Red Badge of Courage Essay: Isolation -- Red Badge Courage Essays

Isolation in The Red Badge of Courage      Ã‚   Stephen Crane's literary technique has long been a matter of analysis and speculation. In The Red Badge of Courage Crane takes us into the life of a young man named Henry Fleming, who wants to enlist in the Army and fight in the war against the South. By using irony, similes, and symbols, Crane "paints" a vivid picture of what life was like for the fragile Henry Fleming. He opens our eyes to the vast reasons of separation for Fleming, and why he lived his life so independently. The precarious, vulnerable, and insecure Henry Fleming was isolated from more than just his family and his regiment; he was isolated from himself.    As the narrative, The Red Badge of Courage, opens, Henry and his mother are engaged in a quarrel about Henry leaving to join the Army. By going against his mother's wishes and disobeying her, he isolates himself from his family. This isolation is imperative to the way Henry lives his life during his time in the Army. Moral support is something that a family, especially a mother, provides for a child, but because Henry has disa... ...s effort.    Works Cited Bloom, Harold, ed.   Modern Critical Interpretations:   Stephan Crane's The Red Badge of Courage.   New York:   Chelsea House Publishers, 1987. Crane, Stephen. The Red Badge of Courage.   Logan, IA:   Perfection Learning Corporation, 1999. Gibson, Donald B. The Red Badge of Courage:   Redefining the Hero.   Boston:   Twayne Publishers, 1988. Wolford, Chester L.   "Stephen Crane."   Critical Survey of Long Fiction.   Ed. Frank N. Magill.   English Language Series.   Vol. 2. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Salem Press, 1991.   

In Praise of Folly - Erasmus Dichotomy Essay -- In Praise of Folly Es

In Praise of Folly - Erasmus' Dichotomy      Ã‚   The Silenus box is a "case carved like an ugly Silenus" that can be "opened to reveal beautiful, precious objects" (Erasmus 43, footnote). This box appears in Erasmus' Praise of Folly as a metaphor for the central claim in the novel, which is that that which appears to be Folly (ugly) externally, is wise (precious) within. Erasmus reveals this dichotomy on three levels: in the image of the box itself, in his genuine praise of Folly, and in the structure of the novel as a whole. Erasmus, using the female voice of Folly, introduces his reader to the image of the Silenus box early in the text, thereby allowing his reader to carry the image with her for the rest of her time reading (and see its metaphoric nature when appropriate). Folly makes the introduction, saying, "All human affairs... have two aspects quite different from each other." She then goes on to explain that this means, according to Plato, that things that "appear 'at first blush'... to be death, will, if you examine [them] more closely, turn out to be life... in brief, you will find everything suddenly reversed if you open the Silenus" (43). In more direct terms, something which on its surface seems one way (the 'bad' way), has opposite ('good') guts. In The Praise of Folly, the pair of opposites that Erasmus focuses on is that of folly and wisdom. By including a passage dedicated to the description of the Silenus, Erasmus gives his readers a concrete picture to grasp onto that stands for the novel's link between this pair of opposites, which is that wisdom comes under the wrapping of folly. The passage allows the reader to understand this central concept more easily. The concept, in its many manifestations, c... ...this same literary tradition, Rabelais utilizes this peculiar narrative technique in Gargantua and Pantagruel, where he too hides the wisdom in his work behind the veil of foolish, and even vulgar, language. Erasmus' inclusion of the passage explaining the Selenus box allows it to be a metaphor for the central concept in the novel. Through its presence, Erasmus gives us, his readers, a tool with which to separate the layers of his text. Without it, we might be stranded (after reading) with the inaccurate belief that Erasmus was a babbling hypocrite, with contradictory ideas sprinkled throughout his work. But, I suppose, we could have just attributed that fault to Folly, who is always more than willing to accept such a title. Work Cited Erasmus, D. 1511. In Praise of Folly. (Translated by L. Dean and republished by Hendricks House Farrar Straus. 1946.)

Elton’s interpretation of the roles of Somerset and Northumberland Essay

Geoffrey Elton presented a view of Somerset as an incompetent leader, who failed to fill the political vacuum the ascension of an infant monarch had created; nonetheless, he was noble minded and had visionary aims. On the other hand, Elton saw Northumberland as ambitious and power greedy; however, he did recognise that Northumberland had introduced welcome reforms to the finances and administration, which certainly marked an improvement upon Somerset’s rule. In this essay, I will argue that Elton’s assessment of their reforms and actions was correct, although his judgement of their characters, although true to a certain extent, has been exaggerated. Somerset demonstrated very little concern for humanitarian reform, as has been said by historians such as Elton, and his rule merely exacerbated problems at the end of Henry’s reign. However, Northumberland showed more political ability in tackling the equally bad situation he faced and was not as power hungry as Elto n suggested. There were significant problems at the end of Henry’s reign. His foreign policy had led to a poor financial situation; wars with France and Scotland, although a matter of national pride, actually achieved very little and led to huge debts. Over 2 million had already been spent on the war with Scotland, however victory would have far outweighed these huge financial repercussions. Somerset, therefore, inherited huge financial problems with huge debts and a debased coinage; in addition, the war with Scotland continued and hostilities with France were high. However, it would be a mistake to say that the situation was at a point of no return, Somerset’s political inability is demonstrated in his failure to deal with the situation inherited from Henry. Indeed, his actions worsened the financial status of the Crown and served only to escalate discontent in his reign. Somerset’s political inability is shown in his failure to discontinue the damaging Scottish war; he didn’t realise, as his successor did, that the Scottish war was unsustainable. Rather, Somerset’s decision to continue the war was the worst possible start for his rule and indicative of his inability, it lead to a poor economic situation throughout his protectorate and also to his neglect of the more important issues facing his subjects. The Chantries Act (1547) that continued the dissolution of the monasteries in Henry’s reign created inflation; as a result, prices, especially grain, rose rapidly fuelling discontent among the poor. Had Somerset been more politically astute, he would have ended the Scottish war and undertaken financial reform. Instead, he made little or no effort to resolve the economic problems and left Northumberland with a worse situation than he had inherited. In this respect, I agree with Elton, who said that Somerset was â€Å"without any sign of administrative or political sense,† 1 this was not, however, limited to his economic policy. Somerset also inherited a nation divided on religion. Henry, although he had split from papal authority, never made the full transition from Catholicism to Protestantism as Northumberland did later in the Edwardian period. Rather, the doctrinal modifications, which followed the split from Rome, resulted in a confused nation. The ten articles of 1536 had seemed to establish England as Protestant; however, the six articles 3 years later represented the return of some Catholic doctrine. As a result, there was a certain confusion and ambiguity as regards the state religion to some extent to do with the competition of the conservative and reform factions of the court, but also the fact the Henry had never been totally converted to Protestantism. Nevertheless, since he followed a monarch who had implemented perhaps the largest religious reform in the history of the church, Somerset had to deal with a situation of religious insecurity. Arguably, the effects of religious reform are harder to forecast than the effects of economic policy; therefore, it is easier to condemn Somerset as inept on the basis of his economic policies than it is on the basis of his religious reforms. Somerset’s religious reforms moved towards Protestantism with the introduction of a new Prayer Book and the Act of Uniformity as well as the Chantries Act, which abolished the remnants of Catholicism. However, in an attempt to appease both sides of the spectrum, a certain ambiguity still remained and Catholicism had not been categorically denied. However, the reforms were met only with discontent, for some it was too extreme and for others too moderate. The Treason Act, which ended restrictions on the discussion of religious doctrine, served only to make matters worse and led to disorder. In terms of religious reform, the outcome would have been more stable had Somerset done nothing. We have seen that religious turmoil was the result of a lack of continuity in the short Edwardian and Marian eras. This suggests that a period of stability following the fast paced religious reform of the Henrician rule would have been beneficial in Somerset’s protectorate. However, as we have noted, the outcome of religious reform would have been much harder to gauge at the time. While Somerset’s religious policy is not the sign of an expert politician, it cannot be used to condemn him to the same extent as his economic record. His religious reform, therefore, supports Elton’s view that â€Å"Somerset had talked much about liberty but had produced disorder.† 2 His aim to appease the extremes can at least be seen as well meaning, while his actions were not those of an experienced politician; furthermore, his belief that appeasing the extremes was possible at th is point is arguably naive. Somerset was poor at dealing with the growing feeling of discontent in England. Not only was he largely responsible for the growth of discontent due to his economic and religious policies, but more importantly, instead of dealing with the roots of discontent he attempted to control the disorder that resulted. The Vagrancy Act (1547) was a heavy-handed attempt to control the public, it meant that anyone out or work for 3 days would be branded with a V and sold into slavery for two years. He put out the message that dissent was not to be tolerated, though his action was strong it showed few signs of effective leadership. As his reign progressed it was clear that he showed no signs of dealing with the root of the issue, rather to avoid rebellion. A reform programme was supposedly being put together by John Hales, who later turned out not to exist. Furthermore, having blamed the problems on enclosure, reforms to remedy the problem were merely piecemeal and demonstrated indecisiveness. Somerset was inept; the paranoid measures preceding his fall such as bans on football and on the spreading of rumours simply confirm the hypothesis that Somerset had no real understanding of the political situation. In a similar vein to his belief that he could appease the religious extremes, attempting to pacify a discontented populace with piecemeal anti-enclosure measures and a fake reform programme was equally naive. Somerset fell from grace because of his own inability to rule; Elton’s assessment was clearly correct: â€Å"Somerset was †¦ disastrous as a leader.† 3 However, Elton’s view of Somerset as a humanitarian reformer with the best intentions exceeds the reasonable bounds of optimism. Most people, who have a most basic sense of human rights, would see the Vagrancy Act as simply morally corrupt. His poor management of the economy and heavy-handed measures of control hit those most in need the hardest. This demonstrates almost a total disregard for the needs of the poor; furthermore, anyone regarded as a humanitarian reformer, or at least a man with good intentions, would be incapable of passing the Vagrancy Act. It has been conceded that some good will may have lay behind his religious reform, also anti-enclosure legislation may show faint concern for the poor. However, such evidence is far outweighed by his record of controlling legislation. Somerset was not a humanitarian reformer; Elton seems to have avoided the conclusion that a rudimentary presentation of the facts would suggest. Rather, the failure of anti-enclosure legislation is evidence of Somerset appeasing the elite as well attempting to pacify the poor, an end from which he could gain a lot more politic al capital. Indeed, far from concurring with Elton’s thesis on this issue, I suggest that Somerset was motivated by a desire to secure his own position of power. His continued use of proclamations as well as his neglect of the Privy Council demonstrates this theme. The Treason Act had done more than permit religious discussions; it repealed a previous act, which said that royal proclamations had the same force as acts of Parliament. Consequently, Somerset was now able to issue proclamations without the consent of his council and he frequently availed himself of this opportunity. Indeed, on average Somerset issued 13 more proclamations per year that usual. Furthermore, his attempts to hold onto power by control rather than tackling the root issues point to a man who was motivated by a need to secure his own position. Elton did recognise his neglect of the council: â€Å"He alienated his fellow councillors whose feelings and ideas he persistently ignored.† 4 However, Elton did not recognise the power seeking nature of Somerset’s character. I would agree with Heard who presented Somerset, not as a man with noble aims as Elton suggests, but as an â€Å"arrogant self-seeker.† 5 Therefore, It seems that Elton was correct in his judgement of Somerset as an inept leader as demonstrated in his economic and to some extent his religious policies as well as his abysmal handling of a situation of unrest, which he himself had created. However, Somerset was power seeking, not a man of noble aims; his record of legislation was clearly not motivated by a concern for the poor. Elton said: â€Å"It is difficult to say who did more harm to the country they were supposed to govern.† 6 It can certainly be said that Somerset exacerbated the poor situation after Henry’s reign, the economic situation worsened through continuation of the wars and the Chantries Act. Religious confusion was not eased and arguably fuelled dissent and he left a country in unrest after the rebellions that led to his fall. Therefore, I agree with Elton’s view that he was inept and cause harm to the country, although I disagree with Elton’s view of Somerset’s aims. Northumberland, on the other hand, introduced welcome reforms. Elton argues as much, however I believe Elton exaggerated his assessment of Northumberland as power hungry; furthermore, Northumberland’s effective reforms did not harm the country and it is unjust to tar Northumberland and Somerset with the same brush. Northumberland inherited a worse situation than Somerset and demonstrated political astuteness in his action, which dealt with the root of the problem. In addition, his dealings with the Privy Council and use of proclamation were far removed from the power hungry tactics of Somerset. Though his religious policy was arguably harsh and his attempts to alter the succession seem power seeking, Elton exaggerated this element of Northumberland’s character. Arguably, Northumberland’s best move was to end the Scottish and French wars. Indeed, the way in which the two leaders dealt with the wars can be seen as key in defining their rule and also how we interpret their ability. The treaty of Boulogue, although bad for England in the short-term, allowed the finances to improve and Northumberland to focus on the serious social unrest, Somerset’s mess that Northumberland was forced to deal with. The treaty is a clear indication of Northumberland’s superior ability to Somerset; indeed, this theme is shown throughout the governance. Far from harming the country, Northumberland had shown realism and taken the first step towards recovery. Furthermore, re-evaluation of the coinage and prohibition of usury in 1552 helped to improve the economy. Northumberland, in contrast with Somerset, made some positive achievements; his economic policies helped to reverse the terrible situation left by Somerset. Moreover, his governance seem s to have shown a commitment to reform, which had a current and lasting positive effect. The reformation of the revenue courts was indicative of this commitment to reform. In 1549, five ministries were responsible for collecting money and the situation was worsened by corruption in some courts. Although reform was not carried out under his rule, the recommendations of the Royal Commission were carried out in the Marian era. Therefore, the Boulogue treaty coupled with other economic policies and a clear commitment to financial reform demonstrates that Northumberland was an able politician. Northumberland’s economic policies were sound and he should be praised for steering a course out of the economic disaster created by Henry and worsened by Somerset. Indeed, it is arguable that Northumberland set the foundations for stable finances through into the Marian and Elizabethan eras. Elton notes that in Mary’s reign â€Å"financial and administrative recovery †¦ owed nothing to the queen or her policy.† 7 This adds strength to the argument that Northumberland deserves particular credit for his economic policy. Certainly, Elton was unreasonable to ask which of the two did more harm to the country. In doing so Elton comes dangerously close to equating the achievements of the two; however, Northumberland could not be accused of harming the country, particularly in reference to the finances. However, on this issue, it seems that this quote should be taken with a pinch of salt, for, within the same paragraph Elton praised Northumberland’s economic policies. Ignoring that rather peculiar quote, I would concur with Elton’s high acclaim of Northumberland’s financial reforms, which Elton says â€Å"provided the basis for sound finance in the reign of Elizabeth I.† 8 His religious policy resulted in a largely more favourable result than that of Somerset. Northumberland’s policy was clear; the Church of England was to become Protestant. The 1552 Prayer Books changed the services to meet Protestant doctrine and all ‘glamour’ was removed in favour of simplicity. Somerset’s mistake had been to introduce half-hearted, indecisive reform that attempted to appease as many people as possible. By contrast, Northumberland was decisive; arguably, this was a risky strategy as it may have incited catholic rebellion. However, rebellions were small and Northumberland was successful in crushing them. It is clear that his religious policy was, once again, a sign of his political ability. Northumberland had recognised that decisive action would create the stability required after the fast paced and confusing reform of his predecessors. His religious policy has been accused of being harsh; though this may be the case, it was a successful policy. Furthermore, it is arguable that had Mary not usurped the Protestant reformation, Northumberland’s religious policy would have enjoyed the same long-term success as his financial policies. Northumberland’s successful consolidation of the reformation supports Elton’s argument that he showed skill in public affairs 9. Further support for Elton’s assessment of Northumberland’s role comes from his handling of the social unrest. He deserves credit for his handling of the serious law and order problem during his rule. The aftermath of the 1549 rebellions and bad economic situation following Somerset’s fall coupled with three bad harvests and a collapse of the cloth trade meant that Northumberland had serious social unrest and disaffection to deal with. Rather than attempting to control and crush the unrest like Somerset, Northumberland attempted to solve the root problems and therein Northumberland’s greater understanding of the situation is demonstrated. Sheep tax was abolished, enclosure commissions were abandoned, an Act in 1552 protected arable farming and a new poor law meant that Northumberland had a more successful social policy. Furthermore, his success with financial recovery enhanced his efforts at calming dissent largely through reducing inflation. In this regard, though not a humanitarian reformer, Northumberland â€Å"demonstrated a concern for social justice† 10, which was clearly greater than that of Somerset. Again I would support the view of Elton that Northumberland showed political skill demonstrated here by his social policy, which solved the root problems rather than attempting to control the dissent. Therefore, Elton was correct in pointing out the very positive achievements of Northumberland’s reign. He played an important role in halting the financial and religious problems, which were created by Henry and exacerbated by Somerset. This was not a point that Elton expressly put forward, however I think this was a significant part of Northumberland’s role, which should be emphasised. I would also agree with Elton that his financial reforms were influential far past his fall although I would venture to suggest that his religious reform also had an influence in the future, though to a lesser extent, in shaping Elizabeth’s policy 11. There may be an argument, however, to suggest that the assessment of Northumberland’s role in the preceding paragraphs has gone too far to presenting Northumberland as a political genius. It must not be forgotten that Northumberland always had the benefit of hindsight, having seen the failures of Somerset’s reign. His financial, religious and social policies can all be seen as informed by the failures of Somerset’s reign. Whether, for example, Northumberland would have followed the same decisive religious policy had he been the direct successor of Henry is an interesting question. Therefore we must conclude that Northumberland was an apt politician, though certainly not anywhere near a political genius as we must recognise that he was able to learn from Somerset’s reign. It is possible to argue on the exact political abilities of Northumberland and how much advantage hindsight afforded him; however, the fact remains that his achievements were positive. While I may give more credit to Northumberland in some areas of his role, I would concur with Elton’s view that Northumberland was an apt politician. Moreover, his view that â€Å"Northumberland’s rule marked an improvement on Somerset’s† 12 is clearly correct and is supported by other historians, such as Alan Smith: â€Å"Northumberland was a much more realistic and effective ruler than the traditionally overpraised Somerset.† 13 Elton was correct in his assessment of Northumberland as greedy, however he has exaggerated the claim that Northumberland was power hungry. It is clear that this desire for power was present in his character as revealed in the desperate attempt to alter the succession at the end of his rule; nevertheless, it did not dominate his governance as Somerset’s desire for power motivated much of his policy. It is undeniable that during his rule his power and wealth increased significantly. Initially he gave himself the Earldom of Warwick and later became the Duke of Northumberland. He proceeded to make financial gains through land; many of his followers took the liberty to do the same. Clearly, he exploited his position to satisfy his greed and many argued this was at the expense of the King. Therefore, I would not argue with Elton’s view that Northumberland was greedy. His desperate attempt to alter the succession is certainly a sign of a serious desire for power. He attempted in vain to abandon the previous succession acts of Henry’s reign to bypass Mary and Elizabeth and install Lady Jane Grey, through whom Northumberland could retain a high level of power. It was a failure from the outset, he was unable to secure Mary’s arrest and upon the death of Edward the people of England opted unsurprisingly for the rightful heir. It was a dismal end to his governance and certainly evidence of a serious desire for power. However, as evidence of his desire for power, it should be viewed in the context of his whole governance. This was an act of desperation at the end of a rule in which his policies could not be seen as indicative of a thirst for power. Many of Somerset’s policies were methods of control to secure his position; moreover, he had demonstrated his desire for power through continued use of proclamation and a neglect of his council. Northumberland, despite the end of his rule, displayed a far more restrained policy and attitude to government, which leads me to the conclusion that Elton has exaggerated his claims of Northumberland as power hungry. Northumberland restored the Privy Council to its proper position under his guidance and control. Although he did not limit his power to use proclamations, he was much more cautious with their use making sure they were always based on parliamentary statute; furthermore, he made sure he consulted the council. This restrained attitude to government is evidence of him limiting his power and therefore is not demonstrative of desire for power. Of course, one could argue that he had learnt from Somerset’s mistakes and realised that the approach he took was the best way to keep in his council’s favour and thus maintain power. This argument leads to the opposite conclusion that this attitude to government demonstrates his desire for power. However, the fallacy of the latter argument is that his attitude to government led to the retention of his position, not to power. His motivation for this relationship with his council was to remain in his position; the fact remains that throu gh these means his power was limited and therefore it seems that it is more reasonable to accept the former argument. His policy and governance was not indicative of power hunger. Therefore, his desperate attempt to alter the succession coupled with his moderate policy and governance as discussed above lead to the conclusion that he did have a desire for power, but not to the extent that Elton suggested. It is worthy of note that the very nature of Somerset and Northumberland’s rules implies a certain extent of power hunger. Their positions relied upon taking advantage of the political vacuum opened up by the infant monarch. Therefore, I would agree with Elton that Northumberland was greedy, however to say that â€Å"Northumberland was exceedingly ambitious of power† 14 is an exaggeration and is not supported by his record in power. Lastly, it must be noted that though Northumberland may have displayed some unpleasant character traits, this does not infringe upon the success of his reform programmes. In brief conclusion, I agree with Elton’s interpretation of the roles of Somerset and Northumberland to a certain extent. I agree with Elton that Somerset was incompetent and his role did indeed harm the country exacerbating the problems he inherited from Henry. However, Elton’s view of Somerset as a humanitarian reformer is an error. Largely, I concur with Elton’s view of Northumberland although I would give him more credit for dealing with serious problems he faced and leaving a lasting political influence. Furthermore, he was undoubtedly greedy, yet Elton has exaggerated his desire for power. If we ignore the characters of the two rulers, Elton’s general view seems to be that Somerset was damaging whereas Northumberland brought forward marked improvements. In this general sense, I would agree with Elton’s thesis. 1 Elton, G.R. England under the Tudors. p. 208 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. p. 210 4 Ibid. p. 208 5 Heard, N. quoted from Webb, C. â€Å"Was it the policies pursued by Henry VIII that caused ‘the mid-Tudor crisis’?† 6 Elton, G.R. England under the Tudors. p. 210 7 Elton, G.R. England under the Tudors. p. 214 8 Ibid. p. 209 9 Ibid. p. 210 10 Smith, A.G.R. The Emergence of a Nation State. p. 71 11 Anderson, A. and Imperato, T. An Introduction to Tudor England 1485-1603. p. 154 12 Elton, G.R. England under the Tudors. p. 209 13 Smith, A.G.R. The Emergence of a Nation State. p. 73 14 Elton, G.R. England under the Tudors. p. 209

Chinese Foreign Policy & National Security Essay

The China-South Korea axis is perhaps the most overlooked variable in the strategic environment of Northeast Asia. For nearly five decades their relationship was characterized by war, lack of dialogue and non-recognition; then, over a period of some three years, this situation gave away to fully normalized and amiable relations in 1992. Rapprochement between Seoul and Beijing in 1992 opened one of the first frontiers of the post-Cold War thaw in the region, and future security will hinge at least partly on this core relationship. In this context, Cha analyzes the evolution of Sino-South Korean reconciliation, and argues that the South Korea’s engagement policy from the late 1980s in the political, economic, and cultural arenas played a major part in eliciting unprecedented cooperation from Beijing, however, its initiatives alone were not a sufficient condition to prompt this cooperation. A prior and necessary condition was a change in the strategic context surrounding China and the Korean Peninsula that raised both the benefits of cooperation and the costs of non-cooperation; the end of Cold War . In the context of security environment in Northeast Asia, South Korea’s success in engaging China has implications for future security on the Korean Peninsula. On balance, the axis is a stabilizing factor but not without its share of future challenges. With this in mind, the key questions of the article include: (1) How does one explain the growth of cooperation between China and South Korea? (2) To what extent has Sino-ROK rapprochement been the result of successful strategies on the part of South Korea to ‘engage’ China? (3) What are the implications on North Korea? For a quarter-century after the Korean War, Sino-South Korean relations sat at the intersection of the global East-West conflict and the Sino-Soviet split, making any hint of cooperation impossible.1 However, since the middle 1980s, Sino-South Korean relationship has moved from being sworn enemies and opposed combatants in the Korean War, to being potential economic partners (but still strategic adversaries), and fully normalized diplomatic relations in 1992. Three key drivers propelled the change in the relationship: (1) the transformation of strategic environment concomitant to the end of Cold War, which established the baseline for post-war interaction. In this context, Sino-Soviet reconciliation was a significant factor in Chinese calculations to normalize with Seoul. In particular, the end of Sino-Soviet rivalry reduced in Chinese minds the strategic consequences of ‘losing’ North Korea to Moscow, and made opening to South Korea more feasible. Furthermore, in South Korea’s view, China had evolved from being a revisionist power to being a status quo one, in the degree to which Beijing emphasized ‘unification’ or ‘peace maintenance’ as the security priority for the Peninsula. ‘Unification’ was associated with China’s revolutionary power and support for North Korea to overthrow the South – the essence of China’s one Korea policy of the Cold War. On the other hand, ‘peace maintenance’ implied stability outcome for Korea by recognizing South Korea and opposing provocative acts by the North which might upset the unstable peace on the Peninsula. (2) Domestic change in China concomitant to Deng Xiaoping’s modernization reforms, and subsequent separation of politics from economics. The initial economic trade was largely indirect, transacted through third-party intermediaries or South Korean trading firms in Hong Kong. By 1985, however, total Chinese-South Korea trade surpassed that between China and North Korea. During the 1980s, while the two sides still viewed one another as military adversaries, they increasingly recognized each other as economic opportunities. The beginnings of a diplomatic relationship also emerged in the 1990s with the establishment of trade offices between the Korea Trade Promotion Association (KOTRA) and the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in 1990, which facilitated shift from indirect trade to open and direct transactions, and subsequently in establishing formal diplomatic relations in August 1992. (3) South Korea’s conscious policy of engagement to elicit cooperation from China, in particular using non-punitive, non-coercive diplomacy and seeking mutual accommodation. South Korea’s engagement strategy contained the following tiers: first, economic linkages, investment and trade ties to increase the benefits to China of cooperation, and the costs of non-cooperation, providing foreign capital and technology, separating political cooperation with economics, but gradually produce cooperative behavior in other arenas. The growth of trade ties in the 1980s was a major reason why China chose to participate in the 1986 Asian Games and the 1988 Olympics hosted by South Korea, which served as key event to normalize relations. Second tenet of South Korea’s engagement strategy was to treat the opposing state’s perspectives as legitimate per se. This meant engaging China’s divergent position into official dialogues on the proposals for enhancing peace and stability in the region such as the Four-Party talks, and more importantly South Korea’s recognition of One China Policy, acknowledging Beijing as the only legal government in China. These initiatives at the diplomatic front were followed by general increase in communication flows on the business, educational, and cultural levels to cultivate goodwill. In this context, South Korea’s engagement strategy included the following goals: (1) cultivate Beijing’s cooperation by tying Chinese national interests to stability on the Peninsula; (2) improve South Korea’s credibility in the international arena by enhancing its image as a ‘regional player’ willing to reduce tensions and foster dialogue; and (3) engage North Korea through alternative channels. In order to pursue these goals, South Korea utilized the following means: in the macro-political perspective, the strategy of engagement of China was pursued through the policy of Nordpolitik and Globalization (segyehwa) which implied mutual economic prosperity as a means of expanding diplomatic ties with former adversaries as well as assuming a leading role for South Korea in international organizations and the continued expansion of program multi-directional diplomacy (i.e. using meetings of multilateral bodies such as APEC, ASEAN, non-governmental track-t wo diplomacy, high-level military exchanges). The second method of engagement has been sports diplomacy – participating in athletic competitions hosted by each country provided a useful means by to express good will and interest in expanding the economic cooperation (Seoul 1988 Olympics, Beijing Asian Games 1990). What was the benchmark of success of South Korea’s engagement strategy? The key was not only engaging China, but also the terms of policy toward North Korea. The following measure could be used: (A) Failure – Chinese support of North Korea (B) Minimal Success – ‘1.5’ Korea policy; formal support of North Korea and de-facto recognition of South Korea (C) Moderate Success – equidistance between North and South Korea (D) Very Successful – discourage North Korean provocation and aggression (E) Most Successful – China supports only South Korea Cha argues that the outcome of South Korea’s engagement falls in the middle range (B to D). For example, Chinese behavior on the North Korean nuclear issue in 1993-94, when Beijing sided with the US and South Korea on many aspects (such as opposing North Korea to renege Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and abide to non-nuclear Peninsula), however, at the same time Beijing expressed strong opposition against any acts of coercion against the North. It persistently pressed for dialogue and negotiona as the only acceptable means of settling the dispute, and opposed any U.S. led sanctions thought the UN Security Council. A more successful outcome was the redefined Chinese behavior on UN admission of the two Koreas in 1991, in which Chinese accepted dual membership of the two Koreas in the UN. Arguing that South Korean engagement of China has been sustained, comprehensive and moderately successful, the next question is how this new relationship will affect security on the Korean Peninsula and throughout the broader region? Salient issues include the impact of the Asian financial crisis, the dynamics of second U.S.-North Korea nuclear crisis, the effect of Bejing-Seoul dà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½tente on South Korea’s alliance with Washington, and the future challenges that could be posed by Korean unification. (1) The impact of the Asian Financial Crisis didn’t affect China-South Korean relations thus far. In-fact, in 2003 China has surpassed the U.S. as South Korea’s largest trading partner (2) Sino-South Korean relations have important implications in understanding current relations between North and South Korea. Under Kim Dae Jung, South Korea initiated Sunshine Policy that rests on Seoul’s assurances of no-isolation, no destabilization, and no absorption. The Sunshine Policy is in many ways similar to the engagement strategy toward China, both in form and potential success. In particular, it is consistent (despite North’s provocations) and designed to elicit cooperation from the opposing state. However, there are also differences- regarding intentions; for cooperation to emerge, the opposing state has to be engageable. North Korea’s behavior does not suggest she is open to an improvement of relations. Second, there are differences in South Korea’s capabilities of early 1990’s and late 1990s, in particular, in the early 1990s South Korea that engaged China did so from a position of relative strength and prosperity; however, in the late 1990s, the Asian financial crisis put South Korean position to a relative weakness., because conciliatory gestures are more likely to be interpreted as appeasement rather than engagement. Hence success to engagement of North Korea is not likely. (3) Looking beyond the immediate North Korean nuclear problem, Korean unification raises a plethora of new factors that would test the resilience of China-South Korea engagement. The absence of the North Korean buffer would give rise to a situation in which two powers with different regimes share a contiguous border. Another future challenges is on the economic front – the rising China may hange its trade needs and increase competition with Korea. A final potential conflict between a united Korea and China centers on nationalism, and the two-million ethnic Korean living in Chinese Jilin province, which a unified Korea might claim. In the final analysis, the dramatic transformation of Chin-South Korean relations in the 1990s represents the most successful case of engaging China in East Asia. The lessons stemming from this engagement include: (1) consistency- a policy can only be successful if it is applied consistently and deliberately, (2) engagement requires will and domestic political support to sustain the policy even in the face of little reciprocity by the other state; (3) engagement applied from a position of strength conveys credibility, but applied from a position of weakness connotes appeasement. For the foreseeable future, the burden of managing the confrontation on the Korean Peninsula falls even more on the new China-South Korea dà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½tente and the continuing U.S.-South Korea Alliance. My Observation: Victor Cha offers a plausible analysis of the South Korea’s engagement strategy and the factors that have significantly improved Sino-South Korean relations, nonetheless, I would argue that he underestimated the historical factors that bind China and South Korea together, which might have accelerated the rapprochement on both sides. Traditionally, Korea has fallen under the Chinese sphere of influence, with Korea belonging to the first-tier state of the Sino-centered worldview. In this context, another traditional binding element is the continuing anti-Japanese sentiments and mistrust in both Koreas and China that target Japanese sense of irresponsibility and demand apology for its war atrocities. Taken together, I would argue that these factors also facilitated the relatively rapid transformation of the relations, on a personal level between Korean and Chinese officials. In the context of enhancing peace and security on the Korean Peninsula, positive Sino-South Korean relations certainly play an important role. Both states are aware of this factor, and share similar interests. However, Beijing seems to be in a dilemma, it desperately does not want to face a collapse of North Korea nor does it want to see a nuclear North Korea. Hence, China’s actions in the foreign policy arena are still bound to the minimum necessary level to ensure stability. Ironically, while the Chinese officials have been claiming that they are making efforts to persuade North Korea to enter multilateral dialogue and negotiation, they also claim that North Korea doesn’t listen as it used to. In this regard, my question is: How much leverage does China have over North Korea? 🙂 1 From the ROK perspective, during the Cold War China was part of the communist bloc, a patron of revolutionary regimes in Asia, and thus one of the primary threats to South Korea’s survival. China’s intervention in the Korean War in 1950, in conjunction with the July 1961 Friendship Treaty between China and North Korea with its automatic intervention clause cemented South Korea’s perceptions of China as a threat. At the same time, China’s hostility toward South Korea was equally intense. South Korea was the ‘fascist’ axis of the ‘iron triangle’ that included ‘U.S. imperialism’, and ‘Japanese militarism.’

Key Roles and Responsibilities Essay

Management: Management have a cardinal function and a big duty of guaranting wellness and safety is followed in their saloon. Directors need to guarantee that all of the right steps are in topographic point so as to maintain all statute laws in order. If directors did non hold any duty in the workplace so all employees would hence non follow any statute laws and many staff and clients could potentially be injured. Directors have to guarantee that all employees on a regular basis read SOP’s and complete all on-line classs sing new statute law every bit good as refresher classs sing wellness and safety at work. Human Resources Manager: Human resources have the chief function within Wetherspoons sing the duty of wellness and safety of the full workplace. Without Human resources the company would non hold any of the SOP’s ( Safety Operating Procedures ) or COSHH ( control of substances risky to wellness ) manuals. If human resources did non make this Wetherspoons would be runing against many Torahs and hence be shut down. Bar Associates: Bar associates have a minor duty in wellness and safety at work but a big function for keeping wellness and safety in the workplace. If staff members did non transport out frequent saloon. floor and lavatory cheques so both employees and clients will be at hazard of a possible hazard. This could be stealing on a spilt drink or the lavatories being unhygienic. Staff need to constantly do the saloon. floor and lavatory as clean and safe as possible. This includes pass overing spillages on the saloon. roll uping spectacless and home bases and sweeping and moping. Kitchen Staff: Kitchen staff have a really high duty and function within the company sing wellness and safety. as they are managing nutrient. Kitchen staff have to guarantee that their custodies are invariably being washed. the kitchen is clean and nutrient is in day of the month. If kitchen staff did non hold a duty within wellness and safety so clients could potentially be nutrient poisoned. every bit good.

A Probation Officer’s View of Effectiveness

This case study is about what a probation officer’s view of effectiveness is and how it can affect his or her view of the job. The local newspaper ran a 3-part article about the probation office and how it was not living up to the expectations of the citizens. The articles discussed how the recidivism rate for the department was high and the department did not utilize social programs in the community. Whose interests were served in the newspaper’s evaluation of the probation office and whose will be served by the proposed evaluation from the department? What theory or theories of effectiveness are represented in the proposed new evaluation format? And what process and outcome measures are included in the evaluation? What domain of activity do these cover? Is the meaning of the variables clear? The newspaper article served the interest of the probationer’s, citizens of the community, social service agencies, and the probation office. If the article had never been published there is a good chance there would not be a change in the operations of the probation office and the citizens of the community and probation officers would not see a change in the recidivism of probationers. The proposed evaluation will serve the probationers due to the fact that he or she will receive more options to break the cycle of crime. It will serve the citizens of the community by breaking the cycle of crime therefore crime rates will decrease. And, it will serve the probation officer’s as he or she can feel better about the options available for their probationers and the programs he or she can refer to them. The process approach and the system resource model are both prevalent in this case study. According to Steers, â€Å"the process approach consists of three related components: goal optimization, a systems perspective, and an emphasis on behavior within organizations† (Stojkovic, Kalinich and Klofas, 2003). In the case study, the officers and the leader discuss how the organization needs to look at how much time the officers are spending with each client, where they are spending this time, and what the probation officer is doing in this time. This type of study is putting the emphasis on behavior within the organization. In the system resource model the effectiveness is based on â€Å"the extent that it can obtain needed resources from its environment† (Stojkovic, Kalinich and Klofas, 2003). An officer in the case study discusses getting his clients in touch with the social agencies in the community to help break the cycle. This is an example of the system resource model. This evaluation will use the gross malfunction analysis. The probation system in the community is considered a failure. The evaluation in which the leader and officers are proposing will examine the reasons for the failure. Another good analysis is the revelatory analysis. This analysis is reflected in the use of social programs by probation officers and his or her client. It will also show how well the probation officers are utilizing inside and outside resources to help eliminate recidivism? The domain of activity these evaluations cover and the studies the probation office wants to utilize are the effectiveness-for-whom and the tendency for effectiveness criteria to influence behavior within organizations. By using the malfunction and revelatory evaluations the probation office and citizens of the community will have a better understanding of the operations and activities of the probation officers. The newspaper article in this study helped to bring about some positive changes for the probation office. The probation officers received a supervisor who included him or her in planning and implementing the type of evaluation needed to decrease the recidivism of all the probation clients. The effectiveness of the probation office became a propriety project not only for the probation supervisor but for the probation officers. The officers were able to feel as if the evaluation was his or her project and therefore he or she would benefit from it. The supervisor brain-storming with the officers gave the officers a sense of ownership over the evaluation and therefore when the results are returned he or she will be more compelled to help find solutions to the problems.

Evolution in biology

The evolution of life on Earth has resulted in many hundreds of thousands of species. Genetic evidence reveals that humans share a common ancestor with life forms as different from us as bacteria and corn plants. In early 1800s, the source of Earth's remarkable diversity of life forms was hotly disputed. Many people believed that all species had come into existence at the same time in the distant past.In 1831 Charles Darwin sailed to South America, and during the long Atlantic crossing Darwin studied geology and collected marine life. During tops along the coast and at various islands, he observed other species of organisms in environments ranging from sandy shores to high mountains. Darwin's melding of his observations of the natural world with the ideas of others led him to propose that evolution could occur by way of a process called natural selection. The history of life on Earth spans nearly 4 billion years.It is a story of how species originated, survived or went extinct, and s tayed put or spread into new environments. Microevolution is the name for cumulative genetic changes that may give rise to new species, Macroevolution is the name for the large-scale patterns, rends, and rates of change among groups of species. An individual fish, flower, or person does not evolve. Evolution occurs only when there is change in the genetic makeup of whole populations of organisms. In biology, a population is a group of individuals of the same species occupying a given area.In theory, the members of a population have inherited the same number and kinds of genes. These genes make up the population's gene pool. Mutation is harmful when it alters a trait such that an affected individual cannot survive or reproduce as well as other individuals. For example, for us humans, small cuts are common. By contrast, a beneficial trait improves some aspect of an individual's functioning in the environment and so improves chances of surviving and reproducing. A neutral trait, such a s attached earlobes in humans, doesn't help nor hurt survival.Darwin formulated his theory of evolution by natural selection by correlating his understanding of inheritance with certain features of populations. In 1859 he published his ideas in a classic book, On the Origin of Species. We can express the main pints of Darwin's insight as follows: 1. The individuals ofa population vary in their body form, functioning, and behavior. 2. Many variations can be passed from generation to generation. 3. In every set of circumstances, some versions ofa trait are more advantageous than others. 4.Natural selection is the difference in survival and reproduction that we observe in individuals who have different version of a trait. 5. A population is evolving when some forms of a trait are becoming more or less common relative to the other forms. 6. Over time, shifts in the makeup of gene pools have been responsible for the amazing diversity of life forms on Earth. Natural selection is not the o nly process that can adjust the relative numbers of different alleles in a gene pool. This kind of gene pool tweaking is called genetic drift.The makeup of a gene pool also can change as individuals migrate into or out of a populations genetically similar. For humans and other sexually reproducing organism, a species is a genetic unit consisting of one or more populations of organism that usually closely resembles each other physically and physiologically. This buildup of genetic differences between isolated populations is called divergence. When the genetic differences are so great that members of the two populations can't interbreed, speciation has occurred: the populations have become separate species.