Friday, December 27, 2019

Mein Kampf Jewish Virtual Library - 988 Words

In Mein Kampf, Hitler wrote various hate-filled comments such as,â€Å"The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew†(â€Å"Mein Kampf: Jewish Virtual Library† 7). This is only one of the variou slurs the dictator used in the Mein Kampf. There were many controversial topics in the book, not just the derogation of the Jews. He explains the formation of his views and thoughts along with the construction of the Nazi party. Hitler â€Å"decided the he would rule the world with words† and he would be successful in doing so (Zusak 445). The printed work is one of the most popular and well known books in today’s time (Goss 20).Mein Kampf was an iconic symbol of WWII due to Adolf’s view of a future Germany. Most†¦show more content†¦In Book Thief, Hans was constantly being disregarded by the Nazi party for being a â€Å"jew lover’. When he went out to buy a copy of Mein Kampf, a passerby comm ents, â€Å"he will never be approved†¦ even if he buys a hundred copies† (Zusak 128). It was as if buying a book by Adolf Hitler would diminish all of the bad deeds Hans had done but it would no longer help due to Hans sympathy towards the Jew. Hitler targeted the Jews in Mein Kampf, blaming them for the loss of war, which people agreed on. Hitler believed that he was â€Å"acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending [himself] against the Jew, [he is] fighting for the work of the Lord†(â€Å"Mein Kampf: Jewish Virtual Library† 6). He had convinced himself that the Jews were dragging down the Aryans, Hitler’s supreme race, from rightfully ruling the world. The â€Å"struggle for world domination† was an â€Å"ongoing racial, cultural, and political battle between Aryans and Jews† (â€Å"Adolf Hitler: Mein Kampf†12). Hitler could not trust the Jews who he believed to be founded upon lies (â€Å"Mein Kampf: Jewish Virtual Library† 6). These views were to be spread throughout the country even in school classrooms. The Hitler Youth program, which Liesel was in, was established to do so. When Hans Junior spots Liesel reading a book, he questions her. â€Å"She should be reading Mein Kampf,’ he comments towards Hans. The idea of being superior to

Thursday, December 19, 2019

Aristotle and John Locke on Nature and Purpose of a...

When I think about a political community, I usually associate it with elections, politicians, and advertisements that bad mouth candidates from the different political parties. Politicians try to persuade citizens to vote for them by making promises that they may never fulfill. But a political community is more than that. A comparison of Aristotle and John Locke’s nature and purpose of a political community has given me a new insight. I learned that, even though the political community is responsible to provide security, its main purpose is aimed for the highest good of all its citizens, which is virtue and happiness. While some differences between Aristotle and John Locke’s nature and purpose of a political community are obvious, the similarities are noticeable. According to Aristotle, the nature and purpose of a political community is for the greater or highest good of all its citizens, which according to him, is virtue and happiness. The purpose of the community is to make it possible for the citizens to achieve this virtue and happiness. â€Å"It is constituted out of numerous households for the sake of satisfying the needs of its citizens other the everyday ones† (Aristotle, Politics 1252b -15). For example, if someone in the community wants their roof to be fixed, they can get it done by a carpenter from the community. Likewise, if the carpenter wants a shirt to be mended, he can get it done by a tailor from the community. In this way the community will be best servedShow MoreRelatedThe Constitution Of Government And Selections From Aristotle s Politics1009 Words   |  5 Pagesprinciples of government, which was ever written,† writers Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay sought to articulate and defend the integrity of the new Constitution, and to demonstrate the ways in which it fulfilled the requirements necessary to establish a Republican form of government. However, as seen in the opening quote, the new Constitution, while drawing from previous political science, in many ways offered new solutions to the old and constant problems inherent in a democraticRead MoreEmpiricism Is The Theory That Experience1202 Words   |  5 Pagesdifferent emphases and refinements; therefore, philosophers who have been labeled empiricists are united generally and may differ in various ways. The Empiricist Revolution helped facilitate discussion on real world, political problems. Since this revolution, philosophers and political theorists have developed two different ideas on what politics should be about and how a government should be ran: politics should be about making citizens more virtuous vs politics should be about the â€Å"basics† like securityRead MoreThe Good Ghanaian Society 1068 Words   |  5 Pagescitizens.’ Nearly every political and economic philosopher from the time of Aristotle to Max Weber has agreed that the provision o f a good society is the ultimate purpose of government. Once the role of government has been defined, it thus becomes imperative to further define how this good society would be established and it is at this point that all the great thinkers whose works are sandwiched in the library between Aristotle and Weber, defined it differently. To Aristotle, the Good Society permitsRead MoreKarl Marx And Friedrich Engels1626 Words   |  7 Pagesthe expectations of Marx and Engels. They were misguided and foolish in their attempts to install a communistic government. This paper will argue that the rise of a true communistic government has yet to happen and it will compare the two political thinkers such John Lock and Karl Marx and their understanding of property and private property. This paper will also examine the failed attempt established by Lenin which caused the over wide fear of communism and the possible rise of a new communistic stateRead MoreAnalysis Of David Hume s Theory Of Justice2868 Words   |  12 Pagesright to take this right away? John Rawls felt that society was responsible for deciding who properly owns property, whether it s individually or communally owned. In his influential work, A Theory of Justice, Rawls conception of society is defined by justice as fairness. Essentially saying that social ins titutions must be open and fair to all, and while wealth and power may be distributed unequally, this distribution must be for the benefit of all. While John Rawls had little to say in regardsRead MoreThe Philosophical And Sociocultural Influences On Educational Theory And Practice958 Words   |  4 Pagesorganized education has been initiated and instated to serve many purposes – spiritual salvation, political socialization, moral uplift, societal stability, social mobility, mental discipline, vocational efficiency, and social reform, among others.† The changes that take place in education are a directly result of the ever growing and shifting needs of students and society. Furthermore, political demands, sociocultural differences, community expectations, parental authority, and professional difficultiesRead MorePhilosophical And Sociocultural Influences On Educational Theory And Practice954 Words   |  4 Pagesâ€Å"Historically, organized education has been ini tiated and instated to serve many purposes – spiritual salvation, political socialization, moral uplift, societal stability, social mobility, mental discipline, vocational efficiency, and social reform, among others.† The changes that result in education stem from the ever growing and shifting needs of students and society. Furthermore, political demands, sociocultural differences, community expectations, parental authority, and professional difficulties causeRead MoreWhat Have Theorists Meant by Liberty? Essay example1589 Words   |  7 Pagesfrom restriction or control, it embodies the right to act, believe or express oneself in the manner of ones own choosing. In this essay I am going to look at the theorists such as Locke, Mill, Hobbes, Machiavelli, Rousseau and Milton to identify what they meant by liberty. The ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle thought liberty was an ideal that could not fully exist in its pure form in the human world. Liberty ha s a different meaning in the modern world than it did in the ancient. BenjaminRead MoreMachiavelli, Hobbes, And Locke1791 Words   |  8 PagesPaper 2 By looking at the readings of Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Locke, there are a few distinctions between how the modern thinkers viewed politics versus the way the ancient thinkers believed politics should be. There are many topics both modern and ancient thinkers discuss in their writings, such as the purpose of politics, the science of politics, human nature, as well as the ideal regime. By doing so, these thinkers’ views on political topics such as these illuminate how they thought politics shouldRead MorePolitical Philosophy and Plato Essay9254 Words   |  38 Pagesstrongly felt today in the use of the scientific method, in which hypothesis is the first stage. The development and practice of this method is one of Socrates most enduring contributions, and is a key factor in earning his mantle as the father of political philosophy, ethics or moral philosophy, and as a figurehead of all the central themes in Western philosophy. To illustrate the use of the Socratic method; a series of questions are posed to help a person or group to determine their underlying beliefs

Wednesday, December 11, 2019

Managing Risks in Commercial & Banking-Free-Samples for Students

Question: Discuss about the Risk Management Practices in Insurance Companies, Manufacturing, Services, and Banking Sectors in Namibia. Answer: Risk management refers to the assessment of financial risks, their nature of exposure to the company, and the formulation of processes or strategies of mitigating the identified risks. The financial sectors are associated with various risks which require proper management hence they embrace various practices so as to avoid certain risks. Risk management helps to minimize the risks exposure of the organizations. (Ghosh, 2012). The financial sectors embrace the idea that risk management requires the identification of the potential losses by assessing the creditworthiness, recognizing the risk, assessing the risk, and developing policies to manage it and vindication of the risks. In Namibia, the banking sectors normally adopt the Basel Accords to track, report, and expose unscrupulous behaviors and other operational risks. Some other practices include outlining the risk exposure and prioritizing it. Some risks may pose to be more dangerous to the organization than others hence they are given the first priority. This means that the potential risks should be identified and given a scale of preference. The risk matters should be in a common language such that every person is able to understand the problem and participate fully in coming up with solutions (Hull, 2012). The organizations can also hire the experts to develop risk management strategies. The financial sectors should centralize the risk management policies so that it becomes easier to manage them. The development of the risk management tools is another practice using the IT systems. Companies need to centralize their communication lines and operations to establish unity and order of command within the enterprise. References Top of Form Ghosh, A. (2012).Managing Risks in Commercial and Retail Banking. New York: Wiley. Press. Bottom of Form Top of Form Hull, J. (2012).Risk management and financial institutions + website. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley Sons, Inc. Press. Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form

Tuesday, December 3, 2019

Skills of Conflicts resolution Essay Example

Skills of Conflicts resolution Essay This work focuses on the conflicts and conflict management mechanisms that arise at the levels of plants and workplaces. Traditionally, this type of dispute resolution has been a major area of interest for scholars in industrial relations, so much research has been done on this topic (Halpern 1992). But major changes have been occurring in the basic characteristics of business relations in the United States because of efforts directed at increasing cooperation between labor and management. This changing context for dispute resolution requires a reexamination of our understanding of how business relations systems now operate. One purpose of this work is to discuss the broad nature of multi-criteria conflict resolution, rather than focus on the litigation and legal policy conflicts that are usually emphasized. Another purpose is to compare different types of conflict resolution, including negotiation, mediation, empathy, and other skills of conflicts resolution. The conflict discussed here provides insights into significant model cases occurring in the management by reviewing the developments of interacting of a buyer with a seller.A significant and growing minority of the more sophisticated managers and their lawyers is coming to recognize that, for many conflicts, various alternatives offer the possibility of producing better results than do trials. Judges are constrained by the need to respond to the issues as they are presented by the litigants attorneys and to follow legal precedents. They often lack the technical or managerial expertise that may be required to understand technical conflicts. These straightjackets need not confine private mediators, neutral experts, or arbitrators. As they become more personally involved in the business of resolving conflicts, some managers are recognizing that they can apply their own business knowledge and creativity to developing solutions better suited to their needs than courts and lawyers alone could devise.Disputes be tween business firms are mainly consumer disputes in the sense that one business firm is a seller and the other is a buyer. This is a very different kind of dispute than the kinds of disputes covered under the consumer dispute category, which mainly involve retail stores and individual buyers. These two kinds of consumer disputes raise an interesting equity question. If the individual buyer is cheated by a retail store, the individual buyer may have to wait months to obtain justice in a traditional courtroom or small claims court, assuming the consumer pursues the matter through the legal process. On the other hand, the business firm as a consumer may arrange to hire a judge as part of the modern commercial arbitration process. At first glance, this practice might seem unfair, and perhaps should be a stimulus to some kind of restrictive legislation. At second glance, commercial arbitration may be socially desirable. The types and complexity of cases going to court also have increase d (Mills 1990). Claims for injuries to consumers by products manufactured or sold by business, for workers exposure to occupational hazards, and for damage to the environment, all of which have grown in number, involve complicated causal relationships and scientific uncertainty.A conflict between two business firms usually involves a buyer-seller relation. Suppose a seller sells a buyer some bad upholstery or upholstery contrary to specifications. Both sides might have a fair chance of winning in court. A buyer could argue that it was sellers fault and that the specifications were not sufficiently clear. The seller could argue that the specifications were clear but the buyer did not comply. They could spend a lot of money fighting each other. The seller then loses what may have been a good source of upholstery. The buyer loses a good customer, and everybody winds up substantially worse off than before.When the seller and the buyer affirmatively attempt to resolve conflicts (rather t han walk away), the most typical way to do so is through negotiation, through which people try to settle their own disputes (Vayrynen 1991). As attempts at settlement progress along the spectrum, outsiders become involved in increasingly active ways, through mediation or some hybrid involving elements of predicting outcome. As outside participation increases, the disputing parties surrender more and more power to resolve their own disputes. Their surrender reaches its ultimate at the far right of the spectrum with adjudication, where outsiders are given the power to make binding decisions for the parties. Arbitration most often is conducted in private, through private decisionmakers. In other forms of adjudication, those decisions are public and are made by public bodies, namely courts or administrative agencies. (Legislatures also make binding, publicly enforceable decisions.) People who use one or more of the various techniques for set ling disputes generally attempt to preempt su ch decision-making through their own agreement. The basic processes for settling disputes are negotiation, mediation, and adjudication.The commercial arbitration approach seeks to work out traditional compromises that are better, but not necessarily super-optimum solutions. A super-optimum solution in the business would might involve some kind of a merger of interests that go beyond the immediate sale. The seller would perhaps like to own a company that makes upholstery, and thereby cut out the middleman and the profits that go to some other company. The buyer would perhaps like to own a company that makes cars, thereby having a large market for its auto upholstery.In negotiation, one side is probably going to win and the other side is going to lose. The loser is likely to be bitter. The winner may feel guilty or disrespectful to the loser. In general, the results are likely to be increased friction. In mediation (especially super-optimum mediation), there is a good possibility of t he problems being resolved to the point where new problems have to occur in order to have a dispute, rather than a reviving of the old conflict. In empathy there is also a winner and a loser. Having disputes resolved by a professional third party has been an important advance in the development of world civilization over the parties resorting to violent resolution or tactics in which the winner is determined by might or power, rather than the rule of objectively administered law. It is, however, ironic (or maybe part of normal world progress) that we now seem to be at a stage where what was considered such an advance in the past is now being substantially improved upon by the mediation perspective (Musambachime 2001). This perspective emphasizes everyone coming out ahead. It also emphasizes preventive action. It is in conformity with a quality of life in which resources are not so scarce, and there is continual economic growth. This kind of expansion facilitates mutually beneficial solutions, even super-optimum solutions, where all sides come out ahead of their best expectations.A critical negotiating skill is the ability to identify the negotiators own as well as other parties interests. In order to do this, interests, or underlying needs, must be separated from positions, the public stands the parties take concerning the issues in dispute. Parties should ask themselves and one another why they care about a particular issue. The answer may well reveal their underlying needs.For example, if an employee asks for a raise, does she need the money? Or does she believe that she currently lacks the prestige her contributions should bring? Or does she consider herself unfairly treated as compared with other employees, who she believes do work of the same or less importance? Is the employers position based on financial or equitable considerations? Do the parties have different views of the employees performance or her value to the company? Generally, each party to a negotiation will have several different interests, which need to be ranked in priority order. Once priorities are understood, it may be possible to devise trade-offs of issues that are unimportant to one party but critical to the other.If the parties can agree on standards, or neutral principles, to govern their settlement, agreement on substance will be easier. It also may seem fairer and less arbitrary. Examples of standards parties might agree to are laws, court decisions, technical specifications, or regulations; neutral appraisals of property to determine values; blue book prices for automobiles; and methods such as letting the person who does not cut the pie choose the first piece.There are several important truths or truisms about the role of negotiating as a technique in dispute resolution between buyer and seller. First, it seems by far the most common dispute resolution technique in this sector of relations. This should be an unsurprising point to make in the context of a functioning social community, particularly one based largely around exchange activities of various kinds. It helps explain the plethora of instructional manuals on the topic, largely geared to the business world. However, most such manuals rightly observe in their introductions that we are in fact negotiating a great deal of the time in human encounters although we may refer to it by other labels— influencing, persuasion, argument, putting our point of view across, sorting things out, being diplomatic, and so on.Negotiating is a basic means of getting what you want from others. It is back-and-forth communication designed to reach an agreement when you and the other side have some interests that are shared and others that are opposed. In our case the parties value the agreement or relationship more highly than they do the values embodied in relevant legal rules. Second, even in those disputes where the parties’ relationship is such that a failure of negotiation has led them to enter the adversarial system of litigation, nevertheless most such cases still end up by settling through negotiation before the forum of adjudication is reached. Studies in the United States and the UK repeatedly demonstrate that over 90 per cent of civil actions end up as out-of-court settlements.In addition, the various parties to a dispute have a range of options in achieving their goals. These include using the legislative arena, regulatory agencies, the courts, or even a decision not to do anything (stalemate). A choice of options is dependent upon a groups power, resources, and a cost-benefit analysis of one option over another. The notion of countervailing power is vital. A party lacking some form of countervailing power is at the mercy of stronger groups.Successful negotiations usually include a limited number of parties. This limited number of parties is both a strength and a weakness. A small group can more easily negotiate, but those interests left out may conte st this result. The limited number of parties is the basis for looking at regulatory negotiation as corporatist in nature.The issue should be mature, a concrete question on which the agency is ready to issue a rule. Related to this is the criterion that the decision be inevitable: if the groups do not negotiate a recommendation, then the agency will issue a rule through traditional processes. The issue should be a non-zero-sum game, or a win-win situation: every party should be better off than if it had not participated. Otherwise, there would be no reason to participate. There should be multiple issues, so that there is something to trade. Research should not dictate a result; although research (and information in general) is important, there generally should be no fundamental research needed that would settle issues. Finally, the agreement should be implemented; the agency should use the agreement, and therefore may (but not necessarily) be part of the negotiations.Mediation/arbit ration (med/arb) is used by disputants who want a binding decision if they cannot agree (Avruch 1991). The third party mediates, then if an agreement is not reached, decides the dispute. The same person often is used to mediate and arbitrate so that the parties do not have to start over if they cannot resolve their dispute in mediation. A person performing both functions is not supposed to use any confidential information learned during mediation in reaching the arbitration decision. But no one knows whether such information actually can be excluded from the arbitrators mind or, conversely, whether the knowledge that the mediator eventually may make a decision prevents the parties from sharing confidential information in the first place. Consequently, some disputants (and many neutrals) prefer to use a different person to arbitrate if they fail to settle in mediation.The third-party techniques can be used directly to assist parties to reach their own agreement, including for example judicial settlement conferences or expert opinion. The domain of ‘assisted’ or ‘structured’ negotiation or settlement is of great interest because the method retains the value of a consensual settlement (therefore offering what is often a more satisfying, sophisticated and stable settlement than a ‘win-lose’ trial verdict) while smoothing the path towards such settlement by means of third-party intervention (Gleason ; Sandra 1997). Of the techniques proposed, the main category of third-party intervention is mediation, although such mediation can take a number of forms, for example voluntary or court-ordered. Sometimes the term ‘conciliation’ is also used. The difference normally drawn between the terms—in one case, the third party seeks to encourage the parties to reach their own agreement (conciliation), in the other case the third party makes positive recommendations for settlement (mediation)—is often a little con trived and difficult to distinguish in practice (Vayrynen 1991).All this material is relevant to the more specifically focused problem of litigation mediation and to the more broadly based problem of mediating any kind of conflict. These concepts can facilitate litigation settlements or other kinds of settlements. The multi-criteria aspects are especially helpful when the settlement involves a package arrangement with one side giving on a number of matters that are not so important to it, but are important to the other side. It is the multicriteria aspect that is most important. The other concepts are basically visual or conceptual aids that enable the parties to see more clearly how the multi-criteria package is in their best interests.The mediator has the same advantage as the arbitrator as far as informality and quietness, but not the disadvantage of having to think in terms of a rightwrong dichotomy. The mediator can try to find right on both sides and work out a settlement that can (if done well) be better than the best expectations of either side. Mediation is a popular dispute resolution process in business law cases, and has even been made mandatory in some states (Rabie 1994). Like arbitration, it is a less formal procedure than litigation and involves the activities of a neutral third party. Often the experienced mediator can help the parties create solutions that neither had thought of individually.Either type could be rated as effective. Successful negotiating, in other words, is not associated particularly with one orientation, but can be demonstrated in either mode. What distinguished the effective negotiator from the ineffective? Amongst the important qualities of the effective co-operatives are their desire to get a fair settlement, avoid litigation and at the same time maximize settlement for the client. The ineffective co-operatives, on the other hand, lack perceptiveness and are not convincing, realistic or rational. Effective competitives a re tough in negotiations, and sought to maximize settlement for the client (and their fee) and outdo or outmaneuver their opponent. They treated negotiating as a game to win by getting the better of the other side. Ineffective competitives, however, are described as irritating, headstrong, unreasonable, arrogant and obstructive, lacking the perceptiveness and realism of the effective competitiveness.In contrast to the friendly, trustworthy approach of the co-operative/effectives, effective/competitives are seen as dominating, competitive, forceful, tough, arrogant, and uncooperative. They make high opening demands, they use threats, they are willing to stretch the facts in favor of their clients’ positions, they stick to their positions, and they are parsimonious with information about the case rather than seeking an outcome that is ‘fair’ to both sides, they want to outdo the other side; to score a clear victory (Ross ; Stillinger 1991).The key qualities which e ffective competitives and effective co-operatives share are that both seen as experienced (hence confident), ethical and trustworthy (despite the competitive’s tough gamesmanship), observed professional customs, are in general realistic, rational and analytical, were fully prepared on facts and law, are legally astute, self-controlled, perceptive and skilled at reading their opponent’s cues (Kramer, Newton, ; Pommerenke 1993). Also both are creative, versatile and adaptable—effective competitives are apparently tough but not obstinate.The study is a major landmark in studies of legal negotiations, both for its strong empirical base, and for its capacity to deal with the complexities of ‘effectiveness’ in negotiation and the relations between negotiating styles, settlement and litigation (Burton ; John 1990). The two orientations identified have their advantages and disadvantages, particularly if not handled effectively, and even then the effective t ough negotiator may have to live with a lower settlement rate. More lawyers, however, are co-operative in orientation, and more co-operatives are ‘effective’. A major saving in trial time could be made if one were to improve the negotiating skills of ineffective negotiators.Conflict is an integral part of individual life and of intergroup and interstate relationships. Conflict can never be eliminated; it can only be managed to minimize its negative impact, reduce its intensity, and facilitate its positive role in human development. Conflict resolution or eradication is not an alternative because it translates into the elimination of choice and perceptual difference. This goal is neither feasible nor desirable. The best we can do is to learn to live with conflict. Conflict resolution is not a process to eliminate conflict but to vastly moderate its intensity and impact, eliminating the negative and reducing conflict to a subconscious force that continues to motivate peop le but does not dominate their outward attitudes and intergroup relationships.