Blog

Lion in the White House A Life of Theodore Roosevelt

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Lion in the White House: A Life of Theodore Roosevelt

The author of the book ‘Lion in the Whitehouse’ is Aida D. Donald. She is a famous writer and editor with several works under her belt. These include books on American Presidents John F. Kennedy and Truman. She has also contributed to many scholarly articles and is the former editor in chief on the Harvard University Press. The biography on Roosevelt gives a look at the president that led the Rough Riders cavalry during the Spanish-American war. He was also one of the most popular US presidents in his eight-year tenure between 1901 and 1908. He won a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts towards ending the Russo-Japanese war. The book is a general analysis of his public political career as well as his personal life. Roosevelt was a forward thinker, a man that many still admire to date. ‘Lion in the Whitehouse’ is a tribute to the heroic president, father, husband, and lover of nature.

The main reason as to why the author decided to write the book is to shed more light on the life of Roosevelt. There are different accounts each focused on different areas of his life. The book brings all these aspects together. One of the primary sources for the book is Roosevelt’s autobiography. Donald takes excerpts of the autobiography at the beginning of each chapter to give a glimpse into his life and his experiences. From the autobiography, we get to know what kind of person he was and the author then expounds on this using other sources to remove bias. The book enables the reader to understand Roosevelt’s life as he grew up, his motivations and the reasons for his decisions in life, both as president and in his personal life. Roosevelt is known to be one of the most open-minded presidents of all time at a time when America was quite conservative and not yet ready to embrace change.

The purpose of the book is to inform. The reader finds out more about the youngest president of the country and all of his achievements. For a person who wishes to get an understanding of Roosevelt and his accomplishments, this book is perfect for them. It details his life from his sickly childhood to his days as president. For example, the first chapter begins with the start of his career as a zoologist. He was also a weak boy as he says, “I was a sickly, delicate boy, suffered much from asthma, and frequently had to be taken away on trips to find a place where I could breathe.’(Donald 3) His life at home was quite sheltered, and he got to learn about politics from an early age. His parents and uncle were a significant influence in his life. His family believed in charity and helping the less fortunate although they grew in a life of privilege. His father also established the National Museum of Art. All these different experiences in early life shed light into his type of leadership when he became president.

One of the main arguments in the book is that Roosevelt was quite the forward thinker and a natural leader who expected as much from himself as he expected from others. The first instance of this is being voted as an assemblyman at only twenty-three years old. (Donald 40). As police commissioner, he fought greed and corruption. He also made sure that appointments did not take color, race, and religion into consideration. For him, all people were equal. The author explains, “Just as importantly, Roosevelt made appointments regardless of color, creed, religion, or politics. When challenged about appointing blacks, he openly defended his policy. The blacks were qualified. As a Republican whose ideal was Abraham Lincoln, Roosevelt would always be color-blind and guided by the tenet of equality.” (Donald 72) He looked up to Abraham Lincoln as his role model, and Lincoln was credited with the fight for equality by fighting against slavery and racial discrimination.

Another argument that the author makes is that Roosevelt was a brave and fearless leader. He led the Rough Riders during the Spanish-American war. “Roosevelt jumped from his horse and led the soldiers on foot. At another, he killed a Spaniard with his bare hands…….this day would be the indelible symbol of his courageous leadership.” Roosevelt stepped up to lead his men by example during the war. It is clear that he would lead the country equally fearlessly. He was granted a Medal of Honor for his bravery during the war. He was also a charismatic leader, winning the governorship of New York under the Republican vote while the city was known to be firmly Democratic (Donald 109) he advocated for better working conditions for workers and also protected the rights of women. “He was generally welcoming to the rising woman’s movement for broader rights and consulted with women leaders in the new social movements.” (Donald 121)

The biography is quite sympathetic to the subject, President Roosevelt. The author portrays him to be a likable and relatable person from his childhood. One example of this was her description of his anguish when his father died (Donald 28). Like any other child, perhaps, even more, he had loved his father. Despite their privileged upbringing, his father took part in numerous charitable activities, and this casts the whole Roosevelt family in an endearing light. His marriage to his first wife Alice also showed him to be a loving and kind man, but unfortunately, she died too soon in childbirth. Tragic life experiences such as this show sympathy to Roosevelt and elicits similar feelings in the reader. While he was still young, he was angry at a corrupt justice of the Supreme Court for engaging in swindles in the railroads (Donald 42). One of President Roosevelt’s significant achievements was breaking the monopoly in the railroads, and it was inspired by his abhorrence for corruption from his earliest days.

I agree with the arguments of the author. Roosevelt’s early life prepared him for the role of President at only forty-three years old, the youngest president of all time. His charisma, hard work, leadership and belief in equality as shown by the author enabled him to achieve a lot in his presidency. He first assumed office as a result of the death of President McKinley who had been shot by an anarchist. The President’s death meant that the vice president would take his position. He aspired to be like Lincoln in his letter, “I must not only be as resolute as Abraham Lincoln in seeking to achieve decent ends, but as patient, as uncomplaining and as even-tempered in dealing, not only with knaves, but with the well-meaning foolish people, educated and uneducated.” (Donald 136). He desired to make changes in the Supreme Court, and the racist South. One of his tenets was equality for all men, and he lived up to this.

The book has some strengths as well as weaknesses. Its main advantage is drawn from the fact that it incorporates Roosevelt’s autobiography at the beginning of each chapter. This makes it credible by showing the reader what Roosevelt himself thought and said. The author’s work is to interpret and expound further on the events associated with a particular excerpt. Its weakness is that it is rarely critical of Roosevelt as a person. It comes across as being more of a tribute and praise to the President rather than a critical analysis of his leadership. The whole narrative is skewed in his favor. However, to be fair to the author, it is merely intended to be an informative piece, and it is based on her own opinion. Roosevelt was generally a likable man, an able leader, and an outstanding President.

President Theodore Roosevelt is widely acclaimed and remembered for many achievements during his presidency. Some of these include the Nobel Peace Prize, strengthening the navy, construction of the Panama Canal, conservation of the environment, removing monopoly in the railroads, and dealing with the coal strike of 1902. He was also instrumental in bringing about equality in terms of racial discrimination and women’s rights. The biography ‘Lion in the Whitehouse’ aptly captures his spirit. The author writes an excellent report on Roosevelt’s life and experiences. The book helps the reader to follow his growth right from his childhood right to all his outstanding achievements as president. While some may remark that it paints an unrealistically positive image, Roosevelt remains human like any other person affected by tragedy and death. His privileged upbringing may have given him an advantage, but he had innate capabilities to become a great leader. The biography is a fitting account of his life and reading it leaves the audience informed about other aspects in life that may not be highlighted as much. Just like the author, the readers end up with a positive bias towards the ‘Lion in the White House.’

Works Cited

Donald, Aida. Lion in the White House: A Life of Theodore Roosevelt. Basic Books, 2008.

Letter to The Editor

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Letter to The Editor

This letter is in response to the article titled “Editorial: Facebook, Zuckerberg’s sins now include preying on teens” that appeared on your publication on the 5th of February, 2019. The internet is a source of information and interaction for most of today’s youth and teens. Social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, and Instagram are quite popular. Privacy is virtually nonexistent as such companies gather and share user’s data without their consent. This debate has been raging for a long time.

It is however shocking that Facebook would lower is standards even more to the extent of preying on teenagers who cannot give informed consent. The teens are more than happy to share their personal information for a monthly amount of money. The truth is that they do not even understand what they are doing. What Facebook is doing is illegal, immoral and downright disgusting. Facebook has been involved in several scandalous cases regarding breach of privacy of its users. The company has been embroiled in a mood-control scandal and has been accused of failing to inform the public of theft of user data. The matter of teen manipulation, while it’s a new low, should not come as a shock. As a company, Facebook’s only concern is profit making, and they do not care what they have to do to achieve this.

I agree with the article that laws regulating tech companies are long overdue. It is upon our leaders to ensure that the public is protected from greedy and manipulative companies. Our children need to be safe online. Despite Zuckerberg’s numerous public apologies, it is clear that Facebook has no intention to follow the law and do what is right and ethical. It is high time that Facebook and others are stopped in their tracks. The right to privacy and informed consent must be upheld.

Letter Gun Control

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Letter to the Editor

Letter: Gun Control

Many countries have been victims of mass shootings but reacted swiftly, why cant we do the same?

The article titled “New Zealand Took 6 Days to Plan New Gun Laws. Here’s How Other Countries Reacted to Shootings” shows just how lax the United States has been in effecting gun controls. With public shootings becoming rampant, more has to be done to curb the menace. So many lives have been lost; so many families have suffered over the senseless and brutal murders of their loved ones by deranged gun-wielding monsters. All because some people feel that owning a gun is their constitutional right, and their rights trump human life.

Many other countries have experienced shootings within their boundaries, the most recent of which was a shooting in a New Zealand mosque in March of 2019. It only took the prime minister a few days to announce gun reforms in the form of banning some types of assault weapons. Such swift action deserves applause. Australia did the same after the shooting of 35vpeople in 1996 and has never experienced a gun-related tragedy of such magnitude since. Britain has an even more impressive record; nearly all handguns are banned from civilian ownership since 1997. Canada has had trouble with gun policies but made an effort.

It is therefore shocking that the United States cannot agree that guns are dangerous. The most tragic part is that so many of the lives lost are those of school and college kids, in a place that is supposed to be safe for them. Reforms have been blocked by constitutional provisions. It is high time that sweeping changes are introduced to put an end to pointless murders of innocent civilians and children. Many of the shooters have a mental illness, a fact that should have been considered during the sale of firearms. Background checks should be implemented on all gun owners to prove they are psychologically fit to own a gun.

Labeling GMOs

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Labeling GMOs

Most people do not know precisely what the term Genetically Modified Organisms means. When it comes to food, genetic modification is necessary with the changing climate and also to add desirable traits to plants. However, many people are mistrustful of GMOs and would prefer not to consume food with genetically modified ingredients. For this reason, there have been calls for the government to mandate the labeling of all genetically modified food sold to consumers. Companies that produce food from genetically modified ingredients have long been resistant to labeling, although they claim that GMOs are not harmful to human health and do not adversely affect the environment (Harmon). It is, therefore, ironic that the same companies would be so opposed to labeling. The government should require GMOs to be labeled for several reasons including the fact that consumers have the right to know and choose what they take, for health and environmental concerns as well as ensuring transparency in the food industry.

To begin, it is necessary to understand why GMOs exist in the first place. The primary reason why GMOs were introduced is to fight environmental conditions such as drought. Climate change is a harsh reality that threatens food production all over the world. Many places that previously experienced heavy rainfall suitable for agriculture now receive significantly less rain, thus reducing production. It, therefore, became necessary to come up with genetically modified crops that can withstand prolonged droughts and little rainfall.

The second reason for producing GMOs is to increase the yields of crops. The population of the earth is growing at an exponential rate, averaging about 7.7 billion in the year 2019. Land for farming is decreasing, and climate change has reduced fertile land area further. It is therefore crucial that the land available for agriculture is utilized to the maximum. Genetically modified crops produce high yields compared to non-modified breeds. Increased productivity ensures that the population of the world has enough food to live on. It also helps to avoid issues of starvation and death due to a lack of food, especially in developing countries. Hunger and malnutrition is a significant contributor to the number of deaths worldwide. In the year 2012, it was estimated that about 868 million people faced starvation and malnutrition (Kamthan et al. 1647). Most of these people live in developing countries. In order to feed its population, the world needs to double its food production by 2050, and GMOs will go a long way toward achieving that goal.

The third reason for GMOs is to produce crops that are resistant to pests and diseases. Climate change has brought with it warmer temperatures that promote the growth of pests and insects that spread disease. Such conditions cause the yield of crops to go down or even disappear completely. If this happens, the world will have nothing to feed on. GMOs resistant to insects and pests mean that crops can grow to maturity and maximum yields. Another advantage of GMOs is herbicide-tolerant crops. Such plants are not affected by herbicides that are used on weeds around them. Farmers can thus kill weeds without affecting their crops. However, the challenge is that with the introduction of these herbicide-tolerant crop varieties, there emerges the issue of resistance that means crops fail to respond to herbicides used on them. Superweeds also develop that cannot be wiped out using herbicides, making farming very difficult.

Genetically modified crops are also produced in order to add nutritious value to food. An excellent example of this is golden rice that is modified to have a high level of vitamin A compared to the other types of rice consumed. In developing and underdeveloped countries, millions of people face malnutrition each year. Lack of vitamin A leads to a compromised immune system, especially in children and also has other severe effects such as blindness. The solution to this is to enrich crops with essential nutrients such as vitamins. A study carried out showed a 24% reduction in child mortality rate with vitamin A supplements, as well as reduced risk of blindness (Oliver 492). Golden Rice is to be used in areas where rice is the staple food for the local population, and especially where there are no other sources of nutrients such as vitamins in the diet.

Many advantages come with the adoption of genetically modified crops. However, for many years, manufacturers have been unwilling to label genetically modified food that they produce. This state of affairs is set to change in the year 2020 when the government will require that all GMOs be labeled. Such a step is a positive one for many reasons. The first reason is that consumers have a right to know what they consume. When a person walks into a store to purchase their food, they want to know exactly what it contains. A recent poll shows that 93% of consumers want all GMOs labeled (Harmon). Given the fact that companies say that GMOs do not affect human beings, why are they so resistant to labeling? People want to know what is in their food, and that information should be afforded to them by labeling.

The second reason why all GMOs should be labeled per government requirements is that it gives the customers a choice between organic and genetically modified food. Producers of organic food have long pushed for labeling of GMOs for selfish reasons. When GMOs are not labeled, customers can pick anything. With labeling, however, they will be motivated to choose organic foods due to the many unfounded theories on GMOs. Organic producers stand to benefit from these theories. The American chain restaurant, Chipotle, banned all GMOs from its food in 2015 (Oliver 492). This action means that customers worried about eating GMOs will know precisely what they are getting at the restaurant. There are many theories surrounding GMOs that are yet to be proven scientifically. Scientists say that genetically modified foods are not harmful, but many people are not confident enough with GMOs. It is therefore essential to label all GMOs so that consumers feel confident in what they consume.

The third reason why GMOs should be labeled is that its effects on human health are still unknown. So far, scientists and researchers who have studied the GMOs say that they have no impact on human beings and their health. Despite this reassurance, many people still don’t feel safe enough when consuming genetically modified crops and animals. It is therefore essential that any food containing GMOs are clearly labeled so that people protect themselves the best way they know how. Many don’t want to take a chance then many years later they find that the GMOs affected their health in some way. The main point when it comes to health and safety concerns is that each individual has a right to do what they think is best for their own interests.

Environmental concerns are another reason why GMOs should be clearly labeled. Genetically modified crops are made by changing some genetic component of the plants to achieve some desirable traits. When these GMOs crossbreed with natural varieties, they can lead to many challenges. Some of the characteristics of GMOs include insecticide resistance and herbicide tolerance (Jones 65). These characteristics affect agricultural practices, and this impacts the environment at the farm level and on a larger scale. Herbicide tolerance or resistance means that the crops are not affected by herbicides sprayed on the weeds. This reaction is suitable for the crops because the herbicides do not hamper their growth or development in any way. In addition to this, it encourages minimal or zero tillage on farms. Farmers can spray their farms before planting to kill the weeds and allow the crops to flourish. However, the downside to the herbicide-resistance is that it gives rise to superweeds that soon become resistant to the herbicides as well. When this happens, the weeds grow harder to destroy, and they will end up overpowering the crops and thus reducing yields on the farms.

Another environmental impact of GMOs is that zero tillage improves soil quality. This style of tillage reduces soil erosion, making a positive impact on the farm. Zero tillage also conserves moisture in the soil and increases water infiltration. Water quality is also a positive effect of zero tillage (Kamthan et al. 1651). Because of reduced run-off, water bodies get fewer sediments, and this makes the water cleaner. A consumer should be allowed to assess the impact of growing GMOs and if they think that the positives outweigh the negatives, then they will consume GMOs to promote environmental sustainability. It is therefore vital for any GMOs to be labeled.

The most obvious reason as to why GMOs should be labeled is that all companies claim that they have no negative effects on human beings; thus there should be no objection to labeling. For many years, there are no strict laws that force companies to label their products as either genetically modified or not. However, there has been growing public concern surrounding the issue. The law that regulates GMO labeling in the country is known as Public Law 114-214 (Fraboni 563). President Obama signed it into law in the year 2016, increasing disclosure of GMO ingredients in the food sold within the country. The law makes several provisions when it comes to labeling of genetically modified foods. Some of these include a sign or symbol on the packaging showing that the food has been genetically engineered, small manufacturers and restaurants excluded from the disclosure requirements among many others.

Those who argue against labeling GMOs present several arguments in their support. The most significant one is that there are no scientifically proven harmful effects on human beings. Therefore, people can consume GMOs as well as non-modified products with the same level of safety. While this may be true, the same reason can be applied to a requirement for labeling. Another reason offered for not labeling is that it will increase alarm among consumers given that there are many false and unfounded beliefs among people. A symbol for genetically engineered food can lead to a reduction in sales as people panic for no reason. To counter this argument, people have the right to know what they consume. The companies producing GMOs should carry out public awareness to ensure that consumers understand that the GMOs are not harmful at all to human beings. They can use scientific research to back up their claims and counter the negative narrative surrounding GMOs.

The main reason why there is so much controversy surrounding genetically modified foods has a lot to do with media portrayal of GMOs. A research carried out to find out how media shapes consumer perception found that more than half of Americans, 58%, turn to the media to find out more about GMOs (Prakash 65). With the widespread use of social media, there has been widespread propaganda that has no scientific basis. However, people consume such false information quickly and use it as a basis for their knowledge of GMOs. The government needs to do something about this. There should be more education of the public around the topic of GMOs. The mainstream media should also play a significant role in making sure that information dispensed to the public is factual and accurate. It is much more challenging to handle social media, but with increased public awareness, the American people will no longer feed into baseless claims designed to create fear by labeling GMOs as ‘Frankenfood.’

In conclusion, the topic of GMOs is still a touchy one with most Americans. All genetically modified products should be clearly labeled in order to improve transparency and afford people the right to information and choice. To promote public knowledge, people need to know more about GMOs based on scientific research. Some of the reasons why GMOs were developed in the first place are to combat hunger and food shortage, improve the nutritious value of food, and adapt to changing climatic conditions on the planet. GMOs have revolutionized agriculture all over the world. The Public Law 114-214 makes it a government requirement that all genetically engineered foods be labeled staring in 2020 (Fraboni 563). The reasons as to why labeling should be mandatory are to promote consumer’s right to information, to address health and environmental concerns of the public, and to improve transparency in the food industry. The federal and state governments need to carry out public awareness campaigns, especially in the media, to alleviate any fears in the public domain arising from false information. Genetically modified foods have been proven to have no harmful effects, and therefore, people should embrace them to promote sustainability in agriculture.

Works Cited

Fraboni, Jordan James. “A Federal GMO Labeling Law: How It Creates Uniformity and Protects Consumers.” Berkeley Tech. LJ 32 (2017): 563.

Harmon, Amy. “G.M.O. Foods Will Soon Require Labels. What Will the Labels Say?” New York Times.12 May 2018. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/12/us/gmo-food-labels-usda.htmlJones, Robert R. “Genetically Modified Organisms Crops In Agriculture? Food For Thought.” Missouri Medicine 112.1 (2015): 28.

Kamthan, Ayushi, et al. “Genetically modified (GM) crops: milestones and new advances in cropimprovement.” Theoretical and Applied Genetics 129.9 (2016): 1639-1655.

Oliver, Melvin J. “Why we need GMO crops in agriculture.” Missouri medicine 111.6 (2014): 492.

Prakash, C. S. “GM crops in the media.” (2015): 63-68.

Kantian Theory

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Kantian Theory

Kant theory is a theory by Immanuel Kant that tries to explain the moral behavior of people. According to this theory an action can either be said to be right or wrong thus moral or immoral. This is different as compared to the utilitarian theory that tries to explain the morality of an action by judging the effect the action will have. According to Utilitarian, an action is considered to be good or bad depending on its final consequences. According to Immanuel Kant his principle on morality was anchored by a standard of rationality that he referred to as the Categorical Imperative. According to Kant’s Categorical Imperative was an unconditional, rationally essential as well as san objective principle which human’s had to adhere to despite the natural inclination or rather desires that one may experience.

Kantanian theory backed other philosophers including Aquinas, Locke and Hobbes in trying to explain how one needs to act in a society as they all argued that a person’s moral obligation had only to base on the standards. Kant agreed with both these ideas and stated that analyses of practical reason disclose the condition that rational agents must obey all principles or laws that have been laid down. Kant’s position was grounded on his doctrine that an individual’s rational will must be considered as free or autonomous from the viewpoint of being a person who would be law abiding. Thus, the main principle of morality when it comes to categorical imperative is law of autonomous will (Rawls, pg. 283-298). Kantanian philosophy, therefore, is based on self-governing reason in all human beings that makes every person of equal worthiness as well as serving equal respect. Emmanuel Kant theory seems more appealing and reasonable as compared to utilitarian theory because according to Kant, as humans we are always in a position to be able to control our will as well as our motives. Our motives behind doing something will determine if something is either right or wrong.

In order to understand Kant’s theory, it is important to look at how the categorical imperative works. The categorical imperative has three ways of how one can be able to formulate if something is right or not. The first is the Formula of Universal Law. According to Kant there was nothing better than good will in itself. He described will as the ability of Humans to act in accordance to the rules and laws that have been set up irrespective of the consequences that the act is going to have in our lives (Wood, 27-47). According to Kant, one could not make exceptions for themselves for example if you expect people to show you respect then you should also show respect to the other people.

The second principle is the moral worth of a person; a person moral actions are able to determine if he is a good person or not. According to Kant’s theory, it is important for one to set up absolute as well as valid moral rules which are based on reasoning only and not by referencing to empirical data supernatural beings. In setting up the moral rules we use the same logical reasoning that stipulates particular irrefutable in logics and Math such as ‘all triangles are three-sided’ and ‘no circle is a square’ and 1+1=2. Kant proposed that absolute moral truths must first be logically consistent and not self-contradictory. Second, all moral truths must be universal, that is, all absolute truths must be applied to everything without exceptions. The statement, ‘All triangles are three-sided’ illustrates this condition (Timmons, pg. 96).

A good example is a scenario where investigating officers have information about a ticking time bomb and are not willing to divulge any useful information that may help the investigators to stop the attack. A ticking time bomb is a case that has always been used to make us question our moral priorities. In such a case evacuation is not always an option but disarming the bomb is always the law enforcers top priority. If a suspect is apprehended and it is evident that he can divulge information on where the bombs are located, then the dilemma kicks in. the police have to carefully choose to torture the suspect for information or decided not to harm him at the expense of letting innocent civilians too. In our scenario, the chief thinks that torture will help him tell the law enforcer where the bomb is. If this information is not obtained, then the bomb could go of killing a lot of people. To the police chief, keeping the city town is his priority. Being in a situation where bombs are about to blow up and the location is not known then desperate measures have to be taken. In this case the measures would include things such as relocation of people on suspected terror spots or torture the suspect to divulge the information (Buha, pg. 304-327).

Using Kantanian theory, this action can be considered to be immoral. This is because according to moral principles, torturing a person is immoral. Torture is considered illegal in most part of the world. This has been attributed to the fact that torture leads to misleading information. An individual being tortured may give out the wrong information to stop the torture. In interrogation involving terrorist suspects, torture may be a slippery slope. This is because the suspect may give misleading information about an attack to derail the police from actually stopping it as most are ready to die for what they stand for. Using the deontology theory, the police chief went against the laws that have been set. Deciding to torture the suspect is a wrong thing to do as there have laws laid out to protect the suspects. Through torture a couple of things may occur. The suspect may die due to too much pain, the suspect too may provide misleading information to the chief police or may withstand the pain and not talk at all. By considering these three things then the chief police are not right by authorizing torture on the suspect. Laws are also set in place to ensure law and order and police officers cannot go breaking these laws as this is what may actually result in anarchy in a society.

However, a person in support of the utilitarian theory will think otherwise. Using the utilitarianism theory then the police chief did the right thing by obtaining information on the attack. The information obtained through the interrogation will help prevent the impending attack. This means that the situation or the information will bring happiness and be of greater good to many people this makes it morally good. If the police decide not to torture the suspect to get the necessary information, then the bombs might have gone off resulting in the death of several innocent live. The chief not taking a step to get information that would prevent the attack may be considered a bad thing. If trough the torture police were not able to get the right information, the police chief still did the right thing. This was on the basis that as he was making the decision, he was still looking at a bigger picture where people would have died if the bomb eventually went off. There are instances where torture ids often the only resort in getting meaningful information that may save lives (Morris, pg. 42).

Kant’s theory has been criticized for allowing deeds that render the world a less pleasant place. Kant’s philosophy does not consider the consequences of an action but rather the action itself. However, in the world we are living in, good deeds do not always lead to positive outcomes, and neither do bad acts bring about adverse consequences. Therefore, applying non-consequentialist in everything does not make the world a better place. This theory is also abstract in that; it does not explain what particular actions are right and in what situations, rendering it less applicable to day to day life. Some critics claim that the theory is unrealistic since human beings rarely act purely out of a sense of duty (George, pg. 35-86). In many instances, human beings perform certain deeds expecting of something in return. Moreover, Kant’s theory is difficult to actualize since it has no place for personal relations and love but instead states that one should instead act out of a cold feeling-duty. Many critics have refuted this reasoning since human beings are prone to feelings of love and attachment. Therefore, despite the Kantian theory of duty and universal morality being stable, it does not wholly apply to today’s modern world.

In conclusion, in the modern day, Kant’s does not apply to most situations due to its absolutist nature. It sets absolutist rules and has no method of applying to the exceptions. For instance, the theory does not vary the rightness or wrongness of an act despite the context. Lying is considered universally wrong, and therefore, the Kantian approach holds lying as immoral. The theory does not consider outcomes but means. For example, from our example, it would immoral to water board a criminal for example a terrorist to try and reveal where a bomb has been hidden. However, from the Utilitarian theory, waterboarding is allowed gas long the lives of people are saved thus bringing joy to many people. I personally believe murder, stealing, invasion of privacy and lying can be allowed in specific instances.

Works Cited

Buha, Mark J. “Rule Ulitarian and Deontlogist Perspectives on Comparison of Torture Killing.” Washington University Jurisprudence Journal (2010): 304-327.

George, Robert P. “Recent Criticism of Natural Law Theory.” Aquinas and Modern Law. Routledge, 2017. 35-86.

Morris, Jeremy. “The Justification of Torture-Horror.” HoRrOR (2010): 42.

Rawls, John. “The independence of moral theory.” The American Philosophical Association Centennial Series (2013): 283-298.

Timmons, Mark. Moral theory: An introduction. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2012.

Wood, Allen. “The final form of Kant’s practical philosophy.” Immanuel Kant. Routledge, 2017. 27-47.

Jurong Point

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Jurong Point

The HR staff at Jurong Point is made up of 3 employees who manage a team of 160. In addition to this, the mall has over 2500 employees working for the tenants of the mall. The tenants of the mall therefore make up the bulk of the employers, and the HR staff has to outsource some of the functions to its tenants. One of the outsourced functions is the recruitment of staff. The tenants use the mall’s job portal to find employees. The task of finding the right employees is usually left to the HR department, and the HR of Jurong Point allows its tenants to carry out this function. In doing so, the tenants can find employees suited to their particular needs. There are also regular recruitment fairs for the tenants to get to meet potential employees.

The second function that Jurong Point’s HR staff outsources to its tenants is conducting traimn9ng programs for its tenants so that they can better manage their employees. The HR department at Jurong Point acts as the overall HR body of the mall, and therefore it is supposed to manage all the employees of the mall. However, it would be quite difficult to manage over 2500 employees, and this has encouraged the HR department at Jurong Point to offer training services to its tenants. When the tenants are well trained on how to manage their employees as well as customers, it makes work easier for the HR department. Millions of customers from all over the world visit Jurong Point each year, and it is essential that their needs are met adequately to keep them coming back. It is the responsibility of the HR department to equip staff with the necessary skills to serve their customers. The tenants can then train their employees on how to do this.

Is democracy the best way for a society to be ruled

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Is democracy the best way for a society to be ruled?

Many countries all over the world prefer the democratic form of government. In this type of leadership, the people choose their leaders through elections. All adult citizens who are eligible to vote have the freedom to choose their leaders after a predetermined period. There are two types of democracies, direct and representative. In direct democracies, each individual is given the power to influence the electoral process without any intermediaries. In the representative form of democracy, there is a political intermediary between the voter and the policies of the country. Most countries prefer this form of democracy because of the large number of voters in each state. The elected representatives remain accountable to the group of people that elected them. The opposite of democracy is tyranny or dictatorship. Here, citizens are not free to choose their leaders, but they are selected through mechanisms such as succession. Both forms of government have their pros and cons, but the benefits of democracy far outweigh those of dictatorship.

Some famous words from Winston Churchill, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” This means that democracy has many flaws, but they are still fewer when compared to those of other existing forms of government. Some of the benefits of democracy include the freedom of citizens of a democratic society. Secondly, the people and their interests are well represented (Dworkin 11). Third, a democratically elected government is more transparent; leading to better governance. Human rights are also upheld in a democracy as compared to a dictatorship. On the flip side, democracies experience slower economic growth compared to autocracies, the democratic governments are all about money, and the electorate is less motivated in a democracy.

The first advantage of a democratic society is freedom. The people are free to choose their leaders in elections, and through this, they have a say in the policies implemented in their country. Another feature is the freedom of people to criticize their leaders. Every individual is free to express their opinion without fear or favor. If they do not like what one of their leaders is doing, they can say this openly. There are also multiple political parties in a democracy that keep the government in check. The opposition to the government makes sure that the government acts in the interest of the people of the country (Moyn). Things are very different in an authoritarian regime. Citizens of such societies are not allowed to question the leaders in power. The consequences for speaking in opposition to the leaders can be imprisonment or even death. Examples of such countries include Bahrain where insulting the emir gets a jail term of between one and seven years as well as a hefty fine of between $2650 and $26,500. This makes it very difficult or even impossible for citizens to call out a president when they act inappropriately. However, not all autocracies are this dictatorial. Apart from the inability to speak out against leadership, the citizens can be free to do any other thing.

The second advantage of democracy as a form of government is that it is representative. People take part in elections to choose leaders who represent them. Every single person has the chance to choose their leaders. If a leader does not act according to the wishes of the people, then they can be impeached and thrown out of office. Such a system ensures that the elite are not the only ones who get a say in the running of the affairs of a society or a country. However, this point of support may not always be valid; the leaders chosen may not reflect the wishes of the majority. The United States and the Electoral College system of electing a president is a perfect example (Dworkin 9). In the 2016 presidential election, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton won the popular vote of 65,844,610 against Republican candidate Donald Trump with 62,797636. However, Hillary lost the Electoral College with 227 votes against Trump’s 304 . The popular vote shows that Hillary was the preferred leader, but the Electoral College has the final say. The president who ends up in office is not the same as the one with most voters.

The third advantage of democracy is better governance because of transparency in government. Most democratically elected governments have three branches, the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. The executive has the most powers, and the other two arms act as a check on its powers. They keep tabs on what is done with the country’s money. If the executive is found to be doing things that are illegal or detrimental to the country, they have to be stopped (Hollyer, et al. 1196). The media also plays a significant role in ensuring the transparency of the government. It explains all the necessary information to the electorate who may not be very knowledgeable on some fronts.

An example of this is discussing Bills that have been tabled in the Senate and Congress in the United States. One of the most controversial issues was the government shutdown in 2019 during which the media educated the public on the causes of the shutdown and the potential effects on the country (Butler 17). The people of the country are therefore kept abreast of what is happening in their government. Fraudulent activities and secret deals can be brought to light by the media. In an autocracy, things are very different. The press is not as free to report on government activities because this information is not made available to the public. The governments can choose to have checks and balance of their power, but this rarely happens.

Another reason as to why democracy should be the preferred form of government is that it respects and promotes human rights. Many human rights are pegged on freedom of speech which is a significant characteristic of democratic governments. The government is of the people, by the people, and for the people. This means that the citizens occupy a central position in government. The citizens can speak out concerning their wellbeing in all areas of life including healthcare, education, infrastructure, freedom of speech among many others. The challenge in this is that people from the same society or country can have many conflicting views and it is impossible to implement them all. The majority will win, and this may jeopardize the rights and freedoms of the minority groups (Moyn).

There also exist some strong points against the democratic rule. The first of this is that democracy can slow down the economic growth of a country or society. Autocracies can do a better job implementing large scale projects necessary for economic growth. This is because there are no avenues for the blocking of the projects such as court injunctions and the like (D’Souza & Nash 241). The projects take much shorter periods proving beneficial to the economy. China, which is the world’s fastest growing economy, is the example of such an autocracy which has been helpful to the economic growth of the country. However, this point has been refuted by the fact that many of the world’s most developed countries are democracies. This is because these countries have moved from manufacturing industries as the base of the economy to service industries. The service industry such as technology, research, and arts requires a lot of freedom and creativity which can only be found in a democracy.

The second point against democracy is that elections have become more about the money than representing the people. The United States is an excellent example of this. Running for Congress requires a substantial financial commitment for the candidate. Because of this, candidacy has been reserved for the wealthy and powerful. It is approximated that the 2008 presidential campaigns cost $1.6 billion and the campaigns for the whole elections amounted to $5.3 billion. These are vast amounts of money that would have been better utilized in other areas of the economy. Autocracies avoid all the excessive spending on campaigns because they do not hold such extravagant campaigns; power is passed quietly from one leader to the next.

In conclusion, the democratic form of government has been shown to have several advantages as well as disadvantages. Some of the main benefits include respect for human rights, freedom of expression, representation of the people and better forms of governance due to transparency. The disadvantages are that it slows down economic growth and waste a lot of money on elections and campaigns. Autocracies, on the other hand, can implement projects for economic growth more quickly and they also do not spend a lot of money campaigning. However, the main disadvantage is that leaders can take the opportunity to enrich themselves because of little oversight over the executive. The citizens are also oppressed because they cannot speak against the government for fear of fines, imprisonment, and even death. Weighing the two options, it safe to conclude that democracy is the best way for a society or country to be ruled.

Works Cited

Butler, Patrick. “A Free Press: Boisterous Watchdog of Democracy.” SAIS Review of International Affairs 38.2 (2018): 15-22.

D’Souza, Juliet, and Robert Nash. “Private benefits of public control: Evidence of political and economic benefits of state ownership.” Journal of Corporate Finance 46 (2017): 232-247.

Dworkin, Ronald. “Constitutionalism and Democracy 1.” Constitutionalism and Democracy. Routledge, 2017. 3-12.

Hollyer, James R., B. Peter Rosendorff, and James Raymond Vreeland. “Democracy and transparency.” The Journal of Politics 73.4 (2011): 1191-1205.

Moyn, Samuel. “Human Rights and Majority Politics: On Felix Frankfurter’s Democratic Theory.” Available at SSRN (2019).

People derive their identity from various aspects of their lives.

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Identity

People derive their identity from various aspects of their lives. This includes race, place of birth, the people they associate with, where they live, among others. Some people have faced discrimination because of their identity. Zora Neale Hurston talks of her identity as a black woman in her short story, ‘How It Feels to Be Colored Me.’ Race is a major identity issue in the United States, therefore it comes as no surprise that Zora feels that people judge her based on race rather than who she is as a person. The narrator in Baca’ poem ‘Immigrants in Our Own Land’ experiences similar issues with identity as an immigrant in the United States. The US is often described as a diverse nation and a melting pot of cultures, but there is a sense of ‘otherness’ that many people still encounter in the country just like Hurston and Baca. Identity is a common theme in Hurston and Baca’s works.

Hurston writes about racial identity in her short story. As a young girl. Hurston lived in a small town called Eatonville where everyone was black, except for white passersby traveling through the town. In her hometown, Hurston never had to think of herself as black as everyone was black like her. However, when she moved to Jacksonville at thirteen, she realized that she was different, that she was colored (Hurston 1). As a grown woman, Hurston does not define herself by her race but just as a person. She explains that she when other African-Americans see themselves as oppressed descendants of slaves, she chooses to focus on freedom that others sacrificed for. She notes that she feels most different around white people. Like when she goes to a jazz club with a white friend. She is inspired and touched by the music, while her white colleague merely compliments it as ‘good music’ (Hurston 2). Zora is astonished at how people choose to discriminate against others based on their race.

Baca’s poem ‘Immigrants in Our Own Land’ also explores the theme of identity. The narrator in the poem talks of moving from their homeland to the US, “looking for better days ahead” (Baca 2). The immigrants escaped bad experiences in their old life. The narrator talks of dictators who would break down their doors and shoot as they pleased. They came to the US with hope of a better life. The people are separated based on their race and ethnicity. The narrator writes, “So we go about our business, blacks with blacks, poor whites with poor whites, Chicanos and Indians by themselves” (Baca 27-29). The narrator then moves to a different setting, a prison cell. New people come into the prison frequently, and the narrator tells how prison will change them forever. Some will die in there while those who leave will go with hate in their eyes and no future ahead of them. Prison changes their identity as the narrator says, when they leave prison they will no longer be human.

Both Hurston and Baca writes about how society judges people based solely on their race and ethnicity. As a young girl, Hurston never thought of herself as a colored girl, she was simply Zora from Orange County. However, as she grew up, she noticed that people judged her simply from her appearance as a colored girl. She writes “Someone is always at my elbow reminding me that I am the granddaughter of slaves” (Hurston 2). People expect her to be sad and angry because of the African American history of slavery, but she chooses not to dwell on the past. She says that her ancestors paid the price for her freedom, and she will use it for glory and adventure. Hurston chooses not to conform to racial identities and politics, and pities those who miss out on her company just because she is black. She has experienced some discrimination, but she chooses to ignore it and focus on who she is as a person. She gives a metaphor of nags of different colors (Hurston 4). Only the contents of the bag matter, she does not focus on the color of the bags themselves.

Baca’s poem involves the narrator and other immigrants taking on a new identity. When they first come to the United States, they have a long process to get through before they can assume their new identity. They take many tests, get shots, new papers, and even new clothes. As the poem goes on, there is a sense of despair when the immigrants are put to work in separate groups. They had high expectations when they arrived, but they get had labor jobs that pay very little. Additionally, they are separated based on the race as the administration says that there should be no mixing of cultures. From this experience, it is clear that the immigrants do not belong in the new country. They came for a biter life, but soon they realize that nothing is different. The narrator also talks about his experience when incarcerated. Going to prison changes one’s identity. Life in prison isolates them from their work, from their families for so long that they give up hope. The narrator explains that when the inmates leave prison, few will remain as human as they came in. prison changes their identity after being away from the life they were used to for so long.

Everyone struggles to define who they are, but sometimes people are handed their identity and they have no say in the issue. A perfect example of this is race where people often encounter negative stereotypes and have to work hard to prove themselves against negative views and opinions. Hurston explains that people expected her to be angry and depressed due to black history of slavery. However, she chooses to define herself as a person rather than base her identity on race. The narrator in Baca’s poem explains how workers were separated based on race and how incarceration changes a person’s identity. Race is a destructive social construct that makes some feel inferior to others, which can be quite damaging, human beings should be judged on their character as an individual rather that by the color of their skin.

Works Cited

Baca, Jimmy Santiago. “Immigrants in our own land.” Baton Rouge: Louisiana State UP (1979).

Hurston, Zora Neale. How it feels to be colored me. Carlisle, Mass.: Applewood Books, 2015.

Specific Prevention Intervention

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Article Summary: Internet-Based Personalized Feedback to Reduce 21st-Birthday Drinking: A Randomized Controlled Trial of an Event-Specific Prevention Intervention

Many young people take their twenty-first birthday celebrations very seriously. Twenty-one is the legal age of drinking and those celebrating their birthdays take advantage of this day to celebrate their freedom. This has led to incidents such as deaths and hospitalizations. Parents, communities and hospital administrators have raised concern over this rite of passage that is most common in college students.

Some of the efforts that have been used previously to prevent this rite of twenty-first birthday drinking include mailed birthday cards containing normative intervention. However, this was found to have limited effectiveness. Providing information such as avoiding drinking games, limiting the number of drinks among other measures was found to reduce extreme drinking. These interventions were found to be effective in cases where the student planned to drink heavily on their twenty-first birthday (Neighbors, et al.). The study is aimed at evaluating the efficacy of web-based interventions.

Participants were selected from large universities, totaling 295 in number. Students were sent emails requesting their participation one week before their twenty-first birthdays. They were screened based on their intention to consume alcohol. The participants were contacted the day before their birthdays and four days after with a link to the web personalized feedback. The control group was only contacted four days after but not before their twenty-first birthdays. The participants were given a list of behaviors to reduce extreme drinking including spacing drinks and alternating between alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages. Hierarchal multiple regression was used to measure the efficacy of the intervention (Neighbors, et al.). From the results, the blood alcohol levels intentions were highly correlated with the levels reached on the twenty-first birthday drinking spree. The measures in the study include evaluating the efficacy of the intervention, perceived norms, and protective behaviors.

From the discussion of the findings, the web-based interventions were effective in reducing the blood alcohol levels of college students during their twenty-first birthdays. However, the limits were still over the legal limit of .08. Students who intended to reach a higher level, however, reached a lower threshold than they earlier planned. The web-based personalized interventions are useful because the drinking behavior of college students is not stable but fluctuates a lot. These interventions should be focused on those at the highest risk of extreme drinking. The main advantage of this study is that it is supported by empirical evidence. Students who had the intention to drink more were the most responsive to the web-based intervention.

Web-based interventions are much cheaper and consume less time. However, personalized feedback for twenty-first birthday drinking would be more effective if presented in person. An example of this is a hard copy of the interventions that would allow the students turning twenty-one to spend more time on the questionnaire. The study faced several limitations, the first of which is the low rate of participation. Abstainers and extreme drinkers are likely not to participate in the surveys (Neighbors,et al.). The second limitation is inconsistency in assessing the intentions of the strategy and the content provided in the intervention. Besides, self-reported levels of blood alcohol content became more inaccurate as the levels of intoxication increased. Students with higher levels may have reported lower levels. Third, the feedback programming did not allow the researchers to assess how long the participants viewed each page. Despite these limitations, the study makes a significant contribution to the analysis of the efficacy of preventive measures on extreme drinking among college students. Inclusion of norms and analysis of blood alcohol levels should be the main focus of future studies.

Works Cited

Neighbors, Clayton, et al. “Internet-based personalized feedback to reduce 21st-birthday drinking: A randomized controlled trial of an event-specific prevention intervention.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 77.1 (2009): 51.

Libyan Islamic Fighting Group

Name:

Course:

Professor:

Date:

Libyan Islamic Fighting Group

Since the overthrowing of Gaddafi’s government in 2011, the country faced years of civil war. The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group spearheaded protests against Gaddafi’s government. The group had been in existence since the 1990s and was identified by the United Nations as a terrorist group (Bhardwaj). This group wanted to overthrow Gaddafi and turn Libya into a state under Islamic law. Gaddafi had been in power for 42 years and kept a tight rein on his government, which was ranked among the most corrupt in the world. The United States wanted to see Gaddafi ousted, so on this point their quest was aligned with that of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

Encouraged by the Arab Spring in other North African countries such as Tunisia and Egypt, the rebels marched across the country in protest of Gaddafi. While most of the protesters were Libyan citizens, a significant number of them were from the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group and the United States had full knowledge of this fact. From Wiki Leaks documents in 2005, the leader of the rebels Abu Sufian Ibrahim Ahmed Hamuda Bin Qumu was a member of al-Qaeda (Bhardwaj). It is apparent that the U.S. government was aware of the fact the rebellion in Libya was led by terrorist factions yet did nothing since they too wanted to see Gaddafi ousted from office.

Works Cited

Bhardwaj, Maya. “Development of conflict in Arab Spring Libya and Syria: From revolution to civil war.” Washington University International Review 1.1 (2012): 76-97..