister. In starting none of my family members knew anything about this country, but my aunt she has been in this country since past 30 years. The first thing that we did when we came was that we got me and my brother in school. After that my mom and dad got their driving permit, as driving and education is the first importantRead MoreDescriptive Essay On Family Vacations850 Words   |  4 PagesWhen I was little, we rented a houseboat for a family vacation. I was probably eighteen months old. Needless to say, I remember none of it. However, from that one vacation to Lake Powell, spurred so many others. Apparently, it was a blast. For the next ten years, our full family vacations were few and far between, after all, there were so many new cousins being born, new jobs being obtained, and kids starting school, we hardly had time to all get toget her for a week away. By the time I was maybeRead MoreDriving On An Open Road916 Words   |  4 Pagesare my favorite things about traveling; enjoying the journey, not just the destination. Growing up, my family did little traveling. As for our travels comprised of short road trips, lots of laughter, fun and adventure. We were not a privileged family, on the contrary, we were quite the opposite. Although we lacked in the financial department, I do not recall feeling like we did, on account of how much love exists in our family. As I grew older, I took notice of where my friends would spend theirRead MoreGraduation Speech - Original Writing991 Words   |  4 PagesI had been eagerly been anticipating this day ever since . The sun was beaming. A nice breeze was flowing. It was a good summer day. There was something different though. The second I came home from the bus, I flopped onto my bed and my eyelids instantly slid. It felt as if I had just rolled up a ball of all my stress and kicked it aside. I had just finished a laborious grade 8 and an exceedingly stressful last week of final exams. I couldn’t help but succumb to after countless days of sleeping lateRead MorePersonal Narrative : My Family, Life, And The Real World1231 Words   |  5 Pages5 years since I moved....Family. Life. Memories. It was a night filled with memories, experiences, and most of all, the word: family. A night where a new life will begin and most of all a night where I was depressed ; a year ‘till I will see my grandparents. I looked into their eyes for the final time, and boarded into the airplane. Everyone was crestfallen about this move; tears coming down their cheeks. I was young, thrilled for a new experience, yet to realize true meaning of family, life, and

The Legalization Of Marijuana Should Be Legal - 917 Words

The legalization of marijuana is one of the most talked about subjects in the news today. With millions of opinions on this certain topic I think the legalization of marijuana should not be allowed in America. Although some might disagree, marijuana is an unnecessary substance in life. With the legalization, it will affect millions of people between the ages of 1-100. Marijuana should be illegal in the United States because if legalized marijuana will lead to child use, addiction, and health problems. Legalizing marijuana will send a message to children saying drug use is acceptable. According to Claire McCarthy a MD pediatrician at Boston’s Children’s Hospital says, â€Å"marijuana use is remarkably common among youth in the U.S. According to the most recent surveys, about 1 in 5 high school students has used in the past month.† I think McCarthy is proving a point by showing survey results of how common it is for children to use marijuana. While most teens are a lready testing out marijuana, others are receiving messages saying it’s not a harmful drug, so why can’t we use it? Buddy T., a recovering alcoholic and alcoholic expert says, â€Å"the message teens are receiving was, ‘If it’s medicine, it must be okay.’ More recently, the message is, ‘If it’s legal it must be safe.’ † Buddy is saying that if marijuana is legalized children will get a clear message that says it’s perfectly fine to do things that aren’t meant for under aged adults. To sum up, teenagers will think usingShow MoreRelatedShould Marijuana Legalization Be Legal?1532 Words   |  7 PagesMarijuana Legalization Marijuana legalization is an issue that the United States is currently facing. Through all branches and aspects of government, the concept of marijuana legalization can be applied and understood. In order to better frame the policy issue, the policy should be viewed through different lenses and all aspects of government. In this essay, it will be shown how marijuana legalization truly incorporates all areas of government interest. First, the politics of marijuana legalizationRead MoreThe Legalization Of Marijuana Should Be Legal Essay1264 Words   |  6 PagesThe legalization of marijuana has been controversial topic throughout recent decades, however the legislature just appears to normally decrease. Marijuana is being utilized wrongfully by means of numerous Americans nowadays of any age. Some people concur with that the legalization of marijuana is best suitable for logical purposes. Supporters contend that it ll significantly benefit economically and it is not any more unsafe than cigarettes or liquor. Others encounter that marijuana is a portalRead MoreThe Legalization Of Marijuana Should Be Legal994 Words   |  4 PagesThe legalization of marijuana has been a very hot topic across Canada since the 2015 federal elections. This is because elected Liberal leader, Justin Trudeau has suggested the legalization, regulation and taxation of Marijuana. This essay will touch upon the Marxian explanation of why marijuana could be come legal, why the use of marijuana is seen as an illegal/legal activity from a Durkheimian perspective, and lastly how people view marijuana use and how they view the use of the law to regulateRead MoreThe Legalization Of Marijuana Should Not Be Legal1238 Words   |  5 PagesArthur Jackson Prof. O`keefe English Composition 30 march 2015 THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA No matter what side of this issue a persons beliefs land them on, there is definitely no denying the amount of money the states who have legalized are bringing in on tax revenue is truly astounding. Despite how you divide the money there will more than likely be enough to go around, seeing how Colorado is poised to rake in nearly $800 million in 2015. Can you imagine if our state had this kind of extraRead MoreThe Legalization Of Marijuana Should Be Legal Essay1767 Words   |  8 Pagesthat are not crimes.† This statement is still relevant in today’s society regarding the illegal use of marijuana. Citizens for the legalization and regulation of marijuana have proposed that legalization would reduce the profits of criminals, direct law enforcement dollars to more serious crimes and gain a new source of tax revenue (Government of Canada, 2016). People against legalizing marijuana argue that is not a harmless drug. They believe that legalizing it might encourage more people to useRead MoreLegalization Of Marijuana Should Be Legal930 Words   |  4 PagesSince the 1970’s, marijuana has increasingly taken the forefront as the next â€Å"socially harmless† drug of choice, akin to the likes of alcohol and tobacco. Many state legislatures have begun a decriminalization process, and in some cases, full legalization and regulation. Though the scope of the following research is not to discuss the differences in legislation, the broad spectrum between completely illegal and legal use of marijuana should be noted. Regulation varies greatly from incredibly restrictedRead MoreThe Legalization Of Marijuana Should Be Legal3190 Words   |  13 PagesStates the legalization of marijuana has been one of the most controversial topics around the country. It is controversial to many people because under federal law the drug â€Å"marijuana† is illegal. However due to the positive medical purposes of the drug, under state law marijuana is lega l in certain states either medically or recreationally. When you look back at this history of our country, we have been through many periods of growth, expansion, and prohibition. Topics such as the legalization of alcoholRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1449 Words   |  6 PagesSince the first efforts to legalize marijuana in the 1960s, Americans have become progressively more accepting of requests to liberalize laws restricting possession and use of marijuana, but the shift has not been a straight line. After 11 states decriminalized marijuana possession in the 1970s, recoil led by suburban parents led too much harsher implementation of drug laws. But since California legalized medical marijuana in 1996, outlooks toward the drug have relaxed significantly.(A Brief HistoryRead MoreThe Social Benefits of Legalization of Marijuana1459 Words   |  6 Pagesgive the definition of Marijuana that is important for my research. â€Å"Marijuana is a mixture of leaves, stems and fl owering tops of the hemp plant.†(Marijuana, 317). Today in most countries soft narcotics and especially narcotics like marijuana are illegal. Marijuana is a misunderstood drug that is thought of as dangerous but it isn’t. Because of people’s ignorance and gullibility marijuana has become illegal for all the wrong reasons and should be re-examined for legalization. Society today cannotRead MoreMarijuana Decriminalization and Legalization636 Words   |  3 PagesThe validity of marijuana decriminalization (and even legalization) is illustrated in the following analysis of the social, fiscal, political, and medical attributes and conceptions associated with the drug. Marijuana has been used for thousands of years, in 2008; archeologists discovered over two pounds of cannabis in a 2,700-year-old grave of a shaman found in Central Asia. (Armentano, 1) Should marijuana be legalized or at least decriminalized in America? The following information may give the

Outline what is meant by the two strands of British conservatism and consider whether they are compatible Free Essays

string(125) " century Michael Oakeshott depicted politics as an art of where to go next, not a science of setting up a permanent society\." The two strands of the conservative thought have ostensibly different views on how the society ought to be organised. The paternalistic strand derives from the 18th century based on an organic society in which privileges and obligations were classified according to hierarchy, with the consequence that the rich should take responsibility as custodians for the poor, nobelle oblige, this rhetoric is used to provide social assistance. The liberal strand derives the from 19th century classic liberalism in which individuals pursue their own interests in a self-help society based on the free market system in which any form of interference in the economy will lead not only to bureaucratic inefficiency but could also be dangerous as a means for totalitarianism. We will write a custom essay sample on Outline what is meant by the two strands of British conservatism and consider whether they are compatible or any similar topic only for you Order Now 1 According to W. H. Greenleaf, a distinguished historian of the British political tradition, the two strands share principles which separate them from other ideologies even though they have different conceptions of the society2. Already in the early nineteenth century different outlooks of the two stands began to appear. In 1835, the conservative Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel advocated a firm government in a free market economy. When Disraeli led the conservative party, however, this attitude changed completely. He believed that competitive capitalism harmed the traditional community. He blamed Peel for selfishness and when the electorate expanded he used the ‘one-nation’ appeal referring to the feudal ideal, in which the rich took their responsibility as custodians for the poor. Disraeli did not believe that without social assistance the mass of the electorate would endorse traditional institutions3. This paternalistic brand proclaimed by Disraeli has been the ascendant strand in British conservatism until 1970’s. The liberal strand has been rarely represented by the mainstream conservative thinkers until 1975, when Margaret Thatcher became the leader of the party. Which does not mean that liberal thinkers were absent in this doctrine, throughout the history of British conservatism individualist principles have been proposed. Perhaps it should be noted that in the United Kingdom Liberals have been displaced by the Conservative Party, absorbing many liberal principles on the way which explains the liberal conservative tradition not found in continental Europe4. It was during the French Enlightenment that many conservative principles were developed as a defence for the establishment, the ancient regime. They countered progressive ideals such as liberty with contrasting theories about history, tradition and moral community. According to Joseph de Maistre individuals are social beings deriving from traditions in the society. Social continuity is guaranteed by moral guardians such as the family, the church and the state. There is no state of nature such as posited by Rousseau; the society reflects the authority of God. The notion of rights was therefore nonsense as obligations always precedence. They stood for hierarchy, aristocracy, the primacy of the collective over the individual and the importance of the sacred. All of these traits were also present in Burke’s writings. Edmund Burke is one of the first who developed conservative principles in England, and although he and his contemporaries have advocated principles now regarded as dead many contemporary conservative thinkers like to trace back their ideas to this heritage5. Although Burke, a Whig, supported a constitutional Monarchy in which the sovereign was constrained by parliament and the parliament by a small and exclusive electorate, he believed in representation of the independent wise derived from ‘natural aristocracy’. 6 When conservatives relate to Burke they mean his themes about organism, test of time and reform. Like Burke, conservatives distrust social change and accept human inequality. Human beings are naturally diverse in energy and talent which also implies that levelling classes is futile, egalitarian programmes are dangerous as they entail authoritarian measures which will crush individual liberty and social hierarch is desirable because the majority will benefit from the leadership of the few. Because conservatives prefer tradition they do not have any illusion that future times can eliminate imperfections of human arrangements, in contrast with their ideological adversaries. But the proposition that conservatism is rooted in a natural dislike of change is blameworthy as they have merged ahistorical patterns of individual behaviour in the Western culture with specific ideals about how the government and the society ought to be organised. Those who equate conservatism with opposition are therefore unsophisticated. A. O. Hirschman has defined three theses in which conservatives vindicate there position advocating tradition. The perversity thesis in which they warn for the opposite of the intended goal, for example; the bid for liberty during the French Revolution would lead to tyranny. The futility thesis, by which social engineering will never eliminate inequalities as it is impossible. And they warn for too high cost outweighing reform in the jeopardy thesis7. Therefore conservatism is best positioned as a device against unproven and thus false optimism. In Edmunds Burke’s book, Reflections on the Revolutions in France in 1790 he claimed that historical experience is more reliable than abstract speculation. The society is a product of organic growth, according to Burke, accumulating the wisdom of generations rather than by impractical ideals. In this same context he advocated the age of reason, comparing the small ‘individual stock’ with the inexhaustible ‘general bank and capital of nation and ages’. According to Burke the individual is sinful and react more often passionate than rational, prone to selfishness and mistaken judgement and therefore incapable of understanding the complexity of public interest. He warned against rationalism, a faulty judgement of individual formulation intoxicated with their capacity of abstract thinking disconnected from historical realities8. It is this disconnection of traditions what Burke shares with conservatives throughout the history. John Reeves who opposed to the natural rights advocated by progressive liberals in the late 18th century, because they rested on rational thinking. In 1872 Benjamin Disraeli blamed Whigs for abstract thinking fashionable in continental Europe, substituting cosmopolitan for national principles. And in the last century Michael Oakeshott depicted politics as an art of where to go next, not a science of setting up a permanent society. You read "Outline what is meant by the two strands of British conservatism and consider whether they are compatible" in category "Papers" Wise politicians use tradition as experience to decide what to do next and are not concerned with ideals such as a classless society. He used the enfranchisement as an example; women were granted the vote not by logic but by their gradually improving legal and social status. Oakeshott defined therefore two types of knowledge, practical knowledge based on tradition and technical knowledge based on abstract thinking. 9 According to Oakeshott technical thinking is incomplete without practice through time; abstract thinking in pursuit of ‘loose metaphysical’ thinking is therefore bound to fail. Clearly, conservatives have vindicated tradition to blame their adversaries of admitting to impractical rational schemes, but concluding that the heart of conservatism lies in traditionalism would not be sustainable. The conservative tradition has shown us that they do sometimes admit to idealistic speculation. While Disraeli blamed Whigs of ‘loose metaphysical’ speculation, he himself referred to an idealistic ideal of the feudal society to dismiss the capitalist market system and to provide social assistance. But also liberal conservatives have been prone to support dogmatic schemes in order to achieve the political formulae they believed consists out of the ‘sound’ conduct. Those Thatcherites have also put aside Oakeshotte’s notion of art, as they knew where to go next. And the New Right broke with tradition as they advocated radical change. This implies that conservatism does not advocate tradition per se and therefore stands for something as they have an image of a sound political order, which determines their attitude to social change. It is the essence of this sound political order which is not clear; there is no future plan which they pursue, perhaps because conservatives do not believe in utopia10. If the conservative standpoint to established institutions distinguishes a set of principles contrasting other ideologies, this would imply that both strands are in pursuit of the same ‘sound’ political conduct, but using different means. Or, although the two strands hold contrasting views on society they ought to be in pursue of the same ends. As mentioned above the paternalist strand used the feudal ideal to provide social assistance for the poor since Disraeli. Harold Macmillan who presented ‘the middle way’ as an updated expression of this ‘one-nation’ ideal as a means to attack the increasingly growing inequalities between two nations, the rich and the poor. The providence of welfare in 1954 was presented by R. A. Butler in a conservative manner; the Disraelian approach to modern politics did not require conservatives to abandon their traditional vindication of inequality. Disraeli provided us with inspiration and he cautioned us †¦. We should seek to secure greater quality not by levelling the few, but by elevating the many’. The modernised Disraelian strand became party orthodoxy until the 1970’s and created a consensus between the major parties over social Welfare. When the liberal strand took over from the collective strand as the mainstream of the British Conservative Party some fundamental differences became clear between the two strands, like the disagreement over the responsibilities of the powerful and the justification of wealth. 1 When collective conservatives talked about decent housing and adequate welfare they often cite Disraeli when urging the aristocratic ethos of noblesse oblige to be adapted in modern conditions. The collectivists felt morally justified to distribute money from the rich to the poor. Which does not mean liberal conservatives did not have a morally justification for their approach to social assistance. They feel that a competitive market is just as it rewards individuals reflecting the diversity of human talent and it nurtures habits of prudence and self-reliance. For liberal conservatives poverty is related to skill and effort, when you give provide welfare you create therefore an environment in which they do not have to work. Another justification of an unfettered economy is that the rich, people with special talent, create wealth which will eventually triples down to the poor. In this sense the rich are creators of prosperity instead of plunderers of the poor. In this same context they justified the distribution of power and wealth. This is in contrast with the collective strand who justifies wealth and power on social breeding of the elite. Common to these strands is the acceptance of inequality and the social obedience of the majority to firm leadership. 12 The arrival of Margaret Thatcher did not only underline these disagreements over justification and distribution of wealth and power, but was a departure from the paternalist strand in general. Many people would argue that the New Right represented classic liberalism instead of conservatism ends. Keith Joseph denied that there was a break with traditional conservative thinking. As long as institutions, culture, conservative responsibilities and political practices were recognisable or at least would be recognisable in the near future, conservatives could be tolerant. According to them conservatives could no longer be confident that this was so by the ends of the 1970’s. In these circumstances conservatives had to advocate in a reconstruction of a social, economical and political order in an attempt to restore lost values. 13 But it is the advocacy of a free-market economy what causes contradiction. Hayek, one of the leading neo-liberalist thought, himself wanted to link the free-market with the reason of test of time, which is in principle incompatible. When you support an unfettered market system you will have to accept the spontaneous outcomes it produces and accept any regime which survives, which is in contrast of Hayek’s refusal of certain institutions and mechanisms such as income distribution. The explanation of Hayek’s refusal is his particular use of tradition. 14 Without this he would be dependent on the outcome of the market. It is his use of spontaneous which is misleading. Although Hayek describes the social order to be spontaneous he probably means that the outcome of the innumerate individual decisions is spontaneous. The social order is constituted out of decisions taken, influenced by tradition and practice. Society is spontaneous as social order comes from within the society, which sits ill with the notion of evolution. According to the evolution theory the society is the result of social arrangement which have survived15. The incompatibility in Hayek’s notions of tradition and the spontaneous market was underlined by people like Letwin. Those liberal conservatives claimed that there was a clear distinction between the free market theory and Thatcherism. Whereas classical liberals favour the spontaneous outcome of the free market in both economical and social sphere, liberal conservatives distinguishes them. The economic consideration of Thatcherism is secondary to the programme of moral regeneration. The extension of ownership promotes rather than reduces traditional continuity in families. Private ownership of properties gives families the opportunity to hand on property which provides them with continuity. Thatcherism was a programme for radical change in many areas but recognised the importance of tradition in other contexts, attacking ‘entrenched’ institutions rather than traditional ones16. In this sense Thatcherism is in a direct line with conservatism. Other people find the connection between classic liberalism and conservatism illogical. Liberal conservatives accept much of the teachings of the laissez-faire theory and yet they insist on nationality and a strong state. In a free market system boundaries constrain the economy and are therefore harmful rather than desired. In principle markets ignore social and cultural differences between individuals and nations. A strong state is desirable as it preserves competition within the economy and encourages individual to participate and to buy private property17. When Letwin proclaimed that private ownership promotes continuity in family life, the influence of paid labour was not taken into consideration. The new Right stimulates structural changes of the economy in which demand and supply determine paid labour. The contradiction in the neo-liberal thought is damaging. On one hand they encourage market competition with detraditionalisation effects, and on the other hand they proclaim to promote the very traditional symbols which it also helps to dissolve and which are held as essential for social solidarity, like the family. Conservatives like Oakeshott, do not belief that market institutions can prosper in an autonomous way; this would namely imply mechanisms of thrust18. Thrust can only be protected by law to a certain extent. Norms and values are part of a wider nexus of social institutions not inherent in economical contracts but in tradition. Accepting the market as an autonomous mechanism which produces endless economical growth also contradicts with the conservative acknowledgement of imperfectability. According to most forms of conservatism humans have often wrongly tried to encompass the world with rational and abstract thinking, which is why they preferred tradition. The New Right does accept Imperfectability in the social sphere and beliefs that the government is incapable of economic planning, but see the market place as a frictionless machine. According to the New Right their doctrine flourished because they had discovered flaws and failures in the organisation the collectivist and socialist had supported after the Second World War19. These problems could be solved by letting free markets flourish and by renewing the core of moral institutions such as the state and the family. The most obvious change of the New Right was the departure from Keynesianism. In the decades before the arrival of Thatcher in British government there was a consensus over welfare policy. Keynes’ management of demand theory had controlled tendencies of capitalism towards cycles of boom and depression fairly well. This era, which is often referred to as a ‘golden age’, was characterised with economical growth. According to some, Keynesianism became ineffective as a result of intensified globalisation and the transformation of everyday life. The Management of demand theory could not cope with the 24-hour international market which typified ‘new’ globalisation20. Keynesian and other welfare programmes presumed a society with more stable lifestyle habits than are characteristic in contemporary 24-hours market economies. Unconstrained markets intensify globalisation which will lead to more detraditionalisation in social life and thus in the family. The New Right proclaimed that the family was central to their theory, but in the context of globalisation as positioned above this is certainly contradictive. As mentioned above conservatives use the notion of tradition in a particular way. The new Right has showed us that conservatism is not always opposed to radical change. According to Roger Scruton the radical change does not have to be a departure of the notion tradition21. Conservatives, he says, place faith in institutions which have been tried before and wishes to give as much as necessary authority to constitute an accepted and objective public realm. Authority is opposed to social contract and all other social arrangements based on choice; authority comes from the transcendent qualities of established institutions. Allegiance is what a member of a collectivity owes to authority. People relate to collectivities, but this is not determined by individual choice or conscious but by the socially and morally transcendent. Transcendence is also the core of tradition. Conservatives are therefore not concerned with any form of authority, but authority legitimised by traditional symbols and allegiance is not just a matter of belonging to some corporate body but it refers to an affiliation with organised groups based on tradition. Sructon also said that practices worth conserving need to have the weight of a successful history of something that has flourished. Such practices must have the ‘allegiance’ and ‘authority’ of their participants and must give a durable meaning to the emergence to be preserved22. These considerations, he says, rule out traditions such as torture, crime and revolution. This test of time is based on a sort of evolutionism in which symbols of traditions have survived through time interpreted for their social function, which is at least suspicious and certainly does not explain the position of conservatives to tradition. The objective distinction which separates the quality of tradition with habits, customs and Oakshott’s notion of technical knowledge is that it is determined by and ritual or revealed truth which is also the origin of its authority. In this sense tradition is not embedded in the practice but in certain rituals transmitted by guardians of tradition such as priests, wise men and respected elderly. The past is therefore essential for tradition, not because it must persist over an indefinite time but because it has to be passed on by practice, like in an apprenticeship23. In the past decades in which globalisation and thus detraditionalisation had intensified preserving tradition has become more like fundamentalism. Fundamentalism is nothing more than securing tradition with traditional means, according to Giddens, as it asserts its ritual truth without moral and cultural communication in conditions where traditions are under challenge24. This is potentially dangerous as it excludes social groups within the cosmopolitan society. The New Right, then, proclaims to be linked with conservatism advocated by people like Burke and Oakshott but is better to be viewed as radicalism in pursuit to preserve and restore institutions they value. My conclusion, therefore, is that the two strands of conservatism are incompatible. How to cite Outline what is meant by the two strands of British conservatism and consider whether they are compatible, Papers

Was the US Government Justified in evacuating Japanese Americans in WWII free essay sample

question: Was the United States Government justified in placing the Japanese American people into relocation facilities during the Second World War? My Answer: These shameful acts against men, women and children targeted because of their religious beliefs, ethnicity or national origin violate basic principles of human rights and justice. Misguided violence at the hands of a few dishonors the nations legitimate anger and shock over the immense loss of life and destruction from the September 11 attacks in the United States. Since Sept. 11, monitoring groups around the country have received several hundred complaints alleging crimes apparently motivated by bias and hate. (Human Rights Watch, news release, 24 Sept. 2001) Racism can be defined as a person being bias against another race. Depending on the current economic situation anyone could be considered a racist. During the First and Second World Wars, the American people were more than happy to show hatred towards the people of Germany. During the Second World War though, the American People were hit harder by an enemy that was closer to home. In the Western states, the Japanese were a very predominate race. They worked alongside of the American People. They ate with them, strolled down the street with them, American People even shopped at the places of business of the Japanese. This was greatly affected after the events of that infamous morning of Sunday, December seventh, nineteen forty one. It was a day that every American person, no matter their race, ethnicity, and even whether they had a family member or friend in the military or not, mourned the loss of 2,335 American Service Members, 68 Civilians, and 1,178 wounded service members (1997 The History Place). This created a hate towards the peoples of the Empire of Japan. This lead to the posters and propaganda with Tokyo Kid, and the Japanese People being portrayed as Monsters. If we were to fast forward to that early Tuesday morning, September 11, 2001, you can probably remember what you were doing. Personally I was Seven years old and I walked into the Library that morning and saw it on the television. I was too young to understand what was happening so when I asked the librarian what it was, she said Oh it is nothing important and shut it off. It did not register to me at the time that is was to be the deadliest attack on American Soil. 2,819 People died from that attack ( September 11 by Numbers. New York Magazine 2011). This caused the American People to to loathe the Muslims and that lead to a general dislike towards people of the Middle East. There were a total of 1,714 reported attacks on people of Middle Eastern descent ( September 11 by Numbers. New York Magazine 2011). How does this relate to the Second World War? After Pearl Harbor, The American people stopped buying from the Japanese, and anyone of Japanese descent was labeled as an enemy or a Spy. This caused the American People to fear them in society. The Government claimed that the reason that they evacuated the Japanese American People was that it was possible that they could be spies. This is very likely since they did not have the technology that we do today. Today, a background check can be done in a matter of minutes. Then, it would have taken days. There are rumors that there were Japanese Spies in Hawaii that would report to the Japanese Government on what the United States Military was doing there. They were a citizen of Hawaii and they fit right into society. This is one of the reasons the American Government was uneasy. It would have been too easy for the Japanese to have a spy in a city as San Francisco or Los Angeles. This caused President Franklin D. Roosevelt to sign Executive Order 9066 on February 19, 1942. This placed e very Japanese American and anyone of interest into a concentration camp. I am taking this second part of the qquestion as a What is your opinion on this situation? I completely agree with it. Although I rather be free than safe I think that in order to protect the majority you must get rid of the threat. It is like taking a precaution in case their would be a problem, like Y2K. Not knowing whether there would be mass chaos or not, everyone took the precautions in case something did happen. What is the difference when the US Government takes precautions? The Empire of Japan suddenly and deliberately attacked the Naval, Army, and Air Forces of the United States. Nat Turner, The Oklahoma City Bombing, the World Trade Center Bombing, and the World Trade Center Attack of 2001 are all examples of were the American Government took certain measures to ensure the safety of the American People. Airport, Subway, and Train security has multiplied tremendously since those occasions. These are the limited situations where the Government should step in. If the American Government had not stepped in and put some safety measures in then the Terrorists would feel as though they can come over and kill the American People whenever. The Government however should only require the agencies of said occasions to fix the problem. These should only go as far as to make the American People feel safenot uncomfortable. By placing the American People in more and more safe measures then they will become more reluctant to use the resources that are vital to the function of the United States. If we take drastic measures to prevent disasters solely because of what terrorist have done alreadythey win.