query_id
stringlengths 32
32
| query
stringlengths 6
3.9k
| positive_passages
listlengths 1
21
| negative_passages
listlengths 10
100
| subset
stringclasses 7
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|
977cdf5a3a7b6b42704b0ba4806e1dfd
|
It would allow for an entirely false image to be created
If celebrities were, in fact simply hard-working entertainment professionals who finished rehearsals and then returned to their private lives then the idea of protecting that privacy might make sense. The reality is that it just isn’t so. It is routine for celebrities to use their status to express opinions on political or social matters on which they have no expertise whatsoever – and expect the media to cover it. Whether it’s the modest but routine endorsing of political parties in the build-up to elections [i] to Paul McCartney on animal rights to Matt Damon on virtually everything – why are we listening to their opinions rather than, say, a professor of economics or ethics?
Equally, they expect coverage – and to be taken seriously – when announcing that the latest movie, or book or album is a masterpiece despite the panning it’s receiving from the critics.
It’s also questionable as to whether pop singer or movie star would count as quite the right career choice for someone looking for a quiet life [ii] .
It would be interesting to see how many would sign-up to Leveson’s proposed list if it was a blanket ban on publicity. No coverage of charity events that happened to get a celeb along, no interviews with actors on economics or pop musicians on ethics.
[i] The Independent. Matilda Battersby and Thomas Mendelsohn. A who’s who of celebrity political endorsements.” 4 May 2010.
[ii] The Guardian. Owen Bowcott. “Media interest in celebrities’ lives is legitimate, European court rules.” 7 February 2012.
|
[
{
"docid": "a817701fe030afb3d700b66928c58b75",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It would seem to be entirely up to the media if they chose to seek an interview with a celebrity about their latest movie – that is, after all, part of most actors’ job descriptions and part of the media’s duty to inform. That hardly seems relevant to whether it’s possible to publish a picture of them shouting at their kids.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "a15864184d021b25a9261d2408fb8bbd",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight The response as simple as the point: Leveson wasn’t asked to create a regulatory framework for the Internet. The web is the papers’ problem, not Leveson’s.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "47397eb7fed55eba6323827d36c2af36",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight There is a clear and demonstrable difference between the public right to know that their savings have been lost but the person who lost them walked off with £40m and seeing a picture that suggests an actress has put on five pounds. The first actually affects the real lives of real people, the second really doesn’t. As for blurred definitions, the NUJ’s own definition of a journalist would seem to work – wherever the person receives the majority of their earnings.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fb521362f99d4fc04d878088a560047c",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It matters if celebrities have double standards when they present themselves as being whiter than white. Equally, as Prop points out, there are already laws on defamation, libel, slander, defamation, trespass and surveillance. It is difficult to see what the register would add to these. One of the points that Leveson has routinely ignored is that all of the issues that prompted the inquiry are already illegal; hence the arrest of the journalists and executives involved [i] .\n\n[i] BBCwebsite. Journalist arrested in computer hacking probe. 29 August 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2b99d9b67bee8ced5c08fe20b70a0ead",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight If this is going to come down to professional judgement on what is and isn’t news then editors of successful magazines and newspapers would seem to have rather more relevant experience than a High Court judge. One of the ironies of the whole process has been that the one group who took no responsibility for the various crimes of newspapers are the people who bought them; papers follow the whims of their readers, whether the middle class like it or not.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ed73d5384c055e2b36bde816e18c750d",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight Article eight only applies to public bodies so, for the most part, the media are not affected. However, to tackle the more general point – celebrity, by its nature requires some surrender of privacy; presumably those who would sign such a register would still want the ‘good’ publicity but want approval over the ‘bad’ stuff. Once you start giving anyone copy approval over a supposedly free press, you might as shut it down. It has simply ceased to be free at that point.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ed48487f61e4bf8fce1cadb2079974cc",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It sets a very dangerous precedent for controlling the output of the media – who is a celebrity?\n\nWhat and who else should the media not be allowed to cover. By the same logic as banning the coverage of the private lives of those celebs that make a living out of publicity, why not the financial lives of those bankers who make their living out of money? There’s no doubt that it caused embarrassment and inconvenience to those concerned and the collapse of banks could have been reported perfectly well without mentioning the tens of millions made by their directors and traders.\n\nWhen does someone become a celebrity and when do they cease to be. If a politician appears on “I’m a celebrity…” or “Celebrity Big Brother”, do they cease to be a politician?\n\nAre the Hamiltons public figures or celebrities? Is Portillo? Is Galloway? Nadine Dorries is the latest sitting member of Parliament to take part in a reality TV show; in this case I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here. [i] When actors become members of parliament is their previous life covered.\n\nPerhaps most obviously if a comedian like Jimmy Carr whose material is often political turns out not to be paying his taxes what happens? [ii]\n\nThere are several differences between telling newspapers what they can and can’t cover in advance and establishing a regulatory framework for when they overstep the mark. An important one of those differences is that Leveson was asked to investigate the latter and not the former.\n\n[i] Mulholland, Hélène, ‘Nadine Dorries to go ahead with TV show after learning of Tory suspension’, guardian.co.uk, 9 November 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/09/nadine-dorries-tory-party-suspension\n\n[ii] The Guardian. Rupert Sawyer. “Poor Jimmy Carr. Being a celebrity shouldn’t be taxing.” 22 June 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "33f59e85b4509e935f981544c71a672a",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It simply won’t work in an internet age\n\nWhatever one thinks about the morality of this idea – and Opposition believes it is an attack on free expression – the simple and compelling fact is that it won’t work. The super-injunctions [i] fiasco demonstrated that keeping information silent in an internet age is simply impossible when there is a keen public interest.\n\nWhether Prop likes it or not, the public is interested in celebrity news, requiring newspapers to ignore what is happening in the blogosphere is asking them not to do their job. It would mean that the only people on the planet who couldn’t tweet celebrity gossip would be those hired to do so.\n\nThis is important because it’s effectively impossible to sue a blog or a twitter account so they can publish any old nonsense. The press by contrast are subject to the law and, as a result, rumours remain the stuff of fantasy until they appear in the media. Without that arbiter between truth and fantasy, a curious public might as well believe what some fantasist has posted on their website.\n\n[i] Useful background on super-injunctions as the history leading up to them is here on the BBC site.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2b1f5afcdd00a74ba8875917b6c0f89f",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It would allow for an entirely false image to be created\n\nIf celebrities were, in fact simply hard-working entertainment professionals who finished rehearsals and then returned to their private lives then the idea of protecting that privacy might make sense. The reality is that it just isn’t so. It is routine for celebrities to use their status to express opinions on political or social matters on which they have no expertise whatsoever – and expect the media to cover it. Whether it’s the modest but routine endorsing of political parties in the build-up to elections [i] to Paul McCartney on animal rights to Matt Damon on virtually everything – why are we listening to their opinions rather than, say, a professor of economics or ethics?\n\nEqually, they expect coverage – and to be taken seriously – when announcing that the latest movie, or book or album is a masterpiece despite the panning it’s receiving from the critics.\n\nIt’s also questionable as to whether pop singer or movie star would count as quite the right career choice for someone looking for a quiet life [ii] .\n\nIt would be interesting to see how many would sign-up to Leveson’s proposed list if it was a blanket ban on publicity. No coverage of charity events that happened to get a celeb along, no interviews with actors on economics or pop musicians on ethics.\n\n[i] The Independent. Matilda Battersby and Thomas Mendelsohn. A who’s who of celebrity political endorsements.” 4 May 2010.\n\n[ii] The Guardian. Owen Bowcott. “Media interest in celebrities’ lives is legitimate, European court rules.” 7 February 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "62cb63df3adceb12be609fc21d9f90a6",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight Redressing the balance\n\nSuch a register would, presumably still allow reporting when there was a genuine public interest – just as is the case for any other member of the public [i] . Presumably in such a circumstance, judicial approval could be sought – a process considerably quicker and easier than grinding an apology out of a magazine or newspaper; let alone winning a libel case.\n\nPutting the burden on publications to demonstrate that something was news rather than gossip would be of huge benefit not only to celebrities themselves but to those long-suffering consumers of British news who, whilst hating it, have had to plough through this dross as it makes its way from the pages of magazines into the public consciousness [ii] .\n\nSo what if celebrities have double-standards? So do most people, none of who would appreciate that fact being pointed out on the front pages of the media.\n\n[i] The Telegraph. Matthew Holehouse. “Leveson Inquiry: Judge suggests a ‘celebrity privacy registry’”. 18 January 2012.\n\n[ii] The Guardian. Sam Delaney. “Will the Leveson inquiry kill celebrity magazines?” 26 December 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "504aec69d5fa4dcce3256c13747aee60",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight Making editor’s think twice\n\nA paparazzo’s shot of a second or third rate celeb doing something stupid, or something perfectly sensible but just not in makeup – or clothes – makes for an easy page lead. Anything that makes editors pause and consider whether they have something that might actually pass for news might do a great deal to pull large chunks of the British media – along with the readers they claim to serve – out of the gutter.\n\nIn recent decades anything with ‘celebrity’ associations has been considered news as a sought of kneejerk reaction by editors. Even in the ‘quality’ press there’s still plenty of coverage of vacuous, self-absorbed, talentless individuals who are famous, mostly, for being famous.\n\nThe defence of many editors is that these individuals deliberately court the attention they receive, which is, no doubt, true. However, whether it’s a good idea to give it to them is something that ought to give editors pause for thought given the deforming impact it has on young people’s sense of ambition [i] . Anything that means that such a productive golden goose is just one signature away from being killed, might be enough to make them ask whether it is really worth it.\n\nNobody is suggesting that this will transform the media overnight but readers moving away from publications that focussed exclusively on celebrity gossip to publications that, while containing some, also have much more news and analysis of real world events and issues certainly couldn’t hurt levels of social and political engagement. The best way to encourage engagement is through education, which the media can provide.\n\n[i] The Telegraph. Lucy Cockcroft. “Cult of Celebrity ‘is harming children”. 14 March 2008.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1fb292970e28ed48c891a08786a5f5db",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight A right to privacy – even if you are famous\n\nJust because somebody chooses to be an actor, singer or an entertainer of any kind does not mean that they lose their right to a private life. In the context of the UK (the Scope of the Leveson Enquiry) it’s worth mentioning that this right is guaranteed under both the Human Rights Act of 1998, which in turn is predicated on the European Convention of Human Rights [i] .\n\nThe people who are having their private lives splayed over the tabloids and gossip magazines are not politicians or judges taking bribes, they are not police officers beating up suspects, they are not teachers offering grades in exchange for sexual favours or any other area of sensible journalistic investigation. They are people who happen to work in the entertainment industries and their lives are being interrupted for the sake of prurience and curiosity that has nothing to do with a meaningful news agenda.\n\nIf, as some of those mentioned in the introduction suggest, the worst that happens as a result of such a register is that celebrity magazines vanish, then the proposition is quite relaxed about that.\n\n[i] Article 8 of the ECHR and the UK HRA (1998). Outlined here .\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
977cdf5a3a7b6b42704b0ba4806e1dfd
|
It would allow for an entirely false image to be created
If celebrities were, in fact simply hard-working entertainment professionals who finished rehearsals and then returned to their private lives then the idea of protecting that privacy might make sense. The reality is that it just isn’t so. It is routine for celebrities to use their status to express opinions on political or social matters on which they have no expertise whatsoever – and expect the media to cover it. Whether it’s the modest but routine endorsing of political parties in the build-up to elections [i] to Paul McCartney on animal rights to Matt Damon on virtually everything – why are we listening to their opinions rather than, say, a professor of economics or ethics?
Equally, they expect coverage – and to be taken seriously – when announcing that the latest movie, or book or album is a masterpiece despite the panning it’s receiving from the critics.
It’s also questionable as to whether pop singer or movie star would count as quite the right career choice for someone looking for a quiet life [ii] .
It would be interesting to see how many would sign-up to Leveson’s proposed list if it was a blanket ban on publicity. No coverage of charity events that happened to get a celeb along, no interviews with actors on economics or pop musicians on ethics.
[i] The Independent. Matilda Battersby and Thomas Mendelsohn. A who’s who of celebrity political endorsements.” 4 May 2010.
[ii] The Guardian. Owen Bowcott. “Media interest in celebrities’ lives is legitimate, European court rules.” 7 February 2012.
|
[
{
"docid": "a817701fe030afb3d700b66928c58b75",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It would seem to be entirely up to the media if they chose to seek an interview with a celebrity about their latest movie – that is, after all, part of most actors’ job descriptions and part of the media’s duty to inform. That hardly seems relevant to whether it’s possible to publish a picture of them shouting at their kids.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "a15864184d021b25a9261d2408fb8bbd",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight The response as simple as the point: Leveson wasn’t asked to create a regulatory framework for the Internet. The web is the papers’ problem, not Leveson’s.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "47397eb7fed55eba6323827d36c2af36",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight There is a clear and demonstrable difference between the public right to know that their savings have been lost but the person who lost them walked off with £40m and seeing a picture that suggests an actress has put on five pounds. The first actually affects the real lives of real people, the second really doesn’t. As for blurred definitions, the NUJ’s own definition of a journalist would seem to work – wherever the person receives the majority of their earnings.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fb521362f99d4fc04d878088a560047c",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It matters if celebrities have double standards when they present themselves as being whiter than white. Equally, as Prop points out, there are already laws on defamation, libel, slander, defamation, trespass and surveillance. It is difficult to see what the register would add to these. One of the points that Leveson has routinely ignored is that all of the issues that prompted the inquiry are already illegal; hence the arrest of the journalists and executives involved [i] .\n\n[i] BBCwebsite. Journalist arrested in computer hacking probe. 29 August 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2b99d9b67bee8ced5c08fe20b70a0ead",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight If this is going to come down to professional judgement on what is and isn’t news then editors of successful magazines and newspapers would seem to have rather more relevant experience than a High Court judge. One of the ironies of the whole process has been that the one group who took no responsibility for the various crimes of newspapers are the people who bought them; papers follow the whims of their readers, whether the middle class like it or not.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ed73d5384c055e2b36bde816e18c750d",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight Article eight only applies to public bodies so, for the most part, the media are not affected. However, to tackle the more general point – celebrity, by its nature requires some surrender of privacy; presumably those who would sign such a register would still want the ‘good’ publicity but want approval over the ‘bad’ stuff. Once you start giving anyone copy approval over a supposedly free press, you might as shut it down. It has simply ceased to be free at that point.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2b1f5afcdd00a74ba8875917b6c0f89f",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It would allow for an entirely false image to be created\n\nIf celebrities were, in fact simply hard-working entertainment professionals who finished rehearsals and then returned to their private lives then the idea of protecting that privacy might make sense. The reality is that it just isn’t so. It is routine for celebrities to use their status to express opinions on political or social matters on which they have no expertise whatsoever – and expect the media to cover it. Whether it’s the modest but routine endorsing of political parties in the build-up to elections [i] to Paul McCartney on animal rights to Matt Damon on virtually everything – why are we listening to their opinions rather than, say, a professor of economics or ethics?\n\nEqually, they expect coverage – and to be taken seriously – when announcing that the latest movie, or book or album is a masterpiece despite the panning it’s receiving from the critics.\n\nIt’s also questionable as to whether pop singer or movie star would count as quite the right career choice for someone looking for a quiet life [ii] .\n\nIt would be interesting to see how many would sign-up to Leveson’s proposed list if it was a blanket ban on publicity. No coverage of charity events that happened to get a celeb along, no interviews with actors on economics or pop musicians on ethics.\n\n[i] The Independent. Matilda Battersby and Thomas Mendelsohn. A who’s who of celebrity political endorsements.” 4 May 2010.\n\n[ii] The Guardian. Owen Bowcott. “Media interest in celebrities’ lives is legitimate, European court rules.” 7 February 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ed48487f61e4bf8fce1cadb2079974cc",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It sets a very dangerous precedent for controlling the output of the media – who is a celebrity?\n\nWhat and who else should the media not be allowed to cover. By the same logic as banning the coverage of the private lives of those celebs that make a living out of publicity, why not the financial lives of those bankers who make their living out of money? There’s no doubt that it caused embarrassment and inconvenience to those concerned and the collapse of banks could have been reported perfectly well without mentioning the tens of millions made by their directors and traders.\n\nWhen does someone become a celebrity and when do they cease to be. If a politician appears on “I’m a celebrity…” or “Celebrity Big Brother”, do they cease to be a politician?\n\nAre the Hamiltons public figures or celebrities? Is Portillo? Is Galloway? Nadine Dorries is the latest sitting member of Parliament to take part in a reality TV show; in this case I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here. [i] When actors become members of parliament is their previous life covered.\n\nPerhaps most obviously if a comedian like Jimmy Carr whose material is often political turns out not to be paying his taxes what happens? [ii]\n\nThere are several differences between telling newspapers what they can and can’t cover in advance and establishing a regulatory framework for when they overstep the mark. An important one of those differences is that Leveson was asked to investigate the latter and not the former.\n\n[i] Mulholland, Hélène, ‘Nadine Dorries to go ahead with TV show after learning of Tory suspension’, guardian.co.uk, 9 November 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/09/nadine-dorries-tory-party-suspension\n\n[ii] The Guardian. Rupert Sawyer. “Poor Jimmy Carr. Being a celebrity shouldn’t be taxing.” 22 June 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "33f59e85b4509e935f981544c71a672a",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight It simply won’t work in an internet age\n\nWhatever one thinks about the morality of this idea – and Opposition believes it is an attack on free expression – the simple and compelling fact is that it won’t work. The super-injunctions [i] fiasco demonstrated that keeping information silent in an internet age is simply impossible when there is a keen public interest.\n\nWhether Prop likes it or not, the public is interested in celebrity news, requiring newspapers to ignore what is happening in the blogosphere is asking them not to do their job. It would mean that the only people on the planet who couldn’t tweet celebrity gossip would be those hired to do so.\n\nThis is important because it’s effectively impossible to sue a blog or a twitter account so they can publish any old nonsense. The press by contrast are subject to the law and, as a result, rumours remain the stuff of fantasy until they appear in the media. Without that arbiter between truth and fantasy, a curious public might as well believe what some fantasist has posted on their website.\n\n[i] Useful background on super-injunctions as the history leading up to them is here on the BBC site.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "62cb63df3adceb12be609fc21d9f90a6",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight Redressing the balance\n\nSuch a register would, presumably still allow reporting when there was a genuine public interest – just as is the case for any other member of the public [i] . Presumably in such a circumstance, judicial approval could be sought – a process considerably quicker and easier than grinding an apology out of a magazine or newspaper; let alone winning a libel case.\n\nPutting the burden on publications to demonstrate that something was news rather than gossip would be of huge benefit not only to celebrities themselves but to those long-suffering consumers of British news who, whilst hating it, have had to plough through this dross as it makes its way from the pages of magazines into the public consciousness [ii] .\n\nSo what if celebrities have double-standards? So do most people, none of who would appreciate that fact being pointed out on the front pages of the media.\n\n[i] The Telegraph. Matthew Holehouse. “Leveson Inquiry: Judge suggests a ‘celebrity privacy registry’”. 18 January 2012.\n\n[ii] The Guardian. Sam Delaney. “Will the Leveson inquiry kill celebrity magazines?” 26 December 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "504aec69d5fa4dcce3256c13747aee60",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight Making editor’s think twice\n\nA paparazzo’s shot of a second or third rate celeb doing something stupid, or something perfectly sensible but just not in makeup – or clothes – makes for an easy page lead. Anything that makes editors pause and consider whether they have something that might actually pass for news might do a great deal to pull large chunks of the British media – along with the readers they claim to serve – out of the gutter.\n\nIn recent decades anything with ‘celebrity’ associations has been considered news as a sought of kneejerk reaction by editors. Even in the ‘quality’ press there’s still plenty of coverage of vacuous, self-absorbed, talentless individuals who are famous, mostly, for being famous.\n\nThe defence of many editors is that these individuals deliberately court the attention they receive, which is, no doubt, true. However, whether it’s a good idea to give it to them is something that ought to give editors pause for thought given the deforming impact it has on young people’s sense of ambition [i] . Anything that means that such a productive golden goose is just one signature away from being killed, might be enough to make them ask whether it is really worth it.\n\nNobody is suggesting that this will transform the media overnight but readers moving away from publications that focussed exclusively on celebrity gossip to publications that, while containing some, also have much more news and analysis of real world events and issues certainly couldn’t hurt levels of social and political engagement. The best way to encourage engagement is through education, which the media can provide.\n\n[i] The Telegraph. Lucy Cockcroft. “Cult of Celebrity ‘is harming children”. 14 March 2008.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1fb292970e28ed48c891a08786a5f5db",
"text": "free speech and privacy house would allow celebrities switch limelight A right to privacy – even if you are famous\n\nJust because somebody chooses to be an actor, singer or an entertainer of any kind does not mean that they lose their right to a private life. In the context of the UK (the Scope of the Leveson Enquiry) it’s worth mentioning that this right is guaranteed under both the Human Rights Act of 1998, which in turn is predicated on the European Convention of Human Rights [i] .\n\nThe people who are having their private lives splayed over the tabloids and gossip magazines are not politicians or judges taking bribes, they are not police officers beating up suspects, they are not teachers offering grades in exchange for sexual favours or any other area of sensible journalistic investigation. They are people who happen to work in the entertainment industries and their lives are being interrupted for the sake of prurience and curiosity that has nothing to do with a meaningful news agenda.\n\nIf, as some of those mentioned in the introduction suggest, the worst that happens as a result of such a register is that celebrity magazines vanish, then the proposition is quite relaxed about that.\n\n[i] Article 8 of the ECHR and the UK HRA (1998). Outlined here .\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
5bd6c37a1927474ee4a68a81ae4dc42b
|
If it was a purely political statement, then why stage it in a church?
There is no shortage of possible venues to stage a protest such as this one. A busy supermarket, a train station, a park, the middle of the street – all of them would have fulfilled the requirement for lots of people with attentions to be attracted. Since it was dubbed not a live concert the location would have been totally interchangeable. [i] Holding it in a church – in front of the high alter during mass – was calculated to cause maximum effect, maximum shock and maximum publicity. Causing intended offence during a religious ceremony is about as close to the definition of blasphemy as it would be possible to get.
Vladimir Putin has shrugged off challenges from much more serious critics than an attention-seeking group of musicians. This very act was calculated to cause the greatest possible offence to people of faith. Such a protest in St Peter’s in the same situation would have caused great offence even if the protest had been about Berlusconi. When British gay rights activist Peter Tatchell interrupted the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Easter service some years ago, he was widely thought of as having done his cause more harm than good because it offended so many and was subsequently convicted [ii] . This is no different, it was blasphemous and, under Russian law, there are punishments for blasphemy.
[i] Whitmore, Brian, ‘Pussy Riot: The Punk Band That Isn't And The Concert That Wasn't’, Radio Free Europe, 30 July 2012
[ii] BBC News Website. Tatchell fined £18.60 for pulpit protest.
|
[
{
"docid": "09051c0f644a8984262722e1c4e7f6d7",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be Firstly protesting in a Church clearly has served to draw maximum attention to the issue and so they appear to have been proven right to have done so. Secondly, it is the severity of the sentence that is the issue here, Tatchell’s actions were described by the magistrate as “a minor public order offence” and he was given a fine of under £20.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "b9b9a4bea811ad8fcd9702a89445ad80",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be It’s a parody of a prayer; nobody has ever denied that. If that’s the form of protest to be used, where better than a church? No property was damaged although some feathers may have been ruffled – but fair enough. Protesting the increasingly totalitarian rule of one of the world’s most powerful nations would seem to justify a fairly minor disturbance on a Sunday morning.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8d8d2be4f27535a1bd9963054f3ca613",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be The protest was certainly intended to be noticed – there’s little point in protesting something if it isn’t. The very fact that they were willing to risk imprisonment suggests that this was something more than a media stunt. It’s also difficult to see how this is different from earlier generations of artists who have protested tyranny – the only significant difference seems to be that this tyrant gets on rather better with leaders of the West.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "af3f70e625f3f3cdaa10c3e951664cd0",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be Their song may have gone on to discuss political themes but its basis was an appeal to Mary to rid Russia of Putin. All the rest was trappings after that initial statement – a sort of protracted “because”. It is quite routine for prayers to start with an appeal to diving authority before addressing secular themes just as this did; it was a mockery of a prayer and, therefore, profane.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1c34450eb14d42b1af0642c8c29bb446",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be It is not just the hierarchy of the Church that have objected to the bands actions. There have also been popular protests from regular churchgoers who have been offended by Pussy Riot’s actions. Strangely this fact rarely gets more than a line – and often not even that – in the Western press. [i] This is not therefore a case of the Church ‘propping up’ the state rather it is speaking out for the outrage that many of its members feel.\n\n[i] BBC Website. Pussy Riot members jailed for two years for hooliganism. 17 August 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7c813479564cc2ce09fce6d630d395a1",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be What is extraordinary is that despite the liberal outrage of much of the Western press, the Russian court system has delivered an appropriate verdict. There can be little doubt that their actions showed a fantastic level of disrespect for the Church, this is the closest relevant charge. Rulings may be convenient or not for leaders of all political persuasions – neither proves bias within the courts.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8ea1da56f096fa2fb6a07d86ab112007",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be Intention\n\nPerhaps more damning than the fact that the protest did cause offence or the fact that it was always likely to was the fact that it was clearly intended to do. At no point can the members of Pussy Riot been under the illusion that no offence would be caused; quite the reverse, they were counting on it. Counting not only on the outcry in the domestic media but also on the impact that would have on the international media in an effort to give themselves some cover.\n\nWhile the charge of ‘hooliganism’ might seem laughable this does meet the Russian definition “The flagrant violation of public order expressed by a clear disrespect for society.” [i] It is clear they did this in terms of their intrusion to areas reserved for priests, by manifestly contradicting common church rules, expressing their disrespect and using swear words, [ii] it is clear that profanity is a much greater offence within a church than outside even if it is a word used in ‘everyday speech’. [iii]\n\nIt is important to be clear that this is not Solzhenitsyn, because of the way this was staged it was intended from the outset to do nothing more than grab headlines. There is no denying that there are real political divisions in Moscow and that there are many people with very real issues with Putin’s style of leadership, it is difficult to see how this publicity grabbing stunt does anything to help that cause.\n\n[i] Taylor, Adam, ‘Why Russian Punks Pussy Riot Aren't Heroes’, Business Insider, 16 August 2012\n\n[ii] Whitmore, Brian, ‘Pussy Riot: The Punk Band That Isn't And The Concert That Wasn't’, Radio Free Europe, 30 July 2012\n\n[iii] Fraser, Giles, ‘Pussy Riot's crime was violating the sacred. That's what got Jesus in court’, The Guardian, 10 August 2010\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "96a4a0edf69834e761c90316f2f8d433",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be Why use the form of a prayer and mention the Virgin in a political protest?\n\nThe members of Pussy Riot themselves seem to admit that the protest was at least in part religious, Sparrow, one of the members told the Guardian \"It was just a prayer. A very special prayer”. [i] When combined with the setting in the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour shows the intent. It would, in theory, be possible to imagine a protest in such a setting that did not cause offence – or at least sought to minimise it. However, the religious overtones and references seem designed purely to inflame it. They served no purpose in making the case about Putin’s policies but seem calculated to offend the congregation and clergy and, given the setting, the Orthodox Church as a whole.\n\nHowever, a quiet and dignified protest, while making the political point more powerfully and without offence would not have served the main purpose here; publicity through maximizing offence as a result of deliberate blasphemy.\n\nTo intend blasphemy, to commit blasphemy, in the full and wilful knowledge that it is blasphemous and then claim it is political dissent is offensive not only to the religious but to those who have genuinely suffered as a result of their political dissent [ii] .\n\n[i] Cadwalladr, Carole, ‘Pussy Riot: will Vladimir Putin regret taking on Russia's cool women punks?’, The Observer, 29 July 2012\n\n[ii] Daily Mail. Mark Dooley. “Am I the only person who thinks that pussy riot should have been jailed?” 24 August 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "661e21cc4ee0f24524261a0c927b7271",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be The focus of their song was one of political dissent rather than religion\n\nPussy Riot’s protest was politically focussed, the response seems politically driven and now they are prisoners. The name and chorus of the song performed was Virgin Mary, Chase Putin Out. [i] It is very hard to see what would be a better definition of the phrase ‘political prisoner’. Where any punishment required for this act – and Proposition contends that there was not – then it was at most a mild public order offence. Amnesty International and the overwhelming majority of the International media have reached that conclusion.\n\nThe very fact that this has become a cause celebre shows the extent to which those who able to step back from the situation recognise this for what it is; a clear abuse of presidential power given the thinnest sheen of respectability by a compliant church.\n\nSuch religious content as was contained in the protest fairly obviously relates to the setting and is not the main content of the song. It’s a fairly straightforward artistic device. It does, however, raise the question that if the intent of this song was to be blasphemous – a necessary component of proving it to be so – then why did they do such a bad job of it and spend so much their time going on about politics; it would suggest somewhat incompetent activists.\n\n[i] Elder, Miriam, ‘Pussy Riot trial: prosecutors call for three-year jail term’, guardian.co.uk, 7 August 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7dfcbe08b1325e92a088360d29b2a74e",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be History of the Orthodox Church and the Russian state\n\nThe Russian Orthodox Church has long been happy to prop up whichever strongman happens to be running the Kremlin, this was particularly the case in the time of the Tsars but was even the case under the Communists for all their supposed Atheism. [i] It certainly would not come as any surprise to Kremlin-watchers that, as Putin’s government shreds the last vestiges of democratic credibility in favour of the strong-arm tactics of earlier Russian leaders – Tsarist and Communist – that the Church would be only too happy to help out with such difficulties as this as the Church and Putin are particularly close.\n\nThe fact is that the long arm of the presidential office now reaches into all parts of Russian public life, including religious life, for example the FSB has harassed other Christian sects and proselytizing has been banned. [ii] The intrusion of the state has been demonstrated far more effectively by the response to the protest than could ever have been achieved through such an event on its own. Although that reality may be powerfully ironic, it does little to help these political prisoners held at presidential whim and nothing more than hollow and self-serving justification from the courts.\n\n[i] Miner, Steven Merritt, Stalin’s Holy War, The University of North Carolina Press, April 2003\n\n[ii] Levy, Clifford J., ‘At Expense of All Others, Putin Picks a Church’, The New York Times, 24 April 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "273f688ea6b1578ef8e36955803285f0",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes imprisoned members pussy riot should be The blasphemy charge looks suspiciously convenient for Putin\n\nThere seems to be little doubt in any one’s mind that Putin and his regime were the focus of the protest. It is, equally, no secret that Putin has a fairly brutal attitude towards political dissent; he has expelled even allies in parliament for criticism [i] , uses force to crush unsanctioned protests, [ii] and locks up potential opponents. [iii] Locking up Pussy Riot in order to stop their opposition therefore fits in with Putin’s previous actions against his opposition and seems likely to be the desired result. In the light of that, it seems an extraordinary coincidence that what he would have wanted is exactly what happened. Putin himself said after they were sentenced \"We have red lines beyond which starts the destruction of the moral foundations of our society… If people cross this line they should be made responsible in line with the law.\" [iv]\n\nPutin’s record is not one that suggests that he is happy to step back and allow events to take their course in the hope that what he wants to happen just chances to come along – quite the reverse. Suggesting that this is a happy coincidence for Putin would be a little like suggesting that the decision to have term limits for the presidency, just not for Putin, was just the happy outcome of an impartial process. [v] If this was just the Church and the courts happening to favour the interests of an over-mighty president, then Putin must be the luckiest man alive.\n\n[i] Vasilyeva, Nataliya, ‘Anti-Putin lawmaker ousted in Russia; who's next?’, guardian.co.uk, 14 September 2012\n\n[ii] Heritage, Timothy, ‘Vladimir Putin using force to crush protests, Russian opposition fears’, National Post, 6 March 2012\n\n[iii] Parfitt, Tom, ‘Mikhail Khodorkovsky sentenced to 14 years in prison’, The Guardian, 30 December 2010\n\n[iv] Stott, Michael, ‘Pussy Riot got what they deserved: Putin’, Reuters, 25 October 2012\n\n[v] Boudreaux, Richard, ‘Putin Accepts Term Limits in Principle, but Not for Him’, The Wall Street Journal, 11 April 2012\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
ecbcdac28b25b79dbe05dd13159e90cb
|
Internet governance is necessary to combat heinous crimes committed via the internet
The internet is a means of communication – therefore also a means of communication between criminals. And because it is global it creates global crime problems that need coordinated responses. One type of crime that has particularly become a problem on the internet is child sexual abuse material: the internet allows for an easy and anonymous distribution method which can even be secured by modern encryption methods. [1]
Governments can help fight this by requiring ISPs and mobile companies to track people’s internet histories, hand over data when requested, and allow police to get information from them without a search warrant, something which has been proposed by the Canadian government. [2] In Australia, the government even proposed mandatory filtering of all internet traffic by ISPs to automatically filter out all child sexual abuse material. [3]
Admittedly, these measures seem drastic – but in cases like these, or similar cases like terrorism, the harm prevented is more important.
[1] ‘Child Pornography on the Rise, Justice Department Reports’. 2010.
[2] ‘Current laws not focused enough to combat child porn online’. 2012.
[3] Mcmenamin, Bernadette, ‘Filters needed to battle child porn’. 2008.
|
[
{
"docid": "75a2117628b2473905bb6132a07bc3e2",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Battling hideous crimes shouldn’t lead us to draconian and ineffective policies\n\nEveryone is against child sexual abuse material. But in their drive to battle it, governments might go too far. For example, granting the police the right to search without (full) warrant is a harm to citizens’ basic right to privacy and freedom from unwarranted government surveillance. [1]\n\nThe automatic internet filtering and data retention are possibly an even worse infringement on basic civil liberties: it designates all internet traffic and therefore all internet using citizens as suspect, even before a crime has been committed. This overturns the important principle that people are presumed innocent until proven guilty.\n\nMoreover, instead of the police and prosecution changing their behavior, internet filters hardwire these new assumptions into the architecture of the internet itself. [2] This means it is more all-pervasive and less noticeable, thus constituting an even worse violation.\n\nThese draconian measures might even seem worth it, until you realise they don’t work: blocking and filtering technology makes mistakes and can be circumvented easily. [3]\n\n[1] ‘Online surveillance bill critics are siding with ‘child pornographers’: Vic Toews’. 2012.\n\n[2] Lessig, ‘Code is Law’. 2000.\n\n[3] ‘Why government internet filtering won’t work’. 2008.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "ed82021d77292dd03bcf1bc2f9473147",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Internet regulation isn’t an effective and legitimate means to create a safe internet\n\nSetting up CERTs aren’t an effective means to create a safer internet, because most of the threats are a result of ‘social engineering’, which means that hackers use social cues to con people into believing frauds. People usually fall for this because of their own gullibility and naïveté, like in Nigerian email scams. [1] The most effective means of combating these threats is to educate citizens directly, the FBI already does this with Nigerian email scams. [2] People and corporations are primarily responsible for their own actions, which includes taking care of their own internet security by obtaining anti-virus software, and which also includes corporations making sure their websites are safe to use or else face liability charges if they turn out not to be.\n\nMoreover, CERTs are illegitimate. They are illegitimate because they facilitate the sharing of information on specific persons across private and public organizations and because they are hard to control democratically. For example: the US-CERT is an agency residing under the department of Homeland Security. Through the sharing of information with private parties, these private parties, unwittingly, run the risk of becoming one of the government’s watch dogs. Moreover, this sharing of information is hard to control democratically: much of the information could be classified as secret, which means that citizens have no way of verifying whether public and private organizations are complying with data sharing regulations.\n\n[1] Plumer, ‘Why Nigerian email scams are so crude and obvious’. 2012.\n\n[2] FBI, ‘Nigerian letter or “419” fraud’.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e16757dbd0b176cbb5ddc4274b08a1d5",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Government shouldn’t interfere with the internet economy\n\nIt almost never ends well when governments interfere with the internet economy. The graduated response policy against the unauthorized downloading of copyrighted content is one example: it violates the same principles as a filter against child sex abuse material, but it also doesn’t succeed in its’ goal of helping content businesses innovate their business models, which is why France is considering discontinuing it. [1] Also, other businesses are slowly replacing the old fashioned music-industry, showing that companies on the internet are fully able to survive and thrive by offering copyrighted content online. [2]\n\nWhen governments do become active in the internet economy, they’re likely to run very high risks. IT projects are very likely to fail, run over budget and time, [3] especially when it concerns governments. [4] This means that governments shouldn’t be ‘going digital’ anytime soon, as the data governments handle is too sensitive. The case of digital signatures is a good example: when the provider of digital signatures for tax and business purposes, DigiNotar, was hacked, it not only comprised the security of Dutch-Iranian citizens, [5] but also hampered government communications. [6]\n\n[1] ‘French anti-p2p agency Hadopi likely to get shut down’. 2012.\n\n[2] Knopper, ‘The New Economics of the Music Industry’. 2011.\n\n[3] Budzier and Flyvbjerg, ‘Why your IT project may be riskier than you think’. 2011.\n\n[4] ‘Government IT Projects: How often is succes even an option?’. 2011.\n\n[5] ‘Fake DigiNotar web certificate risk to Iranians’, 2011.\n\n[6] ‘Dutch government unprepared for SSL hack, report says’, 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3d6cabc3e8f3542297a3b3fce5c871c1",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom As in the offline world, free speech isn’t unlimited\n\nEven in free societies, free speech isn’t always free. Free speech can be demeaning and hurtful to certain people or can even incite hatred and violence. [1] The first reason is why, under internet libel law, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are asked to remove defamatory material and blogs take to moderating their comments more, [2] and the second is why Germany and France have outlawed Holocaust denial and Nazism.\n\nAs in the previous arguments, accountable governments are attempting to strike a balance between free speech and where this can harm others. [3] A carefully struck balance between rights in the offline world shouldn’t have to be abolished, just because we’re now in the online world. [4]\n\n[1] Waldron, ‘The harm of hate Speech’, 2012\n\n[2] Alibhai-Brown, ‘Freedom of speech can’t be unlimited’, 2009.\n\n[3] Minister: The UK “emphatically” supports free speech online but there are limits, 2012\n\n[4] Schellekens, “What holds off-line, also holds on-line?”, 2006\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "93f794e98d4e34ed0f9952cac9bbc2fb",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom With the government as final decision-maker, at least the citizens and consumers have some say\n\nRegulatory capture does sometimes happen and when it does, it’s bad. But the risk of regulatory capture isn’t a sufficient argument to keep the government away from regulating the internet, because governments can also protect citizens and consumers from big companies.\n\nAn example is the net neutrality debate. Content providers could have started paying Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to have their websites load faster than any other website (paid prioritization). Entertainment companies that also provide internet are currently being investigated for not allowing their competitors in the entertainment segment access to their network as internet provider. [1] This threatens the freedom of choice of the consumer, which is why governments have stepped in to ensure that companies aren’t allowed favour some websites. [2] If the government wouldn’t have been involved in regulating the internet, it couldn’t have stood up for consumers’ and citizens’ rights like this.\n\n[1] DOJ Realizes That Comcast & Time Warner Are Trying To Prop Up Cable By Holding Back Hulu & Netflix, 2012\n\n[2] Voskamp, ‘GOP Attempt to Overturn FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules Fails in Senate’, 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ac30a1fcf0324e8a62bd861ac165eb7a",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom ‘Spying on the internet’ is nothing different from a normal police investigation\n\nObviously, governments also use the internet and social media to investigate suspects. But when they’re doing this, they’re only using information that’s publicly available online. The technical term for this is ‘OSINT’, which stands for ‘Open Source Intelligence’, which means that it’s the kind of information that anyone with access to Google and a lot of spare time could have found. [1]\n\nWhen police investigations turn up more severe suspicions, then more extreme methods can be used to obtain evidence if needed, sometimes even actively asking hackers for help. [2]\n\nBut methods like these are not necessarily bad: their disadvantages in use have to be weighed against their significant benefits. And governments are doing this, as is for example shown in Canada’s ‘Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century Act’: governments try to extend the principles of due process and probable cause to the internet, but at the same time they need to be able to defend their citizens from harm. [3]\n\n[1] Wikipedia, ‘Open source intelligence’, 2012.\n\n[2] ‘NSA chief seeks help from hackers’, 2012\n\n[3] ‘Technical Assistance for Law Enforcement in the 21st Century Act’, 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5b6b421dcae814a42f0f0869a150d8fd",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Internet regulation is necessary to ensure a safe internet\n\nCitizens, corporations, and public organizations face several security threats when online: critical infrastructure systems can be hacked, like the energy transport system, [1] citizens can fall victim to identity theft, [2] and phishing, [3] whereby hackers gain access to bank accounts or other sensitive information. Specifically, it seems that the public sector is attacked the most. [4]\n\nIn response to cyber-threats like these, many governments have set up Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs), Incident Response and Security Teams (IRTs), or Computer Security and Incident Response Teams (CSIRT; the fact that we haven’t settled on a fitting acronym yet shows how much it is still a novel phenomenon): agencies that warn citizens and organizations alike when a new threat emerges and provides a platform for (the exchange of) expertise in methods of preventing cyber-threats and exchanging information on possible perpetrators of such threats. Oftentimes, these (inter)governmental agencies provide a place where private CSIRTs can also cooperate and exchange information. [5]\n\nThese agencies provide a similar function online as the regular police provides offline: by sharing information and warnings against threats, they create a safer world.\n\n[1] ‘At Risk: Hacking Critical Infrastructure’. 2012.\n\n[2] ‘Identity theft on the rise’. 2010.\n\n[3] ‘Phishing websites reach all-time high’. 2012.\n\n[4] ‘Public sector most targeted by cyber attacks’. 2012.\n\n[5] see for example the About Us page of the US-CERT or the About the NCSC page of the Dutch CERT\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fda7db84d6ac7bf2b56a32ffeea36804",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Internet regulation is necessary to ensure a working economy on the internet\n\nAs seen above, the internet has enabled many types of criminal behavior. But it has also enabled normal citizens to share files. Music, movie and game producers have difficulty operating in a market where their products get pirated immediately after release and spread for free instantaneously on a massive scale. The internet enables violation of their right of ownership, gained through providing the hard work of creating a work of art, on a massive scale. Since it’s impractical to sue and fine each and every downloader, a more effective and less invasive policy would be government requiring Internet Service Providers to implement a graduated response policy, which has ISPs automatically monitor all internet traffic and fine their users when they engage in copyright violation. Something along these lines has already been tried in France, called HADOPI, which has succeeded in decreasing the downloading of unauthorized content. [1]\n\nApart from this, governments also need to think about how to translate everyday offline activities onto the internet. For example, when you file your tax report offline, you would sign it with your handwritten signature. The online variant would be a digital signature. [2] Developing and deploying a digital signature would enable citizens and corporations to do business, file their tax reports and pay their taxes online.\n\n[1] Crumley, ‘Why France’s Socialists Won’t Kill Sarkozy’s Internet Piracy Law’, 2012\n\n[2] Wikipedia, ‘Digital Signatures’, 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "156c6d6d5031e985ab5a59a75c1889a6",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Internet regjulation is a euphemism for censorship\n\nGovernments are trying to control what citizens can and can’t say online and what they can and can’t access. This can vary from France and Germany requiring Google to suppress Nazism in search results [1] to the Great Firewall of China, where the Chinese government almost fully controls what’s said and seen on the internet and has an army of censors. [2]\n\nThis type of internet censorship is bad because citizens should have freedom of speech and uninhibited access to information, [3] a right so fundamental that we have enshrined it in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [4] and reaffirmed by the participants of the World Summit on the Information Society in 2003. [5]\n\n[1] Zittrain and Edelman, Localized Google search result exclusions, 2005\n\n[2] Internet censorship in China, 2010\n\n[3] Free Speech Debate, 2012\n\n[4] article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights\n\n[5] Declaration of Principles, article 4, 2003\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8085066ce0ec3c6e9163e93ea80211b4",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Internet regulation is an attempt by big interest groups to regulate the internet in their favour\n\nLarge companies have an active interest in shaping the structure of the internet. One example of this is the Stop Online Piracy-Act (SOPA), [1] wherein U.S.-based music and movie companies proposed that they themselves would be able to police copyright infringements against websites that are hosted outside of the United States. [2]\n\nThe phenomenon whereby companies succeed in shaping government policies according to their own wishes is called ‘regulatory capture’. Another example from the telecommunications industry is the lobby effort by several large corporations, who have succeeded in eroding consumer protection in their favour. [3] If the government wouldn’t have been involved in regulating the internet in the first place, big companies wouldn’t have had any incentive to attempt regulatory capture.\n\n[1] 112th Congress, ‘H.R.3261 – Stop Online Piracy Act’\n\n[2] Post, ‘SOPA and the Future of Internet Governance’, 2012\n\n[3] Kushnick, ‘ALEC, Tech and the Telecom Wars: Killing America's Telecom Utilities’, 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "96353ad043a043121065101b47f6b168",
"text": "internet freedom politics government digital freedoms freedom Regulating the Internet is a means for governments to spy on their citizens\n\nGovernments around the world are tracking their citizens’ activities online. [1] They can use all sorts of techniques, like automated data-mining (i.e. via trawling your Facebook and Twitter accounts) and deep packet inspection of each electronic message sent (i.e. intercepting and reading your email). All these methods are violations of important principles.\n\nThe automated data-mining violates the principle that people shouldn’t be investigated by their governments unless there is warrant for it (so there is reasonable suspicion that they have been involved in a crime). Also, data mining creates many false positives, leading to citizens being thoroughly investigated without probable cause. [2] Deep packet inspection violates people’s fundamental right to secrecy of correspondence, which is a violation of privacy.\n\nThe problem with these government policies is that they’re hard to control – even in democracies: much of the spying is done by intelligence agencies, which are often able to evade democratic control on account of the need for secrecy rather than transparency. [3]\n\n[1] Reporters Without Borders, Enemies of the internet, 2012 and Kingsley, Britain won’t be the only country snooping on people’s internet use, 2012\n\n[2] US Researchers Decide Spying On Citizens Is Bad, 2008\n\n[3] Electronic Frontier Foundation, ‘NSA Spying’.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
51c3ba06f63a8ad9a1f002aba2fb6906
|
Inevitably protects entrenched interest groups (Church in Crucible, Muslims in Pakistan)
In the event of two different perceptions of what constitutes harm, there is a tendency for that of the larger group to be seen as normative and, therefore, correct. This is shown to be the case in the example given here but also in other instances from the Salem witch trials to the fatwa on Salman Rushdie [i] ; the fact that there was an authorising body – in the shape of an orthodox religious body – the allegation itself acquires the force of that orthodoxy.
It is rare for minority beliefs to have much success and almost unknown for secularists to do so. Several cases in North America brought in an effort to protect the religious rights of Wiccans, for example, yielded little as they lacked the force of religious orthodoxy [ii] .
In states where there is either great homogeneity of belief or there is a theological element in the courts or political system, this has tended to be even more the case. This is particularly true of states that identify themselves officially with one religion, and especially so in the case of Islamic states [iii] .
[i] The Guardian. Looking back at Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses. 14 September 2012.
[ii] Religioustolerance.org. Wiccan education and anti-defamation groups.
[iii] Viewpoint. The Blasphemy syndrome. 12 October 2012.
|
[
{
"docid": "57de6ff3fff4974570b0e4bf51f127cf",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books It’s fairly predictable that in a country such as Pakistan where the overwhelming majority come from one religious tradition that there will be a higher percentage of those people to be offended and, conversely, that a majority of suspects are likely to come from other groups.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "ea8e4eb0d62bc47986d49082de037da6",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books The right to free speech is not a license to express any opinion regardless of the context. It’s equivalent of standing in a Museum and shouting, “Fire”. It is in these environments that caution is required.\n\nAllowing free speech is one thing, allowing speech likely to cause harm is another is quite a different. There is a crucial difference between public and private space. Where offensive remarks are made in the public space then the blasphemer has knowingly put themselves and others in danger and - citing such principals as civic responsibility and the social contract, governments would have both a responsibility and a duty to use their legal powers.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb2262e8f86e67d109f897b92039428c",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books It is perfectly possible in many circumstances to demonstrate intent before a blasphemous comment is made. Waving a banner making derogatory remarks about the founder of a religion or burning an emblem of the faith outside a place of worship could easily be said to demonstrate an intent to harm.\n\nMoreover many cases come down to one person’s word against another’s.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "383e3df93492c809fa31ef64c87478f7",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books If any state were to try and protect their citizens against all offence, it would have to ban everything. It is difficult to see how such a process could work – one that would allow Saudi men to be offended by the sight of a woman driver and, at the same time, those of a more liberal nature to be offended by them not driving. A test of legislation should be whether it can be universalised, where offence can be taken in both directions that is not, and cannot, be the case. As a result it is clear that legislation is an inappropriate tool to use in regards to blasphemy. The issue is not disagreeing with the particular piece of legislation but with the idea that legislation in this area should be introduced at all. Moreover the examples of limitations on the media used are not good parallel’s to blasphemy as blasphemy may be either unintentional or else be on the spur of the moment which is not the case with the media.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7f6fe25ad7ffc7622c94efabca8666f4",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books This is the truly the argument of rogues. Where a mob seeks to gather to deliver their own brand of very immediate justice would be against the law and should be dealt with as such. For governments to argue such an approach is a complete abdication of responsibility. It is also incredibly naïve to suppose that the niceties of treaties would be observed in the Pashtun Valley or the Gaza strip.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "96ebb6344b44e0308fa4c4548d5039a1",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books There are clear differences between racist, sexist or homophobic language and blasphemy. Hate speech legislation exists to protect minorities against being abused. A blasphemy ban, by contrast, simply perpetuates the influence of already powerful interest groups. Equally, to develop ops theory of sudden vigilante groups springing up to seek out the blasphemer – hate speech legislation seeks to protect the likely victim of a violent crime, according to Opposition, blasphemy legislation would seek to support the perpetrators.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "83c28735dccb4ed335849426938b76a4",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books People have a right to blaspheme\n\nIn the laws that come the closest in framework to blasphemy – libel, slander defamation and a range of incitement laws – there is a requirement to prove harm. This level of proof is not set at the level of being offended or believing that a problem may ensue, and certainly not at the level of just disagreeing with a statement. If there is no proof of harm then the principle of free speech stands, usually termed as a ‘justifiable comment’ in defamation defences. It is entirely possible to respect the rights of others to hold an opinion and, as in this case, disagree with that opinion [i] .\n\nFor anything other than that as the only logical basis for discussing blasphemy, it would be necessary to demonstrate a causal link to actual or probable harm – usually this proof requires either financial or physical harm to be involved [ii] .\n\nIn the case of blasphemy, such harm cannot be demonstrated. There is also an interesting point of whether God can be said to have been harmed and whether it is possible for a third party, other than the state, to act as a result of harm having been caused to another.\n\nAs a result, since harm cannot be proven and neither, in most cases, as we have seen in the previous argument, can intent be proven, it is difficult to see how blasphemy is anything other than free speech. It is far easier for other social groups – sexual and political minorities, people of disabilities and others – to prove both harm and intent of statements and actions but lack the legal protection given to religious organisations through blasphemy laws.\n\n[i] See principle seven of the Free Speech Debate principles .\n\n[ii] Wikipedia. Defamation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0447d4ff35867280ab7850c09a5e1579",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books Based on allegation rather than proof (cf. Sorcery, witchcraft, etc.)\n\nBlasphemy, by its nature, is ‘all in the eye of the beholder’. It is impossible, in most cases, to determine whether there was intent on the part of the accused and as a result it is difficult to codify in legislation. Equally, unless the law takes a particular theological position, one person’s blasphemous slur is another’s sacred profession.\n\nIt relies on the predicate that the person alleging blasphemy was offended or felt their faith was under attack.\n\nOf course these offences are very real and may at times be possible to codify but they cannot be applied universally because the perceptions they necessitate are not universal.\n\nAs a result, as in the case given above, allegation and proof must be deemed to be the same thing - to be accused is to be found guilty [i] . Acts of blasphemy cannot rest on intuited human norms – I do not wish to be harmed in this way therefore you do not wish it either – because those involved have a different understanding of the harm.\n\nIn the light of this there may be many remedies for blasphemy but legislation in general and criminal sanctions in particular cannot be appropriate.\n\n[i] The Economic Times. Rajiv Jayaram. Blasphemy law represents coercive nature of Pakistan towards minorities. 27 August 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c9c719ec60537e3be2a533695324e124",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books Blasphemy is comparable to legislation banning hate speech\n\nNot only can remarks or images be labelled as inappropriate but, in extreme cases governments ban organisations, meeting and demonstrations. Where speech is deemed to be prejudiced or inflammatory the state intervenes to prevent either offence or possible violence. In all of the situations covered by blasphemy laws, the first of those would apply and, as has been seen on so many occasions, the latter is not uncommon. The experience of the “Anti-Islam video” prompted civil unrest around the world [i] costing nations money in terms of lost work and increased police time.\n\nBoth governments and individuals have the right to be protected against such outpourings of outrage. It seems only sensible for governments to prevent such difficulties where they can. In this light a legislative code that bans blasphemy is useful in the maintenance of social order and cohesion in many countries. It is a given in most countries that the government has a duty to protect citizens against statements or actions that they have a reasonable basis for believing are likely to cause social unrest. Blasphemy is just another example on that list.\n\n[i] Al Jazeera. Timeline: Protests over anti-Islam video. 21 September 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eded18dab137c3ffc99297f77a0d9b82",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books Blasphemy causes offence to groups and individuals\n\nNot agreeing with a law does not provide carte blanche to ignore it. The reality is that large numbers of people in many countries and religious traditions find blasphemy offensive and upsetting. If, as prop argues this crime causes no harm, then they presumably accept that it can have no physical benefit to the blasphemer. So why do it? We place limitations on violence, sex and expletives in movies, on TVs and in publications, not because they cause a provable harm but because some find them offensive [i] . These actions, along with blasphemy, are collectively classed as criminal libels as they require the state to act rather than an injured party. We further create public order offences in relation to racial abuse, which, like blasphemy, may not be premeditated [ii] . Those in breach of such limits face a punishment.\n\nIf we are happy to impose widely held norms of behaviour in public fora such as entertainment – or in regard to public behaviour - then why not acknowledge similar issues in the case of spiritual beliefs. If, for example, the overwhelming majority of the population find attacks on the prophet Mohammed offensive then why not legislate on that basis?\n\n[i] The News Manual. Chapter 71: Blasphemy, obscenity and sedition.\n\n[ii] Brian Farmer. The Independent. Comic Frankie Boyle sues Daily Mirror for libel. 15 October 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6fbaf70d0c4656588d8a0b373c35133b",
"text": "nothing sacred house believes blasphemy has no place statute books If the courts did not handle these issues, the mob likely would.\n\nWhere a grave offence is caused to many people and the state proves to be impotent in addressing it, it is not uncommon for vigilantes to take matters into their own hands.\n\nSurely it is preferable to have such situations handled by the courts and under the rule of law. Proposition gave the example of the Salman Rushdie affair, where Ayatollah Khomeni issued a global fatwah on the author following the publication of the Satanic Verses. How much more preferable would it have been for that process to have been handled by means of diplomacy [i] , extradition and trial than a decade’s worth of civil and international discourse. The Arab league and others have called for an international treaty to this effect, as the issue of blasphemy committed in one nation causing offence in another comes increasingly to the fore in an internet age, it seems an effective approach.\n\nIn an increasingly Global world with the possibility for inflammatory remarks to travel the world in a matter of seconds, leaving only their context behind, it is time for governments to have a serious conversation about an international framework - to make sure that justice stays in the courts rather than the streets.\n\n[i] Globalpost. Daniel DeFraia. Muslim nations push for international blasphemy law. 25 September 2012.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
58944caaafa67724d05510d0eb381f8d
|
The British tabloid press isn’t so much free as in freefall. Tabloid journalism in the UK has always been reckless and arrogant in pursuit of the trivial, but as advertising revenue dwindles that trend looks set to get worse
The media increasingly resembles one of the drug addicts it is usually so keen to condemn. As competition over dwindling advertising revenue becomes increasingly bitter, papers become ever more desperate for the next hit story –normally represented by celebrity gossip or a minor scandal. Such content has nothing to do with bold investigative journalism and everything to do with muck-racking for salacious stories and- when that doesn’t work- simply fabricating them.
Creating the impression that Millie Dowler was still alive was simply the most grotesque of a series of activities that put sales way ahead of truth.
|
[
{
"docid": "8c764e392438df2219a0bd76f45618d5",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press There are already laws in place to respond to the fabrication of evidence in support of a news report. Libel laws already prevent newspapers from making attacks based on untruths or even ones that are true but are not in the public interest.\n\nThere is no doubt that times are tough for the British Press – as they are for newspapers around the world – but the overwhelming majority of journalists and publications have responded to that by diversifying the platforms they use for delivering the news. In addition to which they have embraced a 24-hour approach to delivering the news and, for many, the print platform is now seen as a ‘legacy project’.\n\nTo constrain and obstruct the hard work and harder principles of the overwhelming majority of journalists because of the actions of a desperate few would really throw the baby out with the bath water.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "99a026def5ecc4bf659f28db42ced636",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press t is entirely fair to say that the way we approach and share information has changed beyond recognition in the last thirty years. There have been innumerable efforts made to control high-speed information networks and all have failed.\n\nTo hobble journalists with constraining regulation is as impractical as it is reckless at a time when they are no longer competing with a handful of their peers, but also a wider network of information exchange between semi-professional bloggers and capricious groups such as Anonymous and 4chan/b, who spread lies and discord disguised as “entertainment”.\n\nIt is surely better that stories should be put together by trained and acreddited journalists and published through businesses that are bound by libel and other laws than to have them drip out through social media, as was seen with the Ryan Giggs affair over super-injunctions. Introducing regulation would be self-defeating simply because of this fact [i] .\n\n[i] Lucy Buckland. “'It went from thrilling to seedy... I was a fool to risk everything': Natasha Giggs confesses her regrets over Ryan affair”. Daily Mail. 23 December 2011,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "548b02ae724d5a007dfe27b14e990e19",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press It is part of the nature of journalism that it tends to say and reveal things that many people would rather remained unsaid and concealed. On the subject of working with police officers, papers have held the feet of police officers to the fire over many investigations including the Stephen Lawrence murder.\n\nIt is further worth bearing in mind that the collusion of senior members of the Metropolitan police with tabloid journalists was revealed not by a police investigation but by an investigative reporter.\n\nPolice and politicians may like their incompetence or corruption to take place behind closed doors, but that is the very reason for fostering and protecting a vigorous and interventionist press that is willing to bend the rules to find the truth.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8cb27961dc081c8bc91d93e3b8e8c8a0",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press We should remember that the original defence of the NoW was that phone hacking had been carried out by just ‘one rogue reporter’ [i] and that defence has crumbled at every stage. It quickly became clear that others at the paper were involved, then that others in the group and now, apparently, that the practice was fairly commonplace at other papers.\n\nHad this been just one bad apple then the idea that no new regulation was really needed for the otherwise good and noble folk of medialand might stand. As evidence- and a string of arrests among the News of the World’s senior staff- has demonstrated, flaunting of the law, of basic ethical standards and of simple honesty was rife at the news of the world, and is likely to have been used frequently in the newsrooms of the NoW’s rivals.\n\n[i] Huffington Post. “Julian Pike, News Of The World Solicitor, Says He Knew That Phone Hacking Was Widespread In 2009”. 11 January 2012.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5651341a18f4dfd4684330862cb1183e",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press The idea that stopping journalists rummaging through the bins of private citizens in pursuit of credit card statements on the off-chance they might have done something unusual is hardly likely to bring down the entire edifice of freedom and democracy.\n\nIndeed, there is a clear democratic mandate for the robust protection of privacy- informed by the basic equality that underlies rule-of-law- derived from the revulsion that most people feel at the actions of certain parts of the press. As in any profession- including law, medicine and politics- practitioners are allowed discretion on the understanding that they won’t abuse it.\n\nIn this instance, the discretion leant to the political class has been routinely and systematically abused over a period of decades, to little benefit. All of the examples that Opposition has been able to cite have been the result of old-fashioned, dogged investigation and courageous writing and editorship.\n\nIf regulation gets journalists away from the addiction to celebrity, away from the easy sells of sex and venality and back into the better traditions of the trade, it may serve to revive the entire newspaper industry.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3f09135d555a2f0c20acc8f8f69d264d",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press It is, of course, a matter for Lord Leveson and his inquiry to make recommendations on what the final regulatory framework should be. However the idea that newspapers are already accountable in an appropriate manner simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. There is, if nothing else, compelling popular support [i] on such a scale that, apparently the readers of the newspapers in question are uncertain as to whether they are up to the job themselves.\n\nThere has also been an undercurrent in the press which amounts to “well people bought it so it’s their fault really”, which also doesn’t stand up to analysis. Readers of newspapers should surely be allowed to assume that the journalists who gather their news- and style themselves as professionals- act both legally and ethically. It is not the job of readers to double check the facts and activities behind a story.\n\n[i] BBC Website. “Poll suggests public want much tighter press controls”. 14 December 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "74cc8de105de8de0ffbb6a0a71b16c7b",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press There have to be limits to the permissible levels of intrusion into people’s lives, in an increasingly connected world people- celebrities or not- have never been more conscious of this simple fact.\n\nIn an age when any fool with a cell phone and a twitter account can snap a topless pop star on the beach, tabloid hacks are under greater pressure than ever to go the extra mile. There is little reason to doubt that they will. Privacy is already one of the dominant legal issues of our age that looks likely to become ever more the case.\n\nAgainst that background, when a flat out lie can be broadcast around the world in seconds, clearly a different legal and regulatory framework is needed from the old days of print where an apology was actually relevant – however begrudgingly given.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2636dce97e8469cd82025b8e3620116c",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press The British tabloid press has proved singularly incapable of regulating – or for that matter restraining – itself.\n\nThe phone hacking scandal is simply a new low in the recent, tawdry life of the tabloid press. As the Leveson Inquiry is discovering, the use of private detectives, bribing police officers, and trailing the children of celebrities all seem to be common tricks not just for the News of the World but for tabloid journalism as an industry.\n\nIndeed, the journalist who broke the story for the Guardian admitted to the Levenson inquiry that he had hacked a phone on one occasion. Despite the protestation of the Guardian’s editors [i] that “99 percent” of journalists wouldn’t know how to hack a phone, such practices and a culture that invades privacy seems commonplace.\n\n[i] Statement by Alan Rusbridger to the Leveson Inquiry.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2fc0a2b0990b1ff3f001d501c64ce2d4",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press Who does the regulating? All of the obvious bodies – police, parliament and so on – haven’t exactly shown themselves to be whiter than white in the last year or so.\n\nNewspapers are at least accountable to their readers and it is worth noting that exactly the kinds of stories now under the spotlight are the ones that prove the most popular. Further they already work within a legal framework and are accountable to the courts when they break laws governing libel, privacy or theft of information.\n\nWhen we look at the possible candidates for overseeing the media, the line-up is fairly unimpressive and all have an obvious self-interest: MP’s expenses scandal was revealed by journalists, corruption and incompetence (as well as racism previously) at the Metropolitan Police was uncovered by journalists. That would only leave them accountable to the courts, which they already are, or a regulatory body comprising other papers and the public, which they already are.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "83c26add6be50e72d7f955366d756482",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press The overwhelming majority of journalists would not know – and wouldn’t want to know – how to hack a phone and it is unfair to restrict them because a few do\n\nIntroducing regulation on the basis that a handful of journalists have broken laws that already exist – and were caught doing so by other journalists – seems odd, to say the least.\n\nThere is little doubt that there was something extremely murky going on at the News of the World but it is worth remembering that the paper has since been shut down.\n\nTo any observer this looks an awful lot like politicians using the excuse of one newspaper’s poor conduct- which, it is worth repeating, has been shuttered- to attempt to regulate the rest. One of the popular suggestions at the moment is that no journalist should be able to print a story about a politician without getting their permission first. Such a rule would strike at the very heart of a free press.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "27a5043f550d48dcb933b6a7f674d15b",
"text": " debate media and good government house would regulate press All of those involved in the phone hacking cases broke laws. Existing laws. They can be prosecuted under existing frameworks and cases are already being pursued. There is no need for another set of controls\n\nWe should be very cautious when giving politicians- in particular- the power to control what is said about them. Whatever Lord Leveson suggests, chances are those decisions will need to go before parliament.\n\nThe actions of the British media may frequently be distasteful and those who read the so-called ‘quality’ press may find the obsession of the tabloid press with matters that mostly seem trivial and tawdry offensive. However, the liberty that- almost incidentally- allows tabloid newspapers to produce populist pablum, enables broadsheets to maintain an excoriating and forensic oversight of the political class as a whole. The recent Parliamentary expenses scandal would be unthinkable in many countries: analysis undertaken by the press as a whole demonstrating a culture of corruption across the entire political class, not only breathtaking in its extent but also a clear mark of just how far politicians had moved from the realities of day-to-day life for people who actually pay for their own house.\n\nIn this regard, journalistic license is the price of liberty.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
278174442bf9d41cc17d192f13c39e49
|
Trans fats are not uniquely unhealthy
The issue with trans-fat is that there is no better substitute. The fact is that the substitutes are also as bad, if not worse, than trans-fat itself. By banning trans-fat, restaurants will have to adopt these substitute substances, thus undermining the work of the government. This process is a waste of our resources as the government will have to spend huge amount of money to bring about a ban on trans-fat without getting any positive outcome.
The trans-fat ban would only have clear benefits if it were to cause a general reduction in the overconsumption of high-fat foods, but a restaurant ban on one ingredient will not achieve this. This will mean that money will be wasted as increased costs will be passed on to the consumer while there is no benefit.(8) Trans fats are not uniquely and excessively unhealthy. Sugar is unhealthy. Salt is unhealthy. Runny eggs, rare meat, processed flour, nearly anything consumed too frequently or excessively is potentially dangerous. We would not ban these foods because they are unhealthy so the same should apply to trans fats.
The current obesity crisis within the US is not the result of regulatory failure and will not be solved by a ban on trans fats. Better choices, better parenting, exercise and personal restraint are the keys. None of these behavioural traits can be mandated by government.(9) Even if trans fats were eliminated from food products, overall a ban would do nothing to help individuals develop healthy lifestyles. While the ban would curtail consumption of onion rings (if they were cooked in trans fats), for example, it would remain perfectly legal to gorge oneself on Häagen-Dazs or chocolate, both unhealthy foods that contain no trans-fat.(10)
The main alternatives to trans-fat is not even that much healthier. In most cases, food makers will move to saturated fat, which carries all of the same health risks, for example it has been linked to diabetes and cancer.(9) The ban is therefore unlikely to have a perceptible effect on public health.
Trans-fats actually serve two useful purposes. Firstly, trans fats serve an important function of extending the shelf life of products.(1) This is necessary for both producers and consumers as it makes producing these foods cheaper and reduces waste. It also means that consumers are less likely to consume spoiled food and become sick as a result. Secondly, trans fats are tasty and offer enjoyment to consumers. Trans fats keep foods from turning rancid on store shelves; give croissants their flakiness, keep muffins moist and satisfy the sweet tooth. The enjoyment of such tasty foods has a qualitative value to one's emotions and happiness.(3) Therefore trans fats are not uniquely unhealthy and a ban would not improve general public health -it would simply remove a useful and tasty substance from the market. Thus a ban is unjustified.
|
[
{
"docid": "96883c718c55c72e013bf3a6f35b0a7c",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs Health experts agree that banning trans fats would save thousands of lives specifically because the substance is dangerous even when consumed in very low quantities. They are simply a dangerous additive, which adds no extra value to food. 'Taste' considerations are simply a red herring, as switching to other fats would produce no meaningful change in taste, as has been demonstrated by several large food corporations who have made the shift without disappointing their customer base. The fact that other foodstuffs may be dangerous is an argument for better education or regulation regarding them, or -if merited -their own bans, but is not a case against banning trans fats. Trans-fats are significantly different to all the other unhealthy foods listed by side opposition, as trans fats are easily replaceable by less unhealthy substitutes, which things like sugar are not.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "38d15e42a45357842926eb4d9fbaff3a",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs Many large and small chains have already made the transition to alternatives to trans-fat, so it is entirely possible. These alternatives will get cheaper with time as they are used more frequently and as the companies that produce and distribute them increase their sales volumes and are able to sell them for lower prices, meaning that small and individual restaurants will indeed be able to afford them and survive. Moreover, the health concerns in this debate override purely economic concerns or the closure of small businesses, as lives are involved.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "49a2f3f2c5778008e22a00ee16769c69",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs Calling for an \"education campaign\" to inform consumers of what they are eating may sound sufficient, but this is very often just not enough. No matter what the government does, people will simply miss the \"instructional\" information provided by the government and will continue to consume trans fats without full information regarding its negative effects. In such circumstances, it is the government's job to step in a take action through a ban or other measures.\n\nMoreover, when a harmful trend such as the use of trans-fats becomes endemic and entrenched, it becomes increasingly difficult for citizens to always be aware of the fact that a food has trans fats in them and make the \"choice\" to eat or not to eat them.(15)\n\nProducers include trans fats into foods without adjusting labelling, further affecting consumers’ ability to purchase foods that do not include trans-fats. The trans fats hidden in many processed foods are worse for a person's health than saturated fats. In 2005, CHOICE, an Australian watchdog tested more than 50 processed foods and found many contained trans fats at unacceptably high levels. After re-tests it was still clear that, while the fast-food chains had reduced their levels of trans fats, and some of the foods tested previously had eliminated trans fats altogether, others now contained even more than before. Foods such as pies, cakes and doughnuts may contain trans fats without the consumer even knowing about it.(16)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f0e3ffea8a48ec7854eee5963907c95f",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs A ban on trans fats will cause specific harms which cannot be fixed by switching to other fats or food preparation methods. Particularly hard hit would be small businesses, who would struggle to make the transition because they no not have the budgets to research alternative ways to make their products taste the same and so are likely to end up at a disadvantage compared to their bigger rivals. Moreover all businesses would suffer from reduced shelf life for their products.(7)\n\nSuch a ban does not make economic sense, and despite propositions claims trans fats cannot always be easily replaced. We use trans fats because they work well. For example they are needed in hydrogenation in order to convert liquid vegetable oils in to being solid, needed for example to make margarine, the amount of trans fats used for this can be reduced but not eliminated. Moreover, Michael Mason of The New York Times argues: \"for preparing certain kinds of foods, there are few alternatives besides the saturated fats that have long been high on the list of artery-clogging foods.”(18)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1d17c396d3365d3f6a932dfd0ba19a97",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs The American FDA considers the use of trans fats to be 'generally safe'.(1) The British Food Standards Agency says the UK's low average consumption of trans fats makes a complete ban unnecessary.(6) These organisations are already supposed to regulate foodstuffs and monitor trans fats, if they agreed that they needed to act surely they would.\n\nFor individuals considered especially vulnerable to the effects of trans-fat consumption, such as the old or the poor, the government should consider education, not a ban. Moreover, the real issue here isn't about health, but about the right of a citizen of a free country to choose to eat whatever foods he wishes. The role of government is not to restrict the freedoms of its citizens but to protect individuals and to defend their right to act freely. Informed, adult individuals have every right to eat whatever fattening, caloric or artery-clogging meals they please. Government health boards have no right to restrict the foods law-abiding citizens choose to put into their own bodies.(10)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1d17c396d3365d3f6a932dfd0ba19a97",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs The American FDA considers the use of trans fats to be 'generally safe'.(1) The British Food Standards Agency says the UK's low average consumption of trans fats makes a complete ban unnecessary.(6) These organisations are already supposed to regulate foodstuffs and monitor trans fats, if they agreed that they needed to act surely they would.\n\nFor individuals considered especially vulnerable to the effects of trans-fat consumption, such as the old or the poor, the government should consider education, not a ban. Moreover, the real issue here isn't about health, but about the right of a citizen of a free country to choose to eat whatever foods he wishes. The role of government is not to restrict the freedoms of its citizens but to protect individuals and to defend their right to act freely. Informed, adult individuals have every right to eat whatever fattening, caloric or artery-clogging meals they please. Government health boards have no right to restrict the foods law-abiding citizens choose to put into their own bodies.(10)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "745c745e439ca7ad298c324df3f0c29b",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs The government should provide information to consumers, not restrict choice\n\nMilton Friedman argued in the 1980s: \"If we continue on this path, there is no doubt where it will end. If the government has the responsibility of protecting us from dangerous substances, the logic surely calls for prohibiting alcohol and tobacco. . . . Insofar as the government has information not generally available about the merits or demerits of the items we ingest or the activities we engage in, let it give us the information. But let it leave us free to choose what chances we want to take with our own lives.\"(11)\n\nGeorge Mason University economist Don Boudreaux asks what a trans-fat ban is a model for: \"Petty tyranny? Or perhaps for similarly inspired bans on other voluntary activities with health risks? Clerking in convenience stores? Walking in the rain?\"(12) Morally the government should be consistent when it bans things, the sale of an undeniably deadly products such as tobacco is sometimes allowed so far less dangerous substances should be allowed.(13)\n\nEducation should be considered an alternative to banning trans fats or other unhealthy food. There should be aggressive education campaigns to educate consumers as has been done with tobacco.. At the moment consumers are ignorant, they need to know what they are, the dangers and the consequences. Information on trans fats should also be part of a wider program of nutrition awareness which will put it in context. . Many people have rejected tobacco as a result of raised awareness; the same will occur with trans fats. The food industry would respond to consumer demand and reduce the use of trans fats and other ingredients considered ‘bad’.(13) Information on trans-fats is not hard to come by: the Centre for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), for example, is happy to inform about the dangers of dietary trans-fat, and has no trouble getting its declarations of doom on television and into newspapers.(11) This consumer pressure is already occurring. In the United States, for example, many fast-food chains and food manufacturers have already eliminated trans fats from their products or have pledged to phase them out. To pick one case, Wal-Mart is going to reduce its sugar, sodium content and remove all trans fats from its food.(14)\n\nLeft to its own devices, the market will solve this 'problem' in all areas which consumers consider it to be a problem, all without needing an unwieldy government ban. Therefore the government should educate its citizens regarding the health concerns surrounding trans fats, but leave it up to the citizens to choose what they eat.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0ee3690620845707dbbe2363a9632457",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs Banning trans fats in uneconomical\n\nA trans-fat ban would hurt small restaurants the most. Carlie Irwin argues: “Since most of the big chains have already started the process of eliminating trans-fat from their food, the ban would be no big deal to them. But small, independent restaurants are another story. The potential ban has small restaurant owners sweating and nervously eyeing their deep fryers. As the St. Louis Business Journal points out, many small restaurant owners don’t have the ability to effectively and efficiently reformulate their menu items. So banning trans fat could mean that your favorite independently-owned fried chicken joint down the street will be shuttering its doors.”(17)\n\nConsequently, a trans-fat ban would breed legal exceptions and inconsistencies. For example, in Illinois bakeries were exempted from their ban because lawmakers knew that it would drive up their costs and hurt the bakeries specialty items. Many other small businesses would be similarly affected Restaurants and other specialty vendors who use trans-fat products on site would also be affected. Lawmakers then have a choice of either reducing the effect of the ban and including lots of bureaucratic exemptions or punishing these businesses.(9) Tina Pantazis, the manager of Dino's Burgers, which operates two hamburger outlets in California, argues: \"The only effect [a ban on trans fat] is going to have on the consumer is that we are going to have to raise our prices.\"(19)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9448e09b455bb862d1855d73ef3fc379",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs Healthier equivalents of trans fats exist\n\nIt is easy and inexpensive to replace trans fats with other, less harmful products without significantly altering the taste of the food. Kraft eliminated trans fats from its Oreo cookies, with little public perception of any change in taste.(1) Similarly, the Wendy's restaurant chain tested a new frying oil in 370 franchises, with customers not noticing a difference in taste. Denmark imposed a national ban on trans fats with which even McDonald's has complied.(1) Replacements for trans fats will get cheaper and cheaper with time, as they are used more frequently and as the companies that produce and distribute them increase their sales volumes and are able to sell them for lower prices.\n\nSince trans fats are not irreplaceable, objections for the sake of consumer freedom are also unconvincing. As with lead added to paint, trans fats are unnecessary additions to products that can cause significant harm. Most people remain ignorant of the presence of trans-fats in their food, and of their effects. In this area the ban on trans fats differs from restrictions placed on the sale of alcohol and tobacco and so the two kinds of bans are not comparable. Not only are trans fats easy to substitute in foodstuffs, without impairing quality or taste, the presence of trans-fats is hard to detect. It is all-but impossible for informed and conscientious consumers to avoid buying and eating trans-fats.\n\nWhile banning cigarettes and alcohol mean banning an entire product category, banning the ingredient of trans fats means no such thing. Rather, it simply means that readily available replacement ingredients must be used in the preparation of the same foods. And, since these fatty replacements are widespread and cheaply available, food makers and consumers should have little difficulty making the adjustment to making and consuming the same, albeit slightly modified, foods.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "11d917a1bf43787c91d3a2884628ba77",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs The state should ban trans fats to protect the public\n\nOne of the purposes of government is identify possible threats to health and protect the people from these threats. The fact that some government regulations seem 'silly' or misplaced, or cannot easily be understood by lay-people is not a compelling argument for having no regulations at all, or for not having regulations in the case of trans fat. The commentators who denounce the 'nanny state' do not indicate what, if any, regulations or styles of regulation they approve of. Do they think there should be no inspections of restaurants by health inspectors? No regulation at all of food or drug safety by the Food and Drug Administration? Some commentators think that people should be encouraged to study the dangers of trans fats and make their own judgements about what to eat. But people have limited time to do research on such matters. It makes sense to delegate the research to a central authority, so that instead of 300 million people trying to learn about trans fats and every other lurking menace, a handful of experts can make recommendations based on the likely responses and desires of the average, informed citizen.\n\nNon-specialists’ capacity to absorb information on complex chemical and biological subjects is quite limited. The majority of us are reliant on the research of others for most of what we know.(5) The opinion of the experts on the dangers of trans fats is conclusive: trans fats are unsafe.\n\nThe American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers all uses of trans fats to be 'generally regarded as safe.' This allows the use of trans fats in whatever way food producers desire. ’Safe’ for the FDA means 'a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under its intended conditions of use', which no longer applies to trans fats. This 'generally regarded as safe' status should be revoked which in turn would greatly restrict its use in food.\n\nThe other option would be to allow local jurisdictions to regulate trans fats, but this would be more costly and lead to a patchwork of regulations.(1) The most effective method of controlling the use of trans-fats is through centralised, nationally applicable policy making. The poor and young are particularly vulnerable to the negative health effects of trans fats; at the very least, the threat posed to these groups justifies the use of informed regulation. Professor Alan Maryon-Davis, president of the UK Faculty of Public Health said in 2010: \"There are great differences in the amount of trans-fats consumed by different people and we are particularly concerned about young people and those with little disposable income who eat a lot of this type of food. This is a major health inequalities issue.”(6)\n\nThe government has a legitimate interest in protecting its citizens from harms that they are not best placed to understand or avoid themselves, and so a ban on trans fats would not only save lives but would also be legitimate under the government's role to protect when citizens cannot reasonably protect themselves.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6395578c9e7d993164a89311df49fb83",
"text": "health general weight house would ban use trans fats food stuffs Trans fats are uniquely unhealthy\n\nOne of the purposes of government is identify possible threats to health and protect the people from these threats. The fact that some government regulations seem 'silly' or misplaced, or cannot easily be understood by lay-people is not a compelling argument for having no regulations at all, or for not having regulations in the case of trans fat. The commentators who denounce the 'nanny state' do not indicate what, if any, regulations or styles of regulation they approve of. Do they think there should be no inspections of restaurants by health inspectors? No regulation at all of food or drug safety by the Food and Drug Administration? Some commentators think that people should be encouraged to study the dangers of trans fats and make their own judgements about what to eat. But people have limited time to do research on such matters. It makes sense to delegate the research to a central authority, so that instead of 300 million people trying to learn about trans fats and every other lurking menace, a handful of experts can make recommendations based on the likely responses and desires of the average, informed citizen.\n\nNon-specialists’ capacity to absorb information on complex chemical and biological subjects is quite limited. The majority of us are reliant on the research of others for most of what we know.(5) The opinion of the experts on the dangers of trans fats is conclusive: trans fats are unsafe.\n\nThe American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers all uses of trans fats to be 'generally regarded as safe.' This allows the use of trans fats in whatever way food producers desire. ’Safe’ for the FDA means 'a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists that the substance is not harmful under its intended conditions of use', which no longer applies to trans fats. This 'generally regarded as safe' status should be revoked which in turn would greatly restrict its use in food.\n\nThe other option would be to allow local jurisdictions to regulate trans fats, but this would be more costly and lead to a patchwork of regulations.(1) The most effective method of controlling the use of trans-fats is through centralised, nationally applicable policy making. The poor and young are particularly vulnerable to the negative health effects of trans fats; at the very least, the threat posed to these groups justifies the use of informed regulation. Professor Alan Maryon-Davis, president of the UK Faculty of Public Health said in 2010: \"There are great differences in the amount of trans-fats consumed by different people and we are particularly concerned about young people and those with little disposable income who eat a lot of this type of food. This is a major health inequalities issue.”(6)\n\nThe government has a legitimate interest in protecting its citizens from harms that they are not best placed to understand or avoid themselves, and so a ban on trans fats would not only save lives but would also be legitimate under the government's role to protect when citizens cannot reasonably protect themselves.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
53dbcbe2225a66bab51a1a3ee918cb93
|
Obesity is a public health issue .
All around the world, obesity has become a serious threat to public health. And the problem starts early on. In the US, for example, 17% of youth are obese4. Obesity itself has many consequences; most obviously on health such as increasing the risk of numerous diseases like heart disease, there are however economic costs both for treatment of these diseases, lost working days and due to less obvious costs such safety on transport and its resulting fuel cost. [1] Tackling obesity is therefore well within the purview of government policy. A failure to act might seriously affect the economic productivity of the nation, and even bankrupt healthcare systems [2] . A measure like the toy ban would be a first step to tackling the problem at the root, preventing children from growing up into obese adults.
[1] Zahn, Theron, “Obesity epidemic forcing ferries to lighten their loads”, seattlepi, 20 December 2011, http://www.seattlepi.com/local/komo/article/Obesity-epidemic-forcing-fer...
[2] “Obesity ‘could bankrupt the NHS’”. BBC. 15 December 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6180991.stm
|
[
{
"docid": "5082c51300c5808c668328d12ac696e2",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Even if we were to accept that the government has a role in combatting the so-called ‘obesity epidemic’, that does not justify it taking any measures it deems appropriate. The government should at the very least be able to prove that there is some link between the toys sold with the fast food meals and the rise in obesity. After all, the toys have been around since the late 70s. The ‘obesity epidemic’ is a far more recent phenomenon.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "643ba6c53da4df5f1f0c409ca553443a",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast If a parent gives into pressure from a young child so easily, even when she knows it’s the wrong thing to do, then she has bigger parenting problems to worry about than the presence of toys in fast food meals. The government cannot possibly step in to eliminate all temptations and negative influences on children’s choices. Parents need to be firm and provide their kids with the guidance necessary to choose what is best.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a1db9f42d1bc0071af74f8ab0d71d609",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast It is important to instil good habits in children at an early age. But the manner in which it is done is equally important. Kids should be taught to make choices based on what is best for them, through information and appropriate explanations, rather than just being shielded from potential dangers. That kind of behaviour, predicated on reason and understanding, will have a far more lasting impact on the way they make choices, than just protecting them from temptation, with which they will inevitably have to cope later in life.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d0fdfcded2f46be5d824cea03a1863b6",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Children may have a strong preference for a certain type of meal over another, but young kids don’t buy their own food. Parents do. And if kids might not understand that fast food is bad for them, their parents should. If a child is eating too much fast food, that is not a marketing success, it’s a parenting failure.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a1aa713c09b645f4ecf6cc7ef6c26e88",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast This is not exactly a ban on the sale of fast food to children. This ban does not affect the options of bad foods that parents can continue to feed to their young children if they choose to do so. They will even be able to continue buying happy meals – simply without the toy. It merely alters the incentives slightly toward promoting better, healthier choices by making fast food less appealing.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a65d39dd2bbb6f9bae9bd13b4ad3c295",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast While McDonald’s may have found a way to circumvent the ban, the significant pressure that was applied to them in the process led the company to improve the quality of the Happy Meal, by providing clients with fresh fruit and healthier drink options. Therefore, the ban could be considered a success.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9d87dce892ce4f646d6b834105cf8a3e",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Of course there is no such thing as a silver bullet solution to a problem as complex as childhood obesity. This ban would need to be part of a bigger push to regulate the fast food industry’s marketing to children and to provide kids and parents with better choices and information. That doesn’t mean the ban has no merit or that it would not play a beneficial role in the fight against obesity.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da96ea7ff5de59741a319d3c611fa2d3",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Making it easier for parents to raise their children well.\n\nAs well meaning as parents may be in trying to guide their kids toward better nutritional choices, they face a formidable opponent: the fast food marketing machine that spends over 4 billion dollars on advertising a year, much of it targeted directly at kids [1] . This can create enough ‘pester power’ [2] from the kids themselves, seduced by the toy that comes with the meal, that it can persuade parents to make bad choices they wouldn’t otherwise make. By eliminating at least one layer of negative pressure, this law would help parents make those healthy choices that they already know are best.\n\n[1] Philpott, Tom. “The fast-food industry’s 4.2 billion marketing blitz.” Grist. November 10. 2010. http://www.grist.org/article/food-2010-11-09-the-fast-food-industrys-4.2...\n\n[2] “San Francisco Happy meal Toy Ban Takes Effect, Sidestepped by McDonald’s.” Huffington Post. November 2011. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/san-francisco-happy-meal-ban_n_...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ff23c9beb3bd5c809f7fd2fd3107b91a",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Bad nutrition habits start during childhood.\n\nGiving away toys with meals that are calorie laden and of poor nutritional quality creates an emotional attachment between the child and fast food [1] . This bond will then follow that child into adulthood, making it harder for her to make better nutritional choices in order to become a healthy individual. This ban would break that bond and make it easier for children to grow up to be healthier adults.\n\n[1] Storm, Stephanie. “McDonald’s Trims Its Happy Meal.” The New York Times. July 26, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/27/business/mcdonalds-happy-meal-to-get-h...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ce839477f5cf442998e173ccd772277b",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Marketing aimed at children should be subject to strict regulations.\n\nUnlike adults, children are not able to make healthy decisions for themselves. They don’t understand what calories, sodium content, or saturated fats are. They are unable to comprehend the long-term effects that fast food might have on their health and development. On the other hand, a toy is instantly appealing to them and offers a straightforward incentive to opt for such a meal. As long as the negative consequences cannot be explained to kids in a clear and compelling manner, we should not make unhealthy food even more desirable for them. We should not allow children to make bad choices based on information they don’t understand [1] .\n\n[1] Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. “Fast Food FACTS: Evaluating Fast Food Nutrition and Marketing to Youth.” Yale University. November 2010. http://www.fastfoodmarketing.org/media/FastFoodFACTS_Report.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f1e4a174c6a7e45e5fd4cdc595e9d674",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast The ban is ineffective in addressing the problem of obesity.\n\nStudies have shown that only a very small amount of the calories consumed by children come from foods like the Happy Meal. And while kids are eating at fast food restaurants at an alarming rate, it is their parents who make the decision to take them there 93% of the time. Of the kids who do want to go to McDonald’s, only 8% cite the toy as the primary reason. Therefore, this piece of legislation seems to tackle a perceived problem rather than a real one. Legislators would be better off focusing their attention where it matters: providing information to parents about making better choices for their kids, and improving the quality of school lunches, which are actually provided by the government and are eaten by kids every single day, often as their main meal [1] .\n\n[1] Eskenazi, Joe, and Wachs, Benjamin. “How the Happy Meal ban explains San Francisco.” San Francisco Weekly. January 19, 2011. http://www.sfweekly.com/content/printVersion/2330057/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f825dc9e3804acbacbb345759ed7d568",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast This ban constitutes serious governmental intrusion into parental responsibilities and private choices.\n\nParents, not politicians, should be responsible for guiding the choices their children make and the food they eat, especially when they pay for it with their own money. Parents may have other reasons for wanting their children to have the meal with a toy, for example the toy is a useful distraction for the child. Governments should not try to impose their own idea of what constitutes appropriate food choices for children on parents and on businesses. Governments may aim to promote and educate, but imposing bans on private businesses goes too far [1] .\n\n[1] Martinez, Michael. “Mayor vetoes San Francisco ban on Happy Meals with toys.” CNN. November 13 2010. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/11/12/california.fast.food.ban/index.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "501735f412fe9ff746bd667c4a3006ce",
"text": "health general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Such bans are easy to side step.\n\nThe San Francisco ban has already been circumvented by McDonalds who has started selling their Happy Meals without the toys and then selling the toys separately for a nominal price [1] . Banning the sale of any toys in fast food restaurants would be difficult without prompting legal action from the companies. The steep legal costs of defending such a law would waste public resources that could easily be put to better use.\n\n[1] Eskenazi, Joe. “Happy Meal Ban. McDonlad’s Outsmarts San Francisco.” San Francisco Weekly. November 29, 2011. http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2011/11/happy_meal_ban_mcdonalds_out...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
719a0dd5e0081c9c5904cd06ab23449d
|
Compulsory treatment is not a long term solution.
Compulsory treatment may only be successful in the short term. In the long term it does nothing to reduce the fear of food, weight and hospital felt by the patient and is a barrier to treatment. Hospital admission often has a worse outcome for the patient; there are increased mortality rates which are then even higher for those who are admitted against their will. [1] Suicide accounts for 27% of anorexia deaths. [2] Compulsory treatment may make the patient more depressed and at greater risk from harm.
[1] Fedyszyn & Sullivan, ‘Ethical re-evaluation of contemporary treatments for anorexia nervosa’, 2007, http://leedsmet.academia.edu/GavinSullivan/Papers/255145/Ethical_Re-Evaluation_of_Contemporary_Treatments_for_Anorexia_Nervosa_Is_An_Aspirational_Stance_Possible_In_Practice , p.201
[2] BBC News, ‘Compulsory treatment ‘helps anorexics’’, 1999 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/408362.stm
|
[
{
"docid": "e4107fd174e6bedf5b27fd2ca9d49034",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Short term success is all that is necessary to save a life. Once the anorectic patient is out of danger then more long term treatments can be explored. This means working out how to reduce the fear of food and of weight and if the patient has become worried about going to hospital then at least there is time to sort that out as well. While emergency force feeding has to be within a hospital not all treatment has to take place in such an environment and ongoing psychological treatment can take place elsewhere.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "deca9e9494435fb554eb95e7380b23e5",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Palliative care is defeatist and does not attempt to cure the problem. Recovery is always a possibility and that is what doctors should be striving for “In a 10 year follow up of 76 severely ill women with anorexia, Eckert et al found that 18 (24%) had fully recovered, about half had a benign outcome, and only five (7%) had died.” [1] Doctors do not often have to deal with severe or chronic anorexia. Just because it is a very long treatment schedule that can be harrowing for a doctor, this not a reason to settle for palliative care. Better support structures ought to be put in place to enable the doctor to fulfil their obligation to the patient.\n\n[1] Williams, Christopher J. et al., ‘We should strive to keep patients alive’, 1998, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1113542/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "660de51944223047d50eb4238d3c2fc6",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Yes there will be negative consequences to such a step as force feeding however this is only done when it is absolutely necessary and the negative consequences of not doing so are much worse. Doctors will only force feed if they are convinced that doing so is for the good of the patient, indeed they are prohibited from taking such a step if it is not absolutely necessary.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "baa63d94abdbf0264f7f6d93f05ec79d",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed In 1997 the Mental Health Act Commission opened the door to allowing force feeding of anorexic patients in the UK by allowing the compulsory admission of anorexics to hospital. This change of policy did not reduce the number of patients being admitted for treatment which has gone up from 419 in 1996-7 to 620 in 2005-6. [1]\n\n[1] Disordered eating, Anorexia Nervosa Statistics (Uk), http://www.disordered-eating.co.uk/eating-disorders-statistics/anorexia-nervosa-statistics-uk.html , accessed 07/22/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "acf694b01308564d831a4f6e837ed335",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Force feeding is undignified. The World Medical Association considers “Even if intended to benefit, feeding accompanied by threats, coercion, force or use of physical restraints is a form of inhuman and degrading treatment.” [1] This is treatment which the European Convention on Human Rights prohibits in Article 3 on the prohibition of torture. [2] The patient’s right to refuse treatment should be respected even if they are mentally ill. (N.B. Anorexia is not recognised as a mental illness in every country).\n\n[1] World Medical Association, ‘WMA Declaration of Malta on Hunger Strikers’, 2006\n\n[2] European Court of Human Rights, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms’, 2010, P.4\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "611b7e2de0e5aa93625bf2cf740ebc65",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed When it comes to hunger strikes the World Medical Association says that “Forcible feeding is never ethically acceptable.” [1] While there are obviously differences in terms of the objective when it comes to the consent of the patient there is no difference. In both cases the patient does not want to be force fed and understand what the consequences may be.\n\n[1] World Medical Association, ‘WMA Declaration of Malta on Hunger Strikers’, 2006\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a9a9a1f786d8a5bcdb84fd9b78afad6b",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Far from helping solve the patient’s psychological problems force feeding is just as likely to exacerbate the problems and make them much less willing to seek out treatment, something that they are often already unwilling to do. [1] While it may be the case that when starved people over-estimate their own size those who are anorexic in the developed world did not start out starved so there must have been a different initial cause of the anorexia that will need to be found and solved, there are numerous different types of psychological treatment that can help do this. [2]\n\n[1] Jimerson, Shane R. et al., ‘Eating Disorders: Treatment’, 2002, http://education.ucsb.edu/jimerson/eatingdisorders.html\n\n[2] NHS Choices, ‘Treating anorexia’, 2010, http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Anorexia-nervosa/Pages/Treatment.aspx\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4e5e59934b641972a11a99f074ba792c",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Life is more important than dignity. None the less there is a significant difference between someone who is in an emergency condition being treated without their consent and someone who has previously refused treatment being forced to have treatment. Patients are allowed to make decisions doctors believe are unwise. [1]\n\n[1] Patients.co.uk, ‘Consent To Treatment (Mental Capacity and Mental Helth Legislation)’ 2009, http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Consent-To-Treatment-%28Mental-Capacity-...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "749668a231244ad1fdc486bc1a1aa552",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Anorexics need to be able to trust their doctors.\n\nThe most successful policies are where anorectic patients feel safe and trust their doctors so are willing to go to clinics voluntarily as they feel that they are in control of the situation. [1] Conversely an anorectic patient’s fear of weight gain, especially forced weight gain in hospital is an obstacle to treatment. If an anorexia nervosa sufferer thinks that they will be force- fed they may be less likely to seek treatment or advice.\n\n[1] Susic, Paul, ‘Anorexia Treatment and the Unwilling Patient’, http://www.psychtreatment.com/anorexia_treatment.htm , accessed 07/21/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6e85ed02454a718ba3f1836d1486d134",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed The focus should be on palliative care.\n\nSome doctors advocate focusing on palliative care (relief of pain but not treatment of cause) due to the low full recovery rates of anorexia sufferers. Research Studies show that over 10 years only approximately 20% of patients recover. Those patients who are sufferers for more than 12 years are unlikely to ever recover.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8bcb2031fde9d9ae3073480613cc59a2",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Force feeding strategies may cause physical harm\n\nForce-feeding has negative consequences. If the patient is dangerously thin and is then force-fed, it can led to Hypophosphataemia (reduction of phosphates in the blood) which causes heart failure. Anorexics are characterised by self-denial and often do not come forward voluntarily. Indeed it according to Dr Sacker anorexia is often not even about food rather \"By stopping food from going into the body, what they really feel is they can be in control of their body.” [1] This desire is actively harmed by force feeding as a result they are even less likely to come forward voluntarily if they are faced with the possibility of force- feeding.\n\n[1] CBS, ‘A very thin line’, 02/11/2009, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/05/20/48hours/main47832.shtml , accessed 07/22/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5f1426ddeca153006319304d2163383c",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Anorectic patients are not able to make the decision for themselves.\n\nAnorectic patients are typically treated under mental health legislation (e.g. the UK 1983 Act). They do not make a free choice because they are not rationally able to weigh up decisions and consequences, they ‘feel’ fat when they obviously are not and are irrational as they are willing to starve themselves to the point of death when suicide is not their intent. [1] The patient is not “capable of forming unimpaired and rational judgements concerning the consequences” (British Medical Association 1992). There have been court cases that have confirmed that force feeding should be allowed when a patient is considered mentally ill. For example the case of “B vs. Croydon Health Authority” in 1994 it was judged, that B (a borderline personality disorder patient, which involves suffering from an irresistible desire to inflict-self-harm) can be force fed, even though she did not give consent to the treatment.\n\nThe court explained that because she was not aware of the seriousness of her condition and she had found it difficult to break out of the cycle of self-punishment, she was deemed unfit to make decisions about her nutrition. [2]\n\n[1] Fedyszyn & Sullivan, ‘Ethical re-evaluation of contemporary treatments for anorexia nervosa’, 2007, http://leedsmet.academia.edu/GavinSullivan/Papers/255145/Ethical_Re-Evaluation_of_Contemporary_Treatments_for_Anorexia_Nervosa_Is_An_Aspirational_Stance_Possible_In_Practice , p.202\n\n[2] Keywood K., B v Croydon Health Authority 1994, CA: Force-Feeding the Hunger-Striker under the Mental Health Act 1983., University of Liverpool, http://webjcli.ncl.ac.uk/articles3/keywood3.html , accessed 07/22/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d0a5324cf0d3a31bb0cc7e87380acd30",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Force feeding can help psychologically.\n\nA healthier body weight is necessary to be able to treat the patient’s psychological problems. Studies in Minnesota show that when normal volunteers were starved, they began to development anorectic patterns. They over-estimated the sizes of their own faces by approximately 50%. This shows the impact of starvation on the brain. [1]\n\n[1] Fedyszyn & Sullivan, ‘Ethical re-evaluation of contemporary treatments for anorexia nervosa’, 2007, http://leedsmet.academia.edu/GavinSullivan/Papers/255145/Ethical_Re-Evaluation_of_Contemporary_Treatments_for_Anorexia_Nervosa_Is_An_Aspirational_Stance_Possible_In_Practice , P.202\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4cb00ad9dca11b6207464fb17163950f",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed Life is more important than dignity\n\nLife is more important than dignity, many medical treatments are unpleasant or painful but they are necessary to preserve life. Without force feeding the anorectic patient will often die. In Australia about 80 per cent of all anorexic children required hospital admission (from 101 cases), and of those, 50 per cent required tube feeding as a life-saving measure to manage starvation. [1] When a patient requires emergency treatment doctors should do what is necessary to save the patient’s life. Psychological problems can only be treated if the person is alive. Treatment for the psychological problem should be considered to go hand in hand with saving the patient’s life as in the B vs. Croydon Health Authority where force feeding was ruled to be complemented the use of other methods to treat her psychiatric problems. [2]\n\n[1] McLean T., Half of anorexic kids need force feeding, 2008, http://news.theage.com.au/national/half-of-anorexic-kids-need-force-feeding-20080528-2itg.html , accessed 07/22/2011\n\n[2] Keywood K., B v Croydon Health Authority 1994, CA: Force-Feeding the Hunger-Striker under the Mental Health Act 1983., University of Liverpool, http://www.ncl.ac.uk/~nlawwww/articles3/keywood3.html , accessed 07/22/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a1ef0e934e0f36ef10c48fa039a06bbf",
"text": " modern culture health disease health general weight house would force feed In the first instance, doctors should always act to keep a patient alive\n\nMedical ethics say that a doctor has a responsibility to keep the patient alive to administer treatment. In the UK Diana Pretty was denied the right to die by the House of Lords even though she consistently requested it. The Israeli Courts ordered the force- feeding of political hunger strikers arguing that in a conflict between life and dignity, life wins. India prosecuted a physician who allowed a hunger striker to die. The medical profession take their responsibility for life very seriously on a global level.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
81f6ea982da2721404e9a5d183d424b0
|
This acts as a deterrent.
Knowing that, if they commit an offence, their name, photograph, and a description of their crimes will be widely published deters people from committing the offence in the first place and equally of reoffending. Firstly, this is because there are strong moral norms preventing such behaviour; this policy acts not only to reinforce those moral norms (by clearly designating people who commit such an offence as being worthy of shaming), it also increases the consequences of breaching such norms. Specifically, potential offenders will realise the harm this may cause to their personal relationships, and any future relationships – these are typically things people value, and so people will act to minimise this harm. Further, if someone is willing to commit a sexual offence, it is reasonable to assume they value sexual encounters. Such publication may limit their opportunity to access such encounters in the future, and therefore the policy aims to operate such as to minimise what a person desires should they commit a crime.
It is perhaps useful to compare this deterrent to the deterrent offered by prison. It can be argued that the deterrent of prison is a weak one, because there is an information problem – people do not know how bad prison is. This is exacerbated by media narratives that suggest prison is a soft touch, even the Prison Officers Association in the UK claims jail is too soft. [1] This may be especially true for those of the socioeconomic background who are more likely to commit criminal offences; they are probabilistically poorer and less likely to have a job, so the harms of prison (loss of freedom, harming job prospects) may seem less important.
[1] Knapton, 2008
|
[
{
"docid": "5bf2606a4157320a79d7a1517ff6c1de",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Firstly, within relationships; a person looking to commit such an offence is unlikely to be deterred because they expect that, because of the existence of the relationship, they will not be convicted of such an offence. Also, sexual offences against a partner are often an expression of a dominating power within a relationship. In such a case, the offender does not expect the offence to be reported due to the control (s)he holds over the victim. As such, the size of the penalty is less important, as they do not expect to receive it.\n\nThe second circumstance such offences are committed is against a stranger, typically in public. When a person is willing to act in breach of such clear moral norms, they are less likely to be concerned about this being published broadly, and so the deterrent will be weaker.\n\nThese are exacerbated by the fact that many sexual offences are committed in times of passion, where a person’s decision making is focused heavily on the short-term – and so the possibility of a future shaming is not taken into account, and deterrence does not occur.\n\nFinally, it is unrealistic to claim prison is a weak deterrent; the removal of liberty matters to almost everyone, and the difficult conditions of prison are well-known, particularly amongst repeat offenders.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "3ab46b7920a59fc0907d3ac1e1e714ac",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Those same studies suggest that individuals do little extra to protect themselves, as they consider sexual offences to be suitably rare that they can plausibly tell themselves it won't happen to them. This is exacerbated by the fact that most sexual offences are committed by someone who the victim knows. If they already know the person, they are likely to consider them a limited threat, as the popular perception of sexual offences is still one of an offence committed by a stranger. Furthermore, people tend to be highly trusting of their own impression of people. Finally, the harms from never engaging with former sex offenders in a community are set out at Opposition Argument TWO.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "997e67a1d38e3dfdb32ceb9b256ce128",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Freedom is not an absolute good; only something that typically advances overall utility, as we understand that people are normally better placed to maximise their utility, being the only ones with knowledge of their desires and values. This, however, is not such a case – as the opposition arguments below suggest, this causes harmful consequences that outweigh any claimed benefits of utility. Furthermore, this area seems to be one where the police are better placed to determine the importance of the information, given their expertise in offending and re-offending , and especially given the tendency on behalf of the public to panic, and place more importance on past convictions than it factually requires.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "20594e0f00114e1bc90845496940b332",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders The option given to the police and victim to not disclose the information undermines the principled claim in Proposition Argument Two that people should be free to determine the importance of the information on their own; this denies them that freedom in some cases. Given cases where there is a risk of vigilantism are the ones which excite the most public feeling, these cases may be the ones which people feel are most important to know about.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ed89fbcec74776f23b1c766db759327b",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Clearly, vigilantism is a problem; however, the proviso in the policy should act to limit this, as where there is a threat of harm the information will not be released. Furthermore, it will be possible to offer people under threat police protection. Finally, a strong justice system is likely to limit vigilantism, as people perceive justice as being done, and are therefore less likely to resort to acts of individual violence.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "51dbaf0632dcde3327771e4f065eb891",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders While such an argument may act to limit the value of the deterrent effect, it does not completely remove it; there will remain some additional deterrence to some potential perpetrators of sexual offences. This is because some potential offenders will consider the potential harm to themselves of their action, and a greater potential harm will mean they are less likely to commit these offences.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "51dbaf0632dcde3327771e4f065eb891",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders While such an argument may act to limit the value of the deterrent effect, it does not completely remove it; there will remain some additional deterrence to some potential perpetrators of sexual offences. This is because some potential offenders will consider the potential harm to themselves of their action, and a greater potential harm will mean they are less likely to commit these offences.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9f3344ab0cef1d7fc94db9a4da5ad5cb",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Firstly, given the low % of offenders who commit serious crimes within 6 years is around 10%1, this seems like it may be a marginal issue.\n\nFurthermore, it seems unlikely that people who already know someone will stop associating with them merely because of their stigmatization. Family, for example, tend to be very forgiving, as are close friends, who are likely to believe their long-term view of somebody is more accurate and to forgive a mistake. Such people will be able to ensure a person is not alienated from all society.\n\nThis may also be a benefit; if an offender has a tendency to commit sexual offences within relationships, it may be useful to limit his relationships (or at least warn their partner of such a tendency), such that this is not likely to occur again.\n\nFinally, it can be shown that if this policy does increase the deterrent effect to first-time offenders, this may be more important. This is because some people will be prevented from ever being imprisoned, associating with other prisoners, and acquiring a criminal record\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3d90ca3191a7193bce25d69349796e3b",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders This helps people protect themselves and their families\n\nPeople can use the information about the offenders in their area to ensure this. It is especially useful to have a modus operandi; if a local offender is known for typically abducting people walking on their own at night, people can alter their behaviour to ensure they always have company, or get a taxi after dark. More direct measures can be taken, by avoiding contact with that person, or avoiding entering into a close relationship with them. Furthermore, more general measures can be taken to be more vigilant, install better locks, and avoid leaving vulnerable people alone. Some studies1 suggest that there is an increase in measures taken to protect other people where this information is given.\n\n1 Zgoba, K., \"Megan's Law: Assessing the Practical and Monetary Efficacy\", December 2008,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6b795d5150728374974b574231dda72e",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders How this would work\n\nThis policy involves an active disclosure campaign, through websites and the newspapers, where a sex offender has their name, their photo, their address and the nature of their crime published on a website, or in the local media. It may include poster campaigns about individuals for particularly serious crimes, with the aim of both informing people and causing shame. It may be sensible to allow the police to not disclose the information in the following circumstances; 1) where a significant risk of vigilantism exists, 2) where it is against the wishes of the victim, and 3) where it may jeopardize an ongoing criminal investigation. Early studies showed that Megan's law in the United States had high rates of voluntary compliance, between 70 and 80% and rising, proving that the policy is practical1.\n\n1 Simpson, Rachel, ''Megan's law' and other forms of sex-offender registration', NSW Parliamentary Library Research Service, Briefing Paper NBo. 22/99, November 1999,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0ad81b140f9ee7c5c2d09d9415563c34",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders The state has a duty to maximise freedoms.\n\nAll states in some way limit individual freedoms, by requiring them to follow laws and enforcing these laws with the coercive power of the state. However, such limits can be justified in so far as they advance others freedoms; limiting Person A's freedom to kill enhances Person B's freedom to live. States therefore derive their legitimacy to deny freedoms from their advancement of overall freedom. This policy enhances the freedom of people to defend themselves and their family by providing them with information about offenders (see Argument Three), and allows them to determine for themselves the importance of that information1.\n\n1 law.jrank.org, 'Sex Offences\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb7fffefeb6b0db76465fb0095b70934",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders The harms of stigmatization and alienation.\n\nThis harm mainly refers to the possibility of re-offending, which occurs in approximately 30% of cases over a six-year period (although note that the figure is for committing any other offence, not another sexual offence)1. When society labels such people in a very public way as criminals, it may be difficult for them to reintegrate in society. This is because people who know of their crimes will be less willing to engage with them, whether they knew them previously or not. Specifically, it will be very difficult for businesses to employ them if they are publically known to have been convicted of a sexual offence, because of the possible public outrage this would cause. Previous offenders are therefore likely to be distanced from society, shunned by old friends, likely to have difficulty in making new friends, and likely to find it difficult to find employment. It may further encourage them to make friends with those with similar backgrounds. This makes them feel outside society, less constrained by its moral norms, and therefore more likely to commit offences. Furthermore, the difficulty of access to employment may make them turn to crime to survive.\n\nFinally, academic literature on stigmatization suggests that for a stigma to prevent reoffending, the stigma needs to be easy to scale up for subsequent offences2; given the blanket nature of this policy, this does not seem possible.\n\n1 Home Office, \"Reconviction Rates of Serious Offenders and Assessment of their Risk\", 2002, 2 Rasmusen, E., \"Stigma and Self-Fulfilling Expectations of Criminality\", September 1996,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4f764507343042f419dacedc2db72a49",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Expense.\n\nAs alluded to in Counterargument Four above, sexual offences are typically committed within relationships, or by someone the victim knows; around 80% according to some studies1. These proportions are also probably larger, in that rape by an acquaintance is less likely to be reported, as a victim is better able to normalise the incident as a misunderstood sexual interaction.\n\nThis indicates that a deterrent effect is less likely to work, because of the lower chance of the offence being reported, and the relative power within any such relationship. The offender is less likely to respond to that deterrent, as they perceive it as so unlikely to occur to them.\n\n1 National Center for Victims of Crime, \"Acquaintance Rape\", 2008,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "537edbb8d0bf3171aa3f1473744724ba",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Allowing the population to know where sex offenders are would encourage vigilantism.\n\nVigilantism is a real threat to those publicised as sexual offenders, especially those whose sexual offences involve children. For example, in the UK a vigilante published a database naming almost 10,000 paedophiles1, and some misdirected vigilante attacks have been committed against those with no criminal convictions, such as a paediatrician2.\n\nTherefore, there is the possibility of harm occurring in that offenders who have served the punishment the justice system feels is adequate being subjected to further punishment and violence. Furthermore, there is the possibility of mistakes being made and people being subject to violence for no reason.\n\n1 The Telegraph, \"Internet vigilante publishes database naming 10,000 paedophiles\", November 2010, 2 The Independent, \"Vigilante mob attacks home of paediatrician\", August 2000,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c72f81fe124553951237c963bb708990",
"text": "sex sexuality house would name and shame sex offenders Who commits sexual offences?\n\nAs alluded to in Counterargument Four above, sexual offences are typically committed within relationships, or by someone the victim knows; around 80% according to some studies1. These proportions are also probably larger, in that rape by an acquaintance is less likely to be reported, as a victim is better able to normalise the incident as a misunderstood sexual interaction.\n\nThis indicates that a deterrent effect is less likely to work, because of the lower chance of the offence being reported, and the relative power within any such relationship. The offender is less likely to respond to that deterrent, as they perceive it as so unlikely to occur to them.\n\n1 National Center for Victims of Crime, \"Acquaintance Rape\", 2008,\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
6faa15a6ccae3db7a18bd33493b227a5
|
People should be allowed to do whatever they want to their own bodies
It is important that we have the liberty to do what we want to our own bodies. People are allowed to eat or drink to their detriment. In many countries it is legal to take one's life. Why then, should people not be allowed to harm themselves through cannabis use? (Assuming that cannabis use is harmful. In most cases, this is highly debatable.)
Smoking cannabis may have effects on others, such as through the effects of passive smoking. However, regulation has been brought in to minimize the effects on others for alcohol and cigarettes, such as bans on smoking in public places, and the same thing could be done for cannabis.
|
[
{
"docid": "4ecfc2123f438de82b8c784cb1cf8407",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised While individual liberty is an important good, there are cases in which a Government can be justified in behaving in a paternalistic manner, even to prevent individuals harming themselves. Few people debate the law that you must wear a seatbelt in cars, for example.\n\nMoreover, cannabis can harm others and many of the ways in which it does so would not be possible to counter with regulation. In the words of philosopher George Sher, \"Drug use harms strangers by involving them in the collisions, shootouts and other catastrophes to which the impaired and overly aggressive drug users are prone. It harms family members by depriving them of the companionship and income of their addicted partners. It harms fetuses by exposing them to a toxic and permanently damaging prenatural environment. It harms children by subjecting them to the abuse of their drug-addled parents\"1. 1 Wolff, J. (n.d.). Regulation of Recreational Drugs. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from University College London:\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "d0033c15ef43f24dfb920135e92fa5e1",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised It is difficult to assess the true harm caused by cannabis. There are limits to the scope for information on its effects because of its illegal nature1. However, it is widely acknowledged that there are links between cannabis use and mental and physical health problems2. It is also widely acknowledged that excessive cannabis use can harm relationships and prevent people from acting as functional members of society. Cannabis is generally smoked with tobacco and cannabis users are more likely to drink alcohol. Regardless of whether cannabis itself is worse for you than tobacco or alcohol, it is still bad for you and therefore it should remain illegal.\n\nThe reason alcohol and tobacco are legal is not related to their effect on our health. They (alcohol and tobacco) are legal as they have existed in this country since long before laws were passed in relation to health and were far more popular than cannabis so it would have been much harder to ban them. Cannabis is illegal not because it supposedley is worse but because it is was less commonly consumed. That said, alcohol and tobacco are irerelvent in this debate.\n\n1 Wolff , J. (2009, December 1). The art and science of evidence about drugs. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from Guardian:\n\n2 Frank. (n.d.). Cannabis. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from Talk to Frank:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fcd7bd462e2463896fd971fad6e6fc72",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Cannabis does not open the mind. Rather, it harms it. Many researchers have concluded that cannabis impairs short-term memory, cognition and motivation. It has also proven to be highly addictive for some users and has damaged people's mental capabilities and abilities to function in society1. 2 Mabry, C. D. (2001, October). Physicians and the war on drugs: the case against legalization. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from Qualified Surgeons:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a63f081ee13013cb9dd784fcdd2b7e43",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Legalizing cannabis would not stop the criminals who currently sell it from continuing to commit crimes. They could simply diversify their activities. Many of them would already be dealing other drugs or involved in other criminal activities. The legalization of cannabis could simply give them a legitimate base from which they may operate.\n\nIn order to end the \"war on drugs\" and the problems of violence associated with it, all drugs would have to be legalized. While some debate the harmful effects which cannabis may have, few argue that drugs like heroin and crack cocaine do not present a serious threat to people. To sell these kinds of drugs legally would be irresponsible and would ruin lives, families and communities.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5c26c4ffd4c994c729ad70a4c7dc60d3",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised There is little evidence of cannabis being a gateway drug. In fact, there is a higher correlation between cigarette smoking and hard drugs. If anything, the only way in which cannabis could be said to be a gateway drug is that it is illegal and people may be inclined to buy other illegal drugs after they have bought cannabis, particularly as some dealers will sell other drugs. This problem, however, would be immediately eradicated if cannabis were legalized.\n\nFurthermore, the people who refer cannabis as a \"gateway drug\" don't take into consideration the prerequisites and situations people are in prior to ones marijuana use. The people who use it as an additive to relaxation occasionally and are in a relaxed environment, maybe with a few friends over to hang out aren’t using it as an escape from reality but at an additive to their relaxation and fun. When cannabis is referred to as a “gateway drug” people are generally and unknowingly referring to the people who use marijuana as an escape from a much less than pleasant reality and “smoke themselves sober” therefore requiring a harder drug to get the same high and escape that cannabis once provided for them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a4242699a667dd88e164068fde65fd4d",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised While there are studies that argue that cannabis is harmful, there is no substantial proof of many of the harmful effects it is accused of having. Indeed, there are many studies that claim it does not have these harmful effects. For example, a 15-year John Hopkins University study published in May 1999 found \"no significant differences in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and non-users of cannabis.\"1 It is also claimed by many researchers that while cannabis has some potentially harmful effects, it is far less harmful then tobacco and alcohol2. Cannabis is also known to have medicinal qualities, such as in relieving pain for MS sufferers. In California, for example, it is possible to obtain a \"medical marijuana\" card. 1 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10221315 2 The Economist. (2010, November 2). Scoring Drugs. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from The Economist:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "91aa354feda33c72101e6f4f7ec68690",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised First, it is not necessarily a bad thing for cannabis use to increase. Countries with the highest usage rates include some of the most prosperous in the world – Canada, Australia and New Zealand for example.\n\nSecondly, even if increased cannabis use is a bad thing, there is little evidence to prove usage would necessarily go up if cannabis were legalized. Usage may have risen slightly in the Netherlands but cannabis was depenalized in 1976 and usage rates remain lower than in the US today. Moreover, there are other reasons why usage rose. According to Dirk Korf of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Amsterdam, \"There is no appreciable causal connection between the Dutch decriminalization of cannabis and the rate at which cannabis use has evolved\" 1.Portugal decriminalized drug use in 2001 and, a decade later, drug usage and drug related crime rates have fallen and cannabis use remains below the European average2 .\n\n1. Griffin, 2011, http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/cannabis-a-gateway-to-other-drugs-20110718-1hlor.html\n\n2. Hari, 2009, http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-har...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7ef9335971c3749c9d81119fd5f4300d",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Legalization of cannabis would make it easier for scientific studies to take place, thereby providing a more accurate picture of the physical, psychological, spiritual and sociological effects of the drug. Just as the lift of the taboo on discussions of a sexual nature in schools around the world has resulted in people being more informed as to the dangers of unprotected sex, so would the increased availability and accuracy of scientific data on cannabis serve to reduce the ratio of abuse to responsible use.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "dfb11efb122a20cc21b06385304b13f1",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Alcohol and tobacco are more harmful drugs, yet remain legal.\n\nAlthough cannabis can have some harmful effects, it is not nearly as harmful as tobacco or alcohol. Research by the British Medical Association shows that nicotine is more addictive. In England and Wales, cannabis was said to have helped cause 17 deaths, compared to 6627 for alcohol and 86,500 for tobacco1. A study, published by The Lancet, that scores drugs out of 100 for the harm they cause the user and others, gave alcohol 72, tobacco 27 and cannabis 202.\n\nGiven that tobacco and alcohol are more likely to harm the user and other people, it seems ludicrous that they should be legal and cannabis should not be. The legalization of cannabis would remove an anomaly from the law. 1 TDPF. (n.d.). Drug Related Deaths. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from Transform Drug Policy Foundation: 2 The Economist. (2010, November 2). Scoring Drugs. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from The Economist:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f674ac34f2577170be55a8008261bf45",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised If cannabis was legalized, it could be regulated\n\nMany of the problems associated with cannabis use arise from the fact that it is illegal. Cannabis is the world’s most widely used illegal drug – 23% of Canadians admit to having smoked it and up to 7 million people in the UK are estimated to do so.\n\nIn 2009, the UN estimated that the market for illegal drugs was worth $320 billion. This market is run by criminals and is often blighted by violence. It has cost thousands of innocent lives, particularly in supplier countries such as Mexico and Afghanistan 1. In the US, Milton Friedman estimated that 10,000 people die every year as a result of drug dealers fighting over territory 2. Many of the victims are innocent people, caught in crossfire. By legalizing cannabis, the size of this market for illegal drugs would be significantly reduced and so, effectively, would the number of crimes and unnecessary deaths that come with it.\n\nAnother way of seeing the problems of prohibition is to look at the failed attempt at alcohol prohibition in the 1920s. People continued to consume alcohol, only it became 150 per cent stronger, was as easy to obtain for minors as for adults, and was sold by murderous gangsters like Al Capone 3.\n\nGiven all of the problems associated with prohibiting cannabis, it seems nonsensical to spend billions fighting a drugs war when instead governments could reduce crime and make money by selling cannabis in a regulated manner. They could spend some of the profit on treating people who did experience any harmful effects.\n\n1.United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2010, http://www.unodc.org/documents/wdr/WDR_2010/World_Drug_Report_2010_lo-res.pdf\n\n2.Hari, 2009, http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/com\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "10268af765f78ac8ac1559771233a74a",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Cannabis opens the mind in a positive and beneficial manner\n\nCannabis use can alter one's perception of reality or consciousness. The alteration need not be thought of as spiritual or religious to be respected for what it is; a fresh look on a reality that we are programmed as humans to perceive only in a particular manner. Cannabis can help humans perceive that complex reality from simply a different perspective, which can benefit our appreciation for that reality and our unique and limited perceptions of it. With this more intelligent approach to cannabis consumption, it is easy to argue that mental, perceptual, and societal benefits exist1. 1 Harris, S. (2011, July 6). Drugs and the Meaning of Life. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from Huffington Post:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a45abda7271f37cc361c64c09b3e33d2",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Uncertainty over the effects of cannabis means it is best to be prudent\n\nThe debate over the effects of cannabis is based largely upon conflicting evidence. For example, some argue it can cause psychosis while others argue it only has positive effects on the mind. The effect of any illegal drug is a very difficult area to study 1. Most drug users use more than one drug and researchers are often limited to studying those who admit themselves into clinics with a crisis – something of a skewed sample.\n\nGiven that Governments cannot accurately predict what the effects of legalizing cannabis would be, it is prudent to maintain illegality. What if, for example, a state decided to legalize cannabis, to only discover five years later that it has a dramatically more negative impact on human cognition than previously thought, or that it substantially increased the risks of psychosis?\n\n1.Wolff, 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/dec/01/drugs-health-effects-jonathan-wolff\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "288bdd7ac941fcaece2edc0dc3291fdf",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Cannabis is harmful\n\nStudies have shown that cannabis may cause a number of physical and mental problems. It can cause respiratory problems, increase one's heart rate and lower one's sperm count. Cannabis use is also associated with causing or worsening some forms of psychosis. It has also been found to increase tiredness, depression and paranoia, impair short-term memory and hormone production and cause general cognitive decline1. As for cannabis' medicinal qualities, safer, more effective drugs are available. They include a synthetic version of THC, cannabis' primary active ingredient, which is marketed in the United States under the name Marinol. 1 Frank. (n.d.). Cannabis. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from Talk to Frank:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "89397ff10dad267a55ec89ebf98f381c",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised Cannabis is a gateway drug\n\nPeople who use cannabis will be more likely to move on to harder drugs. While the bad effects of cannabis may be disputed, the harmful effects of hard drugs cannot – they seriously damage people’s health. A major study in 2011 found that ‘smoking cannabis daily sets users up for a lifetime of multiple drug use’ 1. Heavy users are more likely to resort to crime to fund their addiction. Their habit often harms their relationships with friends, colleagues and family. State money then has to be spent on benefits, on policing, and on rehabilitation programs.\n\n1. Griffin, 2011, http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/cannabis-a-gateway-to-other-dr...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f885fc2e410473ac05a2a193ecb05eac",
"text": "addiction health general society house believes cannabis should be legalised More people will use cannabis if legalized\n\nIf cannabis is legalized, it will become socially acceptable and more people will smoke it. It will also become more readily available. In the Netherlands, cannabis usage went up after it was legalized1. With more people smoking, more people will experience the adverse physical and mental health effects - more people will be harmed. Furthermore, as Dr. David Murray has noted, 'marijuana use is the leading cause of treatment need for those abusing or dependent on illegal drugs'2; therefore not only will more people use cannabis, more of them will be addicted.\n\n1 Mackenzie, D. (1998, February 21). New Scientists Marijuana Special Report. Retrieved July 20, 2011, from UKCIA: 2 Dubner, Stephen J., 'On the Legalization - or not - of Marijuana', Freakonomics, 30 October 2007\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
719b7159c81aa0a1bf3c745eeaf3a3b7
|
Smokers are a drain on economic resources
Smokers contribute a disproportionately large amount to the cost of healthcare. They are a drain on resources. In the UK it is estimated that up to 9,500 beds are blocked daily by smokers, and that up to eight million doctor consultations are required on their behalf each year. A well-informed smoker, unable or unwilling to quit, might assume an increased risk for himself but he would also be indirectly increasing the likelihood of others being unable to access necessary healthcare and this is not fair. Allowing smokers to take scarce beds or organs needed for transplants - that could otherwise go to those suffering from genuine misfortunes - is an unjust allocation of resources.
|
[
{
"docid": "9a9a0755afb2599934034667db66d6c0",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state The added cost to public healthcare that comes as a result of diseases brought upon by smoking is vastly outweighed by the amount of money governments around the world receive in taxes on tobacco. The UK currently takes around 60% of the cost of a pack of cigarettes in tax duty. In 2008, the US took over $16 billion in tobacco tax revenue1. Such high tax duties and revenues can hardly be justified if smokers are not even to get healthcare for their money. And without the taxes, cigarettes would be much cheaper, encouraging more people to smoke. Moreover, because smokers tend to die earlier than non-smokers, per head the average health care costs are lower than those of non-smokers2. 1 Tax Policy Centre, US Tobacco Revenue Statistics, 2 USA Today, 15 Jul 11, Do smokers cost society money.. Accessed 15 Jul 11.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "1fcbe7e534da646540aba7e0aa61943b",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Smokers may have a higher chance of harm from surgery due to complications arising from their habit, but this is not a phenomenon specific to them. Cardiovascular disease, or heart disease to most people, is the number one killer of men and women in the United States1. It is caused by the build-up of fatty deposits that clog the vessels - those at risk are often smokers, but can just as often be those who are overweight, have diabetes or simply high blood pressure. As such, it is not justified to single out smokers when those with unhealthy diets can just as easily cause complications in their surgeries.\n\n1. Daily News, 13 Jul 11, Cardiovascular disease: Defend yourself by lowering the risks.Accessed 14 Jul 11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eaab7464d25fb7fdc87e050f89295e3d",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state There is no evidence that limiting access to healthcare would act as a deterrent. In fact, in the developing world, where a smoker would on average have worse access to healthcare, tobacco consumption has increased significantly over the last decade.1 Furthermore, governments have indeed acted to discourage smoking through a variety of methods. These have included advertising campaigns and banning smoking in public places and they seem to have worked. Cigarette use in the developed world has declined over the last 50 years. In the UK, smoking rates have dropped by half between 1974 and 2009, from 45% down to 21%2. A majority 59% have never taken up the habit3. 1 World Health Organization, The Tobacco Atlas, 2 Daily Telegraph, 22 Jan 09, Lowest ever number of smokers after public ban and health campaigns.Accessed 14 Jul 2011. 3 Daily Telegraph, 22 Jan 09, Lowest ever number of smokers after public ban and health campaigns.Accessed 14 Jul 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "00d656b63953173c7b841617bb4de70c",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Many smokers do not choose to harm themselves, they simply can't help it. The 1988 US Surgeon General's report on the addictive nature of cigarette smoking provides proof of what is now widely accepted – smoking cigarettes is highly addictive. Moreover, there are high correlations between people smoking and being under stress or having parents that smoke. All of this suggests that people do not necessarily choose to smoke and may not be able to choose to give up. Given that smokers can therefore be portrayed as suffering from involuntary addiction, it would seem sensible to tackle this addiction alongside physical health issues, as oppose to dismissing smokers altogether.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "754bb4e53e723505a328cdc5fff1d05b",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying, or even reducing, access to healthcare for smokers is impractical, and therefore an unrealistic policy goal. First, the extent to which care is denied is questionable. Does the proposition model include denying palliative care? If it does, this literally means leaving people to suffer agonising pain in emergencies while they try to locate private prescription painkillers, if they can afford them. Further, does it include denying emergency procedures such as resuscitation in the case of a heart attack? If it does, where are patients supposed to go? Private emergency rooms are few and far between, or non-existent, in many countries – never mind private ambulances. Second, in order to encourage smokers to stop smoking, the process needs to involve reactivating access to healthcare if smokers quit. But any cut-off point at which the right is re-activated will necessarily be arbitrary. Some studies have suggested that, for instance, teenagers do irreparable damage to their respiratory systems even if they stop smoking young. If all citizens make an informed decision to smoke, as the proposition argues, isn’t it the case that teenagers make an informed decision to do inordinate damage to their bodies? If it is, then why should there be an absolute cut-off point at which one reassumes healthcare rights? Should there be a relative scale? Wouldn’t this be impossible to construct on a scientific basis?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "db2ea2034c05c8e56add51961a5a7c16",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state There are realistic and practical ways in which the policy of denying healthcare to smokers could be carried out. Smoking is a habit that has clear and demonstrable physical effects, which often correlate with the regularity and longevity of the habit; doctors are trained to recognize such symptoms and do not need patient confirmation. Furthermore, if the bill made it quite clear that healthcare was to be denied to present smokers, the hypothetical presented by the opposition is easily negated. The goal of such a bill would to be to ensure that both smokers gave up the habit and non-smokers did not take up the habit. In this case, the man taking up smoking is in the wrong and is acting contrary to the law. He would have little room for complaint.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "279fb6e529cf9e655389994b038b480e",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state In practice, it is both viable and beneficial, in certain cases, to prioritize non-smokers for healthcare. Where there is more chance of a transplant being successful in a non-smoker for example. It is true that people can knowingly damage their health in other ways, such as drug taking or alcohol abuse and it may well be viable to limit access to healthcare in these cases also. This does not mean that every factor in a patient's life must be scrutinized in order to decide where they are placed on a doctor's waiting list. In public policy, the line must be drawn somewhere. Prioritizing non-smokers can mean that more people can be helped with same amount of resources and, where this is the case, it should be practiced.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7dd9c538632f9e13ef96e1f1baa6faa7",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying access to healthcare for smokers will not hurt the economy, for the health care costs of smokers are substantially larger than those of non-smokers. In fact, 'health care costs for smokers at a given age are as much as 40 percent higher than those for non-smokers' . Furthermore, though the opposition points out that because smokers die younger, average health costs are in fact lower than non-smokers, denying access to healthcare will have two effects which will cancel each other out: more people will give up smoking, increasing gross medical costs for the state, but those who don't will die younger for they won't get treatment, which will offset the previous rise.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b408eb9831fb17e181c2f7ce2ccd9e98",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state The opposition fails to recognize the impact that such a policy will have on smokers. Access will only be denied to smokers who continue to smoke once the bill is in place, if it is proven that they have given up, they will be free to access healthcare. Therefore, the only smokers who will be turned away, and who will potentially die from preventable illnesses are those who place their habit above that of their life.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "30d025e9652aaa2ff6cef0875cab7bc9",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Goods provided by the state, like healthcare, are often, and necessarily, subject to certain provisions. For example, in order to get unemployment benefits, a person must prove that they are regularly looking for a job and a means to get themselves off benefits. Denying access to healthcare for smokers does not mean denying them healthcare access forever; they can regain unlimited access if they stop smoking. Therefore, prioritizing non-smokers for healthcare in certain cases is not impeding upon smokers' basic liberties but a recognition that those who care about their own health enough to not smoke should be prioritized.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ad47b0904ac6d76bffcc42fde1adcc08",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state As smokers have a higher chance of harm from surgery due to complications arising from their habit, it is more efficient to prioritize non-smokers\n\nFailure to quit smoking before surgical procedures increases cardiac and pulmonary complications, impairs tissue healing, and is associated with more infections and other complications at the surgical site. For example, in a study of wound and other complications after hip or knee surgery, no smoker who quit beforehand developed a wound infection compared with 26% of ongoing smokers and 27% of those who only reduced tobacco use. Overall complications were reduced to 10% in those who quit smoking compared with 44% in those who continued1. This means that surgery costs more on average for smokers and is also less likely to be effective. Treating more smokers means devoting more resources for lower results. Therefore, prioritizing non-smokers, at least in certain areas of healthcare, would be beneficial to society as a whole. 1http Peters, M.J. (2007) Should smokers be refused surgery? British Medical Journal,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e14c293a346e90352fa4779bc70d9cbf",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state The added cost to public healthcare that comes as a result of diseases brought upon by smoking is vastly outweighed by the amount of money governments around the world receive in taxes on tobacco. The UK currently takes around 60% of the cost of a pack of\n\nMany people have to wait for surgery when they have fallen ill or gotten injured through no fault of their own. Many of the people they are waiting behind have fallen ill out of choice. This includes smokers who have contracted diseases as a result of their habit. There is a vast array of information, easily available to smokers, on the dangers of cigarettes. If despite this, a person chooses to smoke anyway then it is unfair that others who have fallen ill out of genuine misfortune should have to wait in line behind them for healthcare. This problem is particularly in acute in states that have universal healthcare, where non-smokers are forced to wait in a queue for treatment behind those who have negligently made themselves ill smoking. In Britain for example, they have attempted to avoid this by establishing standards under which surgery is denied to obese patients1. Thomas Condliff, the patient, was denied gastric band surgery due to having a body mass index lower than the threshold under which they believed the surgery would be effective2. The priority in such cases is and should be with those who have made a conscious decision to develop an unhealthy habit. 1 BBC News, 11 Jul 11, Man appeals for NHS gastric bypass surgery. Accessed 14 Jul 11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da0363cf7152b85aeca47972e8450927",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state The law would act as a deterrent against attempts to conceal a smoking habit to procure healthcare\n\nThere are realistic ways a policy of denying healthcare access to smokers could be carried out. Insurance companies already ask lots of health-related questions, often including whether their client is a smoker, when assessing life insurance premiums. In these cases, you are required to give details of your lifestyle by law. Of course, some people do not, however this is to be expected since no law is one hundred per cent effective. Sanctions exist to discourage dishonest behaviour. A similar model could be put in place requiring a declaration of smoker status to the health authority. Indeed, many doctors already enquire about their patients' smoking statuses on an informal basis. It is also particularly hard to lie about being a smoker for two reasons. First, other people inevitably see you smoking. This means an abundance of witnesses in the case of a dispute, and thus a disincentive to lie. Second, people require doctors to undertake detailed examinations for treatment purposes, thereby allowing them to see obvious outward signs of smoking: tar deposits, tar in cough, yellowed fingernails, etc.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "47dcc7b2e635ceaba104c5caaac1052c",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying access to healthcare for smokers would act as a deterrent, discouraging smokers\n\nGovernments should do everything they can to discourage smoking. They already attempt to do so in a number of ways, such as through ensuring graphic health warnings are present on all tobacco packaging. Many states have also introduced legislation banning smoking indoors in an attempt to discourage the habit. However, smoking is still a massive problem - millions of people still do it. The refusal of medical treatment to smokers would surely be a massive deterrent to current/potential smokers from continuing/starting the habit. The safety net of modern healthcare being pulled from underneath them would be a powerful incentive to give up the habit, and reduce the estimated $100 billion that the White House believes smokers cost the economy annually through loss of productivity1. 1 USA Today, 15 Jul 11, Do smokers cost society money.. Accessed 15 Jul 11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "113c73f0e21ce0293f5e6362cffb8754",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying healthcare to smokers is a restriction on people's liberties\n\nWhether or not you believe it should be, smoking tobacco is legal. At the same time, healthcare is regarded as a fundamental human right, alongside rights to education, food and water. Denying someone healthcare is to impede upon his/her basic liberties and this cannot be justified when, in the eyes of the law, they have done nothing wrong. Criminals have the right to healthcare – it is often that you hear that the trial of a war criminal is being delayed while they receive treatment. Take the cases of Ratko Mladic or Slobodan Milosevic for example 1. If healthcare is given to men who have committed genocide then surely it should be given to smokers. Also, if a Government adopts the line that one's behavior determines the kind of health service one receives then what is to stop that Government applying such a mantra beyond smoking and controlling the practices of those they govern in any number of ways?\n\n1. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/02/us-mladic-tribunal-idUSTRE7516HM20110602 and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1403054.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "638ed2a70f5b92f9a468dabe16aed4b2",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying access to healthcare for smokers will lead to thousands of people being turned away and potentially dying from preventable illnesses\n\nThe denial of access to healthcare for smokers is a policy that will directly lead to the turning away of millions of people, merely for making one perfectly legal, if ill-advised lifestyle choice. In a state like France, where 20 per cent of the population, 12 million people, are smokers, such a policy would leave a large minority unable to access basic healthcare for issues that may be unrelated to their smoking habit . Furthermore, it may lead to the ridiculous situation whereby smokers are dying from preventable diseases despite hospitals being under-utilized, as a fifth of the population is no longer allowed in.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3faa39ae9fa79aaa747a3aaedf4b06d7",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying healthcare to smokers alone is victimization\n\nThe denial of healthcare, an established right, without the citizen doing anything either immoral or wrong is pure and simple victimization. Suppose you are a doctor and you have two patients waiting for a heart transplant. Patient A is 65. He does not exercise, has never had a job and has committed a series of crimes throughout his life. Patient B is in his 20s, with a first class degree from a good university. He is a trained doctor himself and wants to go and work in the developing world, to help people suffering from leprosy. But Patient B is a heavy smoker. Should you therefore prioritize patient A? It seems problematic to victimize smokers, particularly considering smoking is legal. If you are going to discriminate against smokers then surely you should discriminate against alcohol drinkers and people who do extreme sports as they are also knowingly endangering themselves. Smoking reduces life expectancy by 2.5 years for men, but obesity reduces life expectancy by 1.3 years and if high blood pressure is added to that by a total of 2.8 years all are preventable so why should only smoking be discriminated against?1 Maybe you should discriminate against people who choose to live in polluted cities. And then there are drug users. What about people who could afford private health care? Should age, occupation and past convictions be taken into account? It seems arbitrary and unfair to single out smokers. Yet, if we start to take into account all the factors that determine who \"deserves\" to be prioritized for healthcare, then we are left with the unsavory, illiberal practice of Social Darwinism. 1 Harvard School of Public Health, \"Four Preventable Risk Factors Reduce Life Expectancy in U.S. and Lead to Health Disparities\", 22 March 2010, accessed 24 August 2010.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "30b51d71ab2d5cee3fa19db0d518983c",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying healthcare to smokers is impractical\n\nThere are several reasons why limiting access to healthcare for smokers could prove impractical. Ultimately they surround the issue of how you define who is a smoker. One man might have chain smoked for 20 years but given up for a year, since a bill limiting access to healthcare for smokers was passed. Meanwhile, another might have been smoking cigarettes now and again just for the past year. Who would be prioritized if the two were on a waiting list for the same operation? If the law penalizes anyone who has ever smoked then it would not provide nearly as strong an incentive to stop smoking. But, if the law does not penalize anyone who has smoked, then choosing whom to punish would seem quite arbitrary. Furthermore, what is stopping people from simply lying about how much/whether they smoke? They might not show any obvious signs of being a smoker. Even if they do, they could claim to have given up, work around fumes or be a victim of passive smoking.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "26cb535345a6c346b0d3a1476b8705f1",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare house would deny smokers access state Denying access to healthcare for smokers will hurt the economy\n\nEconomically, the healthcare of the nation is important for maintaining a productive workforce. Do we really want to lose otherwise functional members of the workforce the first time they contract an aggravated throat infection and cannot afford, or delay for financial reasons, a simple course of antibiotics? Quite apart from productivity, as The Guardian notes, smokers in the United Kingdom also contribute over £10 billion to government coffers through the tobacco tax 1. To lose this source of revenue will do more to hurt national health services than the occasional complication in surgery granted to a smoker. Lastly, because smokers die younger than non-smokers, though they cost more per year, over their lifetime their average health costs are lower than those of longer-living, non-smokers.\n\n1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2010/nov/30/smokers-forced-o...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
c68af482a8fd3c6ec35f88291331b478
|
Universal healthcare stifles innovation
Profits drive innovation. That’s the long and short of it. Medical care is not exception, albeit the situation is a bit more complicated in this case.
The US’s current system has a marketplace of different private insurers capable of making individual and often different decisions on how and which procedures they’ll choose to cover. Their decisions are something that helps shape and drive new and different practices in hospitals. A simple example is one of virtual colonoscopies. Without getting into the nitty gritty, they often require follow up procedures, yet are very popular with patients. Some insurers value the first, some the other, but none have the power to force the health care providers to choose one or the other. They’re free to decide for themselves, innovate with guidelines, even new procedures. Those are then communicated back to insurers, influencing them in turn and completing the cycle.
What introducing a single-payer universal health coverage would do is introduce a single overwhelming player into this field – the government. Since we have seen how the insurer can often shape the care, what such a monopoly does is opens up the possibility of top-down mandates as to what this care should be. With talk of “comparative effectiveness research”, tasked with finding optimal cost-effective methods of treatment, the process has already begun. [1]
[1] Wall Street Journal, How Washington Rations, published 5/19/2009, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124268737705832167.html#mod=djemEditorialPage , accessed 9/18/2011
|
[
{
"docid": "574774d85d86be7230e7db36fea25719",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal Profits do drive innovation. But there is nothing out there that would make us believes that the profits stemming from the health care industry are going to taper off or even decrease in a universal coverage system. In short in a single-payer system, it’s just the government that’ll be picking up the tab and not the private companies. But the money will still be there.\n\nAn expert on the issue from the Brigham and Women’s Hospital opined that this lack of innovation crops up every time there is talk of a health care reform, usually from the pharmaceutical industry, and usually for reasons completely unrelated to the policy proposed. [1]\n\nWhereas the opposition fears new research into efficiency of medical practice and procedures, we, on the other hand, feel that’s exactly what the doctor ordered – and doctors do too. [2]\n\n[1] Klein, E., Will Health-Care Reform Save Medical Innovation?, published 8/3/2009, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/08/will_health-care_reform_save_m.html , accessed 9/18/2011\n\n[2] Brown, D., ‘Comparative effectiveness research’ tackles medicine’s unanswered questions, published 8/15/2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/comparative-effectiveness-research-tackles-medicines-unanswered-questions/2011/08/01/gIQA7RJSHJ_story.html , accessed 9/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "23de7f9185b8a909622e0e85b3809f46",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal It is not, in fact, universal health care itself, that’s inefficient, but specific adaptations of it. Often, even those shortcomings are so blown out of proportion that it’s very difficult to get the whole story.\n\nUniversal health care can come in many shapes and sizes, meant to fit all kinds of countries and societies. When judging them it’s often useful to turn to those societies for critiques of their coverage systems.\n\nDespite the horror stories about the British NHS, it costs 60% less per person than the current US system. Despite the haunting depictions of decades long waiting lists, Canadians with chronic conditions are much more satisfied with the treatment received than their US counterparts. [1]\n\nWe should not let hysterical reporting to divert us from the truth – universal health care makes a lot of economic, and, more importantly, moral sense.\n\n[1] Krugman, P., The Swiss Menace, published 8/16/2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/opinion/17krugman.html , accessed 9/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "903291841a232d6e6a480574cc2a21d4",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal We need to analyze this issue from a couple of different perspectives.\n\nThe first is this trillion per decade cost. Is this truly a cost to the American economy? We think not, since this money will simply flow back into the economy, back into the hands of health care providers, insurance companies, etc. – back into the hands of taxpayers. So in this sense it is very much affordable.\n\nBut is this a productive enterprise? For the millions of people that at this very moment have absolutely no insurance and therefore very limited access to health care, the answer is very clear.\n\nIn addition, the reform will more or less pay for itself, not in a year, not even a decade – but as it stands now, it’s been designed to have a net worth of zero. [1]\n\nLastly, just because we live in a bad economic climate doesn’t mean we can simply abandon all sense of moral obligation. There are people suffering because of the current situation. No cost can offset that.\n\n[1] Johnson, S., Kwak, J., Can We Afford Health Care Reform? We Can't Afford Not to Do It., published 9/1/2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/01/AR2009090101027.html , accessed 9/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "be4ae351a99404fd3fef00c9d250715d",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal A range of health programs are already available. Many employers offer health insurance and some people deliberately choose to work for such companies for these benefits, even if the pay is a little lower. Other plans can be purchased by individuals with no need to rely on an employer. This means they are free to choose the level of care which is most appropriate to their needs. For other people it can be perfectly reasonable to decide to go without health insurance. Healthy younger adults will on average save money by choosing not to pay high insurance premiums, covering any necessary treatment out of their own pockets from time to time. Why should the state take away all these people’s freedom of choice by imposing a one-size-fits-all socialist system of health care?\n\nHuman resources professionals will still be needed to deal with the very many other employment regulations put in place by the federal government. Instead of employees being able to exercise control over their health care choices and work with people in their company, patients will be forced to deal with the nameless, faceless members of the government bureaucracy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fce8ac7f461961e1b1edf8b5e45322e3",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal There are several reasons why health care should not be considered a universal human right.\n\nThe first issue is one of definition – how do we define the services that need to be rendered in order for them to qualify as adequate health care? Where do we draw the line? Emergency surgery, sure, but how about cosmetic surgery?\n\nThe second is that all human rights have a clear addressee, an entity that needs to protect this right. But who is targeted here? The government? What if we opt for a private yet universal health coverage – is this any less moral? Let’s forget the institutions for a second, should this moral duty of health care fall solely on the doctors perhaps? [1]\n\nIn essence, viewing health care as a right robs us of another, much more essential one – that of the right to one’s own life and one’s livelihood. If it is not considered a service to be rendered, than how could a doctor charge for it? She couldn’t! If it were a right, than each of us would own it, it would have to be inseparable from us. Yet, we don’t and we can’t. [2]\n\nWe can see that considering health care as a basic human right has profound philosophical problems, not the least of them the fact that it infringes on the rights of others.\n\n[1] Barlow, P., Health care is not a human right, published 7/31/1999, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1126951/ , accessed 9/18/2011\n\n[2] Sade, R., The Political Fallacy that Medical Care is a Right, published 12/2/1971, http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/sademcr.htm , accessed 9/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eb543c1965a3e2e0e81f1b8b401118ff",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal The United States government cannot afford to fund universal health care. Other universal social welfare policies such as Social Security and Medicare have run into major problems with funding. Costs are rising at the same time that the baby boomer generation are growing old and retiring. Soon tens of millions of boomers will stop contributing much tax and start demanding much more in benefits than before. In such a situation we cannot afford to burden the nation with another huge government spending program. Nations that provide universal health care coverage spend a substantial amount of their national wealth on the service.\n\nWith government control of all health care, caps will be placed on costs. As a result many doctors would not be rewarded for their long hours and important roles in our lives. The road to becoming a doctor is long and hard; without the present financial rewards many young people will not choose to study medicine. Current doctors may find that they do not want to continue their careers in a government-controlled market. The American Medical Association does not back a government-controlled, single-payer universal health care system.\n\nThe current system of offering group insurance through employers covers many Americans with good quality health insurance. The group plan concept enables insurance companies to insure people who are high risk and low risk by mixing them in the same pool. Issues over losing or leaving a job with health benefits are dealt with by federal laws which require companies to continue to offer workers cover for at least 18 months after they leave employment.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "55d0f99f544972047aa4b2b9efe2a482",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal While the idea that better access to preventative medicine will quickly and drastically lower general medical care costs is an incredible notion, it sadly is just that – a notion.\n\nAs an aside, the same argument – lowered costs – could be made for simply improving the existing tactics of preventative medicine without the need to invest into universal coverage.\n\nReturning to this proposition though, while it might be realistic to expect some reduction in costs from improved prevention, those would very unlikely ever amount to a significant amount – and certainly not an amount that would make introducing universal health coverage a feasible strategy. [1]\n\nUniversal health care will cause people to use the health care system more. If they are covered, they will go to the doctor when they do not really need to, and will become heavy users of the system. We can see in other countries that this heavier use leads to delays in treatment and constant demands for more resources. As a result care is rationed and taxes keep going up.\n\n[1] Leonhardt, D., Free Lunch on Health? Think Again, published 8/8/2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/business/08leonhardt.html , accessed 9/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "25d77ab0ff4c7bc85ddf0c7f95a93bff",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal Universal healthcare is not affordable\n\nNo policy is created, debated or implemented in a vacuum. The backdrop of implementing universal health coverage now is, unfortunately, the greatest economic downturn of the last 80 years. Although the National Bureau of Economic Research declared the recession to be over, we are not out of the woods yet. [1] Is it really the time to be considering a costly investment?\n\nWith estimates that the cost of this investment might reach 1.5 trillion dollars in the next decade, the answer is a resounding no. Even the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities – a left leaning think tank – opined that the Congress could not come up with the necessary funding to go ahead with the health reform without introducing some very unpopular policies. [2]\n\nDoes this mean universal health care should be introduced at one time in the future? Not likely. Given that there are no realistic policies in place to substantially reduce the “riot inducing” US public debt [3] and the trend of always increasing health care costs [4] the time when introducing universal health care affordably and responsibly will seem ever further away.\n\n[1] New York Times, Recession, published 9/20/2010, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/r/recession_and_depression/index.html , accessed 9/18/2011\n\n[2] New York Times, Paying for Universal Health Coverage, published 6/6/2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/07/opinion/07sun1.html , accessed 9/18/2011\n\n[3] Taylor, K., Bloomberg, on Radio, Raises Specter of Riots by Jobless, published 9/16/2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/17/nyregion/mayor-bloomberg-invokes-a-concern-of-riots-on-radio.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=public%20debt&st=cse , accessed 9/18/2011\n\n[4] Gawande, A., The cost conondrum, published 6/1/2009, http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande , accessed 9/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d76b44e55822072a66631c807e808af",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal Universal healthcare systems are inefficient\n\nOne of the countries lauded for its universal health care is France. So what has the introduction of universal coverage brought the French? Costs and waiting lists.\n\nFrance’s system of single-payer health coverage goes like this: the taxpayers fund a state insurer called Assurance Maladie, so that even patients who cannot afford treatment can get it. Now although, at face value, France spends less on healthcare and achieves better public health metrics (such as infant mortality), it has a big problem. The state insurer has been deep in debt since 1989, which has now reached 15 billion euros. [1]\n\nAnother major problem with universal health care efficiency is waiting lists. In 2006 in Britain it was reported that almost a million Britons were waiting for admission to hospitals for procedures. In Sweden the lists for heart surgery are 25 weeks long and hip replacements take a year. Very telling is a ruling by the Canadian Supreme Court, another champion of universal health care: “access to a waiting list is not access to health care”. [2]\n\nUniversal health coverage does sound nice in theory, but the dual cancers of costs and waiting lists make it a subpar option when looking for a solution to offer Americans efficient, affordable and accessible health care.\n\n[1] Gauthier-Villars, D., France Fights Universal Care's High Cost, published 8/7/2009, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124958049241511735.html , accessed 9/17/2011\n\n[2] Tanner, M., Cannon, M., Universal healthcare's dirty little secrets, published 4/5/2007, http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-tanner5apr05,0,2681638.story , accessed 9/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b125bb47207ee0b3eae4e845757f761d",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal Current health care systems are not sustainable\n\nAmerican health insurance payments are very high and rising rapidly. Even employer-subsidised programs are very expensive for many Americans, because they often require co-payments or high deductibles (payment for the first part of any treatment). In any case employee health benefits are being withdrawn by many companies as a way of cutting costs. For those without insurance, a relatively minor illness or injury can be a financial disaster. It is unfair that many ordinary hard-working Americans can no longer afford decent medical treatment.\n\nMoving to a system of universal health care would reduce the burden on human resources personnel in companies. At present they must make sure the company is obeying the very many federal laws about the provision of health insurance. With a universal system where the government was the single-payer, these regulations would not apply and the costs of American businesses would be much reduced.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e17d649f41dfc97d650523f72d0e735b",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal Health care programmes currently do not offer equality of care\n\nThe United States as a whole spends 14% of GDP (total income) on health care. This includes the amount spent by the federal government, state governments, employers and private citizens. Many studies have found that a single-payer system would cut costs enough to allow everyone in the USA to have access to good health care without the nation as a whole spending more than it does at the moment. Medicare, a government-run health care program, has administrative costs of less than 2% of its total budget.\n\nThe current system of health maintenance organisations (HMOs) has destroyed the doctor-patient relationship and removed patients’ ability to choose between health care providers. Patients find that their doctors are not on their new plan and are forced to leave doctors with whom they have established a trusting relationship. Also, patients must get approval to see specialists and then are allowed to see only selected doctors. Doctors usually can’t spend enough time with patients in the HMO plans. By contrast a universal health system would give patients many more choices.\n\nIn the current system the employee and the employee’s family often depend on the employer for affordable health insurance. If the worker loses their job, the cost of new health insurance can be high and is often unaffordable. Even with current federal laws making insurance more movable, the costs to the employee are too high. With a single-payer, universal health care system, health insurance would no longer be tied to the employer and employees would not have to consider health insurance as a reason to stay with a given employer. This would also be good for the economy as a whole as it would make the labour market more flexible than it has become in recent years.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ae0109c8625148d69ed86e482074abf2",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal Health care would substantially reduce overall costs\n\nWith universal health care, people are able to seek preventive treatment. This means having tests and check-ups before they feel ill, so that conditions can be picked up in their early stages when they are easy to treat. For example in a recent study 70% of women with health insurance knew their cholesterol level, while only 50% of uninsured women did. In the end, people who do not get preventive health care will get treatment only when their disease is more advanced. As a result their care will cost more and the outcomes are likely to be much worse. Preventative care, made more accessible, can function the same way, reducing the costs further. [1]\n\nIn addition, a single-payer system reduces the administrative costs. A different way of charging for the care, not by individual services but by outcomes, as proposed by Obama’s bill, also changes incentives from as many tests and procedures as possible to as many patients treated and healed as possible. [2]\n\nWe thus see that not only does universal health coverage inherently decrease costs because of preventative care, much of the cost can be avoided if implemented wisely and incentivized properly.\n\n[1] Cutler, D. M., Health System Modernization Will Reduce the Deficit, published 5/11/2009, http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2009/05/health_modernization.html , accessed 9/17/2011\n\n[2] Wirzibicki, A., With health costs rising, Vermont moves toward a single-payer system, published 4/7/2011, http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/blogs/the_angle/2011/04/vermonts_single.html , accessed 9/17/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "69d5649cc984f143658d38d63edb8a65",
"text": " finance health healthcare politics house would introduce system universal Healthcare has been recognised as a right\n\nThe two crucial dimensions of the topic of introducing universal health care are morality and the affordability.\n\nParagraph 1 of Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states the following: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.” [1]\n\nAnalyzing the text, we see that medical care, in so far, as it provides adequate health and well-being is considered a human right by the international community. In addition, it also states, that this right extends also to periods of unemployment, sickness, disability, and so forth.\n\nDespite this, why should we consider health care a human right? Because health is an essential prerequisite for a functional individual – one that is capable of free expression for instance – and a functional society – one capable of holding elections, not hampered by communicable diseases, to point to just one example.\n\nUniversal health care provided by the state to all its citizens is the only form of health care that can provide what is outlined in the Declaration.\n\nIn the US the only conditions truly universally covered are medical emergencies. [2] But life without the immediate danger of death hardly constitutes an adequate standard of health and well-being. Additionally, programs such as Medicaid and Medicare do the same, yet again, only for certain parts of the population, not really providing the necessary care for the entire society.\n\nFurther, the current system of health care actively removes health insurance from the unemployed, since most (61%) of Americans are insured through their employers – thus not respecting the provision that demands care also in the case of unemployment. [3]\n\nBut does insurance equal health care? In a word: yes. Given the incredible cost of modern and sophisticated medical care – a colonoscopy can cost more than 3000 dollars – in practice, those who are not insured are also not treated. [4]\n\n[1] UN General Assembly, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, published 12/10/1948, http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/human-rights-basics/universal-declaration-of-human-rights , accessed 9/17/2011\n\n[2] Barrett, M., The US Universal Health Care System-Emergency Rooms, published 3/2/2009, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marilyn-barrett/the-us-universal-health-c_b_171010.html , accessed 9/17/2011\n\n[3] Smith, D., U.S. healthcare law seen aiding employer coverage, published 6/21/2011, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/21/usa-healthcare-employers-idUSN1E75J1WP20110621 , accessed 9/17/2011\n\n[4] Mantone, J., Even With Insurance, Hospital Stay Can Cost a Million, published 11/29/2007, http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2007/11/29/even-with-insurance-hospital-stay-can-cost-a-million/ , accessed 9/17/2011\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
11657789424a77db32737a95ca2d1b63
|
Environmental risks
There are serious environmental factors that should be fully examined before any decision is made to approve the Pipeline project.
For one thing, the Pipeline will mostly extract Oil from Tar Sands. Extracting oil from tar sands is much more complicated than pumping conventional crude oil out of the ground. It requires steam-heating the sands to produce a petroleum slurry, then further dilution. One result of this process, the Canadian Environmental Ministry says, is that greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas sector as a whole will rise by nearly one-third from 2005 to 2020 — even as other sectors are reducing emissions. [1]
Former NASA Climatologist James Hansen has suggested that if the Pipeline is completed it is “Game Over for the Planet”. [2]
Furthermore, the path of the proposed Pipeline will bring it close to the Ogallala Aquifer which provides 30% of the United States’ total irrigation supply and 82% of the drinking water to the 2.3 million people who live within the region it serves. Furthermore, within that region is just under 20% of all US agricultural production.[3] A major spill along the Pipeline would have the potential to render the entire Aquifer unusable.
[1] Girling, Russell K., ‘The proposed Keystone XL pipeline will be built responsibly’, The Hill’s Congress Blog, 13 July 2011, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-a-environment/171321-the-p...
[2] Mayer, Jane, ‘Taking it to the streets’, The New Yorker, 28 November 2011, http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2011/11/28/111128taco_talk_mayer#i...
[3] US Geological Survey, ‘High Plains Regional Ground-Water Study’, http://co.water.usgs.gov/nawqa/hpgw/factsheets/DENNEHYFS1.html
|
[
{
"docid": "55b722747ee3c4287da7fae04523e20d",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general Almost any form of producing and transporting oil risks an environmental disaster if things go wrong, as was demonstrated in the summer of 2010 by the major British Petroleum spill in the Gulf of Mexico.\n\nHistorically however land-based Pipelines have been far safer than Oil Freighters or off-shore platforms because of the ease of access, which means that spills can usually be responded to rapidly. The real damage with the BP Spill was due to its isolated location in deep water and the consequent difficulty of reaching it.\n\nFurthermore, fears of the carbon emissions are flawed because they are based on the assumption that if the Pipeline is not approved the Tar Sands will not be developed. But this is not the case. The Canadian Government has already shown interested in an alternative Chinese proposal which would see a Pipeline built to deliver the oil to the Pacific, and eventually to the Chinese market. [1] If the oil is going to be burned one way or another, it is best for the United States to do it, because the United States enjoys higher fuel efficiency standards and generally cleaner vehicles.\n\n[1] Yahoo news, 2012, http://news.yahoo.com/harper-visit-china-seek-deeper-economic-ties-202731193.html\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "11276ac669ae30e5db6499af16f4b089",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general History does show that renewable technology tends to develop when it is economically efficient. Alternatives to fossil fuels will be found when fossil fuels are too expensive to buy, and therefore people are willing to buy what is initially an inferior product. It is only then after general adoption, that the inferior product will improve to the point at which it is equal to the product it is replacing.\n\nThe fact is that as long as there are large scale supplies of fossil fuels available, and those supplies are plentiful enough to be affordable, consumers will be unwilling to accept the inferior performance they will get from electric cars, or the inferior comfort of smaller vehicles. The EU, with a far superior public transportation system is a bad comparison with the United States, as it is likely that the price at which Americans would accept the same sort of compromises is much higher, and no amount of environmental concern or preaching about alternative energy will generate the political capital to force them to if they don’t have to.\n\nFurthermore, what the opposition ignores in this argument is that it is often the poor who will suffer the most from artificially high fuel prices. Raising prices will increasingly make driving a luxury good, limiting the mobility of low income workers. This will both reduce their standard of living (i.e. ability to take vacations) and reduce their options for work and therefore for advancement.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "481a89d5f828accb773e70d1f340eaa8",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general To say the job numbers are questionable is an understatement. The Department of State issued a report in August putting the estimated number at between 5-6000. [1]\n\nFurthermore, Trans-Canada, one of the major shareholders has backed off larger estimates in public, floating figures in the 20-25,000 range. TransCanada's initial estimate of 20,000 — which it said includes 13,000 direct construction jobs and 7,000 jobs among supply manufacturers — is far more conservative. [2]\n\nWhy the discrepancy? The Washington Post investigated and found that the same author of the Keystone report, Ray Perryman also wrote a report predicting massive job gains from a Wind Farm project. Among the predicted jobs were:\n\n“51 dancers and choreographers, 138 dentists, 176 dental hygienists, 100 librarians, 510 bread bakers, 448 clergy, 154 stenographers, 865 hairdressers, 136 manicurists, 110 shampooers, 65 farmers, and (our favorite) 1,714 bartenders.“ [3]\n\nFurthermore all of these estimates ignore potential job losses they may affect existing workers in the oil industry once the Pipeline is complete. It is perfectly possible that there will be a net loss of jobs.\n\nAs for the Unions, it will provide short-term construction jobs, which is why they support it. But almost any project would do the same.\n\n[1] United States Department of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, ‘Executive Summary Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Keystone XL Project’, 26 August 2011, http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/clientsite/keystonexl.nsf/03_KX...\n\n[2] Kessler, 2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/keystone-pipeline-...\n\n[3] ibid\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb910456ef7270cc4d0d9903fc77f97d",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general Canada’s friendship with the United States is based on shared values, interests and a shared language, things it does not and never can share with China in the foreseeable future. As such, while delaying approval of the Keystone Pipeline might well cost the United States a pipeline, it is unlikely to cost America Canadian friendship.\n\nFurthermore, while the delay of the Pipeline project may well have made the Chinese bid more attractive, the fact that the Chinese government already owns 10% of the Canadian oil industry and was willing to put up the money [1] for a Pipeline is an indication that they may well be willing to a build a second Pipeline of their own regardless of what the United States does, even if it does not make economic sense in the short-run.\n\n[1] Radia, Andy, ‘Should the Harper government allow Chinese ownership of Alberta’s oil sands’, Canada Politics, 13 October 2011, http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/harper-government-allow-c...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c076b48145e9cd730b8c60a1e2dc4e6c",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general The XL Pipeline, upon its completion would simply be replacing one source of Oil dependency with another. And what Canada makes up for in political friendliness, could be undone by the fact that US oil would be coming from a much smaller number of sources.\n\nFurthermore, resolving US supply problems will not solve the global energy shortage that will arrive as Oil deposits shrink and Chinese demand rises. Oil will remain a source of political instability.\n\nThe only true path to energy independence is to find alternative renewable sources that do not leave the United States and the rest of the world dependent on resources that are limited both in amount and in their geographical locations. The XL Pipeline might even undermine these efforts as it will create a false sense of security.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "995baefa53f7e1ff0aa22b06734834e1",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general America should not become more dependent on oil\n\nA successful development of the Pipeline would deepen the Unite States’ dependence on Oil, and undermine the drive towards renewable fuels.\n\nHistorically, consumers switch fuels not when alternatives are available, but when economic forces cause costs to rise to such a point that it becomes inefficient not to switch. This is one reason why the EU has found such success with taxes on gasoline which brought its price above 4$ a gallon long before it reached that price on the market. The result was a rush to adopt smaller and more fuel efficient cars, and to ration other energy consuming hardware.\n\nThe main result of the Keystone Pipeline will be to lower fuel costs in the short-term, under pricing electric cars and alternative fuel sources. When gas prices finally rise, as they eventually will, the United States will find itself far behind the rest of the World in renewable technology.\n\nGiven that renewable technology will be one of the major sources of economic power in the next few decades, choosing short-term savings over-long term investment seems like a bad idea.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "57dc7ac10a2307669c000ee4e233b5ca",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general Job creation\n\nThe XL Pipeline project has the potential to create a large number of jobs, both in its construction, and in refining and processing at its terminal points within the United States.\n\nKeystone Pipelines has produced a report which indicates that the Pipeline should create 118,000 jobs, with as many as 250,000 in total after spinoffs have been counted. [1]\n\nLabor Unions have accepted this line and are aggressively lobbying for the Pipeline, [2] even though it means siding with Republicans and against their own party. Furthermore, Politicians ranging from Jon Huntsman to Bob Casey have embraced the job-creating p[3]otential of the Project.\n\n[1] The Perryman Group, ‘The Impact of Developing the Keystone XL Pipeline Project on Business Activity in the US’ June 2010, http://www.perrymangroup.com/reports/TransCanada.pdf\n\n[2] Fox, Liam, ‘Unions Back Keystone XL Pipeline Threatens Clash with Occupy Movement’, News Junkie Post, 3 December 2011, http://newsjunkiepost.com/2011/12/03/unions-back-keystone-xl-pipeline-th...\n\n[3] Kessler, Glenn, ‘Keystone pipeline jobs claims: a bipartisan fumble’, Washington Post, 14 December 2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/keystone-pipeline-...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "81978233032d64915147361ccdcc58af",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general Rejecting the pipeline bid would worsen US relations with Canada\n\nCanada’s Oil reserves will be of major strategic value in the next century. Currently the United States is Canada’s preferred trading partner and strategic ally, both because of a history of past cooperation, and because the US is both more willing and able to support Canadian claims to the Arctic than China. The Pipeline would consolidate this relationship, ensuring that the development of Canada’s reserves would occur with the American market in mind, because once built, it would be far more expensive to build a second Pipeline than to simply use the existing one.\n\nThe United States, is not however, Canada’s only option. Canada is determined to sell the oil one way or another, and an American refusal will not save the environment. What it will do is make Canada look elsewhere. The Canadian government publicly floated a joint-Canadian-Chinese pipeline proposal which would bring the oil to the Pacific after the Obama Administration delayed consideration of the project until after 2012. [1]\n\nJust as the Keystone Pipeline would lock Canada into the US Market, a decision to develop Canadian reserves with the Chinese market in mind would be difficult to reverse, and undermine the energy independence of the United States rather than secure it.\n\n[1] Tan, Florence, and Hua, Judy, ‘Analysis: Harper’s bet may pay off; China open to Canadian oil’, Reuters, 25 November 2011, http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-harpers-bet-may-pay-off-china-open-045143...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fe82d0bb55f225cf8bcc649b2ca797f8",
"text": " environment animals climate energy environment general health general The pipeline will reduce American dependence on Middle Eastern and Latin American oil\n\nCurrently, the United States imports nearly two-thirds of its Petroleum, with the leading suppliers including nations such as Nigeria, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. [1]\n\nDue to political instability and the difficult US relations with these nations, US supplies cannot be considered secure, and with the results of research into alternative sources of energy being decades away from fruition the United States needs alternative sources of oil today.\n\nOne option is Canada, which is individually already the United States’ single largest energy supplier. Canada’s known reserves total 179 billion barrels, placing it third behind Saudi Arabia, but some estimates have put its total at as high as 2 trillion barrels. [2]\n\nThe XL Pipeline project would help bring this oil overland into the United States. On the Canadian end, the increased market access would lead to rapid development, which in turn would increase Canadian capacity to the level to which it could reach a much greater portion of US demand.\n\nFurthermore, the United States enjoys close relations and an open border with Canada, meaning that this oil will likely arrive without the strings attached that come from buying from Venezuela or the Middle East. In the case of the latter the Pipeline would allow the US to disengage from the region to a degree.\n\nEven if hypothetically Canadian relations were to turn frosty, the existence of the pipeline would nevertheless ensure that the US would remain the only viable market.\n\n[1] U.S. Energy Information Administration, ‘U.S. Imports by Country of Origin’, http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm\n\n[2] Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, ‘Alberta’s Oil and Natural Gas Industry’, http://www.capp.ca/getdoc.aspx?DocId=111607&DT=NTV\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "13f4bec47b972c017834b066695cf87a",
"text": "Negotiations are not needed to isolate terrorists. The vast majority of citizens will abhor violence as they simply desire a quiet life in which they can make a peaceful living. The best way for the government to isolate the terrorists is to ensure the security of the community and meet some of their grievances. When the community sees that they government is in a better position to provide what they want they will support the government. The situation in Iraq was unusual in that there were important people in the community who at one point or another actively supported Al Qaeda so there needed to be negotiations with these people. In most circumstances the important members of the community are on the sidelines so negotiating with them would not be analogous to negotiating with terrorists.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb9f35a4b806d45a2b01ef3f3cf1dc21",
"text": "The era of battlefield warfare has passed. The war on terror may be a new form of combat, but the results are no less serious. Were a terrorist flying a military bomber aircraft to deliver a payload of death and destruction on one of the world’s major cities, nobody would think twice about shooting it down, killing the crew and preventing the bombing.\n\nThere is no meaningful way in which the example above is morally different from leaving a bomb in a station or on a subway train. Societies have the right to defend themselves by all means necessary. The combatants involved in this process consider themselves to be at war and revel in the fatalities they cause. It is only sensible for states to treat these individuals as though that war were a reality in the more traditional meaning of the word.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3c5eca487b4a1faeb730a9701ffb722a",
"text": "It must be remembered that the offshore manufacturing and service sectors are relatively young. Workers have not yet had the opportunity to develop coherent collective bargaining strategies. It takes time for those involved in an industry to learn how to act as advocates for their own and their colleagues’ interests. Once these skills have become commonplace throughout the offshoring industry, workers will be better equipped to form unions and to hold their own governments to account over the lacunae and lax policy making identified by side opposition.\n\nSide opposition have adopted a somewhat orientalist line of argument by suggesting that developing economies are inherently weak and easy to subvert. In jurisdictions such as India quite the opposition is true; governments eager to control the effect of globalisation on domestic markets have adopted policies that inhibit the involvement of foreign firms in their economies. Businesses and politicians- both local and foreign- expend a great deal of political capital in order to make developing states accessible to the offshoring industry – often on terms that require workers’ welfare to be strictly monitored.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "45da8f5797c83b5ac0fe17bdbca68527",
"text": "Western companies must be governed by codes of ethics. These should not merely stop at the border of their home state. If they are to be ethical actors they must uphold the freedoms they claim to value. If this means not being able to profit massively in markets so be it. Western governments should have little sympathy for firms profiting from and aiding in the oppression of peoples.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fee11a6ddcdfb6b9e2296d0584b82236",
"text": "The alternatives to either invasion or atomic bombing are covered in the previous counterpoint. It can only be said that none of them are without a high human cost, though invasion spearheaded by an atomic barrage is surely the worst. The principle of advantage of the conventional bombing option being that it would be easily justifiable as only quantitively different to what the Japanese had already meted out themselves. The blockade similarly has easy justification in not being a deviation from any accepted standards as well as only indirectly attacking the home islands while putting the onus on the Japanese government to avoid starvation. Really in order to find a less costly alternative then diplomacy has to be raised for which refer to the second response argument.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6cef460c3297329d42af5eaf5a5835f7",
"text": "Denying healthcare to smokers alone is victimization\n\nThe denial of healthcare, an established right, without the citizen doing anything either immoral or wrong is pure and simple victimization. Suppose you are a doctor and you have two patients waiting for a heart transplant. Patient A is 65. He does not exercise, has never had a job and has committed a series of crimes throughout his life. Patient B is in his 20s, with a first class degree from a good university. He is a trained doctor himself and wants to go and work in the developing world, to help people suffering from leprosy. But Patient B is a heavy smoker. Should you therefore prioritize patient A? It seems problematic to victimize smokers, particularly considering smoking is legal. If you are going to discriminate against smokers then surely you should discriminate against alcohol drinkers and people who do extreme sports as they are also knowingly endangering themselves. Smoking reduces life expectancy by 2.5 years for men, but obesity reduces life expectancy by 1.3 years and if high blood pressure is added to that by a total of 2.8 years all are preventable so why should only smoking be discriminated against?1 Maybe you should discriminate against people who choose to live in polluted cities. And then there are drug users. What about people who could afford private health care? Should age, occupation and past convictions be taken into account? It seems arbitrary and unfair to single out smokers. Yet, if we start to take into account all the factors that determine who \"deserves\" to be prioritized for healthcare, then we are left with the unsavory, illiberal practice of Social Darwinism. 1 Harvard School of Public Health, \"Four Preventable Risk Factors Reduce Life Expectancy in U.S. and Lead to Health Disparities\", 22 March 2010, accessed 24 August 2010.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e4c3bcc96ab31f60df03d42a6ac689e1",
"text": "Skin whitening creams often contain a wide variety of harmful ingredients – in some cases, mercury. These can cause various health problems; mercury in particular causes renal (kidney) damage, major skin problems as well as mental health issues [1] .\n\nStates, throughout the world, ban consumer products because they are harmful regardless of whether this is for consumption or for cosmetics. This is just another case where that is appropriate in order to prevent the harm to health that may occur.\n\n[1] World Health Organization, “Mercury in skin lightening products”, WHO.int, 2011, http://www.who.int/ipcs/assessment/public_health/mercury_flyer.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "842958844239bb553ce2c0f903d14943",
"text": "A military government may well be as riven by factionalism and division as the system which it replaces. The main interests of the military is often simply to maintain or increase the position of the military, this makes it likely there will be disagreement on other issues including over how quickly to return to democratic government. The military will often opt to return to barracks rather than have such splits become too deep “Military regimes thus contain the seeds of their own destruction” as there is almost bound to be a split into factions at some point when governing a country. 1\n\n1 Geddes, Barbara, 'What do we know about democratization after twenty years?', Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.2, 1999, pp.115-144, http://ussc.edu.au/s/media/docs/other/Geddes1.pdf , p.131\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "27ab7ee03f4539824a7abcb0f2e4d729",
"text": "The Rebate makes membership acceptable to the British people\n\nThe EU is a vast wasteful bureaucracy, for example creating a ‘House of European History’ for €14 million, [1] and is beyond reform. Anything to limit Britain’s contribution to this monster with pretensions to becoming a super-state is desirable. Many in the UK, between 35 and 65% of the population, [2] would prefer that we withdrew altogether, but if we can’t at least we should “starve the beast” by limiting the amount of money we give it to do harm with. Even if you think Britain should stay in the EU, you must recognise that the rebate is one of the only things that makes EU membership acceptable to ordinary people. Giving up the rebate is likely to swing British opinion strongly in favour of withdrawal.\n\n[1] Banks, Martin, ‘Parliament hits back at claims of ‘wasteful’ spending plans’, 2011\n\n[2] Hannan, Daniel, ‘Would Britain vote to leave the EU?’, 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b8e001b9fe2c9376557ae1ec3688ec98",
"text": "Because religion combines dogmatic certainty with the existence of the afterlife, violence and death is all too easy to justify\n\nParticularly in the case of contemporary Islam, although other historical examples could be referred to, the combination of certainty and the promise of life after death is a sure route towards violence. That said, Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland demonstrated this until recently; the Yugoslav wars between Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims, both sides of the battle for Israel/Palestine and many others in history could also be thrown into the mix.\n\nAllowing people the opportunity to claim that “God’s on our side” can be used to justify anything, especially when He appears to be fighting on both sides.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
a2d1f072a2f754347098adbaf8ac0294
|
By expanding the legal use of the drug, it simply makes the illegal, recreational use easier as there’s a greater supply
If the drug were made available, it would need to be grown somewhere, stored somewhere and sold somewhere. Increased supervision of pharmacies and users would be required, in order to guard against the possibility that medical cannabis might be sold on for recreational purposes. Although other pharmaceuticals have narcotics effects, none has the marketability, or market share of cannabis. Many legal types of pharmaceuticals already form the basis of criminal empires and this move would exacerbate that.
Moreover, the increased visibility and mobility of cannabis within the economy will make it easier for determined criminals to hide or obscure the origins of cannabis produced illegally. Individual citizens will be less likely to consider cannabis use that they are victim to as being illegal. It will become harder and more expensive for the police to enforce restrictions on the use and production of cannabis for recreational purposes.
It has been well argued that “drugs are not a threat to society because they are illegal; they are illegal because they are a threat to society” [i] . Legalization in any form will be misconstrued and the health effects will be damaging [ii] . Even if side proposition can demonstrate that the health effects of cannabis are negligible, the risk of incentivizing increased production of cannabis in foreign territories and increased trade and transfer of cannabis at home is simply too high for the state to accept.
[i] Charles D. Mabry, MD, FACS, Pine Bluff, AR. “Physicians and the War on Drugs: The Case Against Legalization”. Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons. October 2001.
[ii] Hillary Rodham Clinton, JD, US Secretary of State and US Senator (D-NY) at the time of the quote, stated the following during an Oct. 11, 2007 town hall meeting at Plymouth State College
|
[
{
"docid": "d72d0280a606e0ce0618580760ceb1bb",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state Ultimately there is a clear difference between the medical use of a drug, the banning of which is both harming patients and is against the wishes of many societies and allowing a free-for-all. As a society we regulate the use of other products to ensure that they are not available to minors or open to abuse.\n\nClearly there would need to be regulations and, equally clearly, sometime those regulations would fail. However, that is true of all regulated product and the blanket ban isn’t producing terribly impressive results at the moment.\n\nThere is compelling evidence of the palliative effects of cannabis as well as popular support for its medicinal use; good policy should not be bound by a reactionary response to the simple mention of the word. There are side-effects to the use of almost any drug but they are relatively benign in this instance compared to many alternatives.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "8f168b203913d9f38c133922ae370382",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state There is compelling evidence that people are more than capable of making the distinction between the use of a drug for recreational and medical use [i] . The long term effects of using alcohol or nicotine recreationally have been demonstrated to be fatal; the same cannot be said for cannabis. Further this is about using the drug in a medical setting under the supervision of medical professionals.\n\nAs Opposition has conceded, this is something that already happens. As societies, we condone the use of far more powerful drugs on a daily basis. This is a clear example of a situation where politics is ignoring reality out of expediency. This is not a proposal for vending machines to sell crack but for the medicinal use of a drug with a proven track record.\n\n[i] Gary Langer. “High Support for Medical Marijuana”. ABC News. 18 January 2010.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cc4641bc6bbb1e747ee47e19eb8dfb59",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state Government policy on this issue has long been confused. When it is perfectly acceptable for politicians, celebrities and other public figures to admit that they have broken the law and face no sanction, it is time for the law to change. Virtually all of the societal problems caused by its usage are directly as a result of its illegality. None of those problems speak to its role in a medical setting.\n\nWhen not under the threat of tabloid headlines, opinion leaders from across the political spectrum accept that this makes sense [i] . The difficulty is that policy makers only accept the fact after they’re in office, not while they’re facing election. The use of the word ‘Former’ in pronouncements on this subject is noticeable\n\n[i] Lyn Nofziger, former Press Secretary to Ronald Reagan, wrote the following in the foreword to the 1999 book Marijuana RX: The Patients' Fight for Medicinal Pot, by Robert C. Randall and Alice M. O'Leary\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b559df83a5859628aa60b459120a781f",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state Of course all drugs can be abused but introducing one into the system full in the knowledge that it will be abused is an entirely different matter. On the basis of the balance of probabilities, the moment any government says that cannabis is safe to use and, more than that, beneficial to health then every pothead in that jurisdiction has an excuse.\n\nThe only way the War on Drugs can work is if prohibition is applied universally. We expect doctors to work within the law and the government, along with medical governing bodies, has a role in determining what it is appropriate to prescribe and what is not [i] .\n\nThere are no situations where society simply stands back and leaves it to individual clinicians to act without guidance. They act within a framework that gives primacy to clinical need but does not ignore the wider social implications. Society regulates when a doctor can rules that someone is incapable of work or needs surgery at the expense of the state. In this particular regard, governments feel that society is best served by not adding cannabis to the pharmaceutical melting pot.\n\n[i] Comment. “Kent Doctor Richard Scott Warned Over Faith Discussion”. BBC. 23 May 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2eac643d16e1f677a94ba7a62a480104",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state Ultimately, in most countries where this is even under discussion, politicians run away from this issue because there are no votes in it. The people don’t want it and that view must be respected.\n\nDrugs policy is, ultimately driven by a standard of what the people in a democratic nation consider appropriate; a couple of drinks after work on a Friday is okay, getting stoned on a regular basis isn’t.\n\nGovernments have a responsibility to set out a moral code that is acceptable to the broadest possible spectrum of the society they represent. If they accept that cannabis can be used to alleviate suffering in patients then why not accept that it is okay to drink at work. Both substances have a similar pain relieving effect, both have similar negative effects. It is easy to envisage, on the basis of the proposition side argument given above, that an individual may claim that alcohol does more to address his various aches and pains than aspirin or codeine. Society works because there are limits.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "baa4797d45dd633c5029eb5861e6fb70",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state Government has a role in establishing what is an acceptable level of behaviour within society. Full in the knowledge that some people will use any substance responsibly and others less so, governments make decisions to protect their citizens and to show a lead. It is the settled will of most people in most countries that cannabis is not a drug they consider acceptable for use in a modern society. Furthermore, there are plenty of other drugs that can be used for all of the uses Proposition has identified. Legalizing cannabis for medical use would send out the message that it is safe to use when all practical evidence suggests that the social, if not the medical, ramifications are anything but safe. Proposition need to demonstrate a medical use for cannabis that cannot be met by existing pharmaceuticals.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "13499f47e19ec41d3bf326863bc5cd8c",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state In most countries where there is an acceptance of the medical value of cannabis it is fairly easily available, this would simply condone its recreational use\n\nAt a time when governments, along with health professionals, are trying to restrict the use of legal drugs such as alcohol and nicotine, giving the use of cannabis the sanction of government approval would take health policy in a direction that most people do not wish to contemplate.\n\nEffectively, such a change in policy would announce, ‘We’d rather you didn’t drink or smoke but it’s okay to get high’.\n\nIn most nations where this discussion is even happening the personal use of mild narcotics is ignored by law enforcement. However, legalizing the use of drugs in any way says to the world at large, ‘this isn’t a problem, do what you like’.\n\nThe production of drugs ruins lives and communities. Any attempt to fully legalise marijuana for medical use would only be effective in western liberal democracies. There is a high probability that it would incentivise increased production of the drug in states where it remains illegal. For the reasons given above, legitimatizing cannabis’ use as a medicine would increase or entrench its use as a recreational drug Restrictions on cannabis production would place the market under the control of criminal gangs. As a result, cannabis growing would continue to be defined by organized violence, corruption, smuggling and adulteration of the drug itself.\n\nLegitimatising cannabis use via state legislation ignores and conceals the human suffering caused by the production of drugs in both developed and developing states. .\n\nMoreover, many organized crime networks prefer to grow and sell cannabis over other, more strictly regulated drugs. It remains highly likely that the legal market for cannabis that the state proposes to create would become a target for organisations attempting to launder the proceeds of crime, or pass off tainted marijuana as medical grade forms of the drug.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bd3652bf0239d528a6b75d446089c502",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state By promoting the use of soft drugs in any context, encourages young people down a slippery slope toward harder drugs\n\nPart of the attraction of cannabis, especially among younger users is its appeal as a ‘forbidden fruit’. Removing that would mean that other, harder drugs would be sought out to fulfill the same need to rebel.\n\nA government sanction on a drug with a proven tendency to effect memory and other neurological functions would still hold open the door to other, more dangerous, drugs as a form of rebellion. In this regard the continued ban on cannabis – and the relative tolerance of the breach of that ban – sends out a clear message of ‘this far and no further’.\n\nAny signal that this narcotic is acceptable simply increases the stakes.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "59c12396547e588e9337899efd258cfb",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state All drugs can be used for a variety of purposes some appropriate some inappropriate that’s a matter of choice, treatment should be based on medical reality\n\nAny drug, legal or illegal, can be used sensibly or it can be abused. If society bases its decisions on the medical provision of drugs on the presumption of abuse the shelves of most drugstores would be empty. The idea that the burden of proof should be set at demonstrating that nothing else can achieve the same results is absurd – let’s ban Codeine because Aspirin works just fine. Drugs that have similar effects are distinguished according to the speed, duration and efficacy of those effects, in addition to the drug’s side-effects. Different individuals experience the pain-relieving effects of aspirin in different ways. A wider range of individuals may experience a longer lasting reduction in pain if taking codeine. Similarly, an even larger number of individuals respond positively to cannabis.\n\nThe reality is that we trust doctors to make judgments on what is a sensible course of treatment, not politicians and certainly not a hysterical media.\n\nAs the law currently stands, politicians are stopping medical professionals from making decisions in the best interest of their patients because nobody wants to be seen to blink first. California and Nebraska already blinked, as have Austria, Canada, Spain and Germany as well as other nations. A failure to recognize this fact is simple political cowardice [i] .\n\n[i] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis#National_and_international_regulations\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5eafe38ae819a3df8cd64f06ca1611c3",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state For governments to refuse treatment on the basis of an unreasonable assertion is cruel and blindly ideological\n\nThe current legislation on drug use in most countries was delivered without canvassing medical opinion and under the influence of public hysteria and moral panic. Seemingly logical but flawed theories linking the use of “soft” drugs to later use of “harder” varieties (cocain, amphetamins) have often been used both to justify and to promote drugs legislation. The apparent sense of these arguments belies the fact that they have been repeatedly disproven [i] .\n\nLurid, prurient portrayals of the catastrophic consequences of narcotics use in the mass media are frequently used to back up arguments that drugs- even cannabis- are so dangerous that even carefully controlled medical applications are unacceptably risky.\n\nIt is clearly the case that when any substance has a proven medical benefit it should be available for prescription. Legislation already exists in most countries to contain the possibility of misuse of prescribed drugs.\n\nHowever, it is clearly the case that politicians are avoiding this issue not because there is medical doubt on the matter but because they are incapable of reaching a logical conclusion for fear of hysterical – and easy – headlines. To withhold treatment from patients who need it on the basis that a tabloid will run a ‘Soft on Drugs’ story the following morning is the height of irresponsibility.\n\n[i] Degenhardt, L, et al. “Whoare the new amphetamine users? A ten year prospective study of young Australians. Adiction, volume 102, 8, p1269-1279. August 2007. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.01906.x/abstract;jsessionid=90232042DE3BB4456F9DE6F41F29BFBF.d03t03\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "781c5e6b4006cb94084ada0e3b22a980",
"text": "addiction health general healthcare thw require provision cannabis any state Cannabis has many medical properties, notably the alleviation of suffering in chronic diseases. It should therefore be freely available\n\nCannabis has been used for medicinal purposes for at least 5,000 years most frequently as an analgesic, that is to say it reduces pain. It also stimulates hunger and can be used as an anti-emetic to control nausea and vomiting. As the DEA Administrative Law Judge Francis L. Young noted in a 1988 ruling [i] , there is no evidence of a fatality resulting from the misuse of cannabis. Indeed the Dutch government currently permits doctors regulated by its Ministry of Health and Welfare to prescribe cannabis to their patients. Further, the Dutch state has licensed a pharmaceutical firm to provide cannabis of a guaranteed level of purity to pharmacies and medical professionals. [ii]\n\nThere are accounts and studies of its successful application to treat the effects of chemotherapy as well as its palliative [iii] use in MS and AIDS [iv] . For governments to turn their backs on a perfectly useful drug simply to prove a point is confusing at best and petulant at worst.\n\n[i] Docket No. 86-22. “OPINION AND RECOMMENDED RULING, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION OF Administrative LAW JUDGE.” FRANCIS L. YOUNG, Administrative Law Judge. 6 September 1988.\n\n[ii] Bedrocan BV home page, 15 November 2011. http://www.bedrocan.nl/\n\n[iii] “Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants.” Espacenet patent search. 07 October 2003. http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=US&NR=6630507&KC=&FT=E&locale=en_EP\n\n[iv] “Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants.” Patentstorm. 07 October 2003. http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6630507/fulltext.html\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
d9bdb9f7f509511fcb3e6c28df328346
|
As the ICC intentionally limits its prosecutions to group leaders, many of those who actually commit atrocities need have no fear of prosecution
By prosecuting only those leaders deemed ‘most responsible’ for the crimes in question, the ICC is effectively allowing lower-ranked perpetrators to commit crimes with impunity. These rank and file troops generally have little awareness or understanding of international criminal laws. Furthermore, just as local domestic laws fail to deter offenders who often commit crimes with little thought of being punished, distant ICC threats are even less likely to deter those whose actions are easily manipulated and controlled by militia leaders. Child soldiers, in particular, have often been drugged before going into combat. [1]
[1] Mullins & Rothe, pp.782-4
|
[
{
"docid": "981691370cc2ccf644e9cfe5238142f6",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Precisely because many rank and file perpetrators are easily controlled or manipulated by group leaders, their criminal responsibility is diminished. While Article 26 of the Rome Statute prevents prosecution of those under 18 years of age, this is designed to prevent injustices towards those who are often themselves victims of those in command. Article 33 specifically rejects the ‘Nuremberg defence’ that following orders absolves a person from criminal responsibility. But in keeping with International Humanitarian Law (Rule 155 of Customary IHL), child soldiers should not be prosecuted for crimes committed under severe coercion by leaders. Prosecuting those responsible for that coercion is the most powerful deterrent. [1]\n\n[1] IRIN News, \"Should child soldiers be prosecuted for their crimes?\"\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "4e5fa554d7055110bcb6cd12e27bf17d",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The Lubanga case took 6 years to reach a verdict owing to problems with the reliability of testimony and the sheer number of witnesses and victims involved in the proceedings. [1]\n\nAlthough the Prosecutor sought a harsher sentence, these problems with the weight of evidence and difficulties ascertaining the number of child soldiers required the Trial Chamber to impose a more modest sentence. [2]\n\nTherefore, even if the Lubanga conviction might not have a strongly deterrent effect by itself, the ICC is pursuing many other cases and it is these constant and cumulative investigations that deter others from committing similar crimes.\n\n[1] Kammer, \"Deconstructing Lubanga\"\n\n[2] Human Rights Brief\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6bfeea1b9405f90c9bae07092e8e5012",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The fact that the Sudanese president has been able to travel freely to several countries without being arrested does not indicate that he or other would-be criminals are undeterred by the threat. Though the African Union has strongly advised its member states to ignore the arrest warrant and most have obliged, more recently Malawi and Kenya prevented Al-Bashir from attending summits. Even when Nigeria allowed his attendance at an AU summit last year, Al-Bashir fled within a day of arriving, after local human rights groups filed a court action.\n\nThe Democratic Republic of Congo has surrendered several suspects to the ICC and this was enough to induce another suspect to surrender. [1]\n\n[1] Roth, \"Africa Attacks the International Criminal Court.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b427fb9fd80bf5e5a3f8f70cc51a499d",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The actions by Columbia and Sri Lanka do not alter the fact that, as noted earlier, the recruitment of child soldiers in Africa and elsewhere is still endemic in 2013.\n\nAnd while the Lord’s Resistance Army and its leader Joseph Kony have indeed been muted, that is largely due to the initiative of the U.S. government which has itself refused to ratify the ICC’s Statute. [1]\n\n[1] Schomerus, Allen and Vlassenroot\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "80f8573fc6570483ead77bfc32cf19bc",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Many of those 122 States Parties have repeatedly shown their reluctance to co-operate with the ICC. Among the African Union states, only Botswana has shown its complete commitment to the Rome Statute. It appears that even South Africa may ultimately be more supportive of the AU than the ICC. [1]\n\n[1] Miruthi , p.4\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "31e7a90116c2dd9716804af24d309cec",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Even if Kenya’s recent reforms were motivated by the ICC’s indictments, the 2013 elections were still marked by violence which “as of February 2013, had claimed more than 477 lives and displaced another 118,000 people.” [1]\n\nDespite many African governments’ initial enthusiasm for the ICC, the African Union has since openly challenged the Court’s investigations and Kenyan authorities have been doing their utmost to obstruct the ICC’s investigations. [2]\n\n[1] Human Rights Watch\n\n[2] Evenson\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eeae5f47e4181f8c843e9c0032facf49",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent In the decade since its formation, the ICC has only one successful conviction\n\nSince becoming operational in March 2003 the ICC has only had one case resulting in a conviction and it is currently being appealed. Despite being found guilty of the war crime of recruiting and forcing child soldiers to fight and kill, Thomas Lubanga was sentenced to just 14 years imprisonment. Lubanga was arrested and sent to the Court in March 2006. This single ICC conviction and the light sentence imposed are hardly sufficient to deter other warlords from using child soldiers. Six years later, in the same country where Lubanga’s crimes occurred, thousands of child soldiers are being recruited by various armed groups. [1]\n\n[1] UN News, \"Child recruitment remains endemic.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "649e1d4ee761a9cae0894bbd8b232df5",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The ICC lacks the power to ensure arrests\n\nWhile the ICC has the power to issue arrest warrants, it does not have the coercive powers to ensure that those warrants are followed. Despite the fact that States that are parties to the Rome Statute are obliged to co-operate with the directions of the Court, there have been many instances where such States have failed to pursue those indicted. Cases that have been referred to the ICC by the United Nations Security Council allows the Court to extend its jurisdiction to include UN member States that are not parties to the Rome Statute. This enabled the ICC to issue an international warrant for the arrest of Sudan’s President Al-Bashir. Yet several of these countries obliged to arrest him have refused when the opportunities have arisen. [1]\n\n[1] Rothe & Collins, pp.198-9\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "35eb5413fd82cb0910dd34ce31247743",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Potential prosecution by the ICC encourages local authorities to improve their own judicial systems.\n\nAs an international court of ‘last resort’, the ICC’s very existence serves as a constant reminder of the failings of national and regional governments to effectively curtail crimes against humanity in all their forms. Therefore, the Court exerts a strong deterrent effect by implicitly challenging the adequacy of those governments whose judicial systems allow such crimes to be committed with impunity. Seeking to avoid such international embarrassment has itself been enough to motivate many countries to both join the ICC Assembly and aim to improve their own domestic judicial systems. A clear example of this direct effect was the Kenyan government’s judicial and electoral reforms that followed from the ICC’s indictments over the post-election violence in 2007 which made the judiciary and election commission constitutionally much more independent. [1]\n\n[1] Kimenyi\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b21d79ed254d0eb07604a80e20e22071",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The ICC’s investigations have already deterred potential crimes.\n\nThere is compelling evidence that the ICC’s past or current investigations have caused potential perpetrators as well as those already indicted, to abandon their plans. For example, as the ICC’s first Prosecutor noted, even before the Court had convicted Thomas Lubanga for the recruitment of child soldiers, its African investigations were enough to prompt responses in Columbia and Sri Lanka, resulting in children being released. [1] At the same time, there has been a notable decrease in crimes by those already under investigation, such as the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda. [2]\n\n[1] ICC Prosecutor's Address to Council on Foreign Relations , p.9\n\n[2] Bosco , p.176\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cf263ab9bf3b79ce64410761a3d7a6ca",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The ICC’s widely endorsed authority extends its deterrent effects.\n\nThe ICC’s investigative and prosecutorial powers are endorsed by 122 States Parties to the Rome Statute. This broad reach and agreement not only provides a strong disincentive for individuals and groups who would attempt to evade prosecution, but also has the effect of deterring states that might otherwise ignore the Court’s authority. Furthermore, even non-member states have recognised the importance of co-operating with the Court’s investigations. In 2013, one of the most wanted war criminals, Bosco Ntaganda was forced to surrender to the ICC while hiding in Rwanda. Though a non-member state, “Rwanda's aid-dependent economy was damaged by the allegations of links to Mr Ntaganda's rebels.” [1]\n\n[1] The Economist\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
f340600839ac9b52d804af9b2136706c
|
The ICC’s widely endorsed authority extends its deterrent effects.
The ICC’s investigative and prosecutorial powers are endorsed by 122 States Parties to the Rome Statute. This broad reach and agreement not only provides a strong disincentive for individuals and groups who would attempt to evade prosecution, but also has the effect of deterring states that might otherwise ignore the Court’s authority. Furthermore, even non-member states have recognised the importance of co-operating with the Court’s investigations. In 2013, one of the most wanted war criminals, Bosco Ntaganda was forced to surrender to the ICC while hiding in Rwanda. Though a non-member state, “Rwanda's aid-dependent economy was damaged by the allegations of links to Mr Ntaganda's rebels.” [1]
[1] The Economist
|
[
{
"docid": "80f8573fc6570483ead77bfc32cf19bc",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Many of those 122 States Parties have repeatedly shown their reluctance to co-operate with the ICC. Among the African Union states, only Botswana has shown its complete commitment to the Rome Statute. It appears that even South Africa may ultimately be more supportive of the AU than the ICC. [1]\n\n[1] Miruthi , p.4\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "b427fb9fd80bf5e5a3f8f70cc51a499d",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The actions by Columbia and Sri Lanka do not alter the fact that, as noted earlier, the recruitment of child soldiers in Africa and elsewhere is still endemic in 2013.\n\nAnd while the Lord’s Resistance Army and its leader Joseph Kony have indeed been muted, that is largely due to the initiative of the U.S. government which has itself refused to ratify the ICC’s Statute. [1]\n\n[1] Schomerus, Allen and Vlassenroot\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "31e7a90116c2dd9716804af24d309cec",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Even if Kenya’s recent reforms were motivated by the ICC’s indictments, the 2013 elections were still marked by violence which “as of February 2013, had claimed more than 477 lives and displaced another 118,000 people.” [1]\n\nDespite many African governments’ initial enthusiasm for the ICC, the African Union has since openly challenged the Court’s investigations and Kenyan authorities have been doing their utmost to obstruct the ICC’s investigations. [2]\n\n[1] Human Rights Watch\n\n[2] Evenson\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4e5fa554d7055110bcb6cd12e27bf17d",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The Lubanga case took 6 years to reach a verdict owing to problems with the reliability of testimony and the sheer number of witnesses and victims involved in the proceedings. [1]\n\nAlthough the Prosecutor sought a harsher sentence, these problems with the weight of evidence and difficulties ascertaining the number of child soldiers required the Trial Chamber to impose a more modest sentence. [2]\n\nTherefore, even if the Lubanga conviction might not have a strongly deterrent effect by itself, the ICC is pursuing many other cases and it is these constant and cumulative investigations that deter others from committing similar crimes.\n\n[1] Kammer, \"Deconstructing Lubanga\"\n\n[2] Human Rights Brief\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "981691370cc2ccf644e9cfe5238142f6",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Precisely because many rank and file perpetrators are easily controlled or manipulated by group leaders, their criminal responsibility is diminished. While Article 26 of the Rome Statute prevents prosecution of those under 18 years of age, this is designed to prevent injustices towards those who are often themselves victims of those in command. Article 33 specifically rejects the ‘Nuremberg defence’ that following orders absolves a person from criminal responsibility. But in keeping with International Humanitarian Law (Rule 155 of Customary IHL), child soldiers should not be prosecuted for crimes committed under severe coercion by leaders. Prosecuting those responsible for that coercion is the most powerful deterrent. [1]\n\n[1] IRIN News, \"Should child soldiers be prosecuted for their crimes?\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6bfeea1b9405f90c9bae07092e8e5012",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The fact that the Sudanese president has been able to travel freely to several countries without being arrested does not indicate that he or other would-be criminals are undeterred by the threat. Though the African Union has strongly advised its member states to ignore the arrest warrant and most have obliged, more recently Malawi and Kenya prevented Al-Bashir from attending summits. Even when Nigeria allowed his attendance at an AU summit last year, Al-Bashir fled within a day of arriving, after local human rights groups filed a court action.\n\nThe Democratic Republic of Congo has surrendered several suspects to the ICC and this was enough to induce another suspect to surrender. [1]\n\n[1] Roth, \"Africa Attacks the International Criminal Court.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "35eb5413fd82cb0910dd34ce31247743",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent Potential prosecution by the ICC encourages local authorities to improve their own judicial systems.\n\nAs an international court of ‘last resort’, the ICC’s very existence serves as a constant reminder of the failings of national and regional governments to effectively curtail crimes against humanity in all their forms. Therefore, the Court exerts a strong deterrent effect by implicitly challenging the adequacy of those governments whose judicial systems allow such crimes to be committed with impunity. Seeking to avoid such international embarrassment has itself been enough to motivate many countries to both join the ICC Assembly and aim to improve their own domestic judicial systems. A clear example of this direct effect was the Kenyan government’s judicial and electoral reforms that followed from the ICC’s indictments over the post-election violence in 2007 which made the judiciary and election commission constitutionally much more independent. [1]\n\n[1] Kimenyi\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b21d79ed254d0eb07604a80e20e22071",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The ICC’s investigations have already deterred potential crimes.\n\nThere is compelling evidence that the ICC’s past or current investigations have caused potential perpetrators as well as those already indicted, to abandon their plans. For example, as the ICC’s first Prosecutor noted, even before the Court had convicted Thomas Lubanga for the recruitment of child soldiers, its African investigations were enough to prompt responses in Columbia and Sri Lanka, resulting in children being released. [1] At the same time, there has been a notable decrease in crimes by those already under investigation, such as the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda. [2]\n\n[1] ICC Prosecutor's Address to Council on Foreign Relations , p.9\n\n[2] Bosco , p.176\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eeae5f47e4181f8c843e9c0032facf49",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent In the decade since its formation, the ICC has only one successful conviction\n\nSince becoming operational in March 2003 the ICC has only had one case resulting in a conviction and it is currently being appealed. Despite being found guilty of the war crime of recruiting and forcing child soldiers to fight and kill, Thomas Lubanga was sentenced to just 14 years imprisonment. Lubanga was arrested and sent to the Court in March 2006. This single ICC conviction and the light sentence imposed are hardly sufficient to deter other warlords from using child soldiers. Six years later, in the same country where Lubanga’s crimes occurred, thousands of child soldiers are being recruited by various armed groups. [1]\n\n[1] UN News, \"Child recruitment remains endemic.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "75a6ae8e5556cce05edb6a4d650bae19",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent As the ICC intentionally limits its prosecutions to group leaders, many of those who actually commit atrocities need have no fear of prosecution\n\nBy prosecuting only those leaders deemed ‘most responsible’ for the crimes in question, the ICC is effectively allowing lower-ranked perpetrators to commit crimes with impunity. These rank and file troops generally have little awareness or understanding of international criminal laws. Furthermore, just as local domestic laws fail to deter offenders who often commit crimes with little thought of being punished, distant ICC threats are even less likely to deter those whose actions are easily manipulated and controlled by militia leaders. Child soldiers, in particular, have often been drugged before going into combat. [1]\n\n[1] Mullins & Rothe, pp.782-4\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "649e1d4ee761a9cae0894bbd8b232df5",
"text": "international law punishment house believes icc not effective deterrent The ICC lacks the power to ensure arrests\n\nWhile the ICC has the power to issue arrest warrants, it does not have the coercive powers to ensure that those warrants are followed. Despite the fact that States that are parties to the Rome Statute are obliged to co-operate with the directions of the Court, there have been many instances where such States have failed to pursue those indicted. Cases that have been referred to the ICC by the United Nations Security Council allows the Court to extend its jurisdiction to include UN member States that are not parties to the Rome Statute. This enabled the ICC to issue an international warrant for the arrest of Sudan’s President Al-Bashir. Yet several of these countries obliged to arrest him have refused when the opportunities have arisen. [1]\n\n[1] Rothe & Collins, pp.198-9\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
7075d4fdb46e217751078dc1d61ebabe
|
A DNA database would reduce the time spent tracking down suspects
A DNA database is not intended to replace conventional criminal investigation. The database ought to identify the potential suspects, each of whom can then be investigated by more conventional means. During 2008/09 in the United Kingdom, 'almost 6 in 10 crime scene profiles loaded to the National DNA Database were matched to a subject profile'1. There is no possibility of escaping the provision of technical evidence before a court. Doctors, ballistics experts, forensic scientists are already a common feature of the large criminal trial. The jury system is actually a bastion against conviction on account of complicated scientific facts. The British jury is instructed to acquit a defendant where they find reasonable doubt. If the genetic data and associated evidence is insufficiently conclusive, or presented without sufficient clarity, the jury is obliged to find the defendant not guilty. 1 NDNAD. (2009). National DNA Database: Annual Report 2007-09. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from
|
[
{
"docid": "81e99b7da3b327c19aa310d348619914",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database There is no such guarantee that a DNA database would have such an effect. In fact, there is a serious risk that genetic evidence will be used to the exclusion of material that might prove the innocence of the suspect. It is further likely that more crimes will be prosecuted on account of largely circumstantial evidence. Moreover, there is the possibility that not only the police, but also the jury, will be blinded by science. It seems unlikely that juries will be able to comprehend, or more importantly, to question, the genetic information that is yielded by the database. The irony is that forensic evidence has been instrumental in establishing the miscarriages of British justice in the 1970s, but might now serve to create miscarriages of its own.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "2e2b7e1a0394014eed276186b00cbb92",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database The database is immaterial to the acquittal or exclusion of non-offenders. Where a primary suspect has been identified, a DNA profile ought to be created and compared to the crime scene data. Likewise, where suspicions persist concerning the guilt or innocence of a convicted individual, a sample of DNA can be taken. The database has predominant application in 'non-suspect' cases, and not the circumstances where the suspect or felon is already identified. It is also important to keep claims regarding the efficacy of DNA matching in context, Chief Constable Sims of the British Metropolitan Police stated that of '4.9 million crimes reported each year, of which 1.3 million are 'detected' (lead to charges)' only 33,000 involve DNA matching1. 1 Home Affairs Committee. (2010, March 4). The National DNA Database. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from UK Parliament:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "08eda125090570ed2624435121541b81",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database The most serious violent crimes, notably the offences of rape and murder, are most commonly committed by individuals known to the victim. When the suspects for the commission of a crime are obvious, DNA detection is superfluous. Moreover, it is invidious to propagate the belief in the public that crimes can be solved, or criminals deterred, by computer wizardry; evidence collected by a UK Parliamentary Commission suggests DNA matching led to crime detection in as little as 0.3% of cases1. Ultimately, unless the DNA is used to identify a genetic cause for aggression, violent crimes will continue to be committed 1 Home Affairs Committee. (2010, March 4). The National DNA Database. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from UK Parliament:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eb3061050bce900857256b03039f4dfb",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database Retaining the DNA of unconvicted suspects is not unlawful, only retaining it indefinitely. New British proposals to meet the requirements of the European Court of Human Rights' judgment are to ensure the DNA of the unconvicted remains on the database for just 6 years. The law has to be laid down in a set manner rather than imprecise terms. Loopholes are often found but in the long run, they are what create a fair and just legal system. We cannot have loose laws, everything must turn on the wording. The ruling stated that the DNA of the innocent could not be saved indefinitely, so the British government is proposing that this DNA only be kept on the system for 6 years. They have done what the Court has asked them to do, to take away the permanency; a DNA database remains.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4529bd0a5e07f2e48f39e81fd62c6bbd",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database The use of a DNA fingerprint can scarcely be regarded as an affront to civil liberties and therefore requiring consent. Firstly, as a British Home Office spokeswoman noted, 'before a person's profile can be added to (the database), the person must have been arrested for a recordable offence. That is a significant threshold'2. Furthermore, the procedure for taking a sample of DNA is less invasive than that required for the removal of blood. The police already possess a vast volume of information relating to the citizenry. The National Crime Information Center Computer in the United States contains files relating to fifteen million Americans and receives approximately seven million queries each day2. The availability of a DNA fingerprint to the police should be seen in the context of the personal information that is already held by outside agencies. Insurance brokers commonly require an extensive medical history of their clients. Employers subject their employees to random urine tests for drug and alcohol consumption. If we are prepared to place our personal information in the private sector, why can we not trust it to the public authority of the police? The DNA will only be utilised in the detection of crime. In short, the innocent citizen should have nothing to fear. 1 Doward, J. (2009, August 9). 'Racist bias' blamed for disparity in police DNA database. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from The Observer: 2 National Crime Information Center. (2009). About Us. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from Federal Bureau of Investigation:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1da9a348c0849b50657797041f26c560",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database DNA fingerprinting has considerable advantages over conventional means of forensic crime detection, advantages that render any slight fallibility irrelevant. Conventional fingerprints attach only to hard surfaces, can be smeared, or avoided by the use of gloves. Even a clear print requires a significant degree of interpretation by investigating officers. The standard technique of comparing fourteen points between the print taken at the crime scene and the print of the accused has been subject to severe criticism. The novel 'polymerase chain reaction' (PCR) amplification technique facilitates an accurate DNA profile from very small amounts of genetic data. The fingerprint can be constructed notwithstanding contamination from oil, water or acid in the crime scene environment. The innocent and the accused should appreciate a novel fingerprinting technique that is both objective and accurate. Lastly, fears of wrongful conviction are misguided, a 2002 study found only 'two cases worldwide'1. 1 Phillipson, G. (2009, November 19). The case for a complete DNA database. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Guardian:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "330412eb3ec1ca607f5a923276e44f32",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database DNA evidence would reduce the risk of wrongful conviction\n\nThe increased use of DNA evidence will minimize the risk of future wrongful convictions. An FBI study indicates that since 1989 DNA evidence has excluded the primary candidate in 25% of sexual assault cases1. This not only saves valuable police time, but ensures suspects are not called in for unnecessary and stressful questioning. Moreover, forensically valuable DNA can be found on evidence that has existed for decades, and thus assist in reversing previous miscarriages of justice. There have been a number of recent, high-profile cases of death row inmates being released on the grounds of DNA evidence, unavailable when they were first convicted. A DNA database would not merely render wrong verdicts right, but prevent such verdicts ever being made. 1 U.S. Department of Justice. (1996, June). Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from U.S. Department of Justice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9481b3f9e77b9f9668c61d125598068f",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database A DNA database would lead to more convictions, particularly in cases of violent crime\n\nAlthough overall levels of crime in England and Wales have decreased over the previous decade, the number of violent crimes against the person has markedly increased. These are the offences which raise most grave public concern and which are unlikely to leave conventional fingerprints. The National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence estimates that thirty per cent of crime scenes contain the blood, semen, or saliva of the perpetrator1. DNA detection will be best equipped to identify the guilty. A full database ought to allow the use of DNA as an investigative tool where no suspect has yet been identified. Studies support this assertion; 'the overall detection rate for crimes of 23.5% rises to 38% where DNA is successfully recovered'2. Furthermore, in the United States, the number of reported rapes dropped to its lowest level in two decades due in large part to the use of DNA evidence3 1 Weathersbee, F. (1999, March 1). National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from National Institute of Justice: 2 Phillipson, G. (2009, November 19). The case for a complete DNA database. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Guardian: 3 McGreal, C. (2009, October 8). Number of reported rapes in US drops to lowest level in two decades. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Guardian:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a6a7024027236b2720c861bd0098a5e5",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database DNA testing is fallible, and therefore should not be used as the basis of convictions\n\nAlthough DNA detection might have advantages over fingerprint dusting, the test is nevertheless fallible. Environmental factors at the crime scene such as heat, sunlight, or bacteria can corrupt any genetic data. Any DNA evidence must be stored in sterile and temperature controlled conditions. Criminals have been suspected of contaminating samples by swapping saliva. There is room for human error or fraud in comparing samples taken from suspects with those removed from a crime scene. The accuracy of any genetic profile is dependent upon the number of genes examined. Where less than four or five genes can be investigated, the PCR technique serves only to exaggerate any defects or omissions in the sample. In 1995 an 18 month investigation was launched into allegations that the FBI Crime Lab was 'dry-labbing' or faking results of DNA comparisons1. Furthermore, in the United Kingdom, the company used by police to analyse its DNA samples was shown to have secretly kept the genetic samples and personal details of 'hundreds of thousands' of arrested people, stoking fears that, if lost, they could be planted as evidence2. The mere creation of a database cannot be the panacea for crime detection. 1 Johnston, D. (1997, April 16). Report criticizes scientific testing at F.B.I Crime Lab. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from New York Times: 2 Barnett, A. (2006, July 16). Police DNA database 'is spiralling out of control'. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Guardian:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d945b1c52d1545163fd662c9138e7b91",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database Retaining the DNA of unconvicted suspects is unlawful\n\nThe European Court of Human Rights was quite clear when it stated that retaining indefinitely the DNA and fingerprint records of unconvicted suspects is unlawful1. The Strasbourg court made a unanimous decision that the UK keeping the DNA of the unconvicted on a database permanently was contrary to human rights and therefore illegal. They stated that due to the high level of disruption to human rights, on this issue the court would not have much \"margin of appreciation\" or leeway. Subsequent attempts to justify the database have been dismissed by the Commission as failing to provide 'clear, justifiable reasons for holding on to the DNA data from people who had not been convicted of a crime'2. The Commission also felt the retention of DNA profiles 'failed to recognise there were a disproportionate number of young black men, vulnerable people and children on the database'2 1 BBC News. (2007, September 5). All UK 'must be on DNA database'. Retrieved May 20, 2011, from BBC News: 2 Doward, J. (2009, August 9). 'Racist bias' blamed for disparity in police DNA database. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from The Observer:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c93f02c86ace4bf520adc59fdf78a2cc",
"text": "crime policing law general house would have criminal dna database Having a DNA database should require individual consent\n\nThe invasiveness of the database resides in the information being maintained on file, rather than in the procedure for obtaining the genetic data. The decision to pass personal information to mortgage or insurance agencies is governed by individual consent. When the citizen releases information to outside agencies he receives a service in return. In being compelled to give a sample of DNA the innocent citizen would receive the scant benefit of being eliminated from a police investigation. Moreover, medical records are already subject to a significant degree of statutory protection from investigation. The use of genetic tests by insurance companies remains highly controversial. There is considerable potential for abuse of information that is so private, the person giving the sample will probably not know its contents and they will certainly not know the possible ways the information may be used1. Finally, there is a subtle yet significant difference in the attitude of government towards the citizen that is conveyed by the creation of a database. Every citizen, some from the moment of their birth, would be treated as a potential criminal. 1 BBC News. (2007, September 5). All UK 'must be on DNA database'. Retrieved May 20, 2011, from BBC News:\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
2e2f6662450e88422abde104e798593d
|
Banning assault weapons increases liberty and security
Many who are pro guns argue that it would be illegitimate for assault weapons to be banned while the police have them. Police forces, however, are going to be much more likely, and able to give them up when a ban is in place. The police don’t want to be involved in an arms race with criminals to have the biggest guns; just look at the British police force where there is little gun crime and few shootings of police officers it is not felt that there is the need to have police armed with more than a taser or even truncheon. [1] Put simply a ban on assault weapons can help reverse the arms race between police and criminals.
Civil liberties would also be enhanced as law enforcement agencies would not need to devote so many resources into monitoring assault weapons purchases and those who have done the purchasing. Instead they would be able to simply target all assault weapons purchases as needing immediate attention. [2]
Finally we must remember that this ban enhances the highest liberty at all; life. Today as Justice Breyer says “gun possession presents a greater risk of taking innocent lives” than not having a gun. [3]
[1] Keating, Ruth, ‘This House would arm the police’, Peter Squires ed., Debatabase, 2011, http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/law/house-would-arm-police
[2] Matthews, Jake, ‘For Lives and Liberty: Banning Assault Weapons in America’, Harvard University Institute of Politics, 2012, http://www.iop.harvard.edu/lives-and-liberty-banning-assault-weapons-america
[3] Masters, Brian, ‘America’s deadly obsession with guns’, The Telegraph, 16 December 2012, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/9749024/Americas-deadly-obsession-with-guns.html
|
[
{
"docid": "683ef6668d1511be24a0a4d2cd5dbe2b",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Banning assault weapons is an infringement on Americans freedom to protect themselves; what minor civil liberties advances may be gained pale by comparison to this.\n\nIt is also unlikely that the police and the FBI would recognise the linkage between fewer guns in the civilian population and reducing the firepower of the police. Similarly the FBI is unlikely to monitor civilians less simply because there is one less reason. The justification of “preventing homegrown attacks before they are hatched” will still remain just as strong as before they will simply be looking for different things.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "d256eb593adc9bda8d6643d6427c05c1",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons The Second Amendment was not designed for only self defense and hunting. The idea that the common man should be reasonably able to protect themselves from tyranny, foreign invasion, and insurrection is a reasonable and just cause. But even if we were to accept that self defense and hunting are the only legitimate reasons for owning a gun then why should the state get to decide what weapons someone should use when hunting or defending themselves? That a gun may not be the best choice for these activities does not mean that it should not be a possible choice.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2fdc3f72d34b7853caff4ac046dc0946",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Black plastic on a gun does not make it any more lethal than other guns with wood stocks. Stopping the manufacture of such guns would hand over a lucrative market to the Russians and Chinese rather than reducing the number of assault weapons in the world. [1] Drugs cartels would simply find new routes to get the weapons they need, after all they are already dealing in illegal activities making the guns they want illegal on both sides of the border rather than just one is unlikely to stop them.\n\n[1] Falconer, Bruce, ‘Semiautomatic for the people’, Mother Jones, July/August 2008, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/07/semiautomatic-people\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2fe254ce68e074b221ac56d9b6b3aca8",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons It is exactly correct that deaths as a result of assault weapons are a tiny portion of the total firearms deaths. There is also no way to know if those who were killed by these weapons would have been saved or whether their assailant would not simply have killed them with a handgun instead. Therefore to ban only certain types of guns does not address the issue satisfactorily because it does not take into consideration that any gun can kill.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8a826e2719da3ebcdc3eca5dea4784b6",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Supreme court rulings have been overturned before. This is an area where the bill of rights is clearly outdated and out of touch; today’s militia is clearly the standing army and so this should just be interpreted as only granting members of the army the right to carry arms. The maintenance of “the security of a free state” clearly is not something that today is done through the citizenry having access to guns, whether assault weapons or not. Moreover it is difficult to see why if there is a right to bear arms that is unconnected with the security of the state these arms should be these particular assault weapons rather than types of weapon that we are not looking to ban. Would a rifle not be as useful in the event of invasion as a semi-automatic? The Bill of Rights was written at the end of the eighteenth century when the weapons were muzzle loading muskets it was not conceived with powerful, accurate, modern weapons that are capable of mass murder without reloading.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5e27f30cc4a2c508565a738b2ef2391f",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Of course a ban will not completely eliminate these weapons but it would reduce the supply and make it much easier for the police to seize the weapons so taking them off the streets. It would also be a step in the right direction in attempting to change public perceptions and amend the American attitude. It is understated just how relaxed American laws are in comparison to the rest of the world, even states such as Switzerland and Israel that are often highlighted by the NRA as being model states that allow gun ownership with few resulting shootings are much more restrictive than the USA. [1]\n\nThere is no reason to think that a black market is somehow going to result in more of these weapons being available so the fact that it will exist after a ban is not a reason not to go ahead with the ban. It is not ideal that a ban is not retroactive so leaving a large number of such guns in private hands but this number will slowly diminish over time rather than continuing to rise as it would under the status quo.\n\n[1] Rosenbaum, Janet, ‘A League of Our Own’, Foreign Policy, 19 December 2012, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/12/18/a_league_of_our_own\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "827c0c9617797e091bef2f2d1efa1d8e",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons There is a rational basis for banning assault weapons as they are a firearm of choice among criminals. In a study of young adult purchases of handguns in California buyers with minor criminal histories were twice as likely to purchase automatic pistols as those with no criminal history. This was even higher at five times as likely for those who had been charged with two or more serious violent offenses. [1] This means those purchasing assault weapons intend for them to be used for violent ends.\n\nIt is true that assault weapons are used in a small percentage of crimes, although 1% is disputable in Miami for example 15 out of 79 homicides in 2006 involved assault weapons, [2] but the opposition ignore that large capacity magazines are used in a much higher percentage of crimes; between 14 and 26% before the 1994 ban. [3]\n\n[1] Koper, Christopher S., et al., ‘An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003’, Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice, June 2004, p.17 http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/aw_final2004.pdf\n\n[2] Associated Press, ‘Assault-weapon attacks on rise in Miami area’, MSNBC, 14 September 2007, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20781848/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/assault-weapon-attacks-rise-miami-area/#.UM8YPW_r18E\n\n[3] Koper, Christopher S., et al., ‘An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003’, Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice, June 2004, p.18 http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/aw_final2004.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c8838d7e43ef8b070e565f79b82a7f81",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons The point of an assault weapons ban is not to completely ban guns but to ban guns that can fire large numbers of bullets rapidly and have no purpose other than to shoot people. The ban targets those weapons that are not useful for self defence or hunting. The opposition argument is essentially that because some guns are legal all guns should be legal; the line has to be drawn somewhere and there is little reason why the line at assault weapons is less logical than a line that allows some grenade launchers and shotguns while banning others? [1] Since this line is clearly arbitrary then we should move to the only non-arbitrary line, a full ban, a move towards which this ban is a step towards.\n\n[1] Laurence, Charles, ‘Semi-automatics and grenade launchers are legal again in US’, The Telegraph, 19 September 2004, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1472121/Semi-automatics-and-grenade-launchers-are-legal-again-in-US.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb691e5e05dc29d0103b5c23f5e0d524",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Assault weapons are not necessary for self defence or hunting.\n\nAs New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg argues \"We've got to really question whether military-style weapons with big magazines belong on the streets of America in this day and age.” [1] Police chiefs such as Ralph Godbee of Detroit argue \"We're talking about weapons that are made for war… you can shoot 50 to 60 rounds within a minute.” [2] In a self defense scenario the person defending themselves need to have enough ammunition to provide deterrence, however they would have to be unwise to take on several assailants so there should be little need to have more than 10 rounds in the magazine. Law enforcement expert Leonard J. Supenski has testified “because of potential harm to others in the household, passersby, and bystanders, too much firepower is a hazard” as in self defense, the defenders will often fire until they have expended all the bullets in their magazine. To use an assault weapon would to spray an assailant with bullets from an assault weapon would be using disproportionate force that will not only harm the assailant but will likely hit anyone else nearby.\n\nEven those who are against an assault weapons ban such as David Kopel concede that for the most part these are not useful weapons for hunting. These weapons are “intended to wound rather than to kill” so would certainly not be useful in taking down a deer. Moreover he also concedes “a hunter will carry only a few rounds” so the large capacity magazine is also useless for sport. [3]\n\n[1] Simpson, Connor, ‘Dianne Feinstein Wants to Ban Assault Weapons’, the Atlantic Wire, 16 December 2012, http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/12/dianne-feinstein-wants-ban-assault-weapons/60033/\n\n[2] Jackson, Jesse, ‘Police Chiefs Are Right: Ban Assault Weapons’, Huffington Post, 3 August 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-jesse-jackson/police-chiefs-are-right-b_b_1738147.html\n\n[3] Kopel, David B., ‘Rational Basis Analysis of “Assault Weapon” Prohibition’, Journal of Contemporary Law, Vol.20, 1994 pp.381-417, p.393, http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/rational.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5f12ec3c4f8adfeaf804072fc05e18ec",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons A ban would save lives\n\nPut simply assault weapons are designed for assault, therefore their proliferation should be prohibited in law. To put things into the general context of gun crime within the United States every year 17,000 people are killed, 70 percent of them with guns and nearly 20,000 people commit suicide by shooting themselves [1] . Murder by gunfire particularly affects children, in total well over a million Americans have died in this manner and 80 people continue to be shot in the states every day. So some form of gun control is necessary and a ban on assault weapons is a good starting point.\n\nOut of 62 mass murders since 1982 almost half the weapons used, 67 out of 142, were semi-automatic handguns and more than 30 were assault weapons. [2] The period of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban from 1994-2004 with the exception of 1999, the year of the Columbine massacre (which notably involved a semi-automatic produced before the ban), was also a peaceful period in terms of numbers of mass shootings. [3] While assault weapons are responsible for a relatively small amount of total gun deaths in the USA that is not a good reason for not banning them; any life saved is worthwhile. Taking the low estimate of 1% of deaths from assault weapons that still means 90-100 people a year while the high 7% [4] means 630-700 lives that could be saved.\n\nAustralia shows the advantages on implementing restrictions on guns (in Australia’s case much stricter than anything being contemplated in this debate so the effect would not be as pronounced). In the wake of a mass shooting in Port Arthur in 1996 strict gun laws were implemented. An evaluation by the Australian National University found laws saved $500 million and halved the number of people killed by guns saving 200 lives every year. [5]\n\n[1] Masters, Brian, ‘America’s deadly obsession with guns’ The Telegraph 16 December 2012, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/9749024/Americas-deadly-obsession-with-guns.html\n\n[2] Follman, Mark, et al., ‘A Guide to Mass Shootings in America’, Mother Jones, 15 December 2012, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map\n\n[3] Wang, Sam, ‘Did the federal ban on assault weapons matter?’, Princeton Election Consortium, 14 December 2012, http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/\n\n[4] Matthews, Jake, ‘For Lives and Liberty: Banning Assault Weapons in America’, Harvard University Institute of Politics, 2012, http://www.iop.harvard.edu/lives-and-liberty-banning-assault-weapons-america\n\n[5] Peters, Rebecca, ‘Will Sandy Hook massacre be America’s tipping point’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 17 December 2012, http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/will-the-sandy-hook-massacre-be-americas-tipping-point-20121216-2bhfy.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ece8a3b0c2d1068cb1e44f5e4f7a53b3",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons An assault weapons ban would stop the manufacture of many of the deadliest guns.\n\nYes a ban would not immediately take assault weapons off the streets but there would be significant long term benefits as highlighted by Connecticut Senator Joe Liberman \"We ought to restore the assault weapons ban -- not to take anybody's guns away that they have now, but to stop the manufacturing of these weapons.\" [1] The ban would stop manufacturers from making the weapons and with the legislation improved from the 1994 version it would be possible to prevent the cosmetic changes that were made to keep guns on the market. [2] This would mean that prices both in the USA and globally would increase as there would be less supply. One positive result might also be help to change the United States’ position on the arms trade treaty which would further restrict global supply. [3] This would answer Mexican calls to cut off the supply of guns into the country that helps make the drugs violence in the country so deadly both by meaning less of the weapons are made and by helping to cut off the route through which weapons get into Mexico. [4] A ban on assault weapons would not fix Mexico but it would deprive arms smugglers of the closest, easiest and cheapest place to buy the arms used by the drugs cartels. [5]\n\n[1] Jamieson, Dave, ‘Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy Calls For Tougher Gun Controls’, The Huffington Post, 16 December 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/16/connecticut-governor-dannel-malloy-gun-control_n_2311172.html\n\n[2] Epstein, Edward, ‘NRA clout is outgunning Feinstein / Assault weapons ban renewal in doubt’, SFGate, 28 June 2004, http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/NRA-clout-is-outgunning-Feinstein-Assault-2710800.php#page-1\n\n[3] Urquhart, Conal, ‘Arms trade treaty failure is disappointing, says William Hague’, guardian.co.uk, 28 July 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/28/arms-trade-treaty-william-hague\n\n[4] ‘Mexico urges U.S. to review gun laws after Colorado shooting’, Reuters, 21 July 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/21/us-usa-shooting-mexico-idUSBRE86K0IL20120721\n\n[5] Chertoff, Emily, ‘Regulating U.S.-Made Assault Weapons: The International Case’, The Atlantic, 19 December 2012, http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/12/regulating-us-made-assault-weapons-the-international-case/266433/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2fe578be76dc7cd6088299592df8725c",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons It is incoherent to ban some guns\n\nIt is incoherent to attempt to ban assault weapons while allowing other weapons to remain on the streets. As professor Jacobs from New York University argues “Pistols are dangerous because they are easily carried and concealed; shotguns because they spray metal projectiles over a wide area; certain hunting rifles because they fire large calibre bullets, and certain \"sniper rifles\" because they are accurate over great distances. Assault rifles are not remarkable by any of these criteria.” [1] Indeed the previous ban simply used a list of guns that were banned rather than a specific definition that could then be applied universally showing the difficulty of classifying these weapons. [2] It should also be remembered that this will not affect assault weapons that are already legal in the United States so this would not even be banning all assault weapons so would leave millions in private hands, while it might be argued there is some slight difference between an assault weapon and another gun there is certainly no difference betweena a new and an old assault weapon.\n\n[1] Kopel, David B., ‘Rational Basis Analysis of “Assault Weapon” Prohibition’, Journal of Contemporary Law, Vol.20, 1994 pp.381-417, p.404, http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/rational.htm\n\n[2] Kobayashi, Bruce H., and Olson, Joseph E., ‘In Re 101 California Street: A legal and economic analysis of strict liability for the manufacture and sale of “assault weapons”’, Stanford Law and Policy Review, vol.8 No.1, 1997, http://saf.org/LawReviews/KobayashiAndOlson.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d3badc4b2cfd8352750af25e9f4f5e5",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons A ban on assault weapons would not work, it will simply encourage a black market\n\nIt has already been demonstrated that most crime already takes place using other guns or even without firearms at all so it is illogical to think that this ban would make any difference to crime. For a start as the ban would not be retroactive large numbers of assault weapons would remain legally in the United States. It would create a black market in the weapons which would enrich organised crime which would simply mean that those who are intending to use those guns for ill have access to them while those who want them for self defense don’t. [1] As a response to Obama’s reelection some gun owners are already purchasing more guns and bullets, in some cases with the intention of selling them on the black market should a ban come into force. [2] It is clear therefore that the ban would do little to reduce the number of assault weapons in the United States and would likely even do little to impact on their availability.\n\n[1] Wohlferd, Clark A., ‘Much ado about not very much: The expiration of the assault weapons ban as an act of legislative responsibility’, Legislation and Public Policy, vol.8, 2005, pp.471-484, p.480 https://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv1/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__journal_of_legislation_and_public_policy/documents/documents/ecm_pro_060716.pdf\n\n[2] Hagler, Frank, ‘Gun Sales at Record High: Sales Soar Over Fear of the Black President’, Policy Mic, November 2012, http://www.policymic.com/articles/19701/gun-sales-at-record-high-sales-soar-over-fear-of-the-black-president\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e0d0da8b4c6b69ad95eabd16fb23538b",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons An assault weapons ban would violate the second amendment\n\nThe Second amendment “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” [1] would be violated by a ban on assault weapons. This right clearly does not limit what arms a citizen may bear. The ruling of District of Columbia v. Heller clearly reaffirmed that the government can’t ban certain classes of arms and also that this right is not connected with service in a militia.\n\n[1] ‘Second Amendment – Bearing Arms’, Findlaw, http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment02/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3ab8ed8fb4f21a6b1190e8d60d0d2b88",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Assault weapons are not used in most crimes\n\nThere is little point in banning a type of weapon that is not used in most violence; assault rifles are used in fewer than 1 percent of all violent crimes in the united states at a time when gun violence is falling. [1] If assault weapons are not used in most crime then there is no rational basis for banning them. When the previous assault weapons ban expired in 2004 far from there being an increase in crime as predicted the number of murders declined by 3.6%. [2]\n\n[1] La Jeunesse, William, ‘Debate answer on assault weapons ban could cause problems for Obama’, Fox News, 1 November 2012, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/01/debate-answer-on-assault-weapons-ban-could-cause-problems-for-obama/\n\n[2] Lott, John R., ‘The Big Lie of the Assault Weapons Ban’, Los Angeles Times, 28 June 2005, http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jun/28/opinion/oe-lott28\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
305374cde33e741b2f22390d3adb4fd4
|
A ban would save lives
Put simply assault weapons are designed for assault, therefore their proliferation should be prohibited in law. To put things into the general context of gun crime within the United States every year 17,000 people are killed, 70 percent of them with guns and nearly 20,000 people commit suicide by shooting themselves [1] . Murder by gunfire particularly affects children, in total well over a million Americans have died in this manner and 80 people continue to be shot in the states every day. So some form of gun control is necessary and a ban on assault weapons is a good starting point.
Out of 62 mass murders since 1982 almost half the weapons used, 67 out of 142, were semi-automatic handguns and more than 30 were assault weapons. [2] The period of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban from 1994-2004 with the exception of 1999, the year of the Columbine massacre (which notably involved a semi-automatic produced before the ban), was also a peaceful period in terms of numbers of mass shootings. [3] While assault weapons are responsible for a relatively small amount of total gun deaths in the USA that is not a good reason for not banning them; any life saved is worthwhile. Taking the low estimate of 1% of deaths from assault weapons that still means 90-100 people a year while the high 7% [4] means 630-700 lives that could be saved.
Australia shows the advantages on implementing restrictions on guns (in Australia’s case much stricter than anything being contemplated in this debate so the effect would not be as pronounced). In the wake of a mass shooting in Port Arthur in 1996 strict gun laws were implemented. An evaluation by the Australian National University found laws saved $500 million and halved the number of people killed by guns saving 200 lives every year. [5]
[1] Masters, Brian, ‘America’s deadly obsession with guns’ The Telegraph 16 December 2012, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/9749024/Americas-deadly-obsession-with-guns.html
[2] Follman, Mark, et al., ‘A Guide to Mass Shootings in America’, Mother Jones, 15 December 2012, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map
[3] Wang, Sam, ‘Did the federal ban on assault weapons matter?’, Princeton Election Consortium, 14 December 2012, http://election.princeton.edu/2012/12/14/did-the-federal-ban-on-assault-weapons-matter/
[4] Matthews, Jake, ‘For Lives and Liberty: Banning Assault Weapons in America’, Harvard University Institute of Politics, 2012, http://www.iop.harvard.edu/lives-and-liberty-banning-assault-weapons-america
[5] Peters, Rebecca, ‘Will Sandy Hook massacre be America’s tipping point’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 17 December 2012, http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/will-the-sandy-hook-massacre-be-americas-tipping-point-20121216-2bhfy.html
|
[
{
"docid": "2fe254ce68e074b221ac56d9b6b3aca8",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons It is exactly correct that deaths as a result of assault weapons are a tiny portion of the total firearms deaths. There is also no way to know if those who were killed by these weapons would have been saved or whether their assailant would not simply have killed them with a handgun instead. Therefore to ban only certain types of guns does not address the issue satisfactorily because it does not take into consideration that any gun can kill.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "d256eb593adc9bda8d6643d6427c05c1",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons The Second Amendment was not designed for only self defense and hunting. The idea that the common man should be reasonably able to protect themselves from tyranny, foreign invasion, and insurrection is a reasonable and just cause. But even if we were to accept that self defense and hunting are the only legitimate reasons for owning a gun then why should the state get to decide what weapons someone should use when hunting or defending themselves? That a gun may not be the best choice for these activities does not mean that it should not be a possible choice.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2fdc3f72d34b7853caff4ac046dc0946",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Black plastic on a gun does not make it any more lethal than other guns with wood stocks. Stopping the manufacture of such guns would hand over a lucrative market to the Russians and Chinese rather than reducing the number of assault weapons in the world. [1] Drugs cartels would simply find new routes to get the weapons they need, after all they are already dealing in illegal activities making the guns they want illegal on both sides of the border rather than just one is unlikely to stop them.\n\n[1] Falconer, Bruce, ‘Semiautomatic for the people’, Mother Jones, July/August 2008, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/07/semiautomatic-people\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "683ef6668d1511be24a0a4d2cd5dbe2b",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Banning assault weapons is an infringement on Americans freedom to protect themselves; what minor civil liberties advances may be gained pale by comparison to this.\n\nIt is also unlikely that the police and the FBI would recognise the linkage between fewer guns in the civilian population and reducing the firepower of the police. Similarly the FBI is unlikely to monitor civilians less simply because there is one less reason. The justification of “preventing homegrown attacks before they are hatched” will still remain just as strong as before they will simply be looking for different things.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8a826e2719da3ebcdc3eca5dea4784b6",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Supreme court rulings have been overturned before. This is an area where the bill of rights is clearly outdated and out of touch; today’s militia is clearly the standing army and so this should just be interpreted as only granting members of the army the right to carry arms. The maintenance of “the security of a free state” clearly is not something that today is done through the citizenry having access to guns, whether assault weapons or not. Moreover it is difficult to see why if there is a right to bear arms that is unconnected with the security of the state these arms should be these particular assault weapons rather than types of weapon that we are not looking to ban. Would a rifle not be as useful in the event of invasion as a semi-automatic? The Bill of Rights was written at the end of the eighteenth century when the weapons were muzzle loading muskets it was not conceived with powerful, accurate, modern weapons that are capable of mass murder without reloading.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5e27f30cc4a2c508565a738b2ef2391f",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Of course a ban will not completely eliminate these weapons but it would reduce the supply and make it much easier for the police to seize the weapons so taking them off the streets. It would also be a step in the right direction in attempting to change public perceptions and amend the American attitude. It is understated just how relaxed American laws are in comparison to the rest of the world, even states such as Switzerland and Israel that are often highlighted by the NRA as being model states that allow gun ownership with few resulting shootings are much more restrictive than the USA. [1]\n\nThere is no reason to think that a black market is somehow going to result in more of these weapons being available so the fact that it will exist after a ban is not a reason not to go ahead with the ban. It is not ideal that a ban is not retroactive so leaving a large number of such guns in private hands but this number will slowly diminish over time rather than continuing to rise as it would under the status quo.\n\n[1] Rosenbaum, Janet, ‘A League of Our Own’, Foreign Policy, 19 December 2012, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/12/18/a_league_of_our_own\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "827c0c9617797e091bef2f2d1efa1d8e",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons There is a rational basis for banning assault weapons as they are a firearm of choice among criminals. In a study of young adult purchases of handguns in California buyers with minor criminal histories were twice as likely to purchase automatic pistols as those with no criminal history. This was even higher at five times as likely for those who had been charged with two or more serious violent offenses. [1] This means those purchasing assault weapons intend for them to be used for violent ends.\n\nIt is true that assault weapons are used in a small percentage of crimes, although 1% is disputable in Miami for example 15 out of 79 homicides in 2006 involved assault weapons, [2] but the opposition ignore that large capacity magazines are used in a much higher percentage of crimes; between 14 and 26% before the 1994 ban. [3]\n\n[1] Koper, Christopher S., et al., ‘An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003’, Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice, June 2004, p.17 http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/aw_final2004.pdf\n\n[2] Associated Press, ‘Assault-weapon attacks on rise in Miami area’, MSNBC, 14 September 2007, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20781848/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/assault-weapon-attacks-rise-miami-area/#.UM8YPW_r18E\n\n[3] Koper, Christopher S., et al., ‘An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003’, Report to the National Institute of Justice, United States Department of Justice, June 2004, p.18 http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/aw_final2004.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c8838d7e43ef8b070e565f79b82a7f81",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons The point of an assault weapons ban is not to completely ban guns but to ban guns that can fire large numbers of bullets rapidly and have no purpose other than to shoot people. The ban targets those weapons that are not useful for self defence or hunting. The opposition argument is essentially that because some guns are legal all guns should be legal; the line has to be drawn somewhere and there is little reason why the line at assault weapons is less logical than a line that allows some grenade launchers and shotguns while banning others? [1] Since this line is clearly arbitrary then we should move to the only non-arbitrary line, a full ban, a move towards which this ban is a step towards.\n\n[1] Laurence, Charles, ‘Semi-automatics and grenade launchers are legal again in US’, The Telegraph, 19 September 2004, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1472121/Semi-automatics-and-grenade-launchers-are-legal-again-in-US.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb691e5e05dc29d0103b5c23f5e0d524",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Assault weapons are not necessary for self defence or hunting.\n\nAs New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg argues \"We've got to really question whether military-style weapons with big magazines belong on the streets of America in this day and age.” [1] Police chiefs such as Ralph Godbee of Detroit argue \"We're talking about weapons that are made for war… you can shoot 50 to 60 rounds within a minute.” [2] In a self defense scenario the person defending themselves need to have enough ammunition to provide deterrence, however they would have to be unwise to take on several assailants so there should be little need to have more than 10 rounds in the magazine. Law enforcement expert Leonard J. Supenski has testified “because of potential harm to others in the household, passersby, and bystanders, too much firepower is a hazard” as in self defense, the defenders will often fire until they have expended all the bullets in their magazine. To use an assault weapon would to spray an assailant with bullets from an assault weapon would be using disproportionate force that will not only harm the assailant but will likely hit anyone else nearby.\n\nEven those who are against an assault weapons ban such as David Kopel concede that for the most part these are not useful weapons for hunting. These weapons are “intended to wound rather than to kill” so would certainly not be useful in taking down a deer. Moreover he also concedes “a hunter will carry only a few rounds” so the large capacity magazine is also useless for sport. [3]\n\n[1] Simpson, Connor, ‘Dianne Feinstein Wants to Ban Assault Weapons’, the Atlantic Wire, 16 December 2012, http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/12/dianne-feinstein-wants-ban-assault-weapons/60033/\n\n[2] Jackson, Jesse, ‘Police Chiefs Are Right: Ban Assault Weapons’, Huffington Post, 3 August 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-jesse-jackson/police-chiefs-are-right-b_b_1738147.html\n\n[3] Kopel, David B., ‘Rational Basis Analysis of “Assault Weapon” Prohibition’, Journal of Contemporary Law, Vol.20, 1994 pp.381-417, p.393, http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/rational.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "56f4f232df1d3db331647d54db794497",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Banning assault weapons increases liberty and security\n\nMany who are pro guns argue that it would be illegitimate for assault weapons to be banned while the police have them. Police forces, however, are going to be much more likely, and able to give them up when a ban is in place. The police don’t want to be involved in an arms race with criminals to have the biggest guns; just look at the British police force where there is little gun crime and few shootings of police officers it is not felt that there is the need to have police armed with more than a taser or even truncheon. [1] Put simply a ban on assault weapons can help reverse the arms race between police and criminals.\n\nCivil liberties would also be enhanced as law enforcement agencies would not need to devote so many resources into monitoring assault weapons purchases and those who have done the purchasing. Instead they would be able to simply target all assault weapons purchases as needing immediate attention. [2]\n\nFinally we must remember that this ban enhances the highest liberty at all; life. Today as Justice Breyer says “gun possession presents a greater risk of taking innocent lives” than not having a gun. [3]\n\n[1] Keating, Ruth, ‘This House would arm the police’, Peter Squires ed., Debatabase, 2011, http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/law/house-would-arm-police\n\n[2] Matthews, Jake, ‘For Lives and Liberty: Banning Assault Weapons in America’, Harvard University Institute of Politics, 2012, http://www.iop.harvard.edu/lives-and-liberty-banning-assault-weapons-america\n\n[3] Masters, Brian, ‘America’s deadly obsession with guns’, The Telegraph, 16 December 2012, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/9749024/Americas-deadly-obsession-with-guns.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ece8a3b0c2d1068cb1e44f5e4f7a53b3",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons An assault weapons ban would stop the manufacture of many of the deadliest guns.\n\nYes a ban would not immediately take assault weapons off the streets but there would be significant long term benefits as highlighted by Connecticut Senator Joe Liberman \"We ought to restore the assault weapons ban -- not to take anybody's guns away that they have now, but to stop the manufacturing of these weapons.\" [1] The ban would stop manufacturers from making the weapons and with the legislation improved from the 1994 version it would be possible to prevent the cosmetic changes that were made to keep guns on the market. [2] This would mean that prices both in the USA and globally would increase as there would be less supply. One positive result might also be help to change the United States’ position on the arms trade treaty which would further restrict global supply. [3] This would answer Mexican calls to cut off the supply of guns into the country that helps make the drugs violence in the country so deadly both by meaning less of the weapons are made and by helping to cut off the route through which weapons get into Mexico. [4] A ban on assault weapons would not fix Mexico but it would deprive arms smugglers of the closest, easiest and cheapest place to buy the arms used by the drugs cartels. [5]\n\n[1] Jamieson, Dave, ‘Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy Calls For Tougher Gun Controls’, The Huffington Post, 16 December 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/16/connecticut-governor-dannel-malloy-gun-control_n_2311172.html\n\n[2] Epstein, Edward, ‘NRA clout is outgunning Feinstein / Assault weapons ban renewal in doubt’, SFGate, 28 June 2004, http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/NRA-clout-is-outgunning-Feinstein-Assault-2710800.php#page-1\n\n[3] Urquhart, Conal, ‘Arms trade treaty failure is disappointing, says William Hague’, guardian.co.uk, 28 July 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/28/arms-trade-treaty-william-hague\n\n[4] ‘Mexico urges U.S. to review gun laws after Colorado shooting’, Reuters, 21 July 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/21/us-usa-shooting-mexico-idUSBRE86K0IL20120721\n\n[5] Chertoff, Emily, ‘Regulating U.S.-Made Assault Weapons: The International Case’, The Atlantic, 19 December 2012, http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/12/regulating-us-made-assault-weapons-the-international-case/266433/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2fe578be76dc7cd6088299592df8725c",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons It is incoherent to ban some guns\n\nIt is incoherent to attempt to ban assault weapons while allowing other weapons to remain on the streets. As professor Jacobs from New York University argues “Pistols are dangerous because they are easily carried and concealed; shotguns because they spray metal projectiles over a wide area; certain hunting rifles because they fire large calibre bullets, and certain \"sniper rifles\" because they are accurate over great distances. Assault rifles are not remarkable by any of these criteria.” [1] Indeed the previous ban simply used a list of guns that were banned rather than a specific definition that could then be applied universally showing the difficulty of classifying these weapons. [2] It should also be remembered that this will not affect assault weapons that are already legal in the United States so this would not even be banning all assault weapons so would leave millions in private hands, while it might be argued there is some slight difference between an assault weapon and another gun there is certainly no difference betweena a new and an old assault weapon.\n\n[1] Kopel, David B., ‘Rational Basis Analysis of “Assault Weapon” Prohibition’, Journal of Contemporary Law, Vol.20, 1994 pp.381-417, p.404, http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/rational.htm\n\n[2] Kobayashi, Bruce H., and Olson, Joseph E., ‘In Re 101 California Street: A legal and economic analysis of strict liability for the manufacture and sale of “assault weapons”’, Stanford Law and Policy Review, vol.8 No.1, 1997, http://saf.org/LawReviews/KobayashiAndOlson.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d3badc4b2cfd8352750af25e9f4f5e5",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons A ban on assault weapons would not work, it will simply encourage a black market\n\nIt has already been demonstrated that most crime already takes place using other guns or even without firearms at all so it is illogical to think that this ban would make any difference to crime. For a start as the ban would not be retroactive large numbers of assault weapons would remain legally in the United States. It would create a black market in the weapons which would enrich organised crime which would simply mean that those who are intending to use those guns for ill have access to them while those who want them for self defense don’t. [1] As a response to Obama’s reelection some gun owners are already purchasing more guns and bullets, in some cases with the intention of selling them on the black market should a ban come into force. [2] It is clear therefore that the ban would do little to reduce the number of assault weapons in the United States and would likely even do little to impact on their availability.\n\n[1] Wohlferd, Clark A., ‘Much ado about not very much: The expiration of the assault weapons ban as an act of legislative responsibility’, Legislation and Public Policy, vol.8, 2005, pp.471-484, p.480 https://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv1/groups/public/@nyu_law_website__journals__journal_of_legislation_and_public_policy/documents/documents/ecm_pro_060716.pdf\n\n[2] Hagler, Frank, ‘Gun Sales at Record High: Sales Soar Over Fear of the Black President’, Policy Mic, November 2012, http://www.policymic.com/articles/19701/gun-sales-at-record-high-sales-soar-over-fear-of-the-black-president\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e0d0da8b4c6b69ad95eabd16fb23538b",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons An assault weapons ban would violate the second amendment\n\nThe Second amendment “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” [1] would be violated by a ban on assault weapons. This right clearly does not limit what arms a citizen may bear. The ruling of District of Columbia v. Heller clearly reaffirmed that the government can’t ban certain classes of arms and also that this right is not connected with service in a militia.\n\n[1] ‘Second Amendment – Bearing Arms’, Findlaw, http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment02/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3ab8ed8fb4f21a6b1190e8d60d0d2b88",
"text": "crime policing house would united states ban assault weapons Assault weapons are not used in most crimes\n\nThere is little point in banning a type of weapon that is not used in most violence; assault rifles are used in fewer than 1 percent of all violent crimes in the united states at a time when gun violence is falling. [1] If assault weapons are not used in most crime then there is no rational basis for banning them. When the previous assault weapons ban expired in 2004 far from there being an increase in crime as predicted the number of murders declined by 3.6%. [2]\n\n[1] La Jeunesse, William, ‘Debate answer on assault weapons ban could cause problems for Obama’, Fox News, 1 November 2012, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/01/debate-answer-on-assault-weapons-ban-could-cause-problems-for-obama/\n\n[2] Lott, John R., ‘The Big Lie of the Assault Weapons Ban’, Los Angeles Times, 28 June 2005, http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jun/28/opinion/oe-lott28\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
c56221a0fc7102278dab8e346a909d3f
|
Personal freedom
Gambling is a leisure activity enjoyed by many millions of people. Governments should not tell people what they can do with their own money. Those who don’t like gambling should be free to buy adverts warning people against it, but they should not be able to use the law to impose their own beliefs. Online gambling has got rid of the rules that in the past made it hard to gamble for pleasure and allowed many more ordinary people to enjoy a bet from time to time. It provides the freedom to gamble, whenever and wherever and with whatever method the individual prefers.
|
[
{
"docid": "dc3071e18a1eb0c5acaf68574cd585ca",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression People are not free to do whatever they want whenever they want. When their activities harm society it is the government’s role to step in to prevent that harm. Online gambling simply provides the freedom for more people to get into debt, not a freedom that should be encouraged.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "d6924ffbf7a5c0eede21e753486fcc44",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Gambling is quite different from buying stocks and shares. With the stock market investors are buying a stake in an actual company. This share may rise or fall in value, but so can a house or artwork. In each case there is a real asset that is likely to hold its value in the long term, which isn’t the case with gambling. Company shares and bonds can even produce a regular income through dividend and interest payments. It is true that some forms of financial speculation are more like gambling – for example the derivatives market or short-selling, where the investor does not actually own the asset being traded. But these are not types of investment that ordinary people have much to do with. They are also the kinds of financial activity most to blame for the financial crisis, which suggests we need more government control, not less.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fd1028be7102382a512cb70f346ce532",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression It is only in the interests of big gambling sites that aim to create a long term business to go along with tough regulation. Online gambling sites can get around government regulations that limit the dangers of betting. Because they can be legally sited anywhere in the world, they can pick countries with no rules to protect customers. In the real world governments can ban bets being taken from children and drunks. They can make sure that the odds are not changed to suit the House. And they can check that people running betting operations don’t have criminal records. In online gambling on the other hand 50% of players believe that internet casino’s cheat [14].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "342af02f07b46aea1237720572608838",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Governments have the power to ban online gambling in their own country. Even if citizens could use foreign websites, most will not choose to break the law. When the United States introduced its Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act in 2006 gambling among those of college-age fell from 5.8% to 1.5% [12]. Blocking the leading websites will also be effective, as it makes it very hard for them to build a trusted brand. And governments can stop their banks handling payments to foreign gambling companies, cutting off their business.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f2dda83ef1d8bd47c5f6a757e49726ca",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Because people will gamble anyway, the best that governments can do is make sure that their people gamble in safe circumstances. This means real world that casinos and other betting places that can easily be monitored.\n\nThe examples of government using gambling for their own purposes are really the government turning gambling into a benefit for the country. Physical casinos benefit the economy and encourage investment, and lotteries can be used to raise money for good causes. Online gambling undermines all this, as it can be sited anywhere in the world but can still compete with, and undercut organised national betting operations.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2f08dcebe6a69d716aeb84341890c7d7",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression There is no evidence that gambling prevents people from caring for their family. The vast majority who gamble do so responsibly. It isn’t right to ban something that millions of people enjoy just because a few cause problems. And banning gambling, whether online or in the real world will not stop these problems. Sadly, even if it is illegal, people with problems will still find a way to hurt those around them – just look at drugs.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5708330b27d71fc54d4bccb16a346895",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Criminals will always try to exploit any system, but if governments allow legal online gambling they can regulate it. It is in the interest of gambling companies to build trustworthy brands and cooperate with the authorities on stopping any crime. Cheats in several sports have been caught because legal websites reported strange betting patterns. Betfair for example provides the authorities with an early warning system ‘BetMon’ to watch betting patterns.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a7ea9c3aa2e7aa96b4bf307f33fa101f",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Unlike drugs, gambling is not physically or metabolically addictive. Most gamblers are not addicts, simply ordinary people who enjoy the excitement of a bet on a sporting event or card game. The large majority of people who gamble online keep to clear limits and stop when they reach them. The few people with a problem with being addicted will still find ways to gamble if gambling is illegal either through a casino, or else still online but in a black market that offers no help and that may use criminal violence to enforce payment.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8216916e9a3e8410c13c73a649d570f3",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Every leisure industry attracts a few troubled individuals who take the activity to harmful extremes. For every thousand drinkers there are a few alcoholics. Similarly some sports fans are hooligans. Those who gamble enough to harm themselves would be those who would gamble in casinos if the internet option was not available.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "90f8b0653d66c675035b208c0ee1745b",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Government only objects to online gambling because they dont benefit\n\nGovernments are hypocritical about gambling. They say they don’t like it but they often use it for their own purposes. Sometimes they only allow gambling in certain places in order to boost a local economy. Sometimes they profit themselves by running the only legal gambling business, such as a National Lottery [15] or public racecourse betting. This is bad for the public who want to gamble. Online gambling firms can break through government control by offering better odds and attractive new games.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d8831bdeef85619662d7621231eaf40f",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Cant enforce an online gambling ban\n\nGovernments can’t actually do anything to enforce a ban on the world wide web. Domestic laws can only stop internet companies using servers and offices in their own country. They cannot stop their citizens going online to gamble using sites based elsewhere. Governments can try to block sites they disapprove of, but new ones will keep springing up and their citizens will find ways around the ban. So practically there is little the government can do to stop people gambling online. Despite it being illegal the American Gambling Association has found that 4% of Americans already engage in online gambling [11].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "49f8bfab4148ca07ed071beb87230716",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Other forms of online gambling\n\nWhat is the difference between gambling and playing the stock market? In each case people are putting money at risk in the hope of a particular outcome. Gambling on horse-racing or games involves knowledge and expertise that can improve your chances of success. In the same way, trading in bonds, shares, currency or derivatives is a bet that your understanding of the economy is better than that of other investors. Why should one kind of online risk-taking be legal and the other not?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "50b2a12ff1a26e5fda02c65e89e8bdd6",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Only regulation can mitigate harms\n\nIt is where the sites operate, not where they are set up that matters for regulation. It is in gambling sites interest to run a trustworthy, responsible business. Whatever they are looking for online, internet users choose trusted brands that have been around for a while. If a gambling site acts badly, for example by changing its odds unfairly, word will soon get around and no one will want to use it. Regulation will mean that sites will have to verify the age of their users and prevent problem gamblers from accessing their site. When there is regulation consumers will go to the sites that are verified by their government and are providing a legal, safe service [13].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9145047f8ab841c91c3758caa935a47f",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Online gambling affects families\n\nA parent who gambles can quickly lose the money their family depends on for food and rent. It is a common cause of family break-up and homelessness, so governments should get involved to protect innocent children from getting hurt [5]. Each problem gambler harmfully impacts 10-15 other people [6]. The internet makes it easy for gamblers to bet secretly, without even leaving the house, so people become addicted to gambling without their families realising what is going on until too late.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1ba6c6770de03b55d728fa4b01d80cf0",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Gambling is addictive.\n\nHumans get a buzz from taking a risk and the hope that this time their luck will be in, this is similar to drug addicts [7]. The more people bet, the more they want to bet, so they become hooked on gambling which can wreck their lives. Internet gambling is worse because it is not a social activity. Unlike a casino or race track, you don’t have to go anywhere to do it, which can put a brake on the activity. The websites never shut. There won’t be people around you to talk you out of risky bets. There is nothing to stop you gambling your savings away while drunk.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6d0098c203cd477a9a3f333ef47ce460",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Gambling is bad for you.\n\nGamblers may win money from time to time, but in the long run, the House always wins. Why should governments allow an activity that helps their citizens lose the money they have worked so hard to earn? The harm is not just the loss of money and possible bankruptcy; it causes depression, insomnia, and other stress related disorders [4]. The internet has made gambling so much easier to do and encouraged lots of new people to place bets so dramatically multiplying the harm.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4aa46c4b05d7dae9fdcfe16a89956bfc",
"text": "omy business economic policy law crime policing digital freedoms freedom expression Online gambling encourages crime\n\nHuman trafficking, forced prostitution and drugs provide $2.1 billion a year for the Mafia but they need some way through which to put this money into circulation. Online gambling is that way in. They put dirty money in and win clean money back [8]. Because it is so international and outside normal laws, it makes criminal cash hard to track. There is a whole array of other crime associated with online gambling; hacking, phishing, extortion, and identity fraud, all of which can occur on a large scale unconstrained by physical proximity [9]. Online gambling also encourages corruption in sport. By allowing huge sums of money to be bet internationally on the outcome of a game or race, it draws in criminals who can try to bribe or threaten sportsmen.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
0d45ea8ed4ef852f8be29a678b87b50b
|
Prisons create criminals
The prison environment is harmful to many offenders. Consider the risk of developing a drug or alcohol addiction while incarcerated in the UK (15% of the inmates of one of the UK’s largest jails tested positive for drugs in 2006) [i] ; the risk of being subjected to sexual violence in an US prison (217,000 prisoners were subjected to sexual violence in American prisons in 2008) [ii] ; the rise in gang motivated violence and killings within prisons on both sides of the Atlantic.
Prison brings together individuals with a wide range of social and behavioural problems that incline them towards deviance and violence. These individuals are placed in closed conditions with restricted access to productive activities. In many western nations, a lack of funding and staff means that most prisoners have little to fill their time, and may be confined to their cells for up to twenty three hours a day. The privations of prison make prisoners more, rather than less likely to engage in violent or exploitative behaviour. Prisoners in overcrowded, understaffed jails are more likely to develop mental illnesses and less likely to have such conditions diagnosed and treated. The brutality of their surroundings makes prisoners more likely to seek the protection and comradeship offered by gangs or the comfort of intoxicants.
Furthermore, the shame and isolation associated with incarceration cause prisoner’s non-criminal social networks to decay. Relationships with partners or spouses may break down. Contact with children may be limited. Families may shun the offender, leaving him with a social circle comprised mainly of fellow inmates. These associations can prove toxic, leading offenders to validate each other’s behaviour and share knowledge about criminal activities.
Finally, the stigma of criminality extends to employment. Businesses may be unwilling to employ those with criminal records, limiting ex-offenders’ opportunities for social reintegration.
[i] “Inspector finds gangs and high level of violence in jail”, The Guardian, 11 July 2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/jul/11/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation?INTCMP=SRCH
[ii] “Combating rape in prisons”, The Economist, May 5 2011, http://www.economist.com/node/18651484
|
[
{
"docid": "544f54e978e0256b9b42b2bd2a3cea47",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Although prisoners may associate closely with other criminals within jail, many more offenders were introduced to crime outside prison. A deprived social background, a family life disrupted by domestic violence and family members with histories of criminal behaviour can all lead an individual to become involved with crime.\n\nFor many young men, prison can become a sanctuary from links with gangs or a chaotic and damaging home life. Once placed within the regulated, disciplined environment of the prison, they can be introduced to the essential skills and educational opportunities that they may have been denied in the outside world.\n\nPrison can give an individual the opportunity to develop the practical and psychological skills they require to escape social alienation. Many prisons in Europe, the UK and the States achieve this objective. US prisons may also operate special units that offer help and protection to offenders who want to leave gangs.\n\nUnder-staffing and a poor understanding of inmates’ needs are arguments for reform of the prison system, not arguments against incarceration itself. Where these issues are addressed, rehabilitation programmes have had many successes. Once political prejudices about building and funding rehabilitation oriented prisons are overcome, the benefits of penal supervision will become more accessible.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "149b92f80d4f62bf46a9df6fdf25ca8b",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders It is unrealistic to expect the police to act as the sole deterrent to criminal behaviour. The majority of police work concerns the detection rather than the prevention of crime. Only a massive and unfeasible expansion of police numbers and powers could provide a real deterrent to criminality.\n\nThe purpose of deterrence is to reduce the likelihood of damaging behaviour without dramatically raising the cost of enforcing the law. Deterrence relies on individuals acting in a rational manner and being able to regulate their own behaviour. Property crime often results from the offender performing a rational balancing of his likely gains against the likely costs of incarceration. Limiting the use of prison sentences means that calculating offenders will be much more likely to engage in property crime.\n\nFinally, the proposition is unable to deal with the threat posed by habitual and compulsive petty criminals. The actions of such individuals often straddle the boundary between outright criminality and anti-social behaviour. Their offences may never be severe enough to attract a penal sentence, but it is the continuous and repeated nature of their criminal acts that causes harm. Once again, the best response to such conduct is the forcible segregation of the offender inside a prison.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "99765a8e44f6a004e066bc809900469d",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders As noted above, the consequences of non-violent crimes can be just as damaging as those of violent crimes. More over, non-violent criminals can also present an immediate danger to society.\n\nThe cost of constructing a prison is outweighed by the benefit of preventing individuals from committing crimes. Rehabilitation programmes are not a panacea – they are not instantly or reliably effective. Even if an individual refuses to engage with any rehabilitative activities in prison, they are still restrained from engaging in further criminal activity.\n\nConsider the senior members of organised criminal syndicates. These individuals may only be involved in using deceptive accounting or front-companies to conceal the activities of their colleagues, but by doing so they enable and encourage multiple violent offences.\n\nSimilarly, drug dealers may create conditions in which social deprivation and family break-down flourish. As noted both above and on side proposition, these same conditions can cause others to turn to criminality. In this instance, drugs dealers can present a danger to their communities, and an obstacle to the rehabilitation of addicts. Arguably, the most effective solution to this particular form of criminal behaviour is the removal of the dealer from that community.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b9564746e0e8043c2699ec08e9192bcd",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders The victims of non-violent offences may suffer as much as the victims of violent offences. A large scale financial fraud, such as that perpetrated by Robert Maxwell or Bernard Madhoff, may deprive thousands of individuals of their savings and pensions, condemning them to a life of poverty. A petty drugs dealer may be supplying a habit that drives an addict to steal and attack others in order to find money.\n\nMoreover, fraud, deception and drug dealing draw on the same predatory, cynical and exploitative attitudes that motivate violent theft, organised crime and violent rape. An individual who has committed only non-violent offences is not necessarily in a better position to appreciate the harm that violence may do, or to understand that others may suffer as a result of his actions.\n\nIt may be proportional to hand down a severe prison sentence to a “white collar” criminal, who has abused a position of trust or wealth for personal gain. Such crimes are aggravated by the fact that their perpetrators have often led privileged, secure lives, free from the deprivation and poverty that drives most criminals. Confidence in the justice system may be harmed if it is felt that those of professional standing or a high social class are subjected to softer punishments.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "15a1b7291d0b61348e49bfb145e7ad35",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders The opposition argument assumes that punishment must be proportional only to the suffering caused to the victim of a particular crime. Opposition state that for a sentence to be truly proportionate, it must reflect the subjective responses of the victim. This analysis fails to acknowledge that the definition of proportionality extends beyond the victim.\n\nThe four objectives of criminal sentencing are complimentary, not mutually exclusive. The aspect of a sentence that seeks to punish should be proportionate to offender’s crime, but in addition, it must not obstruct the functioning of the other objectives of sentencing.\n\nA burglary may be upsetting for the victim, and incarceration of the burglar may seem a proportionate response. However, when that sentence is weighed against the imperative to rehabilitate the burglar, we discover that rehabilitation in prison would be less effective than rehab in a community setting. When custodial punishment is weighed against the imperative to protect the public, we discover that non-violent criminals who have been incarcerated are more likely to engage in violent crime following their release. The greater cost of incarceration- to the criminal and to the efficacy of the rehabilitative process- renders the sentence disproportionate.\n\nThe comparative popularity of imprisonment has distorted our understanding of which criminals it is most suited to.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da7186e61e217027ae84dfc4ecb6cf0f",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders A modern liberal state’s duty is to pursue policies and promote values that will have a real and lasting impact on its citizen’s lives. The resolution is such a policy. The opposition’s argument has been tried and failed; in the US, ‘increasing punitive measures have failed to reduce criminal recidivism and instead have led to a rapidly growing correctional system that has strained government budgets’ [i] .\n\nPandering to populist thinking in the name of maintaining confidence in a particular government is a short-term strategy. It is an approach designed to win elections rather than bring about social change. The most effective way for a government to fulfil its obligation to protect its citizens is to reduce deviance effectively and efficiently, even if that change has to come at the expense of political capital.\n\nThe penal system operating under the status quo brutalises individuals and entrenches criminality in communities in the name of law and order.\n\n[i] Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J., “Rehabilitating Criminal Justice and Policy” in Psychology, Public Policy and Law (2010, Vol. 16, No.1). Page 39\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9f22791235437497e01ce21d6c27e23e",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Families and other social networks can play an important role in supporting and encouraging an offender as they rehabilitate. Wives, husbands and children can effectively monitor the behaviour of an offender when trained staff are unavailable. Given that the imprisonment of an adult family member is emotionally traumatic and financially damaging, families have a strong incentive to ensure that rehabilitation is successful.\n\nDisruptive family environments are also catered for by the proposition resolution. Where family breakdown is a cause of criminality, social workers and rehabilitation specialists will be able to “treat” the family alongside the offender. Underlying drug or alcohol addictions can be addressed. ‘Therapeutic programs’, as they are termed, enable offenders to be rehabilitated by and within the community in a ‘living-learning situation’ [i] .\n\nPrison on the other hand is an unsupportive environment where offenders are blamed for their behaviour and sometimes coerced into rehabilitation programs [ii] . In a prison context, an offender would be treated in isolation, without the opportunity to address underlying familial issues that might cause reoffending. Prison can be iatrogenic (increase risk) by removing offenders from their source of social support, families, jobs and accommodation; rehabilitation is more likely to be effective when it is used in conjunction with those factors, not apart from them. Furthermore, the available evidence suggests that prison staff hold ‘rather unsympathetic’ attitudes towards prisoners [iii] , inferring a culture unfavourable to effective rehabilitation.\n\nAlthough an offender may be prevented from committing crime for the duration of a prison sentence, this does not represent a significant advantage over the proposed resolution. For the reasons set out above, a prisoner released from a custodial sentence is likely to be incentivised to engage in crime (due to a lack of employment opportunities and social isolation), and will commit more serious types of crime.\n\n[i] Day, A., Casey, S., Vess, J. & Huisy, G., “Assessing the Social Climate of Prisons”, February 2, 2011 from Australia Institute of Criminology, Page 8/Page 32\n\n[ii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 300\n\n[iii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 294\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f78f6d7e1910b32eef33ca7fecb6b35e",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Incarceration is expensive, rehabilitation is not\n\nMany of the rehabilitation and intervention schemes made available in prison are replicated in community settings by social services and charities. The cost of delivering these programmes in prison originates from the concept of prison itself. The expense of building, equipping, staffing and monitoring a prison vastly outweighs the cost of rehabilitative activities. Research conducted by Steve Aos has shown that rehabilitative programs designed to reduce crime can be cost-effective [i] .\n\nPrisons should be used only where the imperative to protect society from criminal behaviour cannot be met by the imperative to rehabilitate. A minority of offenders will be incorrigibly violent and uncontrollable, but under the status quo, these dangerous offenders not represent the majority of the prison population (see statistics above).\n\nThe yearly cost of incarcerating a young offender in the UK is now £140,000, almost three times the annual fee charged by an elite public school [ii] . Diverting this money to intervention programmes delivered to families, in homes and in schools would avoid the harms of incarceration (described above), while retaining the benefit of rehabilitation. The focus should therefore be prevention and early intervention rather than punishment.\n\n[i] Aos, S., The Comparative Costs and Benefits of Programs to Reduce Crime, Washington State Institute for Public Policy, May 2001, http://barry.mo.networkofcare.org/library/costbenefit.pdf\n\n[ii] “Punishing Costs” The New Economics Foundation, 2010, p18\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1afe3f17a61f0993a5d25b6e727aaee4",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Proportionality\n\nA recent study conducted among prisoners in Florida found that from 1997 to 2010 the proportion of new inmates who had committed violent crimes (collating both state and federal prisons statistics) fell by 28% [i] . Meanwhile, the number of first time prisoners who had committed non-violent offences rose by 189% [ii] .\n\nIt is argued that imprisoning individuals found to be guilty of non-violent crimes is a disproportionate response to their actions and does not serve the objectives of criminal sentencing set out above.\n\nCriminal sentences must deliver a punishment in proportion to the crime an offender has committed. A disproportionate sentence- using the death penalty to punish theft, for instance- is less likely to be perceived as a fair or rational response to criminal behaviour. An offender who is punished excessively is more likely to see himself as the victim of injustice, and less likely to consider the impact of his own conduct. A law abiding individual who that fears that jaywalking may result in jail time will have no confidence in the criminal justice system, and may begin seeking other sources of security.\n\nThere are many alternatives to penal sentences available to magistrates and judges. Using fines and curfews to restrict financial and personal liberty, alongside restorative forms of punishment such as community service, can provide a much more efficient way of condemning an individual’s criminal behaviour.\n\n[i] “Rough Justice in America”, The Economist, July 22 2010, http://www.economist.com/node/16636027\n\n[ii] “Rough Justice in America”, The Economist, July 22 2010, http://www.economist.com/node/16636027\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "874d54128a23caf6c582dcd455a2ca91",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Deterrence is a myth\n\nThe deterrent effect of prison is uniformly overstated. It is popularly thought that the indignity and strictness of the prison environment will discourage criminal behaviour. Further, exposure to the harsh realities of prison is thought to discourage former inmates from re-offending. These assumptions do not reflect most offenders’ reasoning, nor do they reflect the contexts in which most criminal behaviour occurs. Punishment of the type offered by prisons doesn’t meet the criteria for reinforcement of behaviour that one would associate with behaviour change; the punishment happens long after the behaviour, and is therefore futile [i] .\n\nFirstly, it should be noted that among many inmates, especially young men, criminal actions, including public order offences, assault and petty theft, are carried out on impulse. Impulsive behaviour is often influenced by alcohol and peer pressure. Under these circumstances, deterrence is ineffective.\n\nSecondly, empirical evidence indicates that it is the likelihood of being caught performing a criminal act, rather than the sentence for that crime, that deters potential offenders. If a potential offender believes he is more likely to be caught and convicted, he is less likely to engage in criminal behaviour. Meta-analyses such as the Cambridge Study on Deterrence [ii] have shown that the severity of a sentence only has a marginal effect on an offender’s decision to break the law.\n\nIn the light of these findings, deterrence can be seen as a matter of policing and detection, rather than a set of misleading assumptions based on an over-simplification of rational-actor theory.\n\n[i] Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J., “Rehabilitating Criminal Justice and Policy” in Psychology, Public Policy and Law (2010, Vol. 16, No.1). Page 42\n\n[ii] “Criminal deterrence and sentence severity: an analysis of recent research”, von Hirsch, A, and others\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "759653af8c36fc73546b3b8d8dfea94a",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Rehabilitation can only succeed in prison\n\nRehabilitation programmes are not a panacea – nor are they instantly or reliably effective. The risk of an individual committing crime can only be reduced by long-term engagement with such schemes.\n\nUnder these circumstances, the best location in which to rehabilitate offender is prison. Prison serves, in some cases, to separate prisoners from poverty and desperation, and to help them access training and education that they may have failed to engage with previously. Prison can also quarantine offenders from the influence of gangs and other sub-cultures that may compete with the positive behaviours fostered by rehabilitation. This is particularly the case for high risk offenders.\n\nIt seems ridiculous to assume that dramatic changes in an individual’s behaviour can be brought about without a correspondingly dramatic change in their environment and lifestyle. Criminality frequently develops as a survival strategy within hostile or chaotic social environments.\n\nFor many crimes, family may also be the root cause. Problematic relationship with relatives can further hinder the rehabilative process. How can we still expect family members to help facilitate the rehabilative process when they may be the reason reason why the offender committed crimes.\n\nIf there are minimal restraints put on an offender’s freedom while he rehabilitates, it will be easier for him to avoid complying with rehabilitation programmes. It will also be easier for the offender to avoid complying with other, more punitive measures, such as fines and community service orders.\n\nAs a last resort, a prison term prevents offenders who refuse to engage with rehabilitation from committing crimes for the length of their sentence. Given that a UK home office survey conduct in 2000 found that, on average, offenders committed 140 crimes a year, even a brief sentence represents a significant disruption of criminal activity [i] .\n\n[i] Civitas, Fighting Crime: Are Public Policies Working?, February 2010, p.1, http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/CrimeBriefingFeb2010.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "62cac50f75cde42aa9e5b12a6a392f64",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders The false distinction between “violent” and “non-violent” crime\n\nDistinctions between violent and non-violent offences are not useful when deciding which offenders should be imprisoned and which should receive more lenient, rehabilitative sentences. The severity of a crime can only be defined by its context and consequences, not by semi-arbitrary labels such as violent and non-violent.\n\nAll forms of criminality, and not just violent crimes, can have disturbing and traumatic consequences. The effect of a robbery on the physical health and psychological stability of an elderly person can be as pronounced as the effects of a violent assault on a healthy young man.\n\nIt is disingenuous to claim that the nature of a criminal act can be separated from that act’s effects on a victim. As the widely known common law maxim states, a victim should be taken as he is found. A reasonable adult citizen will not be excused from responsibility for what he knew to be a harmful criminal act simply because he did not foresee the extent or type of harm he would do.\n\nA judicial system that takes the concept of proportionality seriously should be free to decide that the consequences of a robbery committed against an impoverished, frail widow should result in a more severe sentence than a teenager’s impulsive attempt to shop-lift alcohol.\n\nSimilarly, the outcome of a wide ranging financial fraud is likely to be more harmful than the outcome of a fist fight between two drunken football fans.\n\nJudges are allowed to exercise discretion so that they can adapt the broad rules and objectives of sentencing to the nuances of each case brought before them. The context and consequences of criminal activity should inform sentencing decisions, not an artificially narrow definition of “violence”.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8a0194f9dbfa4d6c45e548b22565fb33",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Incarceration has symbolic value\n\nA custodial sentence has strong symbolic value, for offenders, for victims and for society as a whole.\n\nExclusion from society and confiscation of freedoms that the state would normally protect at any cost is a powerful message, one that can be understood easily by both white collar fraudsters and semi-literate muggers. There are few more effective ways of communicating society’s disapproval and indicating the boundaries of its tolerance.\n\nFor all side proposition’s talk of long term consequences and proportionality, there remain a significant number of offenders and potential offenders who would perceive the resolution as a weakness to be exploited. We give up the symbol of incarceration at the cost of emboldening criminals.\n\nConfidence in the state is founded on the state’s ability to protect its citizens and their property from physical harm. This is something on which all but the most extreme ends of the political spectrum would agree. Even if the state is no longer willing to wield violence against a criminal minority in protection of a law abiding majority, it should still be prepared to project the power that contemporary constitutional settlements have allowed it to retain. If it does not, the state risks being accused of forgetting its core duties in favour of more abstract notions of “harm”.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
69f86130dfef42784c6ca6d073a76729
|
The false distinction between “violent” and “non-violent” crime
Distinctions between violent and non-violent offences are not useful when deciding which offenders should be imprisoned and which should receive more lenient, rehabilitative sentences. The severity of a crime can only be defined by its context and consequences, not by semi-arbitrary labels such as violent and non-violent.
All forms of criminality, and not just violent crimes, can have disturbing and traumatic consequences. The effect of a robbery on the physical health and psychological stability of an elderly person can be as pronounced as the effects of a violent assault on a healthy young man.
It is disingenuous to claim that the nature of a criminal act can be separated from that act’s effects on a victim. As the widely known common law maxim states, a victim should be taken as he is found. A reasonable adult citizen will not be excused from responsibility for what he knew to be a harmful criminal act simply because he did not foresee the extent or type of harm he would do.
A judicial system that takes the concept of proportionality seriously should be free to decide that the consequences of a robbery committed against an impoverished, frail widow should result in a more severe sentence than a teenager’s impulsive attempt to shop-lift alcohol.
Similarly, the outcome of a wide ranging financial fraud is likely to be more harmful than the outcome of a fist fight between two drunken football fans.
Judges are allowed to exercise discretion so that they can adapt the broad rules and objectives of sentencing to the nuances of each case brought before them. The context and consequences of criminal activity should inform sentencing decisions, not an artificially narrow definition of “violence”.
|
[
{
"docid": "15a1b7291d0b61348e49bfb145e7ad35",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders The opposition argument assumes that punishment must be proportional only to the suffering caused to the victim of a particular crime. Opposition state that for a sentence to be truly proportionate, it must reflect the subjective responses of the victim. This analysis fails to acknowledge that the definition of proportionality extends beyond the victim.\n\nThe four objectives of criminal sentencing are complimentary, not mutually exclusive. The aspect of a sentence that seeks to punish should be proportionate to offender’s crime, but in addition, it must not obstruct the functioning of the other objectives of sentencing.\n\nA burglary may be upsetting for the victim, and incarceration of the burglar may seem a proportionate response. However, when that sentence is weighed against the imperative to rehabilitate the burglar, we discover that rehabilitation in prison would be less effective than rehab in a community setting. When custodial punishment is weighed against the imperative to protect the public, we discover that non-violent criminals who have been incarcerated are more likely to engage in violent crime following their release. The greater cost of incarceration- to the criminal and to the efficacy of the rehabilitative process- renders the sentence disproportionate.\n\nThe comparative popularity of imprisonment has distorted our understanding of which criminals it is most suited to.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "da7186e61e217027ae84dfc4ecb6cf0f",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders A modern liberal state’s duty is to pursue policies and promote values that will have a real and lasting impact on its citizen’s lives. The resolution is such a policy. The opposition’s argument has been tried and failed; in the US, ‘increasing punitive measures have failed to reduce criminal recidivism and instead have led to a rapidly growing correctional system that has strained government budgets’ [i] .\n\nPandering to populist thinking in the name of maintaining confidence in a particular government is a short-term strategy. It is an approach designed to win elections rather than bring about social change. The most effective way for a government to fulfil its obligation to protect its citizens is to reduce deviance effectively and efficiently, even if that change has to come at the expense of political capital.\n\nThe penal system operating under the status quo brutalises individuals and entrenches criminality in communities in the name of law and order.\n\n[i] Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J., “Rehabilitating Criminal Justice and Policy” in Psychology, Public Policy and Law (2010, Vol. 16, No.1). Page 39\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9f22791235437497e01ce21d6c27e23e",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Families and other social networks can play an important role in supporting and encouraging an offender as they rehabilitate. Wives, husbands and children can effectively monitor the behaviour of an offender when trained staff are unavailable. Given that the imprisonment of an adult family member is emotionally traumatic and financially damaging, families have a strong incentive to ensure that rehabilitation is successful.\n\nDisruptive family environments are also catered for by the proposition resolution. Where family breakdown is a cause of criminality, social workers and rehabilitation specialists will be able to “treat” the family alongside the offender. Underlying drug or alcohol addictions can be addressed. ‘Therapeutic programs’, as they are termed, enable offenders to be rehabilitated by and within the community in a ‘living-learning situation’ [i] .\n\nPrison on the other hand is an unsupportive environment where offenders are blamed for their behaviour and sometimes coerced into rehabilitation programs [ii] . In a prison context, an offender would be treated in isolation, without the opportunity to address underlying familial issues that might cause reoffending. Prison can be iatrogenic (increase risk) by removing offenders from their source of social support, families, jobs and accommodation; rehabilitation is more likely to be effective when it is used in conjunction with those factors, not apart from them. Furthermore, the available evidence suggests that prison staff hold ‘rather unsympathetic’ attitudes towards prisoners [iii] , inferring a culture unfavourable to effective rehabilitation.\n\nAlthough an offender may be prevented from committing crime for the duration of a prison sentence, this does not represent a significant advantage over the proposed resolution. For the reasons set out above, a prisoner released from a custodial sentence is likely to be incentivised to engage in crime (due to a lack of employment opportunities and social isolation), and will commit more serious types of crime.\n\n[i] Day, A., Casey, S., Vess, J. & Huisy, G., “Assessing the Social Climate of Prisons”, February 2, 2011 from Australia Institute of Criminology, Page 8/Page 32\n\n[ii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 300\n\n[iii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 294\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "544f54e978e0256b9b42b2bd2a3cea47",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Although prisoners may associate closely with other criminals within jail, many more offenders were introduced to crime outside prison. A deprived social background, a family life disrupted by domestic violence and family members with histories of criminal behaviour can all lead an individual to become involved with crime.\n\nFor many young men, prison can become a sanctuary from links with gangs or a chaotic and damaging home life. Once placed within the regulated, disciplined environment of the prison, they can be introduced to the essential skills and educational opportunities that they may have been denied in the outside world.\n\nPrison can give an individual the opportunity to develop the practical and psychological skills they require to escape social alienation. Many prisons in Europe, the UK and the States achieve this objective. US prisons may also operate special units that offer help and protection to offenders who want to leave gangs.\n\nUnder-staffing and a poor understanding of inmates’ needs are arguments for reform of the prison system, not arguments against incarceration itself. Where these issues are addressed, rehabilitation programmes have had many successes. Once political prejudices about building and funding rehabilitation oriented prisons are overcome, the benefits of penal supervision will become more accessible.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "149b92f80d4f62bf46a9df6fdf25ca8b",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders It is unrealistic to expect the police to act as the sole deterrent to criminal behaviour. The majority of police work concerns the detection rather than the prevention of crime. Only a massive and unfeasible expansion of police numbers and powers could provide a real deterrent to criminality.\n\nThe purpose of deterrence is to reduce the likelihood of damaging behaviour without dramatically raising the cost of enforcing the law. Deterrence relies on individuals acting in a rational manner and being able to regulate their own behaviour. Property crime often results from the offender performing a rational balancing of his likely gains against the likely costs of incarceration. Limiting the use of prison sentences means that calculating offenders will be much more likely to engage in property crime.\n\nFinally, the proposition is unable to deal with the threat posed by habitual and compulsive petty criminals. The actions of such individuals often straddle the boundary between outright criminality and anti-social behaviour. Their offences may never be severe enough to attract a penal sentence, but it is the continuous and repeated nature of their criminal acts that causes harm. Once again, the best response to such conduct is the forcible segregation of the offender inside a prison.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "99765a8e44f6a004e066bc809900469d",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders As noted above, the consequences of non-violent crimes can be just as damaging as those of violent crimes. More over, non-violent criminals can also present an immediate danger to society.\n\nThe cost of constructing a prison is outweighed by the benefit of preventing individuals from committing crimes. Rehabilitation programmes are not a panacea – they are not instantly or reliably effective. Even if an individual refuses to engage with any rehabilitative activities in prison, they are still restrained from engaging in further criminal activity.\n\nConsider the senior members of organised criminal syndicates. These individuals may only be involved in using deceptive accounting or front-companies to conceal the activities of their colleagues, but by doing so they enable and encourage multiple violent offences.\n\nSimilarly, drug dealers may create conditions in which social deprivation and family break-down flourish. As noted both above and on side proposition, these same conditions can cause others to turn to criminality. In this instance, drugs dealers can present a danger to their communities, and an obstacle to the rehabilitation of addicts. Arguably, the most effective solution to this particular form of criminal behaviour is the removal of the dealer from that community.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b9564746e0e8043c2699ec08e9192bcd",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders The victims of non-violent offences may suffer as much as the victims of violent offences. A large scale financial fraud, such as that perpetrated by Robert Maxwell or Bernard Madhoff, may deprive thousands of individuals of their savings and pensions, condemning them to a life of poverty. A petty drugs dealer may be supplying a habit that drives an addict to steal and attack others in order to find money.\n\nMoreover, fraud, deception and drug dealing draw on the same predatory, cynical and exploitative attitudes that motivate violent theft, organised crime and violent rape. An individual who has committed only non-violent offences is not necessarily in a better position to appreciate the harm that violence may do, or to understand that others may suffer as a result of his actions.\n\nIt may be proportional to hand down a severe prison sentence to a “white collar” criminal, who has abused a position of trust or wealth for personal gain. Such crimes are aggravated by the fact that their perpetrators have often led privileged, secure lives, free from the deprivation and poverty that drives most criminals. Confidence in the justice system may be harmed if it is felt that those of professional standing or a high social class are subjected to softer punishments.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "759653af8c36fc73546b3b8d8dfea94a",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Rehabilitation can only succeed in prison\n\nRehabilitation programmes are not a panacea – nor are they instantly or reliably effective. The risk of an individual committing crime can only be reduced by long-term engagement with such schemes.\n\nUnder these circumstances, the best location in which to rehabilitate offender is prison. Prison serves, in some cases, to separate prisoners from poverty and desperation, and to help them access training and education that they may have failed to engage with previously. Prison can also quarantine offenders from the influence of gangs and other sub-cultures that may compete with the positive behaviours fostered by rehabilitation. This is particularly the case for high risk offenders.\n\nIt seems ridiculous to assume that dramatic changes in an individual’s behaviour can be brought about without a correspondingly dramatic change in their environment and lifestyle. Criminality frequently develops as a survival strategy within hostile or chaotic social environments.\n\nFor many crimes, family may also be the root cause. Problematic relationship with relatives can further hinder the rehabilative process. How can we still expect family members to help facilitate the rehabilative process when they may be the reason reason why the offender committed crimes.\n\nIf there are minimal restraints put on an offender’s freedom while he rehabilitates, it will be easier for him to avoid complying with rehabilitation programmes. It will also be easier for the offender to avoid complying with other, more punitive measures, such as fines and community service orders.\n\nAs a last resort, a prison term prevents offenders who refuse to engage with rehabilitation from committing crimes for the length of their sentence. Given that a UK home office survey conduct in 2000 found that, on average, offenders committed 140 crimes a year, even a brief sentence represents a significant disruption of criminal activity [i] .\n\n[i] Civitas, Fighting Crime: Are Public Policies Working?, February 2010, p.1, http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/CrimeBriefingFeb2010.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8a0194f9dbfa4d6c45e548b22565fb33",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Incarceration has symbolic value\n\nA custodial sentence has strong symbolic value, for offenders, for victims and for society as a whole.\n\nExclusion from society and confiscation of freedoms that the state would normally protect at any cost is a powerful message, one that can be understood easily by both white collar fraudsters and semi-literate muggers. There are few more effective ways of communicating society’s disapproval and indicating the boundaries of its tolerance.\n\nFor all side proposition’s talk of long term consequences and proportionality, there remain a significant number of offenders and potential offenders who would perceive the resolution as a weakness to be exploited. We give up the symbol of incarceration at the cost of emboldening criminals.\n\nConfidence in the state is founded on the state’s ability to protect its citizens and their property from physical harm. This is something on which all but the most extreme ends of the political spectrum would agree. Even if the state is no longer willing to wield violence against a criminal minority in protection of a law abiding majority, it should still be prepared to project the power that contemporary constitutional settlements have allowed it to retain. If it does not, the state risks being accused of forgetting its core duties in favour of more abstract notions of “harm”.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ba7def8fe52a63649e5c61a530ab4b60",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Prisons create criminals\n\nThe prison environment is harmful to many offenders. Consider the risk of developing a drug or alcohol addiction while incarcerated in the UK (15% of the inmates of one of the UK’s largest jails tested positive for drugs in 2006) [i] ; the risk of being subjected to sexual violence in an US prison (217,000 prisoners were subjected to sexual violence in American prisons in 2008) [ii] ; the rise in gang motivated violence and killings within prisons on both sides of the Atlantic.\n\nPrison brings together individuals with a wide range of social and behavioural problems that incline them towards deviance and violence. These individuals are placed in closed conditions with restricted access to productive activities. In many western nations, a lack of funding and staff means that most prisoners have little to fill their time, and may be confined to their cells for up to twenty three hours a day. The privations of prison make prisoners more, rather than less likely to engage in violent or exploitative behaviour. Prisoners in overcrowded, understaffed jails are more likely to develop mental illnesses and less likely to have such conditions diagnosed and treated. The brutality of their surroundings makes prisoners more likely to seek the protection and comradeship offered by gangs or the comfort of intoxicants.\n\nFurthermore, the shame and isolation associated with incarceration cause prisoner’s non-criminal social networks to decay. Relationships with partners or spouses may break down. Contact with children may be limited. Families may shun the offender, leaving him with a social circle comprised mainly of fellow inmates. These associations can prove toxic, leading offenders to validate each other’s behaviour and share knowledge about criminal activities.\n\nFinally, the stigma of criminality extends to employment. Businesses may be unwilling to employ those with criminal records, limiting ex-offenders’ opportunities for social reintegration.\n\n[i] “Inspector finds gangs and high level of violence in jail”, The Guardian, 11 July 2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/jul/11/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation?INTCMP=SRCH\n\n[ii] “Combating rape in prisons”, The Economist, May 5 2011, http://www.economist.com/node/18651484\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f78f6d7e1910b32eef33ca7fecb6b35e",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Incarceration is expensive, rehabilitation is not\n\nMany of the rehabilitation and intervention schemes made available in prison are replicated in community settings by social services and charities. The cost of delivering these programmes in prison originates from the concept of prison itself. The expense of building, equipping, staffing and monitoring a prison vastly outweighs the cost of rehabilitative activities. Research conducted by Steve Aos has shown that rehabilitative programs designed to reduce crime can be cost-effective [i] .\n\nPrisons should be used only where the imperative to protect society from criminal behaviour cannot be met by the imperative to rehabilitate. A minority of offenders will be incorrigibly violent and uncontrollable, but under the status quo, these dangerous offenders not represent the majority of the prison population (see statistics above).\n\nThe yearly cost of incarcerating a young offender in the UK is now £140,000, almost three times the annual fee charged by an elite public school [ii] . Diverting this money to intervention programmes delivered to families, in homes and in schools would avoid the harms of incarceration (described above), while retaining the benefit of rehabilitation. The focus should therefore be prevention and early intervention rather than punishment.\n\n[i] Aos, S., The Comparative Costs and Benefits of Programs to Reduce Crime, Washington State Institute for Public Policy, May 2001, http://barry.mo.networkofcare.org/library/costbenefit.pdf\n\n[ii] “Punishing Costs” The New Economics Foundation, 2010, p18\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1afe3f17a61f0993a5d25b6e727aaee4",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Proportionality\n\nA recent study conducted among prisoners in Florida found that from 1997 to 2010 the proportion of new inmates who had committed violent crimes (collating both state and federal prisons statistics) fell by 28% [i] . Meanwhile, the number of first time prisoners who had committed non-violent offences rose by 189% [ii] .\n\nIt is argued that imprisoning individuals found to be guilty of non-violent crimes is a disproportionate response to their actions and does not serve the objectives of criminal sentencing set out above.\n\nCriminal sentences must deliver a punishment in proportion to the crime an offender has committed. A disproportionate sentence- using the death penalty to punish theft, for instance- is less likely to be perceived as a fair or rational response to criminal behaviour. An offender who is punished excessively is more likely to see himself as the victim of injustice, and less likely to consider the impact of his own conduct. A law abiding individual who that fears that jaywalking may result in jail time will have no confidence in the criminal justice system, and may begin seeking other sources of security.\n\nThere are many alternatives to penal sentences available to magistrates and judges. Using fines and curfews to restrict financial and personal liberty, alongside restorative forms of punishment such as community service, can provide a much more efficient way of condemning an individual’s criminal behaviour.\n\n[i] “Rough Justice in America”, The Economist, July 22 2010, http://www.economist.com/node/16636027\n\n[ii] “Rough Justice in America”, The Economist, July 22 2010, http://www.economist.com/node/16636027\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "874d54128a23caf6c582dcd455a2ca91",
"text": "crime policing punishment house would limit prison violent offenders Deterrence is a myth\n\nThe deterrent effect of prison is uniformly overstated. It is popularly thought that the indignity and strictness of the prison environment will discourage criminal behaviour. Further, exposure to the harsh realities of prison is thought to discourage former inmates from re-offending. These assumptions do not reflect most offenders’ reasoning, nor do they reflect the contexts in which most criminal behaviour occurs. Punishment of the type offered by prisons doesn’t meet the criteria for reinforcement of behaviour that one would associate with behaviour change; the punishment happens long after the behaviour, and is therefore futile [i] .\n\nFirstly, it should be noted that among many inmates, especially young men, criminal actions, including public order offences, assault and petty theft, are carried out on impulse. Impulsive behaviour is often influenced by alcohol and peer pressure. Under these circumstances, deterrence is ineffective.\n\nSecondly, empirical evidence indicates that it is the likelihood of being caught performing a criminal act, rather than the sentence for that crime, that deters potential offenders. If a potential offender believes he is more likely to be caught and convicted, he is less likely to engage in criminal behaviour. Meta-analyses such as the Cambridge Study on Deterrence [ii] have shown that the severity of a sentence only has a marginal effect on an offender’s decision to break the law.\n\nIn the light of these findings, deterrence can be seen as a matter of policing and detection, rather than a set of misleading assumptions based on an over-simplification of rational-actor theory.\n\n[i] Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J., “Rehabilitating Criminal Justice and Policy” in Psychology, Public Policy and Law (2010, Vol. 16, No.1). Page 42\n\n[ii] “Criminal deterrence and sentence severity: an analysis of recent research”, von Hirsch, A, and others\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
2128c960db9331542c92ea9c19b0797e
|
Judiciary are undermined
Should Guinea-Bissau become the new front of the US drug war then their judiciary will be furthered undermined. The US has frequently tried offenders from other countries in the US, superseding the local judiciary1. While this is usually due to formal agreements between states, extradition can cause indignation amongst the local population. Guinea-Bissau’s ex Naval chief Na Tchuto was arrested by American forces and, rather than allowing his home state to prosecute him, was tried by the New York District Court. This caused resentment in Guinea-Bissau towards the US2.
1) Aronofsky,D. & Qin,J. ‘U.S. International Narcotics Extradition Cases’
2) Reitano,T. & Shaw,M. ‘Arrest of Guinea-Bissau’s Drug Lords Just the First Step in the Battle Against Trafficking’, Institute for Security Studies, 12 August 2013
|
[
{
"docid": "bb709d393bd40c5bc30c957459cd71c4",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let The judicial system is not capable of handling narcotics cases fairly. Corruption and civil war have left Guinea-Bissau’s judicial system broken. Military leader General Antonio Indaj, who has alleged links to the drugs trade, has vetted all political and judicial appointments1. Considering that Guinea-Bissau has no prison, it is unlikely that those in the drug trade will be properly prosecuted. The US’ judicial system is seen as far more impartial and is, therefore, a more logical choice.\n\n1) Reitano,T. & Shaw,M. ‘Arrest of Guinea-Bissau’s Drug Lords Just the First Step in the Battle Against Trafficking’, Institute for Security Studies, 12 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "0b2917cceb4bc965965c0626cfa5ff57",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let It is only fair that the US should have some say on domestic drug policy considering the extent of their military assistance. The offers of assistance are optional and the conditions of compliance are known by both parties. The US gave $6,495 million in military assistance to the Columbian government between 1998 and 2008 to counter the narcotics trade and the rebels who were reliant on the business1. Since this funding comes from the USA’s federal budget, the US should be able to dictate how the money is spent.\n\n1) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "41dd092e66b7c8ffce8dc9d64dc9c398",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let There is a stronger focus on alternative development in drugs policy compared to the beginning of the drug war. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), historically influenced by US drug policy, has taken an increasingly alternative development-orientated stance. The UNODC has committed itself to effective alternative incomes, gender mainstreaming and community participation which demonstrates a global shift towards beneficial development1.\n\n1) United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime ‘Making a difference through Alternative Development’ data accessed 30 January 2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df5e6cca7dbc9e2c844000ba6d4e2f46",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Part of the financial assistance received by countries on the front line of the drug war is a fund for ‘strengthening of democratic institutions’. Plan Columbia, the USA’s attempt to reduce drug cultivation, saw 27% of all funding going towards democratic initiatives1. In a review by the Congressional Research Service of US drug control policy, the strengthening of the rule of law and democratic institutions is a priority for the US2. If the US drug war was brought to Guinea-Bissau then funding would most likely go towards promoting democratic institutions and a transition of power from the military to the civilians.\n\n1) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008\n\n2) Wyler,L. ‘International Drug Control Policy: Background and U.S. Responses’, Congressional Research Service, 13 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "69fb006da53cbb9897ed6fab6688088a",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Interdiction rarely works. If Guinea-Bissau were to remove illicit drug operations from within its territories then the cartels would move elsewhere. Known as the hydra effect, once one potential drug route is cut off then another one is found and the trade continues1. This was the case for interdiction efforts between the US and Mexico. Initial government operations were successful at interdicting drugs being shipped between South American and Florida. In retaliation, traffickers began to use the US-Mexico border. The border witnesses large volumes of trade and interdicting the drugs proved to be nearly impossible2. It is logical to conclude that traffickers would find a new way to ensure drugs reached the Western markets if Guinea-Bissau sought US assistance.\n\n1) Boaz,D. ‘The Hydra-Headed Drug Business’, CATO institute, 30 June 1998\n\n2) Morton,D. ‘The War on Drugs in Mexico: a failed state?’, Third World Quarterly,39:3, pg.1639\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2f2fcc410849177816e307a507bb1b41",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Considering that many of the military leaders have an invested interest in the drug trade, it is unlikely that Guinea-Bissau will seek help on these grounds. Antonio Indaj, the army’s Chief of Staff, was accused in 2013 of acting as a middle man in transactions between the South American cartels and the Western markets1. Not only has he been involved in drugs transactions, but Indaj has also been accessed of supplying weaponry to the FARC. This makes it unlikely that these leaders would want US assistance which would disrupt their profits and possibly leave them open to prosecution.\n\n1) Hoffman,M. ‘Guinea-Bissau and the South Atlantic Cocaine Trade’, Centre for American Progress, 22 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bfd4adf91ca3470918ec2309ee165b24",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Corruption is still present in many states which have joined the US drug war. The war on drugs has done little, and perhaps exacerbated, Columbia’s corruption despite US assistance. In 2011, Columbian ex-government ministers were jailed and prosecuted for corruption and co-operation with paramilitaries.1Judicial reforms have also met with varied success. The Merida Initiative in Mexico, designed at removing the corruption of the cartels, has failed to address corruption in the judicial system which is still rampant. 2\n\n1) Bogota,S. ‘Closer and closer to the top’, The Economist, 29 July 2011\n\n2) Corcoran,P. ‘Mexico Judicial Reforms Go Easy On Corrupt Judges’, In Sight Crime, 16 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5548e4674ebbda94d9567f8ba404c671",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let US assistance does not guarantee success against illicit drug organisations. Despite the militarisation of the drug war in the Reagan-era, armed gangs are still prominent throughout the drug world. In Columbia, the left wing FARC still remains despite decades of war against the Columbian and USA governments1. The FARC, who use drugs for much of its income, still control large territories in the South Eastern territories. The effectiveness of military aid is consequently uncertain.\n\n1) Acosta,N. ‘Colombia’s FARC rebels end holiday ceasefire’, Reuters, 15 January 2014\n\n2) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "886bbf0d0502b5f9f3afa0224957e478",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Sacrifice of sovereignty\n\nGuinea-Bissau would have to sacrifice its autonomy if it became the new front for the war on drugs. In order to receive assistance from the US, a state must adhere to US policy on drugs. If it fails to do so, like Bolivia did in 2009, then aid is severed under the certification system1. This restricts the recipient state’s ability to respond to the drug threat in a way that they deem suitable to their own circumstances. As a state should be free to form domestic policy without influence by external actors, the USA’s certification process is a violation of national sovereignty.\n\n1) Walsh,J. ‘U.S. Decertification of Bolivia: A Blast from the Past’, Washington Office on Latin America, 17 September 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "78dd9d7a0a4b38734731a6127b778491",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Gives power to military coup leaders\n\nAssistance from the US would ensure that the coup leaders of Guinea Bissau remain in power. The securitisation of issues such as drugs and ‘terror’ is encouraged by the United States. A major problem with this policy is that it provides undue power and legitimacy to those countering the threat1. In early 2014, the military were still unconstitutionally ruling over the country. The drug war provides an external threat for the military to justify their leadership position. Considering the military has refused to allow democratic elections to occur and has regularly committed coups2, the US drug war could be a perfect excuse for to remain in power until the ‘threat’ subsides.\n\n1) Crick,E. ‘Drugs as an existential threat: An analysis of the international securitization of drugs’, International Journal of Drug Policy, 2012\n\n2) BBC, ‘Guinea-Bissau drug trade ‘rises since coup’, 31 June 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1cc7628f15afe230ef78efebd87cf356",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let War on the poor\n\nThe war on drugs has turned in to a war on the poorest in society. Through heavy handed techniques of enforcement and militarisation, the American war on drugs has failed to identify to key motivating factor for many of those involved in the trade; poverty1. Guinea-Bissau is the 5th poorest nation in the world, and other primary exports such as cashew nuts are starting to fail1. Due to lucrative profits, many of the poorer in society turn to the drug trade. US policy does not put enough of a focus on alternative development projects which can provide a livelihood through licit means. Instead they are treated as criminals and, in turn, are pushed further away from reconciliation.\n\n1) Falco,M. ‘Foreign Drugs, Foreign Wars’, Daedalus, 121:2, 2007, pg4\n\n2) The Guardian, ‘Guinea-Bissau’s dwindling cashew nut exports leave farmers facing hardship’, 23 August 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "640dbebc74dd854280743a48fa76bf6d",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let US will provide equipment\n\nGuinea-Bissau should join the US drug war as they do not have the means to fight the war themselves. The local law enforcement is underfunded and ill-equipped to deal with the international threat. Guinea Bissau has one ship which patrols 350km of coastline, their officers have little in the way of land transport, petrol, phones or hand cuffs1. The limited reach of the law has allowed the cartels and gangs to prosper which, in turn, further damages law and order in Guinea Bissau. US military assistance will therefore help restore law and order to Guinea Bissau.\n\n1) Parkinson,C. ‘LatAm Drug Traffickers Set Up in Guinea-Bissau, Expand in Africa’, In Sight Crime, 29 August 2013\n\n2) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008Shirk,D. ‘The Drug War in Mexico’, Council of Foreign Relations, March 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "36fa782210010c6d4a0be499542359c8",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Becoming a narco-state\n\nGuinea-Bissau’s social fabric is being destroyed by the presence of the drug trade and requires international support. Guinea-Bissau has been named as Africa’s first Narco-state; a country controlled by drug cartels and gangs. Violence committed by these gangs has escalated since the arrival of the Columbian cartels in 20071. Addiction, a consequence of the cocaine and heroin use, is prevalent throughout much of the country. It was estimated in 2012 that around 20-30% of the population use crack, an extremely addictive form of cocaine, and there is only one clinic in the country2. The only people who are visibly profiting from the presence of drugs are the Columbian drug lords who have extravagant mansions and modern cars3. Guinea-Bissau cannot hope to fight the prominence of these gangs by themselves and require aid.\n\n1) Time, ‘Guinea-Bissau: World’s First Narco-State’, data accessed 28 January 2014\n\n2) Hatcher,J. ‘Guinea-Bissau: How Cocaine Transformed a Tiny African Nation’, Time, 15 October 2012\n\n3) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bf9338817353327e0bd90c0606b04a6e",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Prevent drugs from reaching Western markets\n\nBy joining the war on drugs, Guinea-Bissau will be in a better position to thwart the transportation of cheap cocaine and heroin to Europe and North America. Guinea-Bissau’s position makes it ideal for the cocaine trade, where drugs can be unloaded from Latin America and then distributed more easily to the West1. Around 18 tons of cocaine (worth $1.25 billion) passes through West Africa annually, most of it travelling through the state2. US assistance and interdiction operations would help prevent illicit drugs from reaching the profitable Western markets.\n\n1) Smoltczyk,A. ‘Africa’s Cocaine Hub: Guinea-Bissau a “Drug Trafficker’s Dream”, Spiegel, 8 March 2013\n\n2) Hoffman,M. ‘Guinea-Bissau and the South Atlantic Cocaine Trade’, Centre for American Progress, 22 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3e64f5990df4259d3a07cc87996562c3",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Deal with Corruption\n\nGuinea-Bissau’s institutions have become too corrupt to deal with the drug problem and require support. The police, army and judiciary have all been implicated in the drug trade. The involvement of state officials in drug trafficking means that criminals are not prosecuted against. When two soldiers and a civilian were apprehended with 635kg (worth £25.4 million in 2013), they were detained and then immediately released with Colonel Arsenio Blade claiming ‘They were on the road hitching a ride’1. Judges are often bribed or sent death threats when faced with sentencing those involved in the drug trade. The USA has provided restructuring assistance to institutions which have reduced corruption, such as in the Mexico Merida Initiative, and could do the same with Guinea Bissau.\n\n1) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n\n2) Corcoran,P. ‘Mexico Judicial Reforms Go Easy On Corrupt Judges’, In Sight Crime, 16 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
3dfda50e9b3e4132a06b73c4d71e1a22
|
US will provide equipment
Guinea-Bissau should join the US drug war as they do not have the means to fight the war themselves. The local law enforcement is underfunded and ill-equipped to deal with the international threat. Guinea Bissau has one ship which patrols 350km of coastline, their officers have little in the way of land transport, petrol, phones or hand cuffs1. The limited reach of the law has allowed the cartels and gangs to prosper which, in turn, further damages law and order in Guinea Bissau. US military assistance will therefore help restore law and order to Guinea Bissau.
1) Parkinson,C. ‘LatAm Drug Traffickers Set Up in Guinea-Bissau, Expand in Africa’, In Sight Crime, 29 August 2013
2) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008Shirk,D. ‘The Drug War in Mexico’, Council of Foreign Relations, March 2011
|
[
{
"docid": "5548e4674ebbda94d9567f8ba404c671",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let US assistance does not guarantee success against illicit drug organisations. Despite the militarisation of the drug war in the Reagan-era, armed gangs are still prominent throughout the drug world. In Columbia, the left wing FARC still remains despite decades of war against the Columbian and USA governments1. The FARC, who use drugs for much of its income, still control large territories in the South Eastern territories. The effectiveness of military aid is consequently uncertain.\n\n1) Acosta,N. ‘Colombia’s FARC rebels end holiday ceasefire’, Reuters, 15 January 2014\n\n2) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "69fb006da53cbb9897ed6fab6688088a",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Interdiction rarely works. If Guinea-Bissau were to remove illicit drug operations from within its territories then the cartels would move elsewhere. Known as the hydra effect, once one potential drug route is cut off then another one is found and the trade continues1. This was the case for interdiction efforts between the US and Mexico. Initial government operations were successful at interdicting drugs being shipped between South American and Florida. In retaliation, traffickers began to use the US-Mexico border. The border witnesses large volumes of trade and interdicting the drugs proved to be nearly impossible2. It is logical to conclude that traffickers would find a new way to ensure drugs reached the Western markets if Guinea-Bissau sought US assistance.\n\n1) Boaz,D. ‘The Hydra-Headed Drug Business’, CATO institute, 30 June 1998\n\n2) Morton,D. ‘The War on Drugs in Mexico: a failed state?’, Third World Quarterly,39:3, pg.1639\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2f2fcc410849177816e307a507bb1b41",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Considering that many of the military leaders have an invested interest in the drug trade, it is unlikely that Guinea-Bissau will seek help on these grounds. Antonio Indaj, the army’s Chief of Staff, was accused in 2013 of acting as a middle man in transactions between the South American cartels and the Western markets1. Not only has he been involved in drugs transactions, but Indaj has also been accessed of supplying weaponry to the FARC. This makes it unlikely that these leaders would want US assistance which would disrupt their profits and possibly leave them open to prosecution.\n\n1) Hoffman,M. ‘Guinea-Bissau and the South Atlantic Cocaine Trade’, Centre for American Progress, 22 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bfd4adf91ca3470918ec2309ee165b24",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Corruption is still present in many states which have joined the US drug war. The war on drugs has done little, and perhaps exacerbated, Columbia’s corruption despite US assistance. In 2011, Columbian ex-government ministers were jailed and prosecuted for corruption and co-operation with paramilitaries.1Judicial reforms have also met with varied success. The Merida Initiative in Mexico, designed at removing the corruption of the cartels, has failed to address corruption in the judicial system which is still rampant. 2\n\n1) Bogota,S. ‘Closer and closer to the top’, The Economist, 29 July 2011\n\n2) Corcoran,P. ‘Mexico Judicial Reforms Go Easy On Corrupt Judges’, In Sight Crime, 16 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0b2917cceb4bc965965c0626cfa5ff57",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let It is only fair that the US should have some say on domestic drug policy considering the extent of their military assistance. The offers of assistance are optional and the conditions of compliance are known by both parties. The US gave $6,495 million in military assistance to the Columbian government between 1998 and 2008 to counter the narcotics trade and the rebels who were reliant on the business1. Since this funding comes from the USA’s federal budget, the US should be able to dictate how the money is spent.\n\n1) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "41dd092e66b7c8ffce8dc9d64dc9c398",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let There is a stronger focus on alternative development in drugs policy compared to the beginning of the drug war. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), historically influenced by US drug policy, has taken an increasingly alternative development-orientated stance. The UNODC has committed itself to effective alternative incomes, gender mainstreaming and community participation which demonstrates a global shift towards beneficial development1.\n\n1) United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime ‘Making a difference through Alternative Development’ data accessed 30 January 2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb709d393bd40c5bc30c957459cd71c4",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let The judicial system is not capable of handling narcotics cases fairly. Corruption and civil war have left Guinea-Bissau’s judicial system broken. Military leader General Antonio Indaj, who has alleged links to the drugs trade, has vetted all political and judicial appointments1. Considering that Guinea-Bissau has no prison, it is unlikely that those in the drug trade will be properly prosecuted. The US’ judicial system is seen as far more impartial and is, therefore, a more logical choice.\n\n1) Reitano,T. & Shaw,M. ‘Arrest of Guinea-Bissau’s Drug Lords Just the First Step in the Battle Against Trafficking’, Institute for Security Studies, 12 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df5e6cca7dbc9e2c844000ba6d4e2f46",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Part of the financial assistance received by countries on the front line of the drug war is a fund for ‘strengthening of democratic institutions’. Plan Columbia, the USA’s attempt to reduce drug cultivation, saw 27% of all funding going towards democratic initiatives1. In a review by the Congressional Research Service of US drug control policy, the strengthening of the rule of law and democratic institutions is a priority for the US2. If the US drug war was brought to Guinea-Bissau then funding would most likely go towards promoting democratic institutions and a transition of power from the military to the civilians.\n\n1) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008\n\n2) Wyler,L. ‘International Drug Control Policy: Background and U.S. Responses’, Congressional Research Service, 13 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "36fa782210010c6d4a0be499542359c8",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Becoming a narco-state\n\nGuinea-Bissau’s social fabric is being destroyed by the presence of the drug trade and requires international support. Guinea-Bissau has been named as Africa’s first Narco-state; a country controlled by drug cartels and gangs. Violence committed by these gangs has escalated since the arrival of the Columbian cartels in 20071. Addiction, a consequence of the cocaine and heroin use, is prevalent throughout much of the country. It was estimated in 2012 that around 20-30% of the population use crack, an extremely addictive form of cocaine, and there is only one clinic in the country2. The only people who are visibly profiting from the presence of drugs are the Columbian drug lords who have extravagant mansions and modern cars3. Guinea-Bissau cannot hope to fight the prominence of these gangs by themselves and require aid.\n\n1) Time, ‘Guinea-Bissau: World’s First Narco-State’, data accessed 28 January 2014\n\n2) Hatcher,J. ‘Guinea-Bissau: How Cocaine Transformed a Tiny African Nation’, Time, 15 October 2012\n\n3) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bf9338817353327e0bd90c0606b04a6e",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Prevent drugs from reaching Western markets\n\nBy joining the war on drugs, Guinea-Bissau will be in a better position to thwart the transportation of cheap cocaine and heroin to Europe and North America. Guinea-Bissau’s position makes it ideal for the cocaine trade, where drugs can be unloaded from Latin America and then distributed more easily to the West1. Around 18 tons of cocaine (worth $1.25 billion) passes through West Africa annually, most of it travelling through the state2. US assistance and interdiction operations would help prevent illicit drugs from reaching the profitable Western markets.\n\n1) Smoltczyk,A. ‘Africa’s Cocaine Hub: Guinea-Bissau a “Drug Trafficker’s Dream”, Spiegel, 8 March 2013\n\n2) Hoffman,M. ‘Guinea-Bissau and the South Atlantic Cocaine Trade’, Centre for American Progress, 22 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3e64f5990df4259d3a07cc87996562c3",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Deal with Corruption\n\nGuinea-Bissau’s institutions have become too corrupt to deal with the drug problem and require support. The police, army and judiciary have all been implicated in the drug trade. The involvement of state officials in drug trafficking means that criminals are not prosecuted against. When two soldiers and a civilian were apprehended with 635kg (worth £25.4 million in 2013), they were detained and then immediately released with Colonel Arsenio Blade claiming ‘They were on the road hitching a ride’1. Judges are often bribed or sent death threats when faced with sentencing those involved in the drug trade. The USA has provided restructuring assistance to institutions which have reduced corruption, such as in the Mexico Merida Initiative, and could do the same with Guinea Bissau.\n\n1) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n\n2) Corcoran,P. ‘Mexico Judicial Reforms Go Easy On Corrupt Judges’, In Sight Crime, 16 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "886bbf0d0502b5f9f3afa0224957e478",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Sacrifice of sovereignty\n\nGuinea-Bissau would have to sacrifice its autonomy if it became the new front for the war on drugs. In order to receive assistance from the US, a state must adhere to US policy on drugs. If it fails to do so, like Bolivia did in 2009, then aid is severed under the certification system1. This restricts the recipient state’s ability to respond to the drug threat in a way that they deem suitable to their own circumstances. As a state should be free to form domestic policy without influence by external actors, the USA’s certification process is a violation of national sovereignty.\n\n1) Walsh,J. ‘U.S. Decertification of Bolivia: A Blast from the Past’, Washington Office on Latin America, 17 September 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "586b1b0fc59f4404080b4ba0b5e6d347",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Judiciary are undermined\n\nShould Guinea-Bissau become the new front of the US drug war then their judiciary will be furthered undermined. The US has frequently tried offenders from other countries in the US, superseding the local judiciary1. While this is usually due to formal agreements between states, extradition can cause indignation amongst the local population. Guinea-Bissau’s ex Naval chief Na Tchuto was arrested by American forces and, rather than allowing his home state to prosecute him, was tried by the New York District Court. This caused resentment in Guinea-Bissau towards the US2.\n\n1) Aronofsky,D. & Qin,J. ‘U.S. International Narcotics Extradition Cases’\n\n2) Reitano,T. & Shaw,M. ‘Arrest of Guinea-Bissau’s Drug Lords Just the First Step in the Battle Against Trafficking’, Institute for Security Studies, 12 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "78dd9d7a0a4b38734731a6127b778491",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Gives power to military coup leaders\n\nAssistance from the US would ensure that the coup leaders of Guinea Bissau remain in power. The securitisation of issues such as drugs and ‘terror’ is encouraged by the United States. A major problem with this policy is that it provides undue power and legitimacy to those countering the threat1. In early 2014, the military were still unconstitutionally ruling over the country. The drug war provides an external threat for the military to justify their leadership position. Considering the military has refused to allow democratic elections to occur and has regularly committed coups2, the US drug war could be a perfect excuse for to remain in power until the ‘threat’ subsides.\n\n1) Crick,E. ‘Drugs as an existential threat: An analysis of the international securitization of drugs’, International Journal of Drug Policy, 2012\n\n2) BBC, ‘Guinea-Bissau drug trade ‘rises since coup’, 31 June 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1cc7628f15afe230ef78efebd87cf356",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let War on the poor\n\nThe war on drugs has turned in to a war on the poorest in society. Through heavy handed techniques of enforcement and militarisation, the American war on drugs has failed to identify to key motivating factor for many of those involved in the trade; poverty1. Guinea-Bissau is the 5th poorest nation in the world, and other primary exports such as cashew nuts are starting to fail1. Due to lucrative profits, many of the poorer in society turn to the drug trade. US policy does not put enough of a focus on alternative development projects which can provide a livelihood through licit means. Instead they are treated as criminals and, in turn, are pushed further away from reconciliation.\n\n1) Falco,M. ‘Foreign Drugs, Foreign Wars’, Daedalus, 121:2, 2007, pg4\n\n2) The Guardian, ‘Guinea-Bissau’s dwindling cashew nut exports leave farmers facing hardship’, 23 August 2012\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
36937d767ab4aa25cfdb67aa0e51535a
|
Deal with Corruption
Guinea-Bissau’s institutions have become too corrupt to deal with the drug problem and require support. The police, army and judiciary have all been implicated in the drug trade. The involvement of state officials in drug trafficking means that criminals are not prosecuted against. When two soldiers and a civilian were apprehended with 635kg (worth £25.4 million in 2013), they were detained and then immediately released with Colonel Arsenio Blade claiming ‘They were on the road hitching a ride’1. Judges are often bribed or sent death threats when faced with sentencing those involved in the drug trade. The USA has provided restructuring assistance to institutions which have reduced corruption, such as in the Mexico Merida Initiative, and could do the same with Guinea Bissau.
1) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008
2) Corcoran,P. ‘Mexico Judicial Reforms Go Easy On Corrupt Judges’, In Sight Crime, 16 February 2012
|
[
{
"docid": "bfd4adf91ca3470918ec2309ee165b24",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Corruption is still present in many states which have joined the US drug war. The war on drugs has done little, and perhaps exacerbated, Columbia’s corruption despite US assistance. In 2011, Columbian ex-government ministers were jailed and prosecuted for corruption and co-operation with paramilitaries.1Judicial reforms have also met with varied success. The Merida Initiative in Mexico, designed at removing the corruption of the cartels, has failed to address corruption in the judicial system which is still rampant. 2\n\n1) Bogota,S. ‘Closer and closer to the top’, The Economist, 29 July 2011\n\n2) Corcoran,P. ‘Mexico Judicial Reforms Go Easy On Corrupt Judges’, In Sight Crime, 16 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "69fb006da53cbb9897ed6fab6688088a",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Interdiction rarely works. If Guinea-Bissau were to remove illicit drug operations from within its territories then the cartels would move elsewhere. Known as the hydra effect, once one potential drug route is cut off then another one is found and the trade continues1. This was the case for interdiction efforts between the US and Mexico. Initial government operations were successful at interdicting drugs being shipped between South American and Florida. In retaliation, traffickers began to use the US-Mexico border. The border witnesses large volumes of trade and interdicting the drugs proved to be nearly impossible2. It is logical to conclude that traffickers would find a new way to ensure drugs reached the Western markets if Guinea-Bissau sought US assistance.\n\n1) Boaz,D. ‘The Hydra-Headed Drug Business’, CATO institute, 30 June 1998\n\n2) Morton,D. ‘The War on Drugs in Mexico: a failed state?’, Third World Quarterly,39:3, pg.1639\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2f2fcc410849177816e307a507bb1b41",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Considering that many of the military leaders have an invested interest in the drug trade, it is unlikely that Guinea-Bissau will seek help on these grounds. Antonio Indaj, the army’s Chief of Staff, was accused in 2013 of acting as a middle man in transactions between the South American cartels and the Western markets1. Not only has he been involved in drugs transactions, but Indaj has also been accessed of supplying weaponry to the FARC. This makes it unlikely that these leaders would want US assistance which would disrupt their profits and possibly leave them open to prosecution.\n\n1) Hoffman,M. ‘Guinea-Bissau and the South Atlantic Cocaine Trade’, Centre for American Progress, 22 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5548e4674ebbda94d9567f8ba404c671",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let US assistance does not guarantee success against illicit drug organisations. Despite the militarisation of the drug war in the Reagan-era, armed gangs are still prominent throughout the drug world. In Columbia, the left wing FARC still remains despite decades of war against the Columbian and USA governments1. The FARC, who use drugs for much of its income, still control large territories in the South Eastern territories. The effectiveness of military aid is consequently uncertain.\n\n1) Acosta,N. ‘Colombia’s FARC rebels end holiday ceasefire’, Reuters, 15 January 2014\n\n2) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0b2917cceb4bc965965c0626cfa5ff57",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let It is only fair that the US should have some say on domestic drug policy considering the extent of their military assistance. The offers of assistance are optional and the conditions of compliance are known by both parties. The US gave $6,495 million in military assistance to the Columbian government between 1998 and 2008 to counter the narcotics trade and the rebels who were reliant on the business1. Since this funding comes from the USA’s federal budget, the US should be able to dictate how the money is spent.\n\n1) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "41dd092e66b7c8ffce8dc9d64dc9c398",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let There is a stronger focus on alternative development in drugs policy compared to the beginning of the drug war. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), historically influenced by US drug policy, has taken an increasingly alternative development-orientated stance. The UNODC has committed itself to effective alternative incomes, gender mainstreaming and community participation which demonstrates a global shift towards beneficial development1.\n\n1) United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime ‘Making a difference through Alternative Development’ data accessed 30 January 2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb709d393bd40c5bc30c957459cd71c4",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let The judicial system is not capable of handling narcotics cases fairly. Corruption and civil war have left Guinea-Bissau’s judicial system broken. Military leader General Antonio Indaj, who has alleged links to the drugs trade, has vetted all political and judicial appointments1. Considering that Guinea-Bissau has no prison, it is unlikely that those in the drug trade will be properly prosecuted. The US’ judicial system is seen as far more impartial and is, therefore, a more logical choice.\n\n1) Reitano,T. & Shaw,M. ‘Arrest of Guinea-Bissau’s Drug Lords Just the First Step in the Battle Against Trafficking’, Institute for Security Studies, 12 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df5e6cca7dbc9e2c844000ba6d4e2f46",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Part of the financial assistance received by countries on the front line of the drug war is a fund for ‘strengthening of democratic institutions’. Plan Columbia, the USA’s attempt to reduce drug cultivation, saw 27% of all funding going towards democratic initiatives1. In a review by the Congressional Research Service of US drug control policy, the strengthening of the rule of law and democratic institutions is a priority for the US2. If the US drug war was brought to Guinea-Bissau then funding would most likely go towards promoting democratic institutions and a transition of power from the military to the civilians.\n\n1) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008\n\n2) Wyler,L. ‘International Drug Control Policy: Background and U.S. Responses’, Congressional Research Service, 13 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "640dbebc74dd854280743a48fa76bf6d",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let US will provide equipment\n\nGuinea-Bissau should join the US drug war as they do not have the means to fight the war themselves. The local law enforcement is underfunded and ill-equipped to deal with the international threat. Guinea Bissau has one ship which patrols 350km of coastline, their officers have little in the way of land transport, petrol, phones or hand cuffs1. The limited reach of the law has allowed the cartels and gangs to prosper which, in turn, further damages law and order in Guinea Bissau. US military assistance will therefore help restore law and order to Guinea Bissau.\n\n1) Parkinson,C. ‘LatAm Drug Traffickers Set Up in Guinea-Bissau, Expand in Africa’, In Sight Crime, 29 August 2013\n\n2) Acevedo,B. ‘Ten Years of Plan Colombia: An Analytical Assessment’, The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, September 2008Shirk,D. ‘The Drug War in Mexico’, Council of Foreign Relations, March 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "36fa782210010c6d4a0be499542359c8",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Becoming a narco-state\n\nGuinea-Bissau’s social fabric is being destroyed by the presence of the drug trade and requires international support. Guinea-Bissau has been named as Africa’s first Narco-state; a country controlled by drug cartels and gangs. Violence committed by these gangs has escalated since the arrival of the Columbian cartels in 20071. Addiction, a consequence of the cocaine and heroin use, is prevalent throughout much of the country. It was estimated in 2012 that around 20-30% of the population use crack, an extremely addictive form of cocaine, and there is only one clinic in the country2. The only people who are visibly profiting from the presence of drugs are the Columbian drug lords who have extravagant mansions and modern cars3. Guinea-Bissau cannot hope to fight the prominence of these gangs by themselves and require aid.\n\n1) Time, ‘Guinea-Bissau: World’s First Narco-State’, data accessed 28 January 2014\n\n2) Hatcher,J. ‘Guinea-Bissau: How Cocaine Transformed a Tiny African Nation’, Time, 15 October 2012\n\n3) Vulliamy,E. ‘How a tiny West African country became the world’s first narco state’, The Guardian, 9 March 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bf9338817353327e0bd90c0606b04a6e",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Prevent drugs from reaching Western markets\n\nBy joining the war on drugs, Guinea-Bissau will be in a better position to thwart the transportation of cheap cocaine and heroin to Europe and North America. Guinea-Bissau’s position makes it ideal for the cocaine trade, where drugs can be unloaded from Latin America and then distributed more easily to the West1. Around 18 tons of cocaine (worth $1.25 billion) passes through West Africa annually, most of it travelling through the state2. US assistance and interdiction operations would help prevent illicit drugs from reaching the profitable Western markets.\n\n1) Smoltczyk,A. ‘Africa’s Cocaine Hub: Guinea-Bissau a “Drug Trafficker’s Dream”, Spiegel, 8 March 2013\n\n2) Hoffman,M. ‘Guinea-Bissau and the South Atlantic Cocaine Trade’, Centre for American Progress, 22 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "886bbf0d0502b5f9f3afa0224957e478",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Sacrifice of sovereignty\n\nGuinea-Bissau would have to sacrifice its autonomy if it became the new front for the war on drugs. In order to receive assistance from the US, a state must adhere to US policy on drugs. If it fails to do so, like Bolivia did in 2009, then aid is severed under the certification system1. This restricts the recipient state’s ability to respond to the drug threat in a way that they deem suitable to their own circumstances. As a state should be free to form domestic policy without influence by external actors, the USA’s certification process is a violation of national sovereignty.\n\n1) Walsh,J. ‘U.S. Decertification of Bolivia: A Blast from the Past’, Washington Office on Latin America, 17 September 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "586b1b0fc59f4404080b4ba0b5e6d347",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Judiciary are undermined\n\nShould Guinea-Bissau become the new front of the US drug war then their judiciary will be furthered undermined. The US has frequently tried offenders from other countries in the US, superseding the local judiciary1. While this is usually due to formal agreements between states, extradition can cause indignation amongst the local population. Guinea-Bissau’s ex Naval chief Na Tchuto was arrested by American forces and, rather than allowing his home state to prosecute him, was tried by the New York District Court. This caused resentment in Guinea-Bissau towards the US2.\n\n1) Aronofsky,D. & Qin,J. ‘U.S. International Narcotics Extradition Cases’\n\n2) Reitano,T. & Shaw,M. ‘Arrest of Guinea-Bissau’s Drug Lords Just the First Step in the Battle Against Trafficking’, Institute for Security Studies, 12 August 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "78dd9d7a0a4b38734731a6127b778491",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let Gives power to military coup leaders\n\nAssistance from the US would ensure that the coup leaders of Guinea Bissau remain in power. The securitisation of issues such as drugs and ‘terror’ is encouraged by the United States. A major problem with this policy is that it provides undue power and legitimacy to those countering the threat1. In early 2014, the military were still unconstitutionally ruling over the country. The drug war provides an external threat for the military to justify their leadership position. Considering the military has refused to allow democratic elections to occur and has regularly committed coups2, the US drug war could be a perfect excuse for to remain in power until the ‘threat’ subsides.\n\n1) Crick,E. ‘Drugs as an existential threat: An analysis of the international securitization of drugs’, International Journal of Drug Policy, 2012\n\n2) BBC, ‘Guinea-Bissau drug trade ‘rises since coup’, 31 June 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1cc7628f15afe230ef78efebd87cf356",
"text": "rnational africa law crime policing house believes guinea bissau should not let War on the poor\n\nThe war on drugs has turned in to a war on the poorest in society. Through heavy handed techniques of enforcement and militarisation, the American war on drugs has failed to identify to key motivating factor for many of those involved in the trade; poverty1. Guinea-Bissau is the 5th poorest nation in the world, and other primary exports such as cashew nuts are starting to fail1. Due to lucrative profits, many of the poorer in society turn to the drug trade. US policy does not put enough of a focus on alternative development projects which can provide a livelihood through licit means. Instead they are treated as criminals and, in turn, are pushed further away from reconciliation.\n\n1) Falco,M. ‘Foreign Drugs, Foreign Wars’, Daedalus, 121:2, 2007, pg4\n\n2) The Guardian, ‘Guinea-Bissau’s dwindling cashew nut exports leave farmers facing hardship’, 23 August 2012\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
44936274b1770b243282a76a84693a1c
|
A curfew is practical.
Very few children are going to be out late at night without an adult or very good reason. This helps make curfews enforceable as the police will be patrolling anyway, and any responsible adult can report children who are out after curfew. The curfew could therefore be for all young people, defined as those under the age of 18, beginning at 10pm on both weeknights and weekends and ending at sunrise, with the exceptions like those noted in the introduction. Curfew violations are punishable by fines and penalty assessments. In Los Angeles these total $675, and violations may also result in community service and driver's license restrictions. The amount can vary with Philadelphia only having a $250 fine. 1
1. Findlaw
|
[
{
"docid": "fd86b418b1d2d8174329fa6517edc8cc",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews are not enforceable even if they are well known by residents and anyone can report those breaking curfew. It simply means that young people are trying to avoid the police so that they do not get fined. The police are only ever likely to catch a small number of those who are violating the curfew resulting in there being little deterrence.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "adadb8002a888363a55f82d9deb5b9bf",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Although protecting children domestic abuse is of vital importance curfews are not the most appropriate way of doing so. Problems at home may be the reason the young person spends so much time out on the streets in the first place. If that is the case, it could be dangerous to force them to stay where they may be at risk of abuse. Also, curfews infringe upon the rights of parents to bring up their children as they choose. Simply because we dislike the way some parents treat their children should not mean that we intervene to stop it; should we intervene in families where conservative religious beliefs are preached? 1\n\n1 Hidden Hurt\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6333b9dde9e44ee3d48469ab3d0fa8e6",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Children in their mid-teens have many legitimate reasons to be out at night without adults. Many will have part-time jobs, for example in fast-food restaurants or delivering newspapers. Others will wish to participate in activities such as church groups, youth clubs or school trip. Whilst there are clauses for allowing such activity, the fear of not being believed would be a serious chilling effect on uptake. Requiring adults always to take them to and from such activities is unreasonable and will ensure that many never take place in the first place, either because adults are unwilling, or are unable to do so.1\n\n1. NYRA,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0f292b604b8c93f2380fcf13342eeba6",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews A number of alternative strategies exist which are likely to do more to reduce youth crime. For example, rather than a blanket curfew covering all young people, individual curfews could be imposed upon particular trouble-makers, perhaps involving electronic tagging, breaking up gangs without labelling an entire age-group as criminal. A Scottish scheme puts plenty of police officers on the streets at night with a brief to engage with young people, deterring crime while steering them towards a range of youth activities available at clubs set up by the local council.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ec77f50bea5562839029b1062c2ef678",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews are largely ineffective in preventing crime. Curfews do not target the right times of day as most juvenile crime appears to take place between 3 p.m. and 8 p.m., after the end of school and before working parents return home, rather than in the hours covered by curfews. There are many reports providing evidence that juvenile curfews do not have a significant effect upon crime figures.\n\nIn addition, although society does have a problem with youth behaviour, although it is not as bad as the newspapers make out. What is often labelled anti-social behaviour today was considered normal for kids in the past – things like playing football in the street, going around in groups without an adult in charge, making a bit of noise sometimes, etc. We need to be careful to draw a line between things that some people don’t like, and actual crime.1\n\n1 Adams, 2010.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d114ec557c5feb2aea2fd4d2b3a652a8",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews are easy to police compared to other forms of crime prevention, and are therefore effective. Child curfews can help to the police to establish a climate of zero tolerance and to create a safer community for everyone.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cf9db026302ac44aeb474dbbdb3374ed",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Child curfews can help to change a negative youth culture in which challenging the law is seen as desirable and gang membership an aspiration. Impressionable youngsters would be kept away from gang activity on the streets at night and a cycle of admiration and recruitment would be broken ‘in the hope that we can stop them from getting so far into trouble that they end up in the criminal justice system.1’ By spending more time with their families and in more positive activities, such as sports and youth clubs, which curfews make a more attractive option for bored youngsters, greater self-esteem and discipline can be developed.\n\n1. BBC News, 2009,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3baa13250834f314df04cdae94a51c88",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Child curfews are an important form of zero tolerance policing, showing that a community will not allow an atmosphere of lawlessness to develop. Paul McKeever, Chairman of the Police Federation in England and Wales, argues that: ‘“It would send out the message that we are serious that the criminal justice system has the power to impose immediate sanctions for bad behaviour and that “no” will mean “no”. At the moment no is negotiable.1”The idea of zero tolerance comes from the theory that if low-level crimes, like graffiti-spraying, window breaking and drug-dealing (all common juvenile offences) are not acted against swiftly and effectively by the police, then a permissive atmosphere is created where violence and other serious crimes flourish and law and order breaks down entirely.\n\n1. McKeever, 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "377801e9e533311069f886b41731179b",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews do not harmfully restrict childrens’ rights to participation in activities and actually supports their right to a safe home and neighbourhood environment: ‘The curfew law has several exceptions. Youths can be out after hours if they are with a parent or guardian or doing errands at a parent or guardian's direction. They also can be at work or attending an official school, religious or recreational activity.’ 1If family breakdown means parents lose control, and in cases where parents can’t be bothered, then the police should step in. If the state has the right to take children away from cruel parents to protect them, then it also has the right to protect everyone else from dangerous youths. Most importantly, we can trust the police not to abuse this power. Our police are sworn to uphold the law and protect people, and trained to respect everyone’s rights.\n\n1. Dvorak and Greenwell, 2006\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4a09be21e0dca46d41e6f9c569d6394b",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews also have an important role in the protection of vulnerable children\n\nThe use of child curfews can help to protect vulnerable children. Although responsible parents do not let young children out in the streets after dark, not all parents are responsible and inevitably their children suffer, both from crime and in accidents, and are likely to fall into bad habits. Sir Ian Blair former chief commissioner of the Metropolitan police argued that curfews were aimed at safeguarding youngsters and stopping gangs causing trouble.1 Society should ensure that such neglected children are returned home safely and that their parents are made to face up to their responsibilities.2\n\n1. Rosie Cowan, 2004,\n\n2. Ward, 2000,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3f42a7822a8076014ddc8b594403a723",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews It is best for children to be at home in the evening.\n\nThere is no good reason for children to be out unaccompanied late at night, so a curfew is not really a restriction upon their liberty. Where the child does have good reasons to be out they can be covered by the exceptions. They would be better off at home doing schoolwork, schools often set more than an hour a night which the children should be doing. The time would also be better spent interacting with the rest of their family.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e68723047d1976fbe1245ef0789bcd08",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews The main objective of curfews is usually crime prevention.\n\nYouth crime is a major and growing problem, often involving both drugs and violence. Particularly worrying is the rise of youth gangs who can terrorise urban areas and create a social climate in which criminality becomes a norm. Imposing youth curfews can help to solve these problems, as they keep young people off the street, and therefore out of trouble, and prevent them from congregating in the hours of darkness. Police in Philadelphia have found curfews effective in the prevention of gang violence: ‘the measure has been successful in helping to curb violent attacks by teen mobs that had severely injured several people in recent months, city officials said.’ 1\n\n1. Associated Press, 2011,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ab91af64a96c131e5f21a778767e5665",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews are most effective when used a short-term aid to other policing measures.\n\nOther schemes aimed at reducing youth crime are highly effective but work best in conjunction with curfews. As the National Crime Prevention Council states: ‘A curfew alone won’t stop crime. More preventive measures, including recreational activities and job opportunities, are needed to reach out to young people and keep them from committing crimes.’ 1 In areas with a whole culture of lawlessness a curfew takes the basically law-abiding majority off the streets, allowing the police to engage with the most difficult element. Curfews are a tool in the struggle to improve lives in run-down areas; they often used for relatively short periods of a few weeks or months in order to bring a situation under control so that other measures can be put in place and given a chance to work.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e1be80d0392adbcaf2f3b28f8898e79f",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews compromise children's rights.\n\nYouth curfews infringe upon individual rights and liberties. Children have a right to freedom of movement and assembly which curfews directly undermine, by criminalising their simple presence in a public space. They are also subject to blanket discrimination on the grounds of age and the underlying assumption that all young people are potential law-breakers. It has been established in US law in the 1976 case of Missouri v Danforth that everyone has full constitutional rights regardless of age. Thus, curfews violate the fifth amendment which guarantees a right to free movement and due process. Comparable legal principles exist in most liberal states, and there is no reason to treat children as having less substantive rights to free movement. 1\n\nYouth curfews have great potential for abuse, raising civil rights issues. Evidence from U.S. cities suggests that police arrest far more black children than white for curfew violations. Curfews will tend to be imposed upon poor areas in inner cities with few places for children to amuse themselves safely and within the law, compounding social exclusion with physical exclusion from public spaces. These problems will also be made worse by the inevitable deterioration in relations between the police and the young people subject to the curfew.\n\n1. Vissing, Y. (2011). Curfews. In: Chambliss, W., eds. Juvenile Crime and Justice. London, SAGE publications, Ch. 5. P.62\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cd432a2d4a3d9cc72dacf18786c57288",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Positive engagement would be more effective than curfews.\n\nOther successful schemes aim to work individually with young troublemakers, in order to cut their reoffending rate, for example by requiring them to meet with victims of crime so that they understand the consequences of their actions, and by pairing them with trained mentors. Overall, governments need to ensure good educational opportunities and employment prospects in order to bring optimism to communities where youngsters feel that their futures are pretty hopeless.\n\nRather than trying to scare kids into good behaviour, why don’t we offer them a better life? Most areas with anti-social behaviour problems are poor, with bad schools, few jobs and little for kids to do with themselves. With little hope for the future, no wonder some kids go off the rails. So instead of threatening punishment, we should invest in better schools, places for kids to play and socialise, and the chance of a job.1\n\n1. The Observer, 2004\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "23dc4ab55891ca68e2410da6b67ebdf8",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews are ineffective.\n\nCurfews are not an effective solution to the problem of youth crime; research in the USA suggests that there is no link between areas that achieved a reduction in juvenile crime and areas with youth curfews. Paul McKeever, Chairman of the Police Federation in England and Wales points out that curfews are an unrealistic scheme: ‘It is fantasy to believe the police could impose an immediate sanction for somebody to stay in their home for four weeks without any kind of due process.’ 1Although some places did see a reduction in youth crime, this often had more to do with other strategies, such as zero-tolerance policing.\n\n1. McKeever, 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6c08cfc59fd4085e42ec805711fd16e6",
"text": "crime policing punishment family minorities youth house would introduce child curfews Curfews are counter-productive.\n\nImposing child curfews would actually be counter-productive, as it would increase juvenile offending by turning millions of generally law-abiding young people into criminals. The Executive director of D.C. Alliance of Youth Advocates argues that ‘\"This tells young people they're the problem, not part of the solution\".’ 1Already in the USA, more children are charged with curfew offences than with any other crime. Yet once children acquire a criminal record they cross a psychological boundary, making it much more likely that they will perceive themselves as criminal and have much less respect for the law in general, leading to more serious forms of offending. At the same time a criminal record harms their opportunities in employment and so increases the social deprivation and desperation which breed crime.\n\n1. Dvorak and Greenwell, 2006\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
0f21acd7bcb59d447fd82892a18bab09
|
Individuals should only be held responsible for the consequences of their own actions
In any free and democratic society, criminal law should only hold people accountable for the things they do, not for the actions of others. We are all autonomous, moral agents who make decisions and have to live with their consequences and the consequences of our actions. While it might be justified to punish bullies for their bullying behavior, if it breaks the law, we cannot hold them accountable for another person’s decision to commit suicide.
|
[
{
"docid": "6a7818b099557f3c9c8c07ea2c276b09",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally Under this law, bullies would be held accountable for their own actions, not those of the victim. The law wouldn’t have to equate them with murderers, punish them as harshly, or suggest they bear sole and full responsibility for the victim’s death. But it would make it clear they bear some responsibility for the outcome, and that they should be punished for their role. If they are children, they can be prosecuted as juvenile offenders and given less harsh punishments, like community service.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "489e2d67fa8ce08ca7d66e0d20ae44ee",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally Prosecutions of bullies responsible for suicides, and improved safety in schools are not mutually exclusive goals. Programmes need to be set up that stop bullying early on, give victims support, and people to turn to when they are in need. Schools and their administrators can and should also be held accountable to their boards, and the community. But in those cases where tragedies still happen in spite of such measures, the culprits should be held to account.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da6f74bca276a24fa1aa44fffe494d6f",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally Of course there will always be ambiguous cases. That is why we have trials, and rights for the defendant. The weight of the evidence presented in court should establish what degree of culpability, if any, the bullies had. If the prosecution does not have a solid case to present, it may even choose not to prosecute. But the law should be in place for those cases where it is needed.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cd494767ea847583b3a731aae2b5191f",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally We criminalize behaviour when it is truly harmful. Especially when it is so harmful that it leads to someone losing her life. Eye rolling and gossip are not harmful enough to be criminal offences. Nor would they be under this law. What would become a criminal offence would be the sustained and prolonged torment of another person to the point of pushing her to committing suicide, whatever forms that torment takes, whether it’s gay slurs, or physical threats and insults. It has also long been established that there are limits to the freedom of speech or expression we enjoy, if that can result in the direct harm of others. For example, we don’t allow people to incite violence against others.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e9d6c412c40eac8793866930b5f9cf90",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally Bullies are often children, most of them in their teens. However, they are at an age where they do know right from wrong and can, therefore, be held accountable for their actions. Neither their young age nor their own suffering can justify bearing responsibility for someone else’s death. Most criminal justice systems recognize that children are liable for their behaviour, by allowing children as young as 10, in the UK for example, to be charged with criminal offences. Their age and personal situation can, nevertheless, be taken into account in deciding what punishment they should receive (prison, community service, a fine, etc.). And there is no reason why rehabilitation and education cannot be part, or even the focus, of that punishment.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3c6c13d4deaefa3e2e398b5cddf721df",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally There is a fundamental difference between someone’s actions directly resulting in another person’s death and the case of bullying. In the case of manslaughter, the victim never had a choice. The perpetrator is solely responsible for what happened. But some victims of bullying take a decision to kill themselves, while others do not. The bully cannot be held responsible for someone else’s decision and action, only for her own.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7e27ed2adef89f16fa4ad29b5fad9302",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally The laws are inadequate because it is very hard to define bullying. Almost any act or gesture can constitute bullying depending the victim’s subjective experience of it. Criminalizing bullying would lead to criminalizing behaviour that would be considered normal by most standards.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "21fff1c1e1046ce8e9073349e2f48951",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally We should always focus on stopping the behaviour before it escalates to the point of the victim’s suicide. Bullies should be held to account early on. We shouldn’t wait until someone dies before they are punished. If victims know there will be early intervention, they will be far less likely to even consider suicide. If they know the bullies won’t be punished until after their death, it might even encourage some distraught victims to kill themselves in the hope of exact vengeance on their tormenters. Early intervention is a much better outcome for everyone.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d8e5f230fbaa6637fe4cb31d1504e771",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally The law should only punish people for their own actions, not those of others. It’s fine to punish bullies for their bullying behaviour, if it is against the law. But ‘bullycide’ implies the bully bears individual responsibility for the death of the victim, just like in the case of murder or manslaughter. But the bully did not pull the trigger, the victim did. While the bully may have intended to harm or berate the victim, she made no attempt on the victim’s life, and cannot be treated like a murderer, who intentionally took the life of another.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6be8879cb88f8e12477543455269114f",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally Bullys are frequently as disturbed and victimised as those they target\n\nAccording to studies, bullies are often children who are plagued by their own problems: a troubled family situation, feeling of inadequacy, depression, or pressure to fit in [1] . Their bullying behaviour might just be a coping mechanism and a cry for help. These children might need as much support and care as those they bully. Putting them through the harrowing experience of a criminal trial, and potentially throwing them in prison will further damage them. Destroying one young life as retribution for another is a model of justice that should find no place in a compassionate society.\n\n[1] Carroll, Linda. ”Kids with ADHD may be more likely to bully”. MSNBC. 29 January 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22813400/#.Tvmm8iNWoVc\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f189f87f1dc1b7be21e4b7caa4d7d9d2",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally Conduct offence\n\nDefining bullying would be nearly impossible. Spreading rumours, giving someone the silent treatment, inviting all your classmates but one to a party, expressing a religious belief about someone’s sexuality, eye rolling, making faces, these can all be hurtful and perceived as bullying [1] . Yet this is perfectly legal behaviour. Criminalizing bullying would amount to criminalizing these acts. They may be offensive, they may even be hurtful, but these gestures should never, ever constitute criminal behaviour in any society that is concerned with human rights, freedom of speech, and of expression. Throwing someone in prison for spreading rumours or eye rolls might be worthy of a totalitarian state, but not a liberal democracy.\n\n[1] Bolton, José, and Stan Graeve. No Room for Bullies: from the Classroom to Cyberspace. Boys Town Press. 2005.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f6178bb735dbc5f3764954412e4450fe",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally Making bullying a legal issues does not incentivise robust enforcement of anti bullying rules by schools\n\nSchools are educational establishments that parents trust to protect and educate their children. Teachers and school administrators are those who should be keeping a watchful eye on the students in their care and intervene before harm comes to them. If bullying occurs at school, then that school has failed in its duties. In fact, in cases where suicides occurred, it has often later come to light that a bullying culture was widely tolerated at the school, and that school staff that knew about it did nothing to prevent it, with tragic results [1] . To prosecute the bullies would shift responsibility from the woeful failure of the adults around them, who should have known better and done more than the children in their care.\n\n[1] Bazelon, Emily. “What Really Happened to Phoebe Prince? Entry 1”. Slate. July 20. 2010. http://www.slate.com/articles/life/bulle/features/2010/what_really_happe...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fd3f071f4a7192858b4a3afa0e754fe2",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally It is difficult to make a direct, legally sound link between a bully's behaviour and a victim's suicide\n\nMany of the children and adolescents who take their own lives allegedly as a result of bullying have a far more complicated background. Some already struggle with depression, and have unstable family situations that make it hard to turn to their parents for help with their problems. Phoebe Prince, for example, was taking anti-depressants, was devastated by her parents’ divorce, was self harming, and had already attempted suicide after a break up. And that was long before she was allegedly bullied to death [1] . She was a very troubled young woman, and anything could have pushed her over the edge. It would be hard to find the bullies criminally responsible for her death.\n\n[1] Bazelon, Emily. “What Really Happened to Phoebe Prince? Entry 2”. Slate. July 20. 2010. http://www.slate.com/articles/life/bulle/features/2010/what_really_happe...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8c83c537b0322839e8b0934e8aa53b81",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally The bully's intentions are irrelevant\n\nIn criminal law, the establishment of culpability does not always depend on the intentions of the perpetrator. If, during a fight on a train platform, I shove someone and that person falls on the tracks and is killed by a train, I will be guilty of manslaughter, whether I intended to kill the person or not, because the harm caused by my actions is so great [1] . The same applies to bullying. Bullies try to hurt their victims through their actions, either physically or psychologically. Whether the bully intended for the victim to die or not, is irrelevant. The bully’s actions were responsible for the victim taking her own life.\n\n[1] Ashworth, Andrew. Principles of Criminal Law, Chapter 7.5. Oxford University Press. 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fc2f3edfdeced1049d7cdadd43f4daa2",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally The damage wrought by bullying is cumulative\n\nBullying is truly dangerous when it becomes persistent. Any one incident of it, while unpleasant, may be entirely tolerable for the victim. But being unrelentingly subjected to this treatment for months on end can make life truly unbearable and lead that person to suicide. In the case of Phoebe Prince, an Irish immigrant who was bullied at her US high school, she was called expletives, threatened, and even hit with a beverage container before she finally took her life [1] . She may have survived any one of those taunts, but it was their cumulative effect that was too much to bear. Conversely, punishing her bullies for any one act will fail to acknowledge the much greater extent of the overall harm. A different, special offence is needed to recognize the magnified level of harm caused by bullying.\n\n[1] Eckholm, Eric; Zezima, Katie. “Documents Detail a Girl’s Final Days of Bullying”. The New York Times. April 8, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/09/us/09bully.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3c9a2be8b1d1a8df5f53fd0610503a41",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally The law should always punish actions that inflict serious harm - whether physical or psychological\n\nBullying can inflict serious psychological harm on its victims, especially in the case of young people. It leads to low self-esteem, depression, and for some kids it leads to suicide [1] . Bullied children are almost 6 times more likely to think about or attempt suicide [2] . This phenomenon has been termed ‘bullycide’ and the law should recognize it. Many forms of behaviour that result in the death of another person are criminal, from murder to negligence. It is the duty of the law to brand such behaviour as unacceptable, deter future incidents, punish the perpetrators, and offer comfort to victims: in this case, the families of those who lost their life to bullying.\n\n[1] O'Moore, Mona, “Understanding School Bullying: A Guide for Parents & Teachers”, Veritas, 1, Dublin, 2010\n\n[2] Kim YS, Leventhal BL, Koh YJ, Boyce WT “Bullying Increased Suicide Risk: Prospective Study of Korean Adolescents”. Arch Suicide Res. Vol. 13, No. 1, pp15-30. 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c8c294f12024f8e05b1f604e7c6a8d22",
"text": "ure education education general law law general house would hold students legally The current legal regime is not able to prevent or adequately punish bullying\n\nEven when bullies are sometimes prosecuted, they are charged with offences that constitute individual components of the bullying behaviour, like harassment, stalking, causing bodily harm [1] , or invasion of privacy [2] . But these offences were not designed with bullying in mind and fail to capture its overall impact and the harm it causes. While bullies may be charged with several of these offenses this will still not capture the kind of harm being done and would not be as effective as a specifically tailored offense. We need laws that recognize that harm and which punish those who inflict it adequately.\n\n[1] Eckholm, Erick. “Two Students Plead Guilty in Bullying of Teenager.” The New York Times. May 4, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/us/05bully.html\n\n[2] Foderaro, Lisa W. “Private Moment Made Public. Then a fatal Jump.” The New York Times. September 29. 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/nyregion/30suicide.html\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
8745bfb22d695e8b398586ef5a014a82
|
Politicians should be able to make difficult decisions without fear that selecting one option will lead to their incarceration.
By the most popular definition, a state is the entity with the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within a defined territory. Politicians, as the government of that state, necessarily wield the institutions of that state force. This results in the tremendous responsibility of deciding when the overwhelming power of the state is exercised. This pertains to a variety of areas, such as police action against civil unrest, the interrogation of both alleged and convicted terrorists, and economic policies that subsidize industries with state resources. While it is certainly possible to brazenly abuse this power, in many cases politicians are presented with options which are, if at all illegal, marginally so, and made with the good faith interest of the nation at heart. There are even conceivable situations in which a politician may exercise options that are clearly illegal but serve an overwhelming state interest; consider an illegal raid on a private building in order to prevent a nuclear bomb from going off. While documented instances of policy-makers choosing not to act for a particular reason are rare, several senior CIA officials stated that they had become risk averse merely because the idea of prosecuting officials who made security policy had entered the public discourse. [1] We ought to place politicians in a situation where the only factor in their decision-making process is what serves the public interest, rather than having to weigh what they consider to be the right action against the chance it will lead to their incarceration. Attempting to avoid this through a limited system which allowed for the prosecution of apolitical crimes but immunity for political decisions would fail to accomplish the goals of prosecution of politicians, which is primarily to protect against political abuses of state power which threaten the rights of the citizenry.
[1] Crawford, Robert, ‘Torture and the Ideology of National Security’ Global Dialogue, Vol.12 No.1, Winter/Spring 2010, (“A Risk-Averse CIA” subsection) http://www.worlddialogue.org/content.php?id=454 [Accessed 22 September 2011]
|
[
{
"docid": "3d7aeeac0764fc39c45e2182c42ef5f4",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity No one doubts that politicians have to make morally difficult decisions, where sometimes every option is unpleasant. However, no one wants politicians to have an unrestricted ability to make ethical questionable decisions. That is exactly what immunity would deliver them. A politician who knows that they cannot be touched is incentivized and licensed to be much more brazen in their behavior when in office, and we want a bulwark against unrestricted rule-breaking. A state of affairs wherein politicians can sometimes be prosecuted creates the ideal amount of disincentive for politicians to break rules; they will do so only when there is a pressing need, and only to a moderate degree. Because of the plausible justifications for such acts, politicians need not fear prosecution in the overwhelming majority of cases. For instance, no official from either the UK or USA has been actually indicted with regard to highly-legally-dubious programs to torture detainees [1] [2] . Moreover, politicians are seldom prosecuted anyway, especially because they tend to belong to socioeconomic strata that punished less or not all compared to the rest of society. There is no legitimate need to give them more protection.\n\n[1] Ambinder, Marc, ‘CIA Officers Granted Immunity from Torture Prosecution’, The Atlantic, 16 April 2009, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/04/cia-officers-granted-immunity-from-torture-prosecution-update/16268/ [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n\n[2] Human Rights Education Association, ‘Torture, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment’, hrea.org, http://www.hrea.org/index.php?doc_id=265 [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "8981eba42abc05e3d9198bae7928c364",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Motivation does not matter. Almost every time someone presses criminal charges, it is for their own personal concerns (such as wanting retribution), rather than concern for the public good; that does not change the fact that if charges are laid, it is because the prosecuting authority has decided that, regardless of why the crime has come to their attention, the interest of society at large requires that the individual be prosecuted. If political motivations are what is needed for politicians to be held accountable, so be it. Even if this is a problem, it can be mitigated with sufficient oversight from an independent prosecuting authority.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3333404d085ee80fbade4a956c9ed7c8",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity If we don’t want politicians hurting the dignity of the office, there is only one thing we can do: not elect politicians likely to commit crimes! Of course, this is often impossible to tell in advance, but the dilemma remains: a crime has been committed, and that hurts the dignity of the office no matter what action we take. One thing that’s worse than having an office’s holder raked over the coals is for them to get away with a behavior that otherwise warrants punishment. See discussion below under “hurts the image of the office.”\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4b32af78a44dee56609fa0aceaa0554c",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity These mechanisms are not immediate enough to put an immediate stop to an aberrant behavior. Impeachment proceedings take months at least; elections may be years away; and reputational damage is even more long-term. Moreover, these punishments are nowhere near a sufficient deterrent. If loss of one’s job, and damage to one’s public image were sufficient deterrents, we would not prosecute business leaders for insider trading, nor celebrities for drunk driving. The fact is that a criminal justice system which punishes everyone equally is not just fair; it’s also a practical method of achieving meaningful deterrence. Finally, even if we are willing to settle for one of these lesser punishments, the threat of a great punishment gives prosecutors leverage to strike deals with the politicians, such as offering not to prosecute in exchange for coming forward with the details of misdeeds.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cb50d172b618d29dfc2f9464e0ffcdd7",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Politicians have to divide their focus anyway. As the examples above concede, being a politician means being pulled in several different directions. Elections are particularly distracting, and in jurisdictions with fixed election cycles like the United States can make periods of up to a year prior to the election a write-off for getting real work done. Thus, personal liability is nothing special among the many concerns a politician has. In fact, accountability, of this direct type, and for serious offences, is probably more important than most of the things a politician is forced to consider, and at the very least deserves inclusion among them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0f3b15ac8099b3e3aa2d926ebcef7d6b",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity See argument above regarding other accountability mechanism. Jeopardizing future electoral success, harming one’s political party, and damage to one’s personal legacy are all meaningful checks on the behavior of politicians. To suggest that, in the absence of prosecutions, an under-used tool anyway, politicians will be able to abuse their station with impunity, is simply untrue.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "546c9c05db3bc5e722956aab352e7129",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity The difference between the harm to the office of a politician getting away with a crime and the harm from them being tried for that crime is that the trial is inherently public. Short of widespread corruption – the sort that would probably preclude prosecuting politicians anyway – it is unlikely that unpunished wrongdoing in an office will ever become public. A trial, by contrast, creates a media flashpoint that captures the public consciousness. Thus, even if the damage to the integrity of the office is greater per person in cases of unpunished crimes, the act of punishing the crime informs enough people to outweigh the fact that it may not do as much damage per capita.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3bddc564e47cd8816b0e6af1c0fc0913",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity The concept of retribution is a narrow and dubious foundation for justice. A modern, civilized legal system should not be geared around delivering payback on behalf of victims, but rather around advancing the best consequences for the future. For exactly this reason legal systems give several ways in which defendants can avoid punishment, even though they are technically guilty, if punishing them would have bad consequences; these include jury nullification and suspended sentences.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "22e8206dddb2b18572ebab32be92b858",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity This is not necessarily true. A politician could be a brilliant diplomat who happens to commit a minor offence such as drink driving; very few indictable offences correlate directly with one’s ability to discharge the mandate of a political office. Historically, politicians have often had their secret vices, including the rumored drug habits of many 19th century politicians, that have not impeded the performance of their duties.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f1d71b9872e26a491c9881073de0a093",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity With regard to this issue, elections are unquestionably an effective alternative mechanism. The act of a politician in a liberal democracy holding on to office for another term, by definition, requires public assent. The citizenry has an out: don’t continue electing politicians who aren’t serving the public interest. Regardless, politicians already have a plethora of motives, both legitimate and self-serving, to hold on to public office; this doesn’t move the barometer on incentives to run. Most elections are at least modestly well contested precisely because many qualified candidates really want the position.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "922540b2ff2389884ac0281b80422915",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Prosecutions of politicians are often motivated by partisan concerns.\n\nAs noted above, the political life is steeped in difficult decisions, and some of these are bound to result in choices that are at least potentially illegal. The ability to prosecute politicians incentivizes political opponents to search out past actions by said politicians so as to immobilize them politically. Such prosecutions are therefore not motivated by concern for justice, nor are they conducive to a well-functioning, multipartisan political system wherein representatives seek to work together to achieve their political ends. In the most extreme cases, powerful politicians use prosecutions to immobilize their political opponents.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a60d0d49b030547c40e460f23d5b5f24",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity In the event of major abuses of power it should be the public that holds politicians to account.\n\nThe obvious benefit to prosecuting politicians is that it punishes – and thereby deters – corruption by politicians. However, this benefit can be achieved through other means. Firstly, many western liberal democracies have one form or another of removing a politician from office in the midst of their term, such as impeachment in the American system or a vote of no confidence against the government in the Westminster system. While defenders of immunity oppose impeachment as contrary to the principles outlined above (because of the effect that it may have on political duties), this is an option that remains in cases of gross misconduct. If the political will cannot be mobilized to remove a sitting politician, they are held accountable by the electorate to whom they must answer in the next election, and who will likely punish blatant misuse of political power. Even if the individual politician has reached a limit on their term of office, or does not seek reelection, they are still held in check by the damage that will be done to their party in the event of major misconduct on their part. Finally, most politicians are significantly concerned about their legacy, which is tarnished significantly by corruption even if they are never held legally accountable for it. While Nixon received a full pardon from his success, [1] his name has become synonymous with criminality and scandal: a fate most politicians wish to avoid.\n\n[1] Ford, Gerald R., Proclamation 4311, 8 September 1974, http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/speeches/740061.htm [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c4f5401e5f6adfe97f712e65aead56fb",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Giving politicians’ immunity from prosecution allows them to focus on performing their duties\n\nThe premier reason that most states, even those that allow for the prosecution of politicians, abstain from prosecuting them while they hold office is that being a politician is a job that requires one’s undivided attention. Especially for the holders of prominent national-level offices, writing legislation, responding to crises under one’s purview, consulting one’s constituents, and engaging in campaign work often lead to politicians working an upwards of 12 hour day, every day. To expect politicians cope with all of these concerns will simultaneously constructing a defense against pending charges would be to abandon all hope of them serving their constituents effectively. We are rightly aggravated when politicians take extensive vacations or other extracurricular forays. [1] Being under indictment not only consumes even more of a politician’s time; the stress it causes will inevitably seep into what remaining time they do allocating to fulfilling their duties, further hindering their performance. The impeachment proceedings for Bill Clinton on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice were so intensive that they took tremendous resources away from not only the president himself, but all branches of the federal government for several months [2] , amidst serious domestic and foreign policy concerns such as the ongoing war in Kosovo.\n\n[1] Condon, George E. Jr., ‘The Long History of Criticizing Presidential Vacations’ The Atlantic, 18 August 2011, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/the-long-tradition-of-criticizing-presidential-vacations/243819/ [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n\n[2] Linder, Douglas O., ‘The Impeachment Trial of President William Clinton’, UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY (UMKC) SCHOOL OF LAW, 2005, http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/clinton/clintontrialaccount.html [Accessed September 19, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "19896cf125933f304fee6c6ab4fd991a",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Seeing a politician put on trial hurts the integrity of their office.\n\nIt does tremendous damage to the public perception of a given political position to see the holder of that position on trial for criminal acts. Politicians are important role models for the populace at large, and shining light on everyone one of their misdeeds is not conducive to them playing such a role. This hurts the ability of their successors who, though completely innocent, are stepping into an institution now tainted with the image of corruption or scandal. Finally, the very process of prosecution can be damaging to the country, as citizens on opposing sides of the political spectrum disagree over the legitimacy of charges. These effects all deal real damage to the political institutions necessary for the functioning of the state.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "00c96cb89d656fbdc5cd2ed2925700c8",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Immunity creates a perverse incentive to hang on to their office as long as possible.\n\nProsecutorial immunity brings about a massive side-benefit to being in office. It is easy to get used to a life where minor indiscretions go regularly unpunished, as has happened with dignitaries holding diplomatic immunity. [1] Immunity from prosecution may spur a politician to seek reelection into their old age when they are significantly less effective at performing their duties. This is one reason why in the vast majority of democracies elected representatives, while far from poor, are not paid massive salaries; we don’t want people getting into politics for the wrong reasons.\n\n[1] Uhlig, Mark A., ‘Court Won’t Bar Return of Boy in Abuse Case to Zimbabwe’, The New York Times, 1 January 1988, http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/01/nyregion/court-won-t-bar-return-of-boy-in-abuse-case-to-zimbabwe.html?pagewanted=print&src=pm [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e78109d82b491716d790a1d5ddc780b6",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Politicians who commit crimes are likely unfit to serve.\n\nThe sort of person who commits an offense has demonstrated irresponsibility and so is unworthy of the public trust. Would any reasonable citizen wanted to be represented by a domestic abuser, or have a fraudster manage the public treasury? While almost all people are capable of atonement and redemption, someone who commits crimes worthy of prosecution while in office ought to be immediately removed for the betterment of the state.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d1a2b2a08f6577bcbfe11fc5ee0dfda5",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Immunity for politicians hurts the image of their office\n\nFar from the worst PR for an office being that a holder of it is on trial, the worst possible public perception of a political institution is that it is wracked with corruption, with it not even theoretically possible to hold its members to account. Prosecuting politicians makes it clear that their office is not a den of impunity, and in the wake of a scandal, restoring public confidence in politicians to come. The public wants their politicians to be accountable and granting immunity harms accountability by denying an option.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "11a8dfb3adff6b44ce35bc1dc538c006",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity The ability to prosecute politicians is the ultimate protection against the abuse of power.\n\nIt is impossible to overstate the power that the threat of prosecution has to stay the hand of anyone, including a politician, from transgressing the laws of the state. In fact, we need more aggressive prosecution of politicians. Not a single person has been prosecuted for approval illegal torture or wiretapping. These are illegal actions actually happening which the populace, with only the blunt instrument of voting for or against a politician on the sum total of their policies, is unable to effectively influence. There is no greater deterrent that could be used against politicians.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fa79bbcf93c8c914cc206c163ae6cd43",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Immunity for politicians is an unjust double standard\n\nEvery victim deserves to have the perpetrator of their suffering answer for their misdeeds. It is unjust that certain offenders would avoid retribution, and certain victims would be denied their day in court, simply because of a factor external to the commission of the crime. Even if the crime is not external to the criminal’s political role, the foundation of a free and fair justice system is that all individuals are treated alike, regardless of perceived importance. Hence, a wealthy philanthropist will not be spared from prosecution simply because they are a pillar of the community. Politicians should receive no greater reprieve.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
a138461a758bff36ef0b9abac2a6c1b7
|
In the event of major abuses of power it should be the public that holds politicians to account.
The obvious benefit to prosecuting politicians is that it punishes – and thereby deters – corruption by politicians. However, this benefit can be achieved through other means. Firstly, many western liberal democracies have one form or another of removing a politician from office in the midst of their term, such as impeachment in the American system or a vote of no confidence against the government in the Westminster system. While defenders of immunity oppose impeachment as contrary to the principles outlined above (because of the effect that it may have on political duties), this is an option that remains in cases of gross misconduct. If the political will cannot be mobilized to remove a sitting politician, they are held accountable by the electorate to whom they must answer in the next election, and who will likely punish blatant misuse of political power. Even if the individual politician has reached a limit on their term of office, or does not seek reelection, they are still held in check by the damage that will be done to their party in the event of major misconduct on their part. Finally, most politicians are significantly concerned about their legacy, which is tarnished significantly by corruption even if they are never held legally accountable for it. While Nixon received a full pardon from his success, [1] his name has become synonymous with criminality and scandal: a fate most politicians wish to avoid.
[1] Ford, Gerald R., Proclamation 4311, 8 September 1974, http://www.ford.utexas.edu/library/speeches/740061.htm [Accessed September 9, 2011]
|
[
{
"docid": "4b32af78a44dee56609fa0aceaa0554c",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity These mechanisms are not immediate enough to put an immediate stop to an aberrant behavior. Impeachment proceedings take months at least; elections may be years away; and reputational damage is even more long-term. Moreover, these punishments are nowhere near a sufficient deterrent. If loss of one’s job, and damage to one’s public image were sufficient deterrents, we would not prosecute business leaders for insider trading, nor celebrities for drunk driving. The fact is that a criminal justice system which punishes everyone equally is not just fair; it’s also a practical method of achieving meaningful deterrence. Finally, even if we are willing to settle for one of these lesser punishments, the threat of a great punishment gives prosecutors leverage to strike deals with the politicians, such as offering not to prosecute in exchange for coming forward with the details of misdeeds.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "3d7aeeac0764fc39c45e2182c42ef5f4",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity No one doubts that politicians have to make morally difficult decisions, where sometimes every option is unpleasant. However, no one wants politicians to have an unrestricted ability to make ethical questionable decisions. That is exactly what immunity would deliver them. A politician who knows that they cannot be touched is incentivized and licensed to be much more brazen in their behavior when in office, and we want a bulwark against unrestricted rule-breaking. A state of affairs wherein politicians can sometimes be prosecuted creates the ideal amount of disincentive for politicians to break rules; they will do so only when there is a pressing need, and only to a moderate degree. Because of the plausible justifications for such acts, politicians need not fear prosecution in the overwhelming majority of cases. For instance, no official from either the UK or USA has been actually indicted with regard to highly-legally-dubious programs to torture detainees [1] [2] . Moreover, politicians are seldom prosecuted anyway, especially because they tend to belong to socioeconomic strata that punished less or not all compared to the rest of society. There is no legitimate need to give them more protection.\n\n[1] Ambinder, Marc, ‘CIA Officers Granted Immunity from Torture Prosecution’, The Atlantic, 16 April 2009, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/04/cia-officers-granted-immunity-from-torture-prosecution-update/16268/ [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n\n[2] Human Rights Education Association, ‘Torture, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment’, hrea.org, http://www.hrea.org/index.php?doc_id=265 [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8981eba42abc05e3d9198bae7928c364",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Motivation does not matter. Almost every time someone presses criminal charges, it is for their own personal concerns (such as wanting retribution), rather than concern for the public good; that does not change the fact that if charges are laid, it is because the prosecuting authority has decided that, regardless of why the crime has come to their attention, the interest of society at large requires that the individual be prosecuted. If political motivations are what is needed for politicians to be held accountable, so be it. Even if this is a problem, it can be mitigated with sufficient oversight from an independent prosecuting authority.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3333404d085ee80fbade4a956c9ed7c8",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity If we don’t want politicians hurting the dignity of the office, there is only one thing we can do: not elect politicians likely to commit crimes! Of course, this is often impossible to tell in advance, but the dilemma remains: a crime has been committed, and that hurts the dignity of the office no matter what action we take. One thing that’s worse than having an office’s holder raked over the coals is for them to get away with a behavior that otherwise warrants punishment. See discussion below under “hurts the image of the office.”\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cb50d172b618d29dfc2f9464e0ffcdd7",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Politicians have to divide their focus anyway. As the examples above concede, being a politician means being pulled in several different directions. Elections are particularly distracting, and in jurisdictions with fixed election cycles like the United States can make periods of up to a year prior to the election a write-off for getting real work done. Thus, personal liability is nothing special among the many concerns a politician has. In fact, accountability, of this direct type, and for serious offences, is probably more important than most of the things a politician is forced to consider, and at the very least deserves inclusion among them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0f3b15ac8099b3e3aa2d926ebcef7d6b",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity See argument above regarding other accountability mechanism. Jeopardizing future electoral success, harming one’s political party, and damage to one’s personal legacy are all meaningful checks on the behavior of politicians. To suggest that, in the absence of prosecutions, an under-used tool anyway, politicians will be able to abuse their station with impunity, is simply untrue.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "546c9c05db3bc5e722956aab352e7129",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity The difference between the harm to the office of a politician getting away with a crime and the harm from them being tried for that crime is that the trial is inherently public. Short of widespread corruption – the sort that would probably preclude prosecuting politicians anyway – it is unlikely that unpunished wrongdoing in an office will ever become public. A trial, by contrast, creates a media flashpoint that captures the public consciousness. Thus, even if the damage to the integrity of the office is greater per person in cases of unpunished crimes, the act of punishing the crime informs enough people to outweigh the fact that it may not do as much damage per capita.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3bddc564e47cd8816b0e6af1c0fc0913",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity The concept of retribution is a narrow and dubious foundation for justice. A modern, civilized legal system should not be geared around delivering payback on behalf of victims, but rather around advancing the best consequences for the future. For exactly this reason legal systems give several ways in which defendants can avoid punishment, even though they are technically guilty, if punishing them would have bad consequences; these include jury nullification and suspended sentences.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "22e8206dddb2b18572ebab32be92b858",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity This is not necessarily true. A politician could be a brilliant diplomat who happens to commit a minor offence such as drink driving; very few indictable offences correlate directly with one’s ability to discharge the mandate of a political office. Historically, politicians have often had their secret vices, including the rumored drug habits of many 19th century politicians, that have not impeded the performance of their duties.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f1d71b9872e26a491c9881073de0a093",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity With regard to this issue, elections are unquestionably an effective alternative mechanism. The act of a politician in a liberal democracy holding on to office for another term, by definition, requires public assent. The citizenry has an out: don’t continue electing politicians who aren’t serving the public interest. Regardless, politicians already have a plethora of motives, both legitimate and self-serving, to hold on to public office; this doesn’t move the barometer on incentives to run. Most elections are at least modestly well contested precisely because many qualified candidates really want the position.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "45d3ade6af28f631f3b3c3c58156e65c",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Politicians should be able to make difficult decisions without fear that selecting one option will lead to their incarceration.\n\nBy the most popular definition, a state is the entity with the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within a defined territory. Politicians, as the government of that state, necessarily wield the institutions of that state force. This results in the tremendous responsibility of deciding when the overwhelming power of the state is exercised. This pertains to a variety of areas, such as police action against civil unrest, the interrogation of both alleged and convicted terrorists, and economic policies that subsidize industries with state resources. While it is certainly possible to brazenly abuse this power, in many cases politicians are presented with options which are, if at all illegal, marginally so, and made with the good faith interest of the nation at heart. There are even conceivable situations in which a politician may exercise options that are clearly illegal but serve an overwhelming state interest; consider an illegal raid on a private building in order to prevent a nuclear bomb from going off. While documented instances of policy-makers choosing not to act for a particular reason are rare, several senior CIA officials stated that they had become risk averse merely because the idea of prosecuting officials who made security policy had entered the public discourse. [1] We ought to place politicians in a situation where the only factor in their decision-making process is what serves the public interest, rather than having to weigh what they consider to be the right action against the chance it will lead to their incarceration. Attempting to avoid this through a limited system which allowed for the prosecution of apolitical crimes but immunity for political decisions would fail to accomplish the goals of prosecution of politicians, which is primarily to protect against political abuses of state power which threaten the rights of the citizenry.\n\n[1] Crawford, Robert, ‘Torture and the Ideology of National Security’ Global Dialogue, Vol.12 No.1, Winter/Spring 2010, (“A Risk-Averse CIA” subsection) http://www.worlddialogue.org/content.php?id=454 [Accessed 22 September 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "922540b2ff2389884ac0281b80422915",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Prosecutions of politicians are often motivated by partisan concerns.\n\nAs noted above, the political life is steeped in difficult decisions, and some of these are bound to result in choices that are at least potentially illegal. The ability to prosecute politicians incentivizes political opponents to search out past actions by said politicians so as to immobilize them politically. Such prosecutions are therefore not motivated by concern for justice, nor are they conducive to a well-functioning, multipartisan political system wherein representatives seek to work together to achieve their political ends. In the most extreme cases, powerful politicians use prosecutions to immobilize their political opponents.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c4f5401e5f6adfe97f712e65aead56fb",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Giving politicians’ immunity from prosecution allows them to focus on performing their duties\n\nThe premier reason that most states, even those that allow for the prosecution of politicians, abstain from prosecuting them while they hold office is that being a politician is a job that requires one’s undivided attention. Especially for the holders of prominent national-level offices, writing legislation, responding to crises under one’s purview, consulting one’s constituents, and engaging in campaign work often lead to politicians working an upwards of 12 hour day, every day. To expect politicians cope with all of these concerns will simultaneously constructing a defense against pending charges would be to abandon all hope of them serving their constituents effectively. We are rightly aggravated when politicians take extensive vacations or other extracurricular forays. [1] Being under indictment not only consumes even more of a politician’s time; the stress it causes will inevitably seep into what remaining time they do allocating to fulfilling their duties, further hindering their performance. The impeachment proceedings for Bill Clinton on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice were so intensive that they took tremendous resources away from not only the president himself, but all branches of the federal government for several months [2] , amidst serious domestic and foreign policy concerns such as the ongoing war in Kosovo.\n\n[1] Condon, George E. Jr., ‘The Long History of Criticizing Presidential Vacations’ The Atlantic, 18 August 2011, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/08/the-long-tradition-of-criticizing-presidential-vacations/243819/ [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n\n[2] Linder, Douglas O., ‘The Impeachment Trial of President William Clinton’, UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-KANSAS CITY (UMKC) SCHOOL OF LAW, 2005, http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/clinton/clintontrialaccount.html [Accessed September 19, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "19896cf125933f304fee6c6ab4fd991a",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Seeing a politician put on trial hurts the integrity of their office.\n\nIt does tremendous damage to the public perception of a given political position to see the holder of that position on trial for criminal acts. Politicians are important role models for the populace at large, and shining light on everyone one of their misdeeds is not conducive to them playing such a role. This hurts the ability of their successors who, though completely innocent, are stepping into an institution now tainted with the image of corruption or scandal. Finally, the very process of prosecution can be damaging to the country, as citizens on opposing sides of the political spectrum disagree over the legitimacy of charges. These effects all deal real damage to the political institutions necessary for the functioning of the state.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "00c96cb89d656fbdc5cd2ed2925700c8",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Immunity creates a perverse incentive to hang on to their office as long as possible.\n\nProsecutorial immunity brings about a massive side-benefit to being in office. It is easy to get used to a life where minor indiscretions go regularly unpunished, as has happened with dignitaries holding diplomatic immunity. [1] Immunity from prosecution may spur a politician to seek reelection into their old age when they are significantly less effective at performing their duties. This is one reason why in the vast majority of democracies elected representatives, while far from poor, are not paid massive salaries; we don’t want people getting into politics for the wrong reasons.\n\n[1] Uhlig, Mark A., ‘Court Won’t Bar Return of Boy in Abuse Case to Zimbabwe’, The New York Times, 1 January 1988, http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/01/nyregion/court-won-t-bar-return-of-boy-in-abuse-case-to-zimbabwe.html?pagewanted=print&src=pm [Accessed September 9, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e78109d82b491716d790a1d5ddc780b6",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Politicians who commit crimes are likely unfit to serve.\n\nThe sort of person who commits an offense has demonstrated irresponsibility and so is unworthy of the public trust. Would any reasonable citizen wanted to be represented by a domestic abuser, or have a fraudster manage the public treasury? While almost all people are capable of atonement and redemption, someone who commits crimes worthy of prosecution while in office ought to be immediately removed for the betterment of the state.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d1a2b2a08f6577bcbfe11fc5ee0dfda5",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Immunity for politicians hurts the image of their office\n\nFar from the worst PR for an office being that a holder of it is on trial, the worst possible public perception of a political institution is that it is wracked with corruption, with it not even theoretically possible to hold its members to account. Prosecuting politicians makes it clear that their office is not a den of impunity, and in the wake of a scandal, restoring public confidence in politicians to come. The public wants their politicians to be accountable and granting immunity harms accountability by denying an option.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "11a8dfb3adff6b44ce35bc1dc538c006",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity The ability to prosecute politicians is the ultimate protection against the abuse of power.\n\nIt is impossible to overstate the power that the threat of prosecution has to stay the hand of anyone, including a politician, from transgressing the laws of the state. In fact, we need more aggressive prosecution of politicians. Not a single person has been prosecuted for approval illegal torture or wiretapping. These are illegal actions actually happening which the populace, with only the blunt instrument of voting for or against a politician on the sum total of their policies, is unable to effectively influence. There is no greater deterrent that could be used against politicians.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fa79bbcf93c8c914cc206c163ae6cd43",
"text": "law general punishment politics government house would grant politicians immunity Immunity for politicians is an unjust double standard\n\nEvery victim deserves to have the perpetrator of their suffering answer for their misdeeds. It is unjust that certain offenders would avoid retribution, and certain victims would be denied their day in court, simply because of a factor external to the commission of the crime. Even if the crime is not external to the criminal’s political role, the foundation of a free and fair justice system is that all individuals are treated alike, regardless of perceived importance. Hence, a wealthy philanthropist will not be spared from prosecution simply because they are a pillar of the community. Politicians should receive no greater reprieve.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
9109f6258ea6cc14fcb0151c3f330cd6
|
Tibet is a distinct nation with a distinct history that China illegally invaded
Tibet has a long history of independence going back more than 1500 years. Even in times of Chinese “domination”, Tibetans largely governed themselves independently of the small number of Chinese officials in Lhasa. [1]
Tibet at most was a tributary of China, and was no more part of it than Thailand, Myanmar or Korea. And from 1911 until 1950 it was entirely independent and conducted its foreign relations as such, for example remaining neutral in World War II despite both its neighbours the Republic of China and the British Empire being on the side of the Allies.
Tibet’s annexation by China occurred under the guns of 40,000 Chinese soldiers, and the precedent begun by the invasion stands as one of the few post-1945 cases in which the national principle was abandoned and the only one in which a fully independent state vanished from the map.
When one notes that Tibetans have their own language, and a history that includes far more wars with the Chinese than examples of kinship, Chinese arguments of sovereignty have little bearing on the reality. [2]
[1] van Walt, Michael C., ‘The legal status of Tibet’, Cultural Survival Quarterly (Vol. 12, 1988), http://www.freetibet.org/about/legal-status
[2] Tsering, Lhasang, ‘India’s Tibet: A Case for Policy Review’, 17 March 2000, http://www.friendsoftibet.org/articles/india.html
|
[
{
"docid": "6fa1fac5ef0c810e292c0582b58fe246",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state In order for Tibet to have traditionally been viewed as part of the Chinese nation, there is no requirement that it have been under Chinese rule continuously. Like many other parts of “China”, it was ruled by China during times of imperial strength, and when governments weakened, so too did central authority. In this sense Tibet has a lot in common with Manchuria, another region that tended to drift towards autonomy during times of dynastic weakness.\n\nOne thing however has been clear – the variation in sovereignty in Tibet has been between autonomy and Chinese sovereignty. Even in the 9th century when Tibetan armies were outside the gates of the Tang Dynasty Capital of Chang’an, the Tibetans remained nominally the Emperor’s subjects as proclaimed by a monument from 823 stating “their territories be united as one”. [1]\n\nTibet’s independence between 1904/11 and 1950 was consistent with this cycle. Tibet gained autonomy when China weakened, and this autonomy was as much a product of British influence as it was of any Tibetan desires themselves. In 1950, with China reunited under a strong government, Chinese sovereignty returned. It was undoubtedly the case that the local elites who were displaced resented this change, just as their predecessors did the previous times throughout history when Chinese sovereignty was restored, but this does not justify independence, especially when Tibetan independence in the past has always been a product of the dual factors of Chinese weakness and the strength of foreign powers in the region, neither of which is operative right now.\n\n[1] China Daily, ‘From dynasty to republic’, 9 April 2008 http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-04/09/content_6601917.htm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "e08617fd6d8508bbec664b890c823944",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Migrations for economic reasons is part of the modern global economy. Tibet in 1950 was massively underdeveloped with very low literacy rates, and little modern economic infrastructure. Given the determination of the Chinese government to modernize Tibet, the importation of workers was vital. Educated Chinese were needed to run the administration in the absence of qualified local elites willing to work with them, while Chinese teachers were needed to run the schools. In turn, they brought their families, and a host of businesses followed.\n\nBy the same token, teaching Mandarin is not an issue. There are 6 million Tibetans surrounded by 1 billion Chinese who speak Mandarin, teaching the language of commerce is an effort to integrate the Tibetans.\n\nAnd integration is what the Chinese are after, as while no exact figures are published, it is overwhelmingly clear that Tibet is a net loser financially for them, and has been consistently since the 1950s. The costs of subsidizing a largely unemployed populous along with educational and infrastructure improvements has cost far more than the revenue coming in. If Tibet is a colony, China is not in it for the money. [1]\n\n[1] Coonan, Clifford, ‘Behind the façade of Chinese rule in Tibet’, The Intependent, 3 July 2010, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/behind-the-facade-of-chines...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "29f783b46c58a628006572ebef1a3136",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Everything is comparative. The major reason why China does not face more serious domestic unrest is that its international and economic progress have allowed it to appeal to Chinese nationalism. Withdrawing from Tibet would be viewed as an act of weakness, one which would do far more to undermine the Communist party’s legitimacy and support base than remaining there.\n\nSecondly, attacks on China’s Human Rights record matter less and less each year as trade with the PRC becomes more and more valuable to the West. It barely affected the Olympics and increasingly it is viewed as an effort by the West to divide China.\n\nThirdly, the cost of the province has to be compared against the potential security risks an independent Tibet, especially one under anti-Chinese leadership, would pose to Chinese security.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "906903ff9c58948c56eca52b2f054631",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state On the contrary, this situation almost ensures that the Tibetans will become a puppet of one or another foreign power. Weak states almost invariably need allies to maintain their independence. An independent Tibet, especially one that has inherited the history of the last sixty years would likely be dominated by politicians who are militantly anti-Chinese, but would be too weak to defend itself against China. It would almost certainly become an Indian proxy, as its only hope of survival would be to attempt to gain the support of the United States and India against China.\n\nIn effect the creation of an independent Tibet, rather than avoiding conflict, would make it more pressing by moving the effective frontline hundreds of miles northward. Right now China and India may not like each other, but the Tibetan-Indian border is sufficiently mountainous as to make military action difficult if not impossible. By contrast, its northern border is much more easily crossed as the Chinese themselves showed in 1950. An independent Tibet would be a security threat to China and the region.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "823b5f486354923344b43eba4b0af9a5",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Such progress has been self-serving, with many of the economic gains made by Han Settlers. Secondly it has come at the cost of Tibetan culture and the very national identity that Tibetans hold dear.\n\nIt is also absurd to suggest that these gains would disappear upon independence. Tibet would likely seek to continue to trade with China, and if that is not possible, there would be opportunities to gain investment from India or the West. The benefits of such trade could then be used to help the Tibetans themselves rather than Han settlers. As Ten Zin Samphel, a leader of the Tibetan community in Britain remarks \"At the moment, the economic development is for the benefit of the Chinese… If Tibet were free, we could develop it ourselves.\" [1]\n\n[1] McGivering, Jill, ‘China’s quandary over Tibet’s future’, BBC News, 20 March 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7305558.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4c53fc2845ce60a725f2fd3183fbb8f4",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Simple geography makes a general conflict over Tibet unlikely. Located on some of the most mountainous terrain in the world, moving large armies would be next to impossible in the region, with the consequence that conflicts like the Sino-Indian war of 1962 were contained by the simple inability of the combatants to bring supplies and reinforcements to the front.\n\nMaking Tibet a neutral buffer state would simply exacerbate these challenges by denying the likely combatants a common border behind which to build up military infrastructure. It may well be that China and India would become rivals for influence in Lhasa, but this would be a diplomatic war of shadows rather than a physical one, just like the current competition for influence in Myanmar which is in a similar position, [1] and it would be a conflict which would provide Tibet with the opportunity to play the rivals off against each other in a way that would safeguard its independence as well as peace in the region.\n\n[1] Kuppuswamy, C.S., ‘MYANMAR: Sandwiched between China & India and gaining from both’, South Asia Analysis Group, 31 January 2008, Paper no. 2574, http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers26%5Cpaper2574.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "306b3a321b2b3f5be628e5152bf2edae",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state While of obvious interest, it is hard to see how Chinese opinion is of vital relevance to whether or not Tibet should enjoy independence. Serbian opinion was almost certainly overwhelmingly against Kosovar claims in 1998, and it can be assumed that Southern Sudanese Secession may have been less than popular on the streets of Khartoum than Juba.\n\nFurthermore, a large part of the reason for the reaction of the Chinese Public is that the Communist Party has consistently encouraged nationalist sentiment in an effort to deflect its own population from their lack of human and political rights. An independent Tibet would serve as a beacon of freedom in the region and might well inspire Chinese citizens to begin to make demands of their own for political and social freedoms.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1ded5a70a601be629857f86cb1b3d4ca",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state First of all it is worth noting that the Chinese settlers are themselves the product of deliberate campaign of cultural genocide on the part of the Chinese government. While individually they may be innocent, by their participation they have become targets. In this sense there is little difference between them and Israeli settlers in the West Bank or the former French settlers in Algeria.\n\nBut even granting that, there is no reason to assume this violence would continue if Tibet became independent and the major cause of conflict, namely the Chinese occupation, was removed as a major issue of contention. It could be expected that a new Tibetan government would have an incentive to avoid all of the harms outlined by the opposition.\n\nSymbolic of this is the Dalai Llama’s remarks that Tibet’s future is linked to China’s and that an independent Tibet would benefit from a close relationship with China.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8dfb1145386763bd81851b2c78a05985",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Tibetans are rapidly becoming a minority in their own country\n\nDue to systematic campaign of Sinocization, millions of Han Chinese have been encouraged to settle in Tibet, and with the support of the government they now dominate the economy and upper echelons of the administration. Demographically Tibetans are rapidly becoming a minority within their own country, and administratively this has already taken place.\n\nWhile short of open genocide, the intent of the Chinese government is quite clearly the elimination of the Tibetan people as a distinct national, cultural and linguistic group. Not only are they attempting to drown them through settlement, but Tibetan students are forced to learn Mandarin in the schools and are being taught that they are Chinese.\n\nWhile there may well have been past periods of Chinese sovereignty, the policies of the current Beijing government seem designed to produce an outcome far more permanent than those past efforts which respected Tibetan identity and culture.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a163f948fd3ddcc701422c0e180d8e49",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state An independent Tibet would serve as a buffer state between India and China, reducing the chances of a regional clash\n\nAn independent Tibet would serve a useful purpose as a neutral and demilitarized buffer state between India and China. Given the rising economic and military clout of both powers, a future conflict is becoming ever more likely, and they already fought one war against one another in 1962.\n\nAn independent Tibet would mean that the two nations would no longer have a common border, making their rivalry less practical and far less pressing. This would reduce military obligations for both, and prevent the Tibetans from being caught in the middle of a future conflict.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a1e87ee3aa3a00797691cc408e25f7ea",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Tibet presents an explosive domestic political issue for China which the latter would benefit from eliminating\n\nTibet, and the resistance Tibetans continue to show to Chinese rule presents a toxic domestic and international political problem that costs far more than it worth.\n\nDomestically, violence in Tibet is the most serious domestic disturbance facing the Chinese government, and the fact that there is nearly constant violence between Han Settlers and Tibetans forces the Chinese to alienate everyone in order to contain it. Furthermore, the economic and political disenfranchisement of the Tibetan people is an enormous domestic problem, as it has led to large numbers becoming unemployed and moving to other parts of China where they form an underclass.\n\nInternationally, the Tibetan issue keeps China’s Human Rights record in the news and almost torpedoed the 2008 Olympic games. Given that China is already losing money on the province, it may well be worth it for China to jettison it in order to gain much greater international benefits.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b1553aedae7d76473d4aeed599d3da06",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Tibet is almost 50% Han Chinese and they dominate the economy. Expelling them would be catastrophic\n\nWhatever the reasons or the moral legitimacy behind the move, Tibet is a very different place today than it was in 1950. According to the 2000 census, 2.3 million of Tibet’s 7.3 Million citizens are Han Chinese, and if temporary residents are added the numbers nearly double.\n\nIn the event Tibet achieves independence it is likely that these Han residents will face discrimination if not open pogroms. Already they are a constant target of riots launched by Tibetan Nationalists, events that often end in the destruction of Han businesses and property.\n\nSuch an outcome would not only be morally abhorrent – it would also be catastrophic for Tibet’s economic and political position.\n\nThis minority plays a key role in the Tibetan economy, and their departure would create a vacuum that could lead to an economic collapse.\n\nFurthermore, any mistreatment of the Han Minority would likely push Chinese opinion, already of the view that the Tibetans are coddled according to Faread Zakaria, into support for military intervention.\n\nThe Economist’s James Miles remarked of the 2008 riots that \"What I saw was calculated targeted violence against an ethnic group, or I should say two ethnic groups, primarily ethnic Han Chinese living in Lhasa, but also members of the Muslim Hui minority in Lhasa.\" [1]\n\n[1] ‘Transcript: James Miles interview on Tibet’, CNN, 20 March 2008, http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/20/tibet.miles.interview/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e210c9125cf8f1cb3994ccf9733e58a1",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Tibet could never be a viable independent state and would either become a Chinese puppet or a launching pad for American and Indian power against China.\n\nGiven the realities of geography, Tibet has little prospect of real independence. Landlocked, with few natural resources, and no clear way to get any resources it does have out, Tibet would be poor, and overshadowed by its much larger neighbours, China and India.\n\nIt would be faced with the choice of either becoming a prize to be fought over between those two powers or aligning itself with one or the other, most likely India given its difficult recent history over the last few decades.\n\nThe consequence would be that rather than giving the Tibetans greater freedom, independence would render them pawns, and rather than reducing tensions in the region, it would likely increase those between India, Pakistan and China. Tibet would be in the same position it was at the end of the 19th Century when it was a weak power at the mercy of the British and Chinese having to toe the line for whichever neighbour was stronger at the time.\n\nIts hard to see how the United States could avoid being drawn into such a geopolitical quagmire, with likely negative consequences for the Sino-American relationship as well. The US having played a key role in gaining freedom for Tibet could hardly stand aside if that freedom was threatened, and the Chinese in turn would view any US influence in a free Tibet as further evidence of the existence of an American hand behind the Tibetan Freedom Movement.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "979967e39d082f308b4d8aca3780ee55",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state Tibet has made enormous strides under Chinese rule\n\nContrary to the impressions forwarded by the proposition, Tibet has made enormous strides under Chinese rule. The urban population has increased seven-fold since 1950, [1] literacy has increased from the teens to being as high as 95%, [2] and the average life expectancy has increased from the low 30s to the 60s.\n\nFurthermore, with few natural resources and the economy in Han hands, there is a need for investment capital, and that capital can only come from China. Even the Dalai Llama acknowledged this in 2006, suggesting that a relationship with China similar to that between EU countries would be ideal. [3]\n\n[1] European Space Agency, ‘The Himalayan region’, esa.int, 18 February 2010, http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Eduspace_Environment_EN/SEM9VP0SAKF_2.html\n\n[2] Literacy rate among young people climbs in Tibet, People’s Daily Online, 31 July 2008, http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90882/6464183.html\n\n[3] Liu, Melinda, ‘Fears and Tears’, Newsweek, 19 May 2008, http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/03/19/fears-and-tears.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6c6562d7644e5620242ff02dd0edff51",
"text": "rnational asia international law house believes tibet should be independent state China has viewed the last century and a half as non-stop efforts by Westerners to divide China. This looks like another.\n\nThe last century and a half of relations between China and the West have from the Chinese perspective been one long period of national dismemberment. In 1842 the British took control of Hong Kong after the first Opium war, and after its sequel, China lost control of Shanghai and its own customs service. Efforts were made to sever Manchuria, Taiwan from China in the 20th, and Korea and Vietnam were fully removed from Chinese authority.\n\nAs a consequence the Chinese are quite paranoid about outside efforts to divide Chinese territory, and support for the Tibetan Independence, due to the fact that the West has no clear interests in the region, is interpreted chiefly as an effort to divide and weaken China. [1]\n\nAs a consequence, western condemnation tends to be counterproductive, leading to public sentiment in China turning far nastier towards legitimate Tibetan demands.\n\nThese sorts of views on the part of the Chinese Public are far from unwarranted given the likely consequences of Tibetan independence, namely the creation of a Pro-Western, anti-Chinese state on their borders, and the Chinese are therefore likely to respond to future moves in favour of Tibetan independence the same way Americans would have reacted to Pro-Confederate moves on the part of Great Britain or France during the US Civil War.\n\n[1] II. Origins of So-Called ‘Tibetan Independence’, http://www.china.org.cn/e-white/tibet/9-2.htm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
7d77a152fa3a5800df441b2713799885
|
Restricting Habeas Corpus is necessary in the face of the new and dangerous threat which modern terrorism poses.
Restricting suspected terrorists’ rights to challenge their detention is necessary to ensure that that individual cannot participate in future terrorist activities. The attacks of September 11th constituted a catastrophic and unprecedented attack on US soil, and the measures undertaken by the US at Guantanamo Bay, in holding many terrorist suspects without trial, are necessary to prevent future attacks of that nature. Terror suspects still have recourse to military tribunals, which contain many of the same safeguards as the federal court system
|
[
{
"docid": "0e35b98552c6d1e37c40669aaa17af9b",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict There is no reason why the United States cannot uphold constitutional protections such as Habeas Corpus and effectively combat terrorism at the same time. The two are not mutually exclusive. In fact, ensuring that suspected terrorists have access to Federal courts will save much-needed resources and ensure more accurate administration of justice. In the present case, it is unclear which of the Guantanamo detainees actually committed the acts that are used to justify their indefinite detention. Allowing detainees to challenge their detention would bring clarity to this uncertain situation and free up resources in the war against terrorism.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "5ca306fce17a3ddbecf4d103427df58f",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict Via legal precedent, [1] Habeas Corpus protections extend to foreign nationals detained in the US. Furthermore, to focus solely on the immigration status and purported guilt of suspected terrorists ignore the fact that Habeas Corpus exists to protect us all. Eliminating the rights for “bad people” necessarily eliminates them for the innocent as well.\n\n[1] Supreme Court of the United States, Boumediene v Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008), http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-1195.ZS.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8b55196355f605693d7c13fc25b40ced",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict The current war on terror is not comparable to past wars during which Habeas Corpus was suspended. Both the Civil War and World War II were openly declared wars of limited duration following invasions by hostile forces. The “war on terror” is nebulous and open-ended. In any case, history has harshly judged arbitrary detentions during wartime. Lincoln’s Civil War detentions and Roosevelt’s Japanese internment camps of the 1940s are embarrassing chapters in US national history. The fact that former presidents improperly suspended Habeas Corpus is all the more reason to exercise caution now. Additionally, the suspension of Habeas Corpus by the UK in 1971 arguably strengthened the cause of the IRA, and made it easier for the organisation to recruit members. Western governments should be careful not to repeat the mistakes of the past\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1b3867537321b70fd7fc0e531dffc905",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict Global terrorism calls for aggressive responses. We cannot allow our respective nations to be besieged by terrorists while we stand aside and do nothing. Our enemies are well aware of the legal framework in which the US authorities and their Allies operate, and will exploit it wherever possible. Constitutional freedoms are extremely important, but the security and continued existence of our nations must come first. The US and its Allies must make a stand and demonstrate that terrorism will not be tolerated.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eb382f4b698d9e2fa6112bc7c8716fd0",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict The hatred that terrorists feel for the US and its Allies does not depend on details of their respective legal systems. Their hate stems from our success in building a tolerant, democratic society at odds with their narrow vision of harsh conformity. Their propaganda seeks to radicalise young Muslims across the world not by arcane appeals to Habeas Corpus, but by twisted portrayals of Allied military actions against civilians in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia. If the prisoners currently held without trial in Guantanamo Bay were released, they could untold damage to the US and its Allies. The risk of this occurring clearly outweighs the ethical issues concerning the suspension of Habeas Corpus protections.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6284ecadeb4d6aed15d9dd112fb21bae",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict The necessity of the measures, and the size of the terrorist threat which faces the US, outweighs the possible problems posed in the opposition argument.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "40fb3f83962f85c45698a1a01d136873",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict Enemy combatants are not US citizens and as such they should not enjoy any protection which a US citizen enjoys under the Constitution.\n\nUnlawful enemy combatants are not US citizens. The only connection they have to the US is the desire to destroy it. As such, they do not fall within the group of people the Constitution is intended to protect. [1]\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Guantanamo appeal denied’, 12 March 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2842093.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "aedf4a1cd86da59f9bdc4cd03c50c60a",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict Habeas Corpus has often been suspended in times of conflict, when it has been deemed necessary.\n\nThere is a longstanding tradition of suspending Habeas Corpus protections during times of war and conflict. For example, President Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus during the Civil War. [1] Habeas Corpus was also suspended briefly in the Hawaii during World War II, immediately after the attacks on Pearl Harbour. [2] In the UK, Habeas Corpus was suspended in 1794, after the French declared war on Britain, [3] and in 1817, [4] in order to arrest parliamentary reformers. In 1971 Habeas Corpus was again suspended in the UK in order that IRA suspects could be arrested and detained. [5] 9/11 and other Al Qaeda plots require that Western countries respond in just as determined a way. The war on terror may not follow the rules of traditional warfare, but it is a war nonetheless. These precedents show that, in certain circumstances, the suspension of Habeas Corpus is both necessary and justified.\n\n[1] Lincoln, Abraham, ‘Proclamation Suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus’, teachingamericanhistory.org, 24 September 1862, http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=425\n\n[2] Anthony, J. Garner, Hawaii under Army Rule, Stanford University Press, p.5, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=V66lAAAAIAAJ\n\n[3] Holmberg, Tom, ‘Great Britain: Suspension of Habeas Corpus. 7 May 1794’, The Napoleon Series, July 2002, http://www.napoleon-series.org/research/government/british/c_habeus.html\n\n[4] ‘Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill’, Hansard, 24 June 1817, vol.36, cc1145-55, http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1817/jun/24/habeas-corpus-suspension-bill\n\n[5] Wilkinson, Paul, Terrorism versus Democracy: The Liberal State Response, 2nd ed., Routledge, 2006, p.82, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uq6oCZF7iHcC&dq\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c6897caf87fedfc9a4ab3dd12e333a6c",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict Disregarding Habeas Corpus protections sets a dangerous precedent for the treatment of the soldiers and citizens of the US and its Allies when captured by foreign forces.\n\nIf the US disregards Habeas Corpus protections, it sets a dangerous precedent for the rest of the world to follow. If other countries follow suit, the citizens and soldiers of the US and its Allies abroad could also be indefinitely detained and denied legal recourse if captured by foreign forces. This is especially relevant when considering journalists covering foreign conflicts, such as those currently occurring in the Middle East. [1]\n\n[1] Staff reports, ‘USA TODAY writer, 3 other journalists captured in Libya’, USA Today, 8 April 2011, http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-04-07-libya-journalists_N.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fe6ecec29c96802000ba5f7b4b4c0046",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict Suspending Habeas Corpus undermines the moral high ground of the US and its Allies, and strengthens the cause of the terrorists which these nations are fighting against.\n\nRestrictions on Habeas Corpus undermine the war against terror and put national security further at risk. Giving terrorist suspects the protection of Habeas Corpus legitimises the war against terror by ensuring that US actions against suspected terrorists have a legal basis, and are not in contravention of the rule of law. The moment that the US and its Allies show the rule of law the disrespect that typifies the regimes which the West seeks to overthrow, the fight for ‘hearts and minds’ will be lost. This effect can easily be seen in the results of the suspension of Habeas Corpus in the UK in order to arrest suspected IRA activists in 1971 – rather than suppressing the IRA as intended it increased support for the terrorist organisation. [1]\n\n[1] Wilkinson, Paul, Terrorism versus Democracy: The Liberal State Response, 2nd ed., Routledge, 2006, p.82, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=uq6oCZF7iHcC&dq\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d718534b9ff66d615a207bc1116b4881",
"text": "human rights international law punishment politics terrorism house would restrict Suspending Habeas Corpus makes it easier for terrorist organisations to demonise the US and its Allies, and thus to recruit more terrorists in its fight against the West.\n\nBy suspending Habeas Corpus, the US is playing into the hands of terrorists and creating more would-be terrorists for the future. Enemies of the West aim to demonstrate that the US is an oppressive state in order to make its model less attractive to others. In particular, they wish to show that America is at war with Muslims in order to radicalise young Muslims both at home and overseas. The US should take heed of the precedent in Northern Ireland, where widespread internment without trial radicalised many Catholic youths in the 1970s and drove them into the arms of the IRA.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
c5e27ce500b8fca26a6713cf7a9baea3
|
Force does more harm than good.
The use of force is incredibly damaging to the people you are trying to protect.
Military intervention inevitably leads to further casualties and loss of civilian life. All warfare has civilian costs due to imperfect strategic information, the use of human shields and the simple fact that more bombs, troops and guns leads to more violence and thus more death of those caught in the crossfire. Adding to this the propensity of forces to hide among civilian populations and, often, the lack of identifiable military uniforms, leads to further human costs and prolonged guerrilla warfare.
Adding to human cost is the infrastructural costs of prolonged warfare, particularly seen in interventions including bombing campaigns, leads to prolonged and sustained damage caused by the use of force both during war and in reconstruction.
For example, the NATO bombing campaign in Kosovo in 1998 led to 1,200-5,000 civilian deaths [1] .
If we are aimed at protecting the human rights of individuals, the massive loss of human life, and sustained damage to basic infrastructure necessary for the functioning of the state means the use of forces furthers human rights abuses, not stops them.
[1] "Kosovo: Civilian Deaths in the NATO Air Campaign." Human Rights Watch. United Nations High Commission for Refugees, n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,HRW,,SRB,,3ae6a86b0,0.html> .
|
[
{
"docid": "76ef19e2535ff8eec03a6096cb53f0ec",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Although there are some subjective elements of rights, there is generally a consensus amongst most people that fundamental human rights, such as being alive, are universally good. Although we should not impede sovereignty for subjective things, genocide, ethnic cleansing and other systematic abuses of human rights are things that are universal and thus should be protected for all people around the world.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "97afc5520818293ef029f830e3da1191",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society This is unlikely to happen in the majority of cases as not all countries have an anti-Western bias and not all intervening forces have to be Western or identifiably Western. Moreover, the best way to gain the support of a population is to tangibly impact their lives and demonstrate the commitment to their protection and their cause. The best solution for anti-intervention force bias comes with the intervening force itself when real people see troops fighting in a real way to protect them and their rights. There is no more powerful way to build trust than to save a member of someone's family or community in front of their eyes. Thus, this is a self-correcting issue. Although there may be initial issues with backlash from the region, most people will welcome those who are risking their lives to save them and their families.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "045584c23c4993245c4bbf0472dfc0f8",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Most human rights abuses are motivated by ideological factors that are not rationally calculated through a \"cost-benefit-analysis.\" Much of the world's human rights abuses are committed along ethnic or religious lines and thus are not open to incentives and disincentives but are rather absolutist obligations they think they have from their religion or ethno-cultural beliefs.\n\nMoreover, most interventions are costly, damaging for the intervening forces and are generally unappealing to domestic populations in the states that are intervening. As such, the political will for intervention is usually quite low and not feasible. Most regimes will know this and thus take this \"message\" from the international community with a grain of salt and therefore have no impact on their actions.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "274ce3b226c5ca2d4b6ec2f80e27d9b9",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Referring back to counterargument one, this again assumes the a priori existence of individual rights. Moreover, following this logic, as all individuals would, behind a \"veil of ignorance\", most certainly choose to live is a developed, prosperous nation, all developed nations would have the moral obligation to literally relocate the entire population of the developing world into their own countries. Simply because something may be seen as \"preferable\" to some people does not a moral imperative create.\n\nFurther, this experiment assumes universality of any conception of rights or \"human rights\". The subjective nature of what it means to be a human being between different faiths and cultures leads to different conceptions of what \"dignity\" means to humanity and thus enforcing the conception of \"dignity\" held by the militarily powerful on other states does not necessarily protect it, but in many ways can erode it.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5e77cdc25fdb89e49d298c21112ddeb0",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Individual rights are created by the state and do not exist in a vacuum, nor do they exist outside of the realm of the existence of a state. To argue that a “social contract” exists where one gives up their “rights” to the state is to suggest that these rights somehow exist outside of the scope of the state existing, which they do not. States empower individuals to have the capacity to do things and thus allow for practical rights to exist. The rights they allow or disallow, whether “human rights” or otherwise, are simply constructions of the state and its denial of certain rights is therefore in no way a breach of any contract or trust [1] . No state or external organisation has any right to decide what a state should or should not construct as its citizen’s rights and therefore has no basis for intervention.\n\n[1] Burke, Edmund. \"Reflections on the Revolution in France.\" Exploring the French Revolution. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/563/> .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1fe11d47fbe2c37d5fcd83da52c4228d",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Foreign intervention fragments the conflict.\n\nThe use of force by foreign agents fragments conflicts which perpetuates the war. The countries who are likely to and historically have participated in humanitarian intervention are developed Western nations such as the US, UK, Canada and France either unilaterally or under organisational banners such as NATO. In the vast majority of the world, the West is not well-liked and the education systems, media and local history have created negative perceptions of the West as \"imperialists\" and colonialists. Intervention can often be seen as \"neo-colonialism\" and the West trying to assert power to change regimes inside other countries around the world. This, combined with the inevitable human cost of the use of force, turns local populations against the intervening forces and allows government forces to cast any resistance movements that cooperate with the intervening forces as traitors to their country.\n\nThis is both bad in terms of causing large military opposition from both sides of the conflict against the troops who are intervening, but also fragments the conflict. Resistance movements splinter into those cooperating with the intervening forces and those who aren't. This fractures the resistance movements, reducing their chances of success and reducing the possibility of ceasefires by fragmenting the sides of the conflict making it hard to determine who effectively represents who at the negotiating table.\n\nA good example of this can be seen by the fragmentation of Sunni and Shi'a factions in Iraq post-intervention and the further entrenchment of Sunni opposition to the Shi'a after the Western forces specifically enriched the Shi'a through power and wealth for their cooperation1.\n\n1 \"Iraq in Transition: Vortex or Catalyst?\" Chatham House 04.-2 n. pag. Web. 7 Jun 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1c77ac403cc247e37413cf89a9d47196",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society This is an illegitimate violation of national sovereignty.\n\nHuman rights are a social construct that are derived from the idea that individuals have created on the subject. States empower individuals to have the capacity to do things and thus allow for practical rights to exist. The rights they allow or disallow, whether “human rights” or otherwise, are simply constructions of the state and its denial of certain rights is therefore legitimate practice of any state [1] .\n\nThe imposition of one state’s conception of what rights should or should not be protected is in no way morally justifiable or universally applicable. Different religions and cultures create different constructs of human dignity and humanity and thus believe in different fundamental tenets and “rights” each person should or should not have.\n\nIt is not legitimate to impede upon another state’s sovereignty due to subjective consideration imposed upon the less powerful by the superpowers of the global system.\n\n[1] Burke, Edmund. \"Reflections on the Revolution in France.\" Exploring the French Revolution. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/563/> .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "13d0dd080e5e742e4a7a46a36f9a05b4",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society National sovereignty ends when human rights are systematically violated.\n\nStates violate their right to non-intervention through systematic human rights abuses by violating the contract of their state.\n\nStates derive their rights of control and on the monopoly of violence through what is called the ‘social contract.’ A state gains its right to rule over a population by the people of that state submitting to it their rights to unlimited liberty and the use of force on others in society to the state in return for protection by that state [1] . The individual is sovereign and submits his rights to the state who derives sovereignty from the accumulation of an entire population’s sovereignty. This is where the legitimacy and right to control a population by force comes from. When a state is no longer protecting its people, but rather is systematically removing the security and eroding away the most basic rights and life of those citizens, they no longer are fulfilling the contract and it is void, thus removing their right to sovereignty and immunity from intervention.\n\nThe necessity of intervention in such a case comes from the desperation of the situation. Regimes that use the machinery of the state and their enriched elite against their populations hold all the wealth, power and military might in the country. There is no hope for self-protection for individuals facing a powerful, organized, and well-funded national army. In such a case, the sovereignty of the individuals need to be protected from the state that abuses them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "67ac27f201ea988f9b3b2462cd3a7956",
"text": "rnational global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Interventions can be small and successful.\n\nIt is the interventions that take a long time to succeed, such as Kosovo, or even fail such as Somalia, or those where many people do not buy into the justification such as Iraq that are remembered. However this forgets that there have also been many small successful interventions and sometimes the threat of intervention is enough. Sierra Leone is the forgotten conflict of Tony Blair’s premiership in the UK. In 2002 Britain sent 800 paratroopers into Sierra Leone, originally just to evacuate foreigners from the country but became an intervention when the British helped government forces drive out rebels which may have saved many lives. However it may also have emboldened Blair to help with intervention in Iraq. [1] This example also shows that it is important to have support on the ground as the British were seen as being legitimate and there was a functioning government who could do the rebuilding. Where this luxury does not exist it is important not to do as happened in Iraq and disband the civil service and prevent those natives who are qualified from running the country even if they may have been implicit in the previous regimes actions.\n\nWhere possible as little force as possible should be used. In Libya NATO only committed airpower and supplied weapons so keeping the conflict as much a domestic affair as possible. Slowly as it becomes accepted that interventions will happen the threat will become enough. Sudan may well in part have accepted the secession of South Sudan due to the US backing of the peace deal in 2005.\n\n[1] Little, Allan, ‘The brigadier who saved Sierra Leone’, BBC Radio 4, 15 May 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/8682505.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2cd35a56eeca7bce3a39211c06b1aadb",
"text": "Although prisoners may associate closely with other criminals within jail, many more offenders were introduced to crime outside prison. A deprived social background, a family life disrupted by domestic violence and family members with histories of criminal behaviour can all lead an individual to become involved with crime.\n\nFor many young men, prison can become a sanctuary from links with gangs or a chaotic and damaging home life. Once placed within the regulated, disciplined environment of the prison, they can be introduced to the essential skills and educational opportunities that they may have been denied in the outside world.\n\nPrison can give an individual the opportunity to develop the practical and psychological skills they require to escape social alienation. Many prisons in Europe, the UK and the States achieve this objective. US prisons may also operate special units that offer help and protection to offenders who want to leave gangs.\n\nUnder-staffing and a poor understanding of inmates’ needs are arguments for reform of the prison system, not arguments against incarceration itself. Where these issues are addressed, rehabilitation programmes have had many successes. Once political prejudices about building and funding rehabilitation oriented prisons are overcome, the benefits of penal supervision will become more accessible.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8883810f363f43434af15753d7617ba6",
"text": "Policy should not be dictated by religion\n\nArticle 7 of the Ugandan constitution is clear in its separation of church and state “Uganda shall not have a State religion.” The government must serve all its people equally regardless religious and cultural orientation. But this bill has been created with a religious motive. In his interview defending the anti-gay bill, MP David Bahati lamented, that God doesn’t accept homosexuality quoting a bible verse that the wages of sin is death[1]; as if the Ugandan parliament is filled with righteous souls! The constitution allows freedom of religion and prohibits the creation of political parties based on religion[2]. Laws and policies should therefore not base on bible verses as not everyone will share the same belief to such scriptures.\n\n[1] Jack Mirkinson, ‘Rachel Maddow Interviews David Bahati, Author Of Ugandan 'Kill The Gays' Bill’, huffingtonpost.com, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/09/rachel-maddow-bahati-uganda-gays_n_794271.html\n\n[2] U.S. Department of State, ’Uganda’, state.gov, http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/171644.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b4a56e6eb0c3e8e8ed93361e0c10dcf1",
"text": "It is simply untrue to present the Republicans as the party of small government. The two presidents under whom the size of government grew the fastest - both in terms of personnel and expenditure – were Reagan and Bush Jr. When Republicans says they are interested in small government they simply mean that they want it to be small enough to get under the bedroom door; making it more interventionist not less.\n\nThey have been reduced to a fringe organisation obsessed with a handful of issues, endlessly mouthed as soundbites to prove their orthodoxy to the most extreme wing of their party which does nothing to endear them to a largely uninterested electorate. In an age of economic austerity, the party simply has nothing meaningful to say on this, the most crucial, matter of the day.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df94007fb69e208f3b7d6ec240580415",
"text": "There are realistic and practical ways in which the policy of denying healthcare to smokers could be carried out. Smoking is a habit that has clear and demonstrable physical effects, which often correlate with the regularity and longevity of the habit; doctors are trained to recognize such symptoms and do not need patient confirmation. Furthermore, if the bill made it quite clear that healthcare was to be denied to present smokers, the hypothetical presented by the opposition is easily negated. The goal of such a bill would to be to ensure that both smokers gave up the habit and non-smokers did not take up the habit. In this case, the man taking up smoking is in the wrong and is acting contrary to the law. He would have little room for complaint.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "61ba2ff5d0be45fc9677dcdaa378da3a",
"text": "Forced evictions pave the road for African cities to set a trend towards Eco-Cities.\n\nA key character of global cities are the global connections made. Whether financial, economic, political, or cultural - global cities become a fundamental hub providing key resources. Forced evictions provide space in overcrowded, unorganised, cities whereby new architecture and districts can be built, and new trends set. Forced evictions provide spaces for new financial districts and beautiful cities to emerge across Africa.\n\nRecently plans have been set to implement 'Eco' projects across African cities. Proposed projects include the Konza Techno City, Nairobi; Eko Atlantic, Lagos; HOPE, Ghana; and Kampala Tower, Kampala, as part of the Venus Project.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "badaff1383e96d551b2de9716b5f7b3e",
"text": "More casual sex with barrier contraception is preferable to the current amount without contraception. The amount of consensual sex is not going to change no matter what the church teaches. As long as the use of barrier contraception was promoted along with this promotion of casual sex, it would be a huge net reduction in the cases of contraction of HIV. Therefore, condoning the use of barrier contraception would be the more responsible stand to take on the part of the Catholic Church.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df4b19af2c51a40ab2f2a68b5e578e1a",
"text": "The cost of space exploration exceeds the positive benefits\n\nNASA during the 1990s spent over a third of its budget simply keeping the ISS manned and the Space Shuttle working1; it will now spend $60 million per seat to use Russian transport to the ISS2. The vast majority of its spending on scientific research comes through ground based research, telescopes and unmanned missions. China has made no claims that there is a scientific benefit to its manned mission and nor has Russia in recent years. There are few experiments so important that they can justify the huge cost needed to allow them to be carried out by humans in zero gravity. NASA made a lot of noise about growing zero-gravity protein crystals as a potential cure for cancer when it was trying to justify building the ISS but has since dropped the claims as experiments have shown the claims were overstated. There are few experiments so important that they can justify the huge cost needed to allow them to be carried out by humans in zero gravity. 1 New York Times. (1995, March 6). Is NASA Among the Truly Needy? Retrieved May 19, 2011, from New York Times 2 Stein, K. (2011, May 18). Critical juncture for U.S. human spaceflight. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from The Examiner:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "14a0f1c133cf8566d50fabfb7247e4a2",
"text": "That’s what the status is now. If Africa is indeed rising, surely that is a better bet for Cape Verde? Cape Verde is already being integrated into Africa; it is a member of the Economic Community of West African States. There is an intention for these regional African communities to at some point merge into a market stretching across Africa; The African Economic Community. Cape Verde should increase its integration with a community it is already a member of.\n\nLooking to the European Union also ignores China, India and other important economise – including millions of fellow Portuguese speakers in Brazil, one of the much touted BRIC economies.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e788913e3633ebf69416cd7b67a9bae4",
"text": "Genetic screening allows for parents to give their children the possibility of living a life without a debilitating genetic condition. Surely those who live with these conditions would not want to have other endure their pain, when there is an option not to.\n\nBy having these genes that cause such pain, and short life expectancy eventually removed from the gene pool we are also increasing the strength of the human race.\n\nGenetic screening is only to be used to prevent and let families know about genetic defects. It is not discrimination to want humans to not bear genetic defects that debilitate their life, or end it premature through pain and suffering.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "386b496ec63c4fcf551923123d73a413",
"text": "An armed police force will deter criminal behaviour\n\nMost countries in Europe and North America have armed police forces, in part to deter criminal acts, but also to protect officers working in an armed or dangerous environment’ . Armed criminals operate in at least some areas of virtually every jurisdiction. Given this reality, a failure to routinely arm the police gives armed criminals a strong advantage in terms of their ability to threaten and commit violence, without any corresponding risk to themselves. [1] In Bristol in England where police are not routinely armed the deployment of armed police in inner-city areas in 2003 defused gang tensions and reduced crime enough to allow the armed police to be withdrawn again. [2] Only putting armed police in for brief periods will only have a short term impact, having permanently armed police is the only way to keep this deterrence in effect. A world-wide ‘meta-study’ of armed police patrols found some evidence that in high violence areas, targeted armed police patrols could chill down the tensions and reassure the community but the evidence was not very compelling and the authors acknowledged that such a ‘sticking plaster’ approach was no long term solution to urban violence [3] .\n\n[1] Kopel, David B., ed., Guns: Who Should Have Them, Prometheus Books, 1995.\n\n[2] BBC News, ‘Armed police patrols withdrawn’, 7 February 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2734997.stm accessed 20 September 2011\n\n[3] Koper, C.S. and Mayo-Williams E. (2006) Police crackdowns on illegal gun carrying: a systematic review of their impact on gun crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology Vol. 2 pp. 227-261.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
1b60e0f1571711df9876e323f7f392c4
|
U.S. policies have helped create the cartels
A change in US immigration law in 1996 meant that non-citizens and foreign born citizens sentenced to more than a year in jail are deported. This moved the problem from the USA’s cities to cities in Central America creating new gangs that were already bound by ties created in the US. Effectively gangs created in the US thrived in central America where they were able to overwhelm the local government and spread north to Mexico and back into the USA helping create the network of gangs and drugs traffickers that plague Mexico today. [1] Similarly the problems in Mexico represent the success of the US in cutting of the routes through the Caribbean used previously by drugs traffickers. Colombian criminals as a result simply switched routes and began smuggling cocaine and heroin through the Central American isthmus and Pacific routes. Both smuggling routes led through Mexico. The successes of the war on drugs in Columbia has reduced the size of the drugs groups in Columbia reducing their ability to control the whole route to the USA making room for the Mexicans to take the role of middleman through Central America. [2]
[1] Wolfe, Adam, 'Central America's Street Gangs Are Drawn into the World of Geopolitics', Power and Interest News Report, 25th Aug. 2005.
[2] Logan, Samuel, ''Mexico's Internal Drug War'', Power and Interest News Report, 14th August 2006.
|
[
{
"docid": "d8add096bb5b5028fc39876b15aefc80",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible These were alien criminals who should never have been in the United States in the first place. The blame for these people being able to create drugs cartels in Central America should not lie with the United States for deporting these people but with the Central American states for not then monitoring and controlling these returnees.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "c227c0d91dccb153bef7f9bb1edd2ab6",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible This is claiming exactly the opposite of the previous point on U.S. demand for drugs; is not Mexican demand for guns as much to blame for guns in Mexico as U.S. supply? The US has put considerable effort into making sure that the Mexicans are able to counter cartels armed with guns with U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers training Mexican army commandoes. Similarly the Marine Corps also is working on an exchange program with the Mexican Marine Corps that will include sharing experiences on urban warfare. The US also arms the Mexican armed forces to prevent them being outgunned by the gangs. [1]\n\n[1] Bowman, Tom, 'CIA And Pentagon Wonder: Could Mexico Implode?' NPR.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bf5f6a95c643843c9147c8a55d9cf0eb",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible There will always be two ways to solve the problem of illegal drugs, focusing on demand and focusing on supply. Focusing on supply is a valid strategy, as the US pushes the price of drugs on US streets up so it pushes the drugs beyond the ability of most people to afford the drugs and will as a result mean less drug addicts in the United States. This in turn could result in a drop in supply.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8cbbfa15379f4df0b051276f3fefe1c0",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Mexico has its own problems with drugs consumption so the demand problem can’t all be blamed on the US. Mexico City's former chief of police, Gertz Manero has said there are now 4.5 million crimes a year committed in Mexico. \"90% of those are stealing or are related to stealing. And 90% of those are for less than 8,000 pesos (about US$727). Mostly this is for drugs.\" Unemployment due to liberalisation of the economy has led to mass drug consumption so drugs would continue to flow into Mexico and enrich the cartels even if the U.S. drugs market dried up. [1]\n\n[1] Evans, Leslie, 'Electoral Democracy Has Yet to Shake Mexico's Corrupt Bureaucracy', UCLA International Institute, 16 March 2005.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8627149889f4e3668ae328eb0b821406",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Mexico’s government is no weaker than any other government. The country in Central America which has the lowest homicide rate is Costa Rica, [1] a country which has no standing army. [2] Yet it suffers from many of the same disadvantages that Mexico has, for example, like Mexico it is on the drugs route to the United States. This implies that at the very least having a weak government is not the whole cause of Mexico’s conflict.\n\nYes there is a weak government in Mexico, particularly at the local level, but we need to ask ourselves how the government becomes so subverted. The answer is money. There have been allegations that President Vicente Fox allowed the most powerful drug lord to escape prison in 2001 in return for $20 million. [3] If the very top of the governmental hierarchy can be subverted for money then the rest is as well.\n\n[1] Schwarz, Isabella Cota, ‘Homicide rate drops to lowest in region’ The Tico Times, 8 June 2012.\n\n[2] ‘Costa Rica’, The World Factbook, 24 May 2012.\n\n[3] Rohr, Mathieu von, ‘A Nation Descends into Violence’, Spiegel Online, 23 December 2010.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a00592cd21b16c7d6465474b87016e23",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible As Mexico’s biggest trading partner the United States always has a major role in the state of the Mexican economy. The United States is also partially to blame for the Peso crisis. Wall St in particular played up a ‘Mexican miracle’ helping to create a bubble, and idea that was also boosted by the US government which was making the case for the North American Free Trade Agreement at the time. [1]\n\nWe should also not be too quick to blame the economy as there is always some uncertainty in the figures; using different statistical methods you get different results. A study implies a growth rate of household income for Mexico of 4½-5½ percent per year in 1984-2006, which is substantially higher than the 2 percent implied by standard methods. [2] If this was the case then a poor economy could not be seen as much of a factor in the increase in violence and drugs trafficking.\n\n[1] Edwards, Sebastian, ‘The Mexican Peso Crisis: How much did we know? When did we know it?’ NBER working paper series, Working paper 6334, p.4\n\n[2] Carvalho Filho, Irineu de, and Chamon, Marcos, ‘The Myth of Post-Reform Income Stagnation: Evidence from Brazil and Mexico’, IMF working paper, (Aug. 2008), p.27.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5c4e2f085239f1a876a5511e12301e2c",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible The United States can be blamed for the downward spiral. There would not be a downward spiral of fear and violence if the United States was not a source of arms for the cartels.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "89d317a028a58a765e0bd5565d48c77a",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible U.S. supplies the guns used by drugs cartels\n\nWhile the US complains about the Mexico’s inability to stop drugs flowing north the USA seems equally unable to stop guns and weapons flowing south into Mexico. As Clinton says “Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians.” Clinton argues that one problem is that the bad guys outgun the law enforcement officers and so is supplying Mexico with better equipment such as night vision goggles, [1] however at least in the short term the only result can be an arms race and more violence as shown by the increasing violence in 2010 and 2011. [2] So long as the cartels are able to easily buy guns then the problem will not be solved. Here again the United States is to blame. The United States has 54,000 licenced gun dealers while Mexico only has one heavily guarded compound so the cartels smuggle their weapons in from the U.S. [3]\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Clinton admits US blame on Drugs’, 26 March 2009.\n\n[2] AFP, ‘Mexico drug death toll rising again in 2011’, Fracne24, 11 January 2011.\n\n[3] Beaubien, Jason ‘At Mexico’s Lond Gun Shop, Army Oversees Sales’, NPR, 24 June 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "720842e3662fe3255a91b45431c4e854",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible U.S. anti-drugs policy focuses on the supply of drugs not the root problem of demand\n\nFor the last two decades the USA has been focused on the supply side of reducing the drugs trade. Making it a 'war on drugs' forces a fight back from the drugs cartels leading to gunfights and instability in the countries en route. This happened in Columbia, in Peru and now in Mexico. The focus on supply, or else the containment of drugs in Mexico, is shown by the Obama's US-Mexico border policy press release that devotes a lot more space to extra boarder security to catching the drugs as they reach the US compared with one small paragraph on demand. [1] The U.S. war on drugs focusing on supply and transit routes has clearly failed and has been failing for decades. Back in 1992 Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori declared the war a failure while claiming that between 1980 and 1990, when the U.S. was engaging in military efforts to stop production and transportation, coca production increased tenfold. [2]\n\n[1] Napolitano, Janet et al. ‘Administration Officials announce U.S.-Mexico Border Security Policy: A comprehensive response & commitment’, The White House, 24 March 2009.\n\n[2] Williams, Ray B., ‘Why “The War on Drugs” Has Failed’, Psychology Today, 6 June 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e633a8c7518f8c140335d76c727a80a7",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible U.S. demand for drugs\n\nIt is the rich US that creates the demand for drugs in the first place. Without this demand the price of drugs would be low and the profits of drugs trafficking through Mexico to the USA would disappear. In 2010 an estimated 22.6 million Americans aged 12 or over were illicit drug users. [1] And this immense drugs market was estimated to provide Mexican cartels with earnings between $13.6 and $48.4 billion. [2] Drugs are therefore a problem that is best dealt with from the perspective of reducing demand. Hillary Clinton accepted this when she said “Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade”. However the US' answer to the drugs problem has so far been the 'war on drugs' concentrating massive investment on trying to reduce supply and this includes funding the Mexican government in its war as well and at the same time as making this admission Clinton was giving $80 million to provide Mexico with Blackhawk helicopters. [3]\n\n[1] Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, ‘Results from the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings’, NSDUH Series H-41, HHS Publication No. (SMA) 11-4658. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2011.\n\n[2] Cook, Colleen W., ‘Mexico’s Drug Cartels’, CRS Report for Congress, 16 October 2007, p.4\n\n[3] BBC News, ‘Clinton admits US blame on Drugs’, 26 March 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1b9d55d9b9dbbdb5debf43ef3295c3ed",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Violence creates a downward spiral of violence\n\nJust as the United States cannot be blamed for weak governance in Mexico it cannot be blamed for the spiral of decline that occurs as a result of that weak government. Once the police and local government are infiltrated it becomes very difficult to stop the violence. The gangs gain enough control and power that they can no longer be stopped without a massive investment by the central government. Any who do stand up to the traffickers are killed as, for example, was Alejandro Domínguez when appointed to serve as the city police chief of Nuevo Laredo. Domínguez made it clear that he would not negotiate with the cartels. As he was leaving his office on June 8 2005, his first day on the job, he was ambushed and killed by gunmen. [1]\n\nA culture of fear exists in Mexico, as in other countries where the government fails to suppress gang warfare. Fear within the government and police force paralyses both into inaction Municipal and state officials insist that the problem is not theirs to solve, since drug trafficking is a federal crime, or they engage in denial, claiming that the situation is improving and that the violence will soon end. While journalists report the death and violence they fear to report on who caused them, the background or the causes of the violence; the media self-censors itself. [2]\n\n[1] Althaus, Dudley, and Buch, Jason, ‘Nuevo Laredo police chief killed on street’, Houston Chronicle, 3 February 2011.\n\n[2] Laurie Freeman, ‘State of Siege: Drug-Related Violence and Corruption in Mexico Unintended Consequences of the War on Drugs, WOLA Summer report (2006), pp.5-7.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87da51e0baa4ae52e211c86e6f599220",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Weak Mexican government is to blame not the U.S.\n\nWhen there is an internal conflict such as this it is almost always a weak government that is to blame for not preventing an escalation of violence. The government is to blame as it is meant to have a monopoly on the use of force, conflicts such as this drugs war occur when that monopoly on violence is broken. In Mexico the election of Vicente Fox as president may have been a democratic triumph for ending the 70 year one party rule by the P.R.I. but in terms of the effectiveness of the central government it was not a success. The National Action Party has been weak in the lower house and senate so unable to advance a legislative agenda. [1] An inability to legislate significantly reduces the ability of the federal government to respond to the drugs crisis. This reduces the ability of the Federal government to step in and sort out local problems. There has been an upsurge of social unrest of all types, not just drugs violence but protests, riots and strikes as well. [2]\n\nDrugs traffickers have taken over many local areas, the local government, police and even some of the army has been penetrated by the drugs traffickers. This leaves the local government unable to do anything against the traffickers. It was not the drugs traffickers who created the institutional problems that allowed the government to become penetrated in the first place; corruption, inefficient police forces and a weak judiciary were already a problem. [3]\n\n[1] The Economist, ‘The siesta congress’, 21 January 2012.\n\n[2] Gundzik, Jephraim P. , ‘As Elections Approach, Mexico Faces Internal Instability', Power and Interest News report.\n\n[3] Freeman, Laurie, ‘State of Siege: Drug-Related Violence and Corruption in Mexico Unintended Consequences of the War on Drugs, WOLA Summer report (2006), p.2.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4c39c4ab03faa530ff529204c9c0cbc3",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Mexico is poor; it is the economic conditions that drive conflict not the U.S.\n\nDeclining real income drives social unrest and instability. Real incomes for workers in Mexico's manufacturing sector declined by a cumulative 2.6 percent between 1995 and 2005. It is likely that the decline in the informal economy is larger. The Government keeps a tight control over the minimum wage preventing it from rising. Although this does not affect many Mexicans directly a lot more have their wages set at a multiple of the minimum wage. At the same time there has been high unemployment and lower benefits. [1] In 1994-5 Mexico was hit hard by a financial crisis known as the ‘peso’ or ‘Tequila’ crisis. The peso depreciated by 47%, inflation went up to 52% and GDP fell by 6% not reaching its 1993 level until 1997. Unsurprisingly household income fell substantially; by 31% between 1994 and 1996, those in poverty rose from 10.4% of the population to 17% [2] Since 1996 although Mexico has experienced growth not only has it been slower than most developing countries this has been significantly cut into in real per capita terms by population growth. Mexico has large disparities in income between urban and rural areas and the gap between rich and poor has been widening. [3] The inequality leads people to be more willing to engage in the potentially lucrative drugs trafficking and the informal economy. Unemployment meanwhile makes them more likely to take drugs themselves as an escape.\n\n[1] Gundzik, Jephraim P. , ‘As Elections Approach, Mexico Faces Internal Instability', Power and Interest News report.\n\n[2] Baldacci, Emanuele, Luiz de Mello and Gabriela Inchauste, Financial crises, Poverty and Income distribution, IMF Working paper, pp.20-21.\n\n[3] Economy Watch, ‘Mexico Economy’, 24 March 2010.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
3ba546f8ec7fe660f7b6d556717911cb
|
Violence creates a downward spiral of violence
Just as the United States cannot be blamed for weak governance in Mexico it cannot be blamed for the spiral of decline that occurs as a result of that weak government. Once the police and local government are infiltrated it becomes very difficult to stop the violence. The gangs gain enough control and power that they can no longer be stopped without a massive investment by the central government. Any who do stand up to the traffickers are killed as, for example, was Alejandro Domínguez when appointed to serve as the city police chief of Nuevo Laredo. Domínguez made it clear that he would not negotiate with the cartels. As he was leaving his office on June 8 2005, his first day on the job, he was ambushed and killed by gunmen. [1]
A culture of fear exists in Mexico, as in other countries where the government fails to suppress gang warfare. Fear within the government and police force paralyses both into inaction Municipal and state officials insist that the problem is not theirs to solve, since drug trafficking is a federal crime, or they engage in denial, claiming that the situation is improving and that the violence will soon end. While journalists report the death and violence they fear to report on who caused them, the background or the causes of the violence; the media self-censors itself. [2]
[1] Althaus, Dudley, and Buch, Jason, ‘Nuevo Laredo police chief killed on street’, Houston Chronicle, 3 February 2011.
[2] Laurie Freeman, ‘State of Siege: Drug-Related Violence and Corruption in Mexico Unintended Consequences of the War on Drugs, WOLA Summer report (2006), pp.5-7.
|
[
{
"docid": "5c4e2f085239f1a876a5511e12301e2c",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible The United States can be blamed for the downward spiral. There would not be a downward spiral of fear and violence if the United States was not a source of arms for the cartels.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "8627149889f4e3668ae328eb0b821406",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Mexico’s government is no weaker than any other government. The country in Central America which has the lowest homicide rate is Costa Rica, [1] a country which has no standing army. [2] Yet it suffers from many of the same disadvantages that Mexico has, for example, like Mexico it is on the drugs route to the United States. This implies that at the very least having a weak government is not the whole cause of Mexico’s conflict.\n\nYes there is a weak government in Mexico, particularly at the local level, but we need to ask ourselves how the government becomes so subverted. The answer is money. There have been allegations that President Vicente Fox allowed the most powerful drug lord to escape prison in 2001 in return for $20 million. [3] If the very top of the governmental hierarchy can be subverted for money then the rest is as well.\n\n[1] Schwarz, Isabella Cota, ‘Homicide rate drops to lowest in region’ The Tico Times, 8 June 2012.\n\n[2] ‘Costa Rica’, The World Factbook, 24 May 2012.\n\n[3] Rohr, Mathieu von, ‘A Nation Descends into Violence’, Spiegel Online, 23 December 2010.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a00592cd21b16c7d6465474b87016e23",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible As Mexico’s biggest trading partner the United States always has a major role in the state of the Mexican economy. The United States is also partially to blame for the Peso crisis. Wall St in particular played up a ‘Mexican miracle’ helping to create a bubble, and idea that was also boosted by the US government which was making the case for the North American Free Trade Agreement at the time. [1]\n\nWe should also not be too quick to blame the economy as there is always some uncertainty in the figures; using different statistical methods you get different results. A study implies a growth rate of household income for Mexico of 4½-5½ percent per year in 1984-2006, which is substantially higher than the 2 percent implied by standard methods. [2] If this was the case then a poor economy could not be seen as much of a factor in the increase in violence and drugs trafficking.\n\n[1] Edwards, Sebastian, ‘The Mexican Peso Crisis: How much did we know? When did we know it?’ NBER working paper series, Working paper 6334, p.4\n\n[2] Carvalho Filho, Irineu de, and Chamon, Marcos, ‘The Myth of Post-Reform Income Stagnation: Evidence from Brazil and Mexico’, IMF working paper, (Aug. 2008), p.27.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c227c0d91dccb153bef7f9bb1edd2ab6",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible This is claiming exactly the opposite of the previous point on U.S. demand for drugs; is not Mexican demand for guns as much to blame for guns in Mexico as U.S. supply? The US has put considerable effort into making sure that the Mexicans are able to counter cartels armed with guns with U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers training Mexican army commandoes. Similarly the Marine Corps also is working on an exchange program with the Mexican Marine Corps that will include sharing experiences on urban warfare. The US also arms the Mexican armed forces to prevent them being outgunned by the gangs. [1]\n\n[1] Bowman, Tom, 'CIA And Pentagon Wonder: Could Mexico Implode?' NPR.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d8add096bb5b5028fc39876b15aefc80",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible These were alien criminals who should never have been in the United States in the first place. The blame for these people being able to create drugs cartels in Central America should not lie with the United States for deporting these people but with the Central American states for not then monitoring and controlling these returnees.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bf5f6a95c643843c9147c8a55d9cf0eb",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible There will always be two ways to solve the problem of illegal drugs, focusing on demand and focusing on supply. Focusing on supply is a valid strategy, as the US pushes the price of drugs on US streets up so it pushes the drugs beyond the ability of most people to afford the drugs and will as a result mean less drug addicts in the United States. This in turn could result in a drop in supply.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8cbbfa15379f4df0b051276f3fefe1c0",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Mexico has its own problems with drugs consumption so the demand problem can’t all be blamed on the US. Mexico City's former chief of police, Gertz Manero has said there are now 4.5 million crimes a year committed in Mexico. \"90% of those are stealing or are related to stealing. And 90% of those are for less than 8,000 pesos (about US$727). Mostly this is for drugs.\" Unemployment due to liberalisation of the economy has led to mass drug consumption so drugs would continue to flow into Mexico and enrich the cartels even if the U.S. drugs market dried up. [1]\n\n[1] Evans, Leslie, 'Electoral Democracy Has Yet to Shake Mexico's Corrupt Bureaucracy', UCLA International Institute, 16 March 2005.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87da51e0baa4ae52e211c86e6f599220",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Weak Mexican government is to blame not the U.S.\n\nWhen there is an internal conflict such as this it is almost always a weak government that is to blame for not preventing an escalation of violence. The government is to blame as it is meant to have a monopoly on the use of force, conflicts such as this drugs war occur when that monopoly on violence is broken. In Mexico the election of Vicente Fox as president may have been a democratic triumph for ending the 70 year one party rule by the P.R.I. but in terms of the effectiveness of the central government it was not a success. The National Action Party has been weak in the lower house and senate so unable to advance a legislative agenda. [1] An inability to legislate significantly reduces the ability of the federal government to respond to the drugs crisis. This reduces the ability of the Federal government to step in and sort out local problems. There has been an upsurge of social unrest of all types, not just drugs violence but protests, riots and strikes as well. [2]\n\nDrugs traffickers have taken over many local areas, the local government, police and even some of the army has been penetrated by the drugs traffickers. This leaves the local government unable to do anything against the traffickers. It was not the drugs traffickers who created the institutional problems that allowed the government to become penetrated in the first place; corruption, inefficient police forces and a weak judiciary were already a problem. [3]\n\n[1] The Economist, ‘The siesta congress’, 21 January 2012.\n\n[2] Gundzik, Jephraim P. , ‘As Elections Approach, Mexico Faces Internal Instability', Power and Interest News report.\n\n[3] Freeman, Laurie, ‘State of Siege: Drug-Related Violence and Corruption in Mexico Unintended Consequences of the War on Drugs, WOLA Summer report (2006), p.2.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4c39c4ab03faa530ff529204c9c0cbc3",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible Mexico is poor; it is the economic conditions that drive conflict not the U.S.\n\nDeclining real income drives social unrest and instability. Real incomes for workers in Mexico's manufacturing sector declined by a cumulative 2.6 percent between 1995 and 2005. It is likely that the decline in the informal economy is larger. The Government keeps a tight control over the minimum wage preventing it from rising. Although this does not affect many Mexicans directly a lot more have their wages set at a multiple of the minimum wage. At the same time there has been high unemployment and lower benefits. [1] In 1994-5 Mexico was hit hard by a financial crisis known as the ‘peso’ or ‘Tequila’ crisis. The peso depreciated by 47%, inflation went up to 52% and GDP fell by 6% not reaching its 1993 level until 1997. Unsurprisingly household income fell substantially; by 31% between 1994 and 1996, those in poverty rose from 10.4% of the population to 17% [2] Since 1996 although Mexico has experienced growth not only has it been slower than most developing countries this has been significantly cut into in real per capita terms by population growth. Mexico has large disparities in income between urban and rural areas and the gap between rich and poor has been widening. [3] The inequality leads people to be more willing to engage in the potentially lucrative drugs trafficking and the informal economy. Unemployment meanwhile makes them more likely to take drugs themselves as an escape.\n\n[1] Gundzik, Jephraim P. , ‘As Elections Approach, Mexico Faces Internal Instability', Power and Interest News report.\n\n[2] Baldacci, Emanuele, Luiz de Mello and Gabriela Inchauste, Financial crises, Poverty and Income distribution, IMF Working paper, pp.20-21.\n\n[3] Economy Watch, ‘Mexico Economy’, 24 March 2010.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "89d317a028a58a765e0bd5565d48c77a",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible U.S. supplies the guns used by drugs cartels\n\nWhile the US complains about the Mexico’s inability to stop drugs flowing north the USA seems equally unable to stop guns and weapons flowing south into Mexico. As Clinton says “Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians.” Clinton argues that one problem is that the bad guys outgun the law enforcement officers and so is supplying Mexico with better equipment such as night vision goggles, [1] however at least in the short term the only result can be an arms race and more violence as shown by the increasing violence in 2010 and 2011. [2] So long as the cartels are able to easily buy guns then the problem will not be solved. Here again the United States is to blame. The United States has 54,000 licenced gun dealers while Mexico only has one heavily guarded compound so the cartels smuggle their weapons in from the U.S. [3]\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Clinton admits US blame on Drugs’, 26 March 2009.\n\n[2] AFP, ‘Mexico drug death toll rising again in 2011’, Fracne24, 11 January 2011.\n\n[3] Beaubien, Jason ‘At Mexico’s Lond Gun Shop, Army Oversees Sales’, NPR, 24 June 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "720842e3662fe3255a91b45431c4e854",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible U.S. anti-drugs policy focuses on the supply of drugs not the root problem of demand\n\nFor the last two decades the USA has been focused on the supply side of reducing the drugs trade. Making it a 'war on drugs' forces a fight back from the drugs cartels leading to gunfights and instability in the countries en route. This happened in Columbia, in Peru and now in Mexico. The focus on supply, or else the containment of drugs in Mexico, is shown by the Obama's US-Mexico border policy press release that devotes a lot more space to extra boarder security to catching the drugs as they reach the US compared with one small paragraph on demand. [1] The U.S. war on drugs focusing on supply and transit routes has clearly failed and has been failing for decades. Back in 1992 Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori declared the war a failure while claiming that between 1980 and 1990, when the U.S. was engaging in military efforts to stop production and transportation, coca production increased tenfold. [2]\n\n[1] Napolitano, Janet et al. ‘Administration Officials announce U.S.-Mexico Border Security Policy: A comprehensive response & commitment’, The White House, 24 March 2009.\n\n[2] Williams, Ray B., ‘Why “The War on Drugs” Has Failed’, Psychology Today, 6 June 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e633a8c7518f8c140335d76c727a80a7",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible U.S. demand for drugs\n\nIt is the rich US that creates the demand for drugs in the first place. Without this demand the price of drugs would be low and the profits of drugs trafficking through Mexico to the USA would disappear. In 2010 an estimated 22.6 million Americans aged 12 or over were illicit drug users. [1] And this immense drugs market was estimated to provide Mexican cartels with earnings between $13.6 and $48.4 billion. [2] Drugs are therefore a problem that is best dealt with from the perspective of reducing demand. Hillary Clinton accepted this when she said “Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade”. However the US' answer to the drugs problem has so far been the 'war on drugs' concentrating massive investment on trying to reduce supply and this includes funding the Mexican government in its war as well and at the same time as making this admission Clinton was giving $80 million to provide Mexico with Blackhawk helicopters. [3]\n\n[1] Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, ‘Results from the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings’, NSDUH Series H-41, HHS Publication No. (SMA) 11-4658. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2011.\n\n[2] Cook, Colleen W., ‘Mexico’s Drug Cartels’, CRS Report for Congress, 16 October 2007, p.4\n\n[3] BBC News, ‘Clinton admits US blame on Drugs’, 26 March 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e73ebd036702963d1badac83ddd6f8b6",
"text": "rnational americas law crime policing house believes united states responsible U.S. policies have helped create the cartels\n\nA change in US immigration law in 1996 meant that non-citizens and foreign born citizens sentenced to more than a year in jail are deported. This moved the problem from the USA’s cities to cities in Central America creating new gangs that were already bound by ties created in the US. Effectively gangs created in the US thrived in central America where they were able to overwhelm the local government and spread north to Mexico and back into the USA helping create the network of gangs and drugs traffickers that plague Mexico today. [1] Similarly the problems in Mexico represent the success of the US in cutting of the routes through the Caribbean used previously by drugs traffickers. Colombian criminals as a result simply switched routes and began smuggling cocaine and heroin through the Central American isthmus and Pacific routes. Both smuggling routes led through Mexico. The successes of the war on drugs in Columbia has reduced the size of the drugs groups in Columbia reducing their ability to control the whole route to the USA making room for the Mexicans to take the role of middleman through Central America. [2]\n\n[1] Wolfe, Adam, 'Central America's Street Gangs Are Drawn into the World of Geopolitics', Power and Interest News Report, 25th Aug. 2005.\n\n[2] Logan, Samuel, ''Mexico's Internal Drug War'', Power and Interest News Report, 14th August 2006.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
398a3389cb9e0f96cd7b89a601e20806
|
Cultural relativism and adapting to conflict
The issues underlying all debates on child soldiers go to the very heart of intercultural justice, politics and governance. International and supranational legislation notwithstanding, the notion that children should be protected from all forms of violence at any cost is expressly western.
The facts stated in the introduction are not sufficient to support the creation of a defence of cultural relativism to charges of recruiting and using child soldiers. “Cultures” are not simply sets of practices defined by history and tradition. They are also methods of living, of survival and of ordering societies that change and develop in response to societies’ environments. Within many communities, children are inducted (or induct themselves) into military organisations as a result of necessity. The traditional providers of physical safety within a society may have been killed or displaced by war. Communities left vulnerable by long running and vaguely defined conflicts may have no other option but to begin arming their children, in order to help them avoid violent exploitation. A great many child soldiers in South Sudan actively sought out units of the rebel army known to accept child recruits [i] . Following the death of parents and the dispersal of extended families, children gravitated towards known sources of safety and strength – organisations capable of providing protection and independence within nations utterly distorted and ruined by conflict.
Western notions of inviolate childhood, free of worry and violence, are merely a cultural construct. This construct cannot be duplicated in societies beset by forms of privation and conflict that have been alien to western liberal democracies for the last seventy years. Attempting to enforce this construct as law- and as a form of law that can trump domestic legislation- endangers vulnerable communities, inhibits the creation of democratic norms and can even criminalise the children it claims to protect.
[i] “Raised by war: Child Soldiers of the Southern Sudanese Second Civil War”, Christine Emily Ryan, PhD Thesis, University of London, 2009
|
[
{
"docid": "aced230a24661359a2ded81322f8271e",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require Side proposition are attempting to make an argument in favour of reforming the ICC’s prosecution guidelines, but are doing so in terms of the culturally relative definition of adulthood. In other words, side proposition are trying to discuss war, realpolitik and international justice using the language of social anthropology. This approach is flawed.\n\nArguments about the appropriate age to allow a child to hunt, to leave school or to marry pale beside the life-and-death significance of participation in warfare. A child does not become an adult by acting like a soldier, and those who recruit children into military organisations do not necessarily view them as adults. Indeed, children are seen as easy targets for recruitment, due to their emotional immaturity, their gullibility and deference to those who wield authority.\n\nChildren may join armed groups out of necessity, and in the interests of survival, but this does not mean that those armed groups should accept child volunteers, or should escape criminal liability when they do so. Although the west is now a safe and prosperous place to live, the categories of war crime that the ICC prosecutes were created in response to the depravity and ruthlessness of conflicts that liberal-democracies experienced directly.\n\nThe developed, liberal democratic world is not blind to the sense of necessity that drives children to take up arms. However, it understands only too well that child soldiers are unnecessary. Children do not autonomously organise into armed militias – they are recruited by states and groups with defined political and military objectives. Such groups should be aware that there is no value or necessity underlying the use of children in combat, and should be made legally accountable when they flaunt this norm.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "ab169f3674c06597aacf4144e153ad0a",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require Opposition agree that the culture and law of a nation has a prodigious impact on the conscience of its civilians. However, according to Alcinda Honwana, an anthropologist and authority on the topic of child soldiers, the problem does not \"have its roots in African traditional culture.\" [i] Although culture has an impact on society, the issue of child soldiers is not affiliated with it.\n\nSide proposition implied that conscripting children should be excusable if it is permitted by an authoritative body of local law. However, are laws based on value-sets that do not aspire to an accessible law making process more valid than the abiding law of that nation? No. Side opposition believe that the \"rule of law is a legal maxim according to which no one is immune to the law.” The fundamental purpose of government is the maintenance and promotion of basic security and public order. Without it the nation will deteriorate.\n\nThe proposition mentioned the Democratic Republic of Congo as an example. The DRC signed the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” on 21 September 1990. During this time era, Congo was not a declared democracy. However they have hitherto developed a more democratic and stable government. Additionally, DRC has not withdrawn from the Convention on the Rights of the Child, thus accentuating the fact that they are strongly against conscription of children.\n\nBeing oblivious of the fact that conscripting child soldiers is illegal is no defence. As side opposition’s substantive material will show, both national and international systems of law are expected to take account of the fact that cultural, environmental and social plurality will lead to variable rates of compliance with particular laws. While it may be difficult to make community leaders liable for the creation of child soldiers, the ICC frequently seeks to make officials linked to state actors liable for failing to protect children from military recruitment [ii] .\n\nMoreover, cultural relativism originally assumed some degree of parity and open exchange between communities with diverging cultural values. There is no parity between the value-sets of stable liberal democratic states and the adaptations that vulnerable cultures undergo in order to survive amongst prolonged military conflict.\n\nFinally, it would damage the reputation and reduce the efficiency of the ICC if states were permitted to argue that regions in which child soldiers were active had an established tradition of military activity among the young.\n\n[i] “Children’s Involvement in War: Historical and Social Contexts”, Alcinda Honwana, The Journal of the history of Childhood and Youth, Vol 1 2007\n\n[ii] The Prosecutor v Thomas Lubanga Dylio, The International Criminal Court, http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Situations+and+Cases/Situations/Situation+ICC+0104/Related+Cases/ICC+0104+0106/Democratic+Republic+of+the+Congo.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "939a1f278d0cb100b3e451b453cf5919",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require The ICC is not likely to target children or the leaders of marginalised communities when prosecuting the use of child soldiers. Officials of states parties who play a role in commanding and deploying military units can be held liable for failing to prevent the use of child soldiers at a local level.\n\nIf the agony of their circumstances forces a community to recruit ever younger boys into its militia, then officers, ministers or heads of state, along with the commanders of non-state actors, can be brought to trial for allowing children to be used as soldiers. This will be the case whether these individuals do so negligently or by omission. A guilty party need not engage in a positive act.\n\nICC prosecutors and judges exercise their discretion in order to avoid the types of injustice that the proposition describes. The lack of prosecutions relating to the ad-hoc use of child soldiers by pro-independence groups in South Sudan underlies this fact [i] .\n\nMoreover, the ICC is bound by the principle of complementarity, an obligation to work alongside the domestic courts and legislators of the states that refer potential war crimes to the international community. If a state’s corpus of law allows for a margin of appreciation in judging the actions of isolated and endangered communities, these principles must also be reflect in the investigation and inquiries conduct by the ICC.\n\nComplementarity enables the ICC to function with the flexibility and insight that proposition assume it lacks.\n\n[i] “Raised by war: Child Soldiers of the Southern Sudanese Second Civil War”, Christine Emily Ryan, PhD Thesis, University of London, 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "91e9ad7012195fa144cd50826177d990",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require The proposition understates the extent to which the needs of child soldiers are catered to by international justice bodies. The Paris Principles [i] , which are used to guide the formation and functions of national human rights organisations, state that\n\n“3.6 Children who are accused of crimes under international law allegedly committed while they were associated with armed forces or armed groups should be considered primarily as victims of offences against international law; not only as perpetrators...\n\n3.7 Wherever possible, alternatives to judicial proceedings must be sought, in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other international standards for juvenile justice.”\n\nAlthough not strictly binding, an onus is placed on bodies such as the ICC to seek alternatives to the trial process when dealing with children. (The Principles define a child as anyone less than 18 years of age).\n\nEven where children are placed in the role of officers or recruiters, they are unlikely to be tried in the same fashion as an adult.\n\nThis leaves only the issue of social exclusion following the process of demobilisation and treatment. Many of the problems of reintegration highlighted by the proposition do not seem to be uniquely linked to ICC prosecutions. Columbian child soldiers are as likely to be perceived as threatening whether or not they have come to the attention of the ICC. The ICC does not create negative stereotypes of former child soldiers.\n\nAs noted above, it seems perverse to give military commanders an opportunity to use cultural relativism to excuse their culpability for what would otherwise be a war crime. Ranking officers are much more likely than Yemeni tribesmen or orphaned Sudanese boys to understand the intricacies of such a defence, and much more likely to abuse it. Realistically, the commanders of child solders, and the politicians who sanctioned their use are the only class of individuals pursued by the ICC.\n\nWhere the boundaries between community leader, military officer and political leader become blurred, the court will always be able to fall back on its discretion. Practically, however, this mixing of roles is only likely to be observed in marginal communities a few major conflict zones. This does not favour stepping away from established judicial practice in order to create an entirely new form of defence.\n\n[i] “Principles and Guidelines On Children Associated With Armed Forces or Armed Groups”, International Workshop on National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, 2007, http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/IMG/pdf/Paris_Conference_Principles_English_31_January.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ff72c042db5309b7589b3bda5531d1d1",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require The purpose of the resolution is not to eliminate conflict in the developing world. Side proposition are merely seeking to remove the harmful side effects of the way in which the use of child soldiers is currently prosecuted – the risk of criminalising children and teenagers, the stigma attached to being a child soldier, and the condemnation of communities that rely on child soldiers for protection.\n\nChildren are already the victims of atrocities perpetrated against civilians. They already volunteer to engage in military service. Armed groups that target civilian populations have already broken international law and have proven willing to do so repeatedly. Children will always be a target, whether or not they have sought out the means with which to defend themselves.\n\nWith the international community unwilling to provide wide-ranging policing and supervision of international legal norms, it is not just to condemn individuals and communities who unwillingly take up arms to try to survive attacks by groups who flagrantly disregard international law.\n\nPeaceful communities forced to adopt abnormal survival strategies in the face of lawless aggression should be given the opportunity to compel the ICC to make situation specific judgments.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "15d75a63176688303dcbc9db8f5e70d6",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require As noted above, the definition of adulthood accepted within western liberal democracies is not a cultural absolute. It can be argued that the legal cut-off point- be it sixteen, eighteen or twenty-one years of age- is largely arbitrary. Children who care for disabled parents take on adult responsibilities inconceivable to many undergraduate students. Many developing world cultures would regard the under-emphasis of practical skills and physical training that exists in the education systems of knowledge-based western economies to be tantamount to neglect.\n\nIn both war-torn Afghanistan and peaceful Botswana, a boy of fourteen is considered old enough and able enough to hunt; to protect his younger siblings; to marry or to be responsible for a harvest. Why should an Afghani child or his parents be condemned for allowing him to participate in the defence of his community? A family in a similar position in Botswana may never have been confronted with that choice. Although they might find the idea appalling in peace-time, the pressing necessity of war can cause opinions and beliefs to become highly flexible.\n\nThis restatement of cultural relativism goes hand in hand with side proposition’s concluding objection. Although a culture can quickly assimilate and normalise necessary practices- such as arming children- it need not think that they are objectively good and valuable. It may be keen to abandon the practice.\n\nA community that responds to an urgent need to arm children may not want to arm children.\n\nSide opposition regard the use of child soldiers as symptomatic of cultural depravity, of a callous attitude to suffering. This approach patronises communities subject to privations and abuses now unknown in the west. It assumes that traditions cannot be overturned and that societies in the developing world will hasten to use their children as cannon-fodder for without devoting any thought or debate to the risks involved.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df4a88a642636e48292436b6dcd516d1",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require It is not sufficient to observe that there exist groups that use brutality to recruit and control child soldiers. As accounts of conflicts in South Sudan and Myanmar show, politically motivated recruitment of children is less common than children volunteering through necessity.\n\nSide opposition should not overlook the fact that there are few constructive alternatives available to children in such situations. Educational institutions are often the first forms of state support to be withdrawn when war breaks out. Many children are orphaned as a result of the indiscriminate targeting of civilians. Taking flight as a refugee may postpone a child’s exposure to conflict, but is rarely useful in escaping it.\n\nProposition have already established that child soldiers do not originate exclusively within state-based bodies or organised opposition groups seeking control of a state. They are just as likely to be the products of necessity or non-western conceptions of adulthood. The status quo is blind to this distinction, failing to recognise that military involvement is entirely consistent with other norms of adulthood in certain non-western cultures. Further, taking up arms as part of an organised, coherent force is often preferable to remaining a vulnerable, untrained civilian.\n\nFinally, it should be noted that very few opposition-side speakers are likely to argue that individuals, including children, do not have a right to defend themselves against aggression. However, a right to self-defence can be rendered meaningless if weak individuals are not permitted to combine their strength and resources to defend themselves. For ICC prosecutors this would likely be seen as the first step to forming a militia. For a physically weak fourteen year old, it is simply a survival strategy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "15a8da0d9a95ed5f1719516363b573aa",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require The failure of rule of law\n\nAs the anthropologist and lawyer Sally Falk-Moore observed “law is only ever a piecemeal intervention by the state in the life of society.” [i]\n\nLaws are, ultimately, social norms that are taught, enforced and arbitrated on by the state. The value of these norms is such that they are deemed to be a vital part of a society’s identity and the state is entrusted with their protection. However, this ideal can be difficult to achieve. Debate as to which norms the state should be custodian of is constant. Where there is a disconnect between a law and the daily lives, aspirations and struggles of a society, it becomes unlikely that that law will be complied with. Generally, a state will not be able to give a pronouncement the force of law if it does not reflect the values held by a majority of a society.\n\nCompliance with the law can be even harder to obtain in highly plural societies. Even in plural societies ruled peacefully by an effective central government (such as India), communities’ conceptions of children’s rights may be radically different from those set down in law. The Indian child marriage restraint act has been in force since 1929, but the practice remains endemic in southern India to this day [ii] . Governments can attempt to enforce compliance with a law, through education, incentives or deterrence.\n\nWhat if the state that is intended to mount the “piecemeal intervention” of banning the use of child soldiers is weak, corrupt or non-existent? What if a state cannot carry out structured interventions of the type described above? Norms that state that the conscription of children is acceptable- due to tradition or need- will be dominant.\n\nSituations of this type will be the rule rather than the exception in underdeveloped states and states where conflict is so rife that children have become participants in warfare. The ICC has jurisdiction to prosecute individuals with command over military units who use children as combatants [iii] , but how should the concept of a “commander” be defined in these circumstances?\n\nIn order for the juristic principles underlying the authority of the ICC to function properly, it is necessary for there to be a degree of certainty and accessibility underlying laws promulgated by a state. While ignorance of the law is not a defence before the ICC, it impossible to call a system of law fair or just that is not overseen by a stable or accepted government. This is not possible if a state is so corrupt that it does not command the trust of its people; if a state is so poor that it cannot afford to operate an open, reliable and transparent court and advocacy system; if territory with a state’s borders is occupied by an armed aggressor. Western notions of rule-of-law are almost impossible to enforce under such conditions. All of these are scenarios encountered frequently in Africa, and central and southern Asia.\n\nSome regions within developing nations are so isolated from the influence of the state, or so heavily contested in internecine conflicts, that communities living within them cannot be expected to know that the state nominally responsible for them has signed the Convention of the Rights of The Child or the Rome Statute. Nor can the state attempt to inform them of this fact. Laws still exist and are enforced within such communities, but these are not state-made forms of law.\n\nFor an individual living within a community of the type described above- an individual living in the DRC, in pre-secession South Sudan [iv] or an ethnic minority enclave on the border of Myanmar [v] - the question is a simple one. Does the most immediate source of authority and protection within his world- his community- condone the role that children play in armed conflict? He should not be made liable for abiding by laws and norms that have sprung up to fill a void created by a weak or corrupt central state. There is little hope that he will ever be able to access the counter-point that state sponsored education and engagement could provide.\n\nChild soldiers and their commanders are simply obeying the strongest, the most effective and the most stable source of law in their immediate environment.\n\n[i] “Comparative Law in a Global Context: The Legal Systems of Asia and Africa”, Werner Menski, Cambridge University Press, 2006\n\n[ii] “State of the World’s Children 2009”, UNICEF, United Nations, 2008\n\n[iii] “Elements of Crimes”, International Criminal Court, http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Legal+Texts+and+Tools/Official+Journal/Elements+of+Crimes.htm\n\n[iv] “Child Soldiers: Global Report 2008”, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 2007, p315, http://www.childsoldiersglobalreport.org/files/country_pdfs/FINAL_2008_Global_Report.pdf\n\n[v] “Child Soldiers: Global Report 2008”, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 2007, p240, http://www.childsoldiersglobalreport.org/files/country_pdfs/FINAL_2008_Global_Report.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1e96113acd85b3b9f0f2d20473e57e91",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require Removing barriers to demobilisation, disarmament and rehabilitation\n\nIt can easily be conceded, without weakening the resolution, that war and combat are horrific, damaging experiences. Over the last seventy years, the international community has attempted to limit the suffering that follows the end of a conflict by giving soldiers and civilians access to medical and psychological care. This is now an accepted part of the practice of post-conflict reconstruction, referred to as Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) [i] .\n\nThe effects of chronic war and chronic engagement with war are best addressed by a slow and continuous process of habituation to normal life. Former child soldiers are sent to treatment centres specialising in this type of care in states such as Sierra Leone [ii] .\n\nWhat is harmful to this process of recovery is the branding of child soldiers as war criminals. The stigma attached to such a conviction would condemn hundreds of former child soldiers to suffering extended beyond the end of armed conflicts.\n\nSentencing guidelines binding on the ICC state that anyone convicted of war crimes who is younger than eighteen should not be subject to a sentence of life imprisonment. Their treatment, once incarcerated, is required to be oriented toward rehabilitation.\n\nMany child soldiers become officers within the organisations that they join. Alternately, they might find themselves ordered to seek more recruits from their villages and communities. For these children participation in the conflict becomes participation in the crime itself. What began as a choice of necessity during war-time could, under the status quo, damage and stigmatise a child during peace-time [iii] . Even if their sentence emphasises reform and education, a former child soldier is likely to become an uninjured casualty of the war, marked out as complicit in acts of aggression. When labelled as such children will become vulnerable to reprisal attacks and entrenched social exclusion.\n\nDiscussing attempts to foster former Colombian child combatants, the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers state that, “The stigmatization of child soldiers, frequently perceived as violent and threatening, meant that families were reluctant to receive former child soldiers. Those leaving the specialized care centres moved either to youth homes or youth protection facilities for those with special protection problems. While efforts continued to strengthen fostering and family-based care, approximately 60 per cent of those entering the DDR program were in institutional care in 2007.” [iv]\n\nCrucially, fear of being targeted by the ICC may lead former child soldiers to avoid disclosing their status to officials running demobilisation programs. They may be deterred from participating in the DDR process [v] .\n\nMoreover, the authority of the ICC is often subject to criticism on the international stage by politicians and jurists linked to both democratic states [vi] and the non-liberal or authoritarian regimes most likely to become involved in conflicts that breach humanitarian law. It cannot assist the claims of the ICC to be a body that represents universal concepts of compassion and justice if it is seen to target children- often barely in their teens- in the course of prosecuting war crimes.\n\nAs the Child Soliders 2008 Global Report notes, “Prosecutions should not, by focusing solely on the recruitment and use of child soldiers, exclude other crimes committed against children. Such an approach risks stigmatizing child soldiers and ignores the wider abuses experienced by children in conflict situations. It is on these grounds that some have questioned the exclusive child-soldier focus of the ICC’s charges against Thomas Lubanga. After all, the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC/L), the armed group he led, is widely acknowledged to have committed numerous other serious crimes against children, as well as adults.” [vii]\n\n[i] “Case Studies in War to Peace Transition”, Coletta, N., Kostner, M., Widerhofer, I. The World Bank, 1996\n\n[ii] “Return of Sierra Leone’s Lost Generation”, The Guardian, 02 March 2000, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/mar/02/sierraleone?INTCMP=SRCH\n\n[iii] “Agony Without End for Liberia’s Child Soldiers”, The Guardian, 12 July 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/12/liberia-child-soldiers?INTCMP=SRCH\n\n[iv] “Child Soldiers: Global Report 2008”, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 2007, p103, http://www.childsoldiersglobalreport.org/files/country_pdfs/FINAL_2008_Global_Report.pdf\n\n[v] “Child Soldiers: Global Report 2008”, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 2007, p16, http://www.childsoldiersglobalreport.org/files/country_pdfs/FINAL_2008_Global_Report.pdf\n\n[vi] “America Attacked for ICC Tactics”, The Guardian, 27 August 2002, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/aug/27/usa.ianblack?INTCMP=SRCH\n\n[vii] “Child Soldiers: Global Report 2008”, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 2007, pp32-33, http://www.childsoldiersglobalreport.org/files/country_pdfs/FINAL_2008_Global_Report.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2c069f6a8e6ed4186f3d7c6cf1d1ced5",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require The cultural construction of armed conflict\n\nThe jurisdiction of the ICC is primarily exercised according to culturally constructed assumptions about the way war works – that there will be a clear division between aggressors and defenders, that armies will be organised according to chains of command, the civilians will not be targeted and will be evacuated from conflict zones. But countless conflicts in Africa and central Asia have proven these assumptions to be flawed.\n\nIt should not be forgotten that almost all formulations of this motion define cultural relativism only as a defence to the use of child soldiers. It will still be open for ICC prosecutors to prove that the use of child soldiers has been systematic, pernicious and deliberate, rather than the product of uncertainty, necessity and unstable legal norms. Moreover, not all defences are “complete” defences; they do not all result in acquittal, and are often used by judges to mitigate the harshness of certain sentences.\n\nIt can be argued that it was never intended for the ICC to enforce laws relating to child soldiers against other children or leaders of vulnerable communities who acted under the duress of circumstances. At the very least, those responsible for arming children in these circumstances should face a more lenient sentence than a better-resourced state body that used child soldiers as a matter of policy.\n\nDue to the nature of conflicts in developing nations, where the geographic influence of “recognised” governments is limited, and multiple local law-making bodies may contribute to an armed struggle, it is difficult for the international community to directly oversee combat itself. United Nations troops are often underfunded, unmotivated and poorly trained, being sourced primarily from the same continent as the belligerent parties in a conflict. When peacekeepers are deployed from western nations, their rules of engagement have previously prevented robust protection of civilian populations. Ironically, this is partly the result of concerns that western states might be accused of indulging in neo-colonialism. It is outrageous for the international community to dictate standards of war-time conduct to communities and states unable to enforce them, while withholding the assistance and expertise that might allow them to do so.\n\nTherefore, the ICC, as a specialist legal and investigative body, should be encouraged to use the expertise it has accumulated to distinguish between child military participation driven by a desire to terrorise populations or quickly reinforce armies, and child military participation that has arisen as a survival strategy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e54851f0530fd6051d203f5ffd1528c8",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require Punishing objectively harmful conduct\n\nOf the tens of thousands of children exposed to armed conflict throughout the world, most are recruited into armed political groups. Quite contrary to the image of child soldiers constructed by the proposition, these youngsters are not de-facto adults, nor are they seeking to defend communities who will be in some way grateful for their contributions and sacrifices. Child soldiers join groups with defined political and military objectives.\n\nChildren may volunteer for military units after encountering propaganda. Many children join up to escape social disintegration within their communities. Several female child soldiers have revealed that they joined because to escape domestic violence or forced marriage. Many children who do not volunteer can be forcibly abducted by military organisations. One former child soldier from Congo reported that “they gave me a uniform and told me that now I was in the army. They said that they would come back and kill my parents if I didn’t do as they said.” [i]\n\nOnce inducted into the army, children are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. They are usually viewed as expendable, employed as minesweepers or spies. The inexperience and gullibility of children is used to convince them that they are immune to bullets, or will be financially rewarded for committing atrocities. Many children are controlled through the use of drugs, to which they inevitably become addicted [ii] .\n\nFor every account the proposition can provide of a child who took up arms to defend his family, there are many more children who were coerced or threatened into becoming soldiers. Whatever standard of relativist morality side proposition may choose to employ, actions and abuses of the type described above are object4ively harmful to children.\n\nMoreover, the process of turning a child into a soldier is irreversible and often more brutal and dehumanising than combat itself. Proposition concedes that child soldiers will be in need of care and treatment after demobilising, but they underestimate the difficulty of healing damage this horrific.\n\nThe use of child soldiers is an unpardonable crime, which creates suffering of a type universally understood to be unnecessary and destructive. It should not be diluted or justified by relativist arguments.\n\nIt would undermine the ICC’s role in promoting universal values if officers and politicians complicit in the abuses described above were allowed to publicly argue cultural relativism as their defence. Moreover, it would give an unacceptable air of legitimacy to warlords and brigands seeking to operate under the pretence of leading legitimate resistance movements\n\n[i] Child Soldiers International, http://www.child-soldiers.org/home\n\n[ii] “Child Soldiers: Global Report 2008”, Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, 2007, p299, http://www.childsoldiersglobalreport.org/files/country_pdfs/FINAL_2008_Global_Report.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c1de42867298dd61d4db9e9708d95a98",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require Making children military targets\n\nThe purpose of the ban on the use of child soldiers is to prevent the normalisation of such tactics in conflict zones. It is not an inflexible implementation of a lofty European ideal. The ban, and the role of the ICC in enforcing it, is designed to reduce the likelihood that civilians will be deliberately targeted in developing world war zones. Why is this necessary?\n\nIf the defence set out in the motion is used to reduce the number of war crimes convictions attendant on the use of child soldiers, not only will numbers of child soldiers rise, but children themselves will become military targets. Communities ravaged and depleted by war, under the status quo, may be seen as minimally threatening. Armies are not likely to target them as strategic objectives if it is thought that they will offer no resistance. However, if there is no condemnation and investigation of the use of child soldiers, they will become a much more common feature of the battlefield. The increasing militarisation of children will make those children who do not wish to participate in armed conflict- children pursuing some alternate survival strategy- automatic targets. All children will be treated as potential soldiers. The communities that children live in will become military targets.\n\nThe resolution, although seeking to enable children to protect themselves, will simply make them targets of the massacres, organised displacement and surprise attacks that characterise warfare in Africa and central Asia.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "25520a23796704359549119fff09852d",
"text": "ure traditions law human rights international law society family house would require Universal rights and collective compromises\n\nCultural relativism is the philosophical belief that all cultures and cultural beliefs are of equal value and that right and wrong are relative and dependant on cultural contexts. Accordingly, relativists hold that universal human rights cannot exist, as there are no truly universal human values. If rights are relative, the laws that protect them must also be relative.\n\nIf we accept proposition’s contention that culturally relative values can evolve in response to conflicts and crises, then any perverse or destructive behaviour given the force of ritual and regularity by a group’s conduct can be taken to be relative. If the group believes that a practice is right, if it ties into that group’s conception of what is just and good or beneficial to their survival, then there can be no counter argument against it – whether that practice has been continuous for a hundred years or a hundred days.\n\nSystems of law, however, reflect the opinions, practices and values of everyone within a state’s territory, no matter how plural its population may be. Similarly, objections to specific aspects of the universal human rights doctrine are fragmentary, not collective. While a handful of communities in Yemen may object to a ban on the use of child soldiers, many more throughout the world would find this a sensible and morally valuable principle. It is necessary for both the international community and individual nation states to adjust their laws to reconcile the competing demands of plural value systems. Occasionally, a value common among a majority of cultures must overrule the objections of the minority.\n\nIt is perverse to give charismatic leaders who convince impoverished communities to send their sons and daughters into combat an opportunity to use cultural relativism to excuse their culpability for what would otherwise be a war crime. Officers, politicians or dissident commanders are much more likely than Yemeni tribesmen or orphaned Sudanese boys to understand the intricacies of such a defence, and much more likely to abuse it. The commanders of child soldiers are the only class of individuals who should fear the ICC.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
92e52fe884418e24ec21eb48626d185e
|
Repatriation poses a danger for illegal immigrants
The system of repatriating illegal immigrants can be proven harmful for these immigrants on several levels. Some illegal immigrants, although they might not fall under the official category of refugees, have fled dangerous situations such as persecution, violation of human rights and severe poverty. In 2009, France and the UK sent back several migrants that had fled the Taliban to Afghanistan when the country was still at war1. To send these people back to their country of origin would be a severe attack on their liberty and security. Having a zero-tolerance policy on illegal immigration will also make it harder for those who are trafficked to escape from criminal gangs because if they contact the authorities they will be sent home. This gives the criminals behind people-trafficking more power over their victims and will lead to worse living/working conditions in illegal industries.
1 The Telegraph, "France deports illegal Afghan migrants on joint Franco-British flight", 22 October 2009,, accessed 31 August 2009
|
[
{
"docid": "c6492eac9f1ca5283c6af5632d19d3dd",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Although it might be true that immigrants might be harmed by repatriation in some cases, the majority of illegal immigration takes place because of economic reasons, and those people can return safely. The United High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) sets the conditions for voluntary repatriation on the grounds of legal (absence of discrimination, free from persecution), physical (freedom from attack, safe routes for return) and material (access to livelihoods) safety1. If this is not the case, these people should be given temporary asylum. Victims of trafficking are usually given special protection, as is the case with the EU, which also imposes tough rules on criminals involved2.\n\n1 Refugee Council Online, \"Definitions of voluntary returns\", accessed 31 August 2011\n\n2 European Commission, \"Addressing irregular immigration\", 30 June 2011, , accessed 31 August 2011\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "6204e24135986b1baaf4c595de4007c6",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Repatriation is a more direct solution to the problem, and it is not sure whether these alternatives would work. Tougher border controls will only result in immigrants finding better ways to avoid them; improving economical conditions in poor countries is a slow and insecure progress, and the situation in many developing countries in unlikely to improve anytime soon. Giving illegal immigrants temporary working visas will not stop some immigrants from staying in their host country after their visas have expired if they prefer the living conditions. Even in the case where they do decide to go back to their country of origin, this means the money they have earned will be spent there, and not in the country they have worked. This means the states loses out on revenue.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1f4cb9c38848dce437fbaa3feff22457",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would The repatriation of illegal immigrants is not immoral because they do not have the right to be in that country in the first place. Laws are put in place to prevent people to live certain countries without a legitimate reason, and if these laws are wilfully breached, people must face the consequences. It is true that people have the right of freedom of movement, but this right is restricted to the borders of one's home country, and are widened by international agreements. But even then the freedom of movement can be restricted, even for people in Western countries. If we take the example of a European or an American that wants to go on holiday to a tropical island, we see that freedom of movements is relative. Legally this person can be free to go, but if he or she does not have money to pay a ticket or refuses to do so, this right can still be taken away.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "392a2e9d230d7a601d07694a3248e7e3",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would It might be true that repatriation is a costly option, but so are other alternatives. Illegal immigrants are already putting a costly burden on the state by using its resources without giving much back. If this situation is left on its own, the long-term costs of keeping illegal immigrants might be higher than the relative short-term cost of repatriation. Alternatives, such as nationalisation of immigrants are also very costly and time-intensive, and would moreover encourages more potential migrants to come and obtain the country's nationality.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "286a453eec130f8ce36411ec4718cc49",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would A repatriation policy will not effectively target this area of illegal immigration. Criminal networks will always find ways of smuggling people into a country and evading detection. All a repatriation policy will do is make these gangs more sophisticated when it comes to hiding illegal immigrants. This not only makes it more difficult to discover and undermine these networks, but also puts the illegal immigrants that are involved in these criminal activities at risk. If there is a standard repatriation policy for all illegal immigrants, vulnerable groups such as trafficked women are less likely to seek help, because not only is it likely that they will be repatriated, but they also put the lives of themselves and their families at risk by going through this procedure, rather than receiving anonymous help. As a result, illegal immigrants that are often at the bottom of criminal organisation will be worse off, while the criminal at the top will get more power over their victims.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "727a09c02ba26e20c690453be30661b3",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would The repatriation of all illegal immigrants is an impossible task to start with, so if this policy is adopted and fails in its execution, this will lead to a greater loss of trust in the government. If immigration policies focus more on the integration of illegal immigrants, this will have a more beneficial effect than criminalizing them. Marking illegal immigrants as criminals that have to leave the country as soon as possible will actually incite more conflict between migrants and populists.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "16a59665a42e2652c0d1ba61c9a75239",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would It is impossible to prove that all illegal immigrants are a drain on the system and so their cost to society cannot be used as a justification for repatriation policies. Many illegal immigrants pay taxes in some way and actually contribute to the economy of a country. For instance, every time an illegal immigrant buys something, they pay the same amount of sales tax or VAT as any other person. Illegal immigrants do not always undercut the labour market. The illegal workforce is a necessary part of the economy because lawful residents do not want jobs such as casual labour, agricultural or domestic jobs. Illegal immigrants often provide vital services that would otherwise be too expensive or hard to find if regular workers were employed e.g. cleaning, childcare and manual labour. Goods would become too expensive to produce if, for example, parts of the agriculture industry had to employ lawful residents/migrants.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "16dd02ebe9c60f2ddfc4af87f45ab67c",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would There are many alternatives to a repatriation policy that will more effectively target the problems caused by illegal immigration. Countries can toughen border controls and have better systems in place for granting asylum. Voluntary repatriation is unworkable, even if accompanied by financial assistance, because many illegal immigrants want to stay in the country. Involuntary repatriation is inhumane and harmful because it restricts the freedom of movement for people, and separates them from their family and friends, whilst they are forced to go back to potentially harmful situations. Repatriation will not stop the numbers of people coming to the country. Illegal immigration does not occur because a country is a 'soft touch': very few, if any, countries have no problems with illegal immigration. The reasons behind immigration are social, political and economic and have nothing to do with an individual country's policy on illegal immigration. Those who turn to illegal immigration are often desperate and will pay no attention to the immigration policies of a country.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1915010f607abcb061a1130d2cfc27d3",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Repatriation is expensive and unrealistic\n\nThe repatriation of all illegal immigrants is impossible to realize, and this large-scale project would cost large sums of money. The Center for American Progress study released in March of 2010 concluded that a strategy aimed at deporting the US population of illegal immigrants would cost the government approximately $285 billion over five years. (A deportation-only policy would amount to $922 in new taxes for \"every man, woman, and child in this country).\"1 In separate research released in January, UCLA professor Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda found that if undocumented immigrants were removed from the economy, it would reduce US GDP by $2.6 trillion over ten years.1\n\nThe impracticality of repatriation lies not only in the costs of the transportation and the help given to immigrants, but also in the time and effort of finding all illegal immigrants. A repatriation policy would be never-ending and a waste of time and money. It would be better to target only those illegal immigrants who pose a proven risk of harm to society.\n\n1. Apsan, 2010 http://news.jornal.us/article-4716.Mass-Deportation-Of-illegal-Immigrant...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b52ea226d7d8b26c7ea8d34ff6f4e93d",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Repatriation is immoral\n\nThe repatriation of illegal immigrants, even if it is not completely under coercion, is immoral. Even if the repatriation is 'voluntary', immigrants know they have no alternatives, and might agree to go back voluntary because the next step would be involuntary repatriation. This means that illegal immigrants are severely restricted in their freedom of movement. In the Western world, people can move around relatively easily, and this is seen as an inalienable right. To restrict this for people that do not come from this part of the world would be inhumane. Moreover, illegal immigrants have often built their lives in the country they reside in, having a family, sometimes children, work and a social circle. Often, children from illegal immigrants get citizenship because of their age, whilst their parents are repatriated. This forceful separation of children from their parents is a violation of their human rights, as article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that the family is the natural unit in society which is entitled to state protection1. Separating children from their mother can be seen as a violation of this right.\n\n1 United Nations, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948,, accessed 31 August 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "63a5c430d1bfad1ea3dfca9ff4de2e6d",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Alternatives are better\n\nThere are alternatives to the repatriation of illegal immigrants that are much more attainable. First of all, there has to be more attention to the root causes of migration, rather than attacking the results. The money that would be spent on repatriation could be used for prevention of immigration by focusing on border controls and improving economic conditions in countries where migrants come from. Trade agreements between developed and developing countries could be improved, which gives poorer countries more opportunities to trade. Most illegal immigrants migrate to Western countries to earn money, so if there are more opportunities for foreign workers to operate legally and on a temporary basis, with the assurance that they can come back if needed, this will remove the current incentive for many illegal immigrants to stay in their host country.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "99630fef4e2137150d60dca58abe38a7",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Illegal immigration is facilitated by criminal networks\n\nRepatriating illegal immigrants would lead to fewer opportunities for criminal networks to gain entry to the country. Illegal Immigration is linked to dangerous criminal activity such as people and drug trafficking, terrorism and the sex trade. An estimated 270 000 victims of human trafficking live in industrialized countries, of whom 43% are forced into commercial sexual exploitation, mostly women and girls1. This is both dangerous for those involved in illegal immigration but also increases the criminal activity in a country, putting lawful residents at risk. The state also has a duty to protect its citizens from the harms associated with illegal immigration. Illegal immigration fuels dangerous industries such as prostitution and the drug trade, repatriating illegal immigrants cuts off a vital source of labour for these industries and could contribute to the eradication of these industries.\n\n1 UN.GIFT, \"Human Trafficking: The Facts\",, accessed 31 August 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b1cea6eff5dd3db68d1a57d75fcb9d45",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Costs of illegal migrants and harm to labour market\n\nIllegal immigrants cost the state in money, time and resources. It is difficult to give an accurate number on the cost of illegal immigrants for the rest of the population (the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) has come up with numbers as high as $1,183 per household in the state of California1), but they are likely to put a strain on resources by not paying taxes whilst demanding social services such as healthcare and education. As a result, they take taxpayer's money away from those who are lawfully entitled to use these services and put a burden on the state. Moreover, illegal immigrants undercut the labour market by accepting low wages and working under illegal conditions. This is harmful to lawful residents because it takes employment opportunities away from them and encourages employers to seek illegal labour in order to keep costs down. Removing the illegal workforce would increase the number of jobs available to lawful residents and force employers to pay fair wages and provide safe working conditions.\n\n1 Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), \"The Costs to Local Taxpayers for Illegal Aliens\", 2006,, accessed 31 August 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "be4af169500e57ca8f3ae4a355ce63fc",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would There needs to be a tough stance to prevent illegal immigration.\n\nThe only way to stop the problem of illegal immigration is to take a hard-line stance and adopt policies of repatriation. This means that illegal immigrants, after it has been proven through a fair hearing that they have no legitimate reason to stay, will be granted a period of voluntary repatriation, where they receive counselling and help to return to their country. If this does not work, and the illegal immigrant wants to stay, he or she will forced to repatriate. Repatriation is needed because illegal immigrants are residing in a country which is different from their country of origin, without fulfilling the legal requirements to do so. They also do not make the same contributions to the state as other people do, such as paying taxes. This means that illegal immigrants are actively harming the legal system, the citizens of the country and legal immigrants. At the same time, the number of illegal immigrants is rising every year, with an estimated 11.5-12 million illegal immigrants living in the US alone1. These kind of numbers show that the rules on immigration need to come with tough sanctions to ensure that they are not exploited or broken in the future. Repatriation is necessary because it targets successful illegal immigrants and ensures a comprehensive immigration policy that aims to reduce illegal immigration. What this policy of repatriation will do, is that it firstly will reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, which will lead to a decline of harms caused by them. Secondly, it will act as a strong deterrence for future immigrants. Repatriation sends a message to potential illegal migrants that their presence in the country will not be tolerated and that any attempt to stay in the country illegally will be unsuccessful.\n\n1 BBC News, \"BBC guide on illegal immigration in the US\", 2005, accessed 31 August 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5f20403f2f506860d1ae81c5e0fc09f1",
"text": "rnational global law human rights society immigration minorities house would Loss of trust in the government\n\nFailing to remove illegal immigrants undermines public confidence in the government and its migration policy. In the UK, opposition leader Ed Milliband has acknowledged that Labour had lost trust in the south by underestimating the number of illegal immigrants and the impact they would have on people's wages1. People believe that allowing those who have no right to remain in the country to stay on means the whole immigration system is broken. Legitimate migrants such as refugees, students and those with visas for work will be lumped together with illegal immigrants, and calls will grow for all forms of migration to be restricted. Populist feeling may also be inflamed against ethnic minorities, with increased social tensions.\n\n1 BBC News, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13133544\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
61d5103b08d3f63c9420195647d05a69
|
Argentina inherited Spain’s claim to sovereignty
Both Argentina and the islands were under Spainish sovereignty. Spain ruled the islands from Argentina – they were therefore part of the same territory – doing so free of British intervention (or complaints) from 1770 until 1811, i.e. 41 years.
Upon independence from Spain, Argentina rightfully asserted sovereignty over the former Spanish territory, a principle that would latter be known under international law as uti possidetis juris. Britain did not claim sovereignty over the islands when Spain left them in 1811. Nor did Britain immediately challenge Argentina’s assertion of sovereignty in 1820, when David Jewett claimed the islands for Argentina, or in 1825, when the first treaty between the new country and Britain was signed.
|
[
{
"docid": "b6bc37bd96e2971d8f419c20ab597832",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland The fact that Spain never formally renounced sovereignty is irrelevant – when Britain asserted its territorial claim Spain acquiesced.\n\nAdditionally if Spain’s claim did not lapse when it evacuated its colony then surely neither did Britain’s. Nor is it obvious that Argentina should have inherited the Spanish claim to the Falklands – they lie 250 miles off the coast of mainland South America.\n\nBritain was of course not going to immediately contest the 1816 claim as she did not yet recognise Argentina so far as Britain was concern the Argentines were not sovereign and did not have sovereignty over any of their territory – at the time the UK recognised Spanish sovereignty over the mainland that Argentina claimed.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "8b81fb34dcc93750e01e53e50dec8f1a",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Vernet sought the permission of the British consulate before establishing his colony – clearly even he thought there was ambiguity over the status of the islands.\n\nMoreover the British and Spanish settlements ended not because of commercial failure but because of indirect pressure caused by war. If Argentinian sovereignty survives expulsion through war then presumably British sovereignty could survive temporary abandonment due to war.\n\nIt is also difficult to describe a settlement as permanent when it was on the point of collapse when the British took it over.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d2cc1c524f0a832cd7ff7d3afe39519",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Britain already has a working relationship with Argentina. In 2001, Tony Blair became the first British prime minister to visit Argentina since the 1982 conflict. [1] The agreements made with the Menem government show the potential for peaceful cooperation without returning the islands.\n\nIn any case, direct relations with Argentina are of little strategic or economic importance to Britain, except where they affect the Falkland Islands. Trade policy is handled on both sides at a supra-national level, through the EU and Mercosur respectively.\n\nThe Falkland Islands are simply not like other examples of decolonisation. Elsewhere Britain has given independence to the indigenous peoples of its former colonial possessions, responding to their desire for self-determination. The Falklands have no indigenous population – their inhabitants regard themselves as British in identity and have no desire to be ruled by Argentina, indeed Britain’s Prime Minister has gone so far as to say the Argentines are the ones who are sounding colonial. [2]\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Blair’s historic Argentina visit’, 2 August 2001, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1467847.stm\n\n[2] BBC News ‘Argentina outraged at Cameron’s ‘colonialism’ remarks’, 19 January 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16625963\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "196d287c3212b3d44ddf88294d3a660f",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Proximity is a poor reason to make a claim to sovereignty as the Falklands lie outside the 200 mile limit that Argentina claims in the southern Atlantic. [1] The Falkland Islands today have effective self-government. They have their own elected legislature and an independent judiciary. The islands are also economically self-sufficient but for the cost of the Military Garrison – which is only necessary because of the Argentinian claim. Moreover with advances in communication the location of the settlement being thousands of miles away from Britain no longer makes much difference when it comes to governing the islands.\n\n[1] R. Reginald & J.M. Elliot, 'Tempest in a Teapot : The Falkland Islands War', The Borgo Press, 1983, http://www.falklands.info/history/hist82article11.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "43b2f2c6f7679164fc9e9dbcfe59d5f9",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland If military costs are excluded, the islands are self-supporting. They are of great value because they bring rights to fishing and oil exploration. If the oil that has been detected in the islands’ territory can be extracted economically, the islands will be an even greater asset to Britain. [1] Strategically, they provide NATO with an airbase in the south Atlantic. Port Stanley was used as a supply base for the Royal Navy in WW1, resulting in the Battle of the Falkland Islands. [2]\n\nMoreover ‘value’ means more than products and services – the value of the inhabitant’s right to self-determination is priceless\n\n[1] Swint, Brian, ‘Oil Grab in Falkland Island Seen Tripling U.K. Reserves: Energy’, Bloomberg, 25 January 2012, http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-25/oil-grab-in-falkland-islands...\n\n[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Falkland_Islands\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b902a04f05b56162d1dcc10b65eb61ef",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland The British colony was established only though the expulsion of the Argentinian colony. It does not matter how long ago this happened - as the legal maxim goes ‘title does not pass with theft’.\n\nColonists do not have a right to self-determination. It would be absurd if a group of people could invade some land, drive off the people living there; and then state that they have acquired the right to decide for themselves to stay there. The natural consequence of that principle would be that anyone could gain property through ethnic cleansing and long enough adverse possession.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8283780e1264c948a702708535c358dc",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland It would not be possible for the UK to argue that it has a claim through prescription and the length of occupation because the original taking over the Argentine colony was not legitimate, as the islands were not res nullis.\n\nIn the Chamizal Case (Mexico vs United States), the ICJ rejected the right to title by prescription invoked by the United States because \"the physical possession taken by citizens of the United States and the political control exercised by the local and Federal Governments, have been constantly challenged and questioned by the Republic of Mexico, through its accredited diplomatic agents.\" [1]\n\n[1] The Chamizal Case (Mexico, United States), Reports of International Arbitral Awards, 15 June 1911, Vol.XI, pp.309-347\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fb275b5aa1e239a56ccc265189262f17",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Britain sent its soldiers to fight an unjust war. Their sacrifices do not make British occupation of the islands legal.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "35db1d7706c15d111d6c084ee6ab8fca",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Returning the islands would not be a sign that violence and threats are legitimate. It would be recognition of the justice of Argentina’s claim and the illegality of Britain’s occupation of the islands. In fact, it would show that illegal acts of violence, like that of 1833, will eventually be overturned.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "38338ada8c2e2b1c0d2be31f1310cbd6",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland If Britain did not have legitimate sovereignty over the Falklands to begin with then it is illegitimate for Britain to hand that sovereignty over to the islanders.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1fac063aa894ead463b2568911a7d20f",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Argentina created a permanent settlement\n\nArgentina formally took posession of the islands in 1820 and established permanent settlements in that decade. Previous settlements by Spain and Britain had been military in nature (garrisons). Britain did not protest to these acts of sovereignty. The Argentinean settlements were only ended by illegal military force, the first strike by an American warship, acting on its own initiative and encouraged by the British charge de affairs in Buenos Aires, and the second and last blow by a British taskforce.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "30e35008dc25270ad4ebee39682b6c0d",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland International relations\n\nReturning the islands would vastly improve Britain’s relationship with Argentina and Latin America as a whole. This would help Britain’s diplomatic and economic ties with the region. It would also be consistent with Britain’s post-war policy of decolonisation, which has seen it withdraw from almost every other colonial possession since 1945. Not only has Britain withdrawn from India, Africa, Malaysia and much of the Caribbean, it has also handed back Hong Kong to China – surely a similar case to that of the Falkland islands and Argentina.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8c2b960c1eda2a75b124a75138064637",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Value\n\nThe islands are of minimal value to Britain. In an era of satellites and long-range ships and aircraft, the islands no longer have strategic value. Maintaining a garrison there is an unnecessary expense. Jorge Luis Borges (an Argentinean writer) likened the 1982 conflict to ‘two bald men fighting over a comb’. [1]\n\n[1] ‘Jorge Luis Borges (1899-1986)’, http://kirjasto.sci.fi/jlborges.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ebfe0e8338cac1a79e2835b5542f3c46",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Distance\n\nThe Falkland Islands are 8000 miles from the UK – in the modern age it is absurd that one country can claim sovereignty over land halfway across the globe from it.\n\nThe needs and wishes of the Falkland islanders would be much better served if the government responsible for them was local.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bc058bb4b07484cff1c56716da355862",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland The islanders are the only ones who can decide.\n\nIt is the Falkland Islanders themselves who have to decide whose sovereignty they should fall under; British, Argentine or even potentially their own. The Falkland Islands are a democracy with a democratically elected Legislative Assembly and Executive Council (made from members of the Legislative Assembly). Similarly it has its own courts. The self-determination of the islanders is prominent in their constitution. [1] The Falklands have therefore been recognised by the British government as a nation just like the Scots, Welsh and Irish. This means that the decision on any change of sovereignty in the future will be up to the islanders alone to make. [2]\n\nIt is no longer up to Britain to simply cede the islands even if they wanted to.\n\n[1] The Falkland Islands Constitution Order 2008, Statutory Instruments, 2008 no. 0000, http://www.falklands.gov.fk/assembly/documents/The%20Falkland%20Islands%20Constitution%20Order%202008.pdf#\n\n[2] Ivanov, Lyubomir, ‘The Future Of The Falkland Islands And Its People’, February 2003, http://www.falklands-malvinas.com/Lyubospaper.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "673a534b1b2f2202cf26868c021cf5b6",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Moral Hazard\n\nReturning the islands would imply that violence and threats are legitimate ways to conduct diplomacy. Britain would be giving in to the invasion of 1982 and Kirchner’s more recent rhetoric. This would set a dangerous precedent that Britain will abandon its interests if threatened.R\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c673dcf6cb27db28650dc2c1ce5d1cf3",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Length of occupation\n\nThe primary means of acquiring title to territory is through the effective exercise of the functions of a state within that territory. This means that Britain has a right to the territory under either ‘occupation’ (if Argentina is not considered to have occupied previously) or ‘prescription’ if it has. [1] The ICJ has stated that the claim must be\n\nI, the possession must be exercised in the character of a sovereign\n\nII, the possession must be peaceful and uninterrupted\n\nIII, the possession must be public\n\nIV, the possession must endure for a certain length of time. [2]\n\nBritain would not have difficulty arguing that it has continuously exercised sovereignty for over 170 years. It has also been peaceful (no attacking native tribes, no unrest etc). It would seem silly to transfer sovereignty to Argentina on the basis of Argentina having only occupied the islands for at most five years compared to the long period of British occupation both after and before the Argentine colony.\n\n[1] Dixon, Martin, Textbook on International Law, 6th ed., Oxford, 2007, p.155, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aS2fv32rvMcC&printsec=frontcover#v=on...\n\n[2] International Court of Justice, ‘Reports of Judgements, Advisory Opinions and Orders Case Concerning Kasikili/Sedudu Island (Botswana/Namibia)’, 23 December 1999, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/98/7577.pdf p.62/1103\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5dbbce9c2d05c11da89117c7c32d692b",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Popular sovereignty\n\nThe people of the Falklands are an established community with a right to self-determination. They are not a transitory population – many of them can trace their origins in the Islands back to the early 19th Century. They are the only successful colonists of the Falklands.\n\nThe Argentinian claim of sovereignty through inheritance of the Spanish title (uti possedetis [1] ) is not accepted as a general article of international law, and even if it was it would have to be subordinate to the Islander’s right of self-determination.\n\nIt is absurd that Argentina claims that the Islanders do not have a right to self-determination because they replaced an indigenous Argentinian population 200 years ago when Argentina consists largely of Spanish colonists who replaced the indigenous Native American population in roughly the same time period.\n\n[1] That newly independent nations inherit the claims of the old colonial states along the colonial boundaries. Dixon, Martin, Textbook on International Law, 6th ed., Oxford, 2007, p.163, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aS2fv32rvMcC&printsec=frontcover#v=on...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "99d174c391c711c29b5e8a62bf8f8e67",
"text": "rnational americas global law international law house would cede control falkland Blood has been spilt\n\nIf Britain returned the islands, it would be a profound insult to the soldiers who fought and died to liberate them in 1982. The campaign was honourably fought in defence of the rights of the people of the Falkland Islands to determine their own future. It was fought against a military dictatorship which used the campaign in a cynical attempt to divert domestic attention away from its oppressive, corrupt and incompetent rule. One of the positive consequences of British victory was that the military junta fell from power and Argentina became democratic. So Britain, Argentina and the Falkland islanders all have cause to celebrate the outcome of the 1982-83 war.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
386b496ec63c4fcf551923123d73a413
|
An armed police force will deter criminal behaviour
Most countries in Europe and North America have armed police forces, in part to deter criminal acts, but also to protect officers working in an armed or dangerous environment’ . Armed criminals operate in at least some areas of virtually every jurisdiction. Given this reality, a failure to routinely arm the police gives armed criminals a strong advantage in terms of their ability to threaten and commit violence, without any corresponding risk to themselves. [1] In Bristol in England where police are not routinely armed the deployment of armed police in inner-city areas in 2003 defused gang tensions and reduced crime enough to allow the armed police to be withdrawn again. [2] Only putting armed police in for brief periods will only have a short term impact, having permanently armed police is the only way to keep this deterrence in effect. A world-wide ‘meta-study’ of armed police patrols found some evidence that in high violence areas, targeted armed police patrols could chill down the tensions and reassure the community but the evidence was not very compelling and the authors acknowledged that such a ‘sticking plaster’ approach was no long term solution to urban violence [3] .
[1] Kopel, David B., ed., Guns: Who Should Have Them, Prometheus Books, 1995.
[2] BBC News, ‘Armed police patrols withdrawn’, 7 February 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2734997.stm accessed 20 September 2011
[3] Koper, C.S. and Mayo-Williams E. (2006) Police crackdowns on illegal gun carrying: a systematic review of their impact on gun crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology Vol. 2 pp. 227-261.
|
[
{
"docid": "fc1c11b9773a4267d2e41bad07b87668",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Arming the police can lead to a spiral of violence. In places where the police are not routinely armed, a portion of criminals will not arm themselves (since, for example, armed robbery often carries a higher sentence than robbery). Once the police are armed, criminals who do not match their capability operate under a strong disadvantage. Therefore, when the police become routinely armed, the criminal world fully arms itself in response. [1] The mere fact of increased weapons possession (by both police and criminals) will in itself result in higher use, since in circumstances where arms may not be currently used (e.g. a police chase), either side carrying weapons will mean that they consider shooting an option which they did not formerly possess. A study comparing police dispute resolution in Norway and Sweden (the former unarmed, the latter armed) [2] tended to confirm that where police have guns, they are much more likely to use them – the Swedish police shot significantly more suspects. Thus gun availability effectively reduces the options currently available to police along the ‘continuum of force’. For example, if the police are armed, they are less likely to use less harmful alternatives such as tasers, “stun guns”, CS spray, and negotiation, even though the lowered lethality of a technology generally seems to imply it will be used more frequently. [3]\n\n[1] Talking Point, ‘Should British police carry guns?’, BBC News, 12 February 2001, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/1156341.stm accessed 20 September 2011\n\n[2] Knutson , J and Strype J. 2003 Police use of Firearms in Norway and Sweden Policing and Society Vol. 13(4) pp. 429-439.\n\n[3] Porter Henry, ‘Should the police ever shoot to kill?’ Liberty Central, 13 May 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/may/13/keith-richards-shoot-to-kill , accessed 20 September 2011\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "6d370c7ca27ce583ccf8b430c675176e",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police The police should not be reacting in such a way that they exacerbate those problems. By routinely arming its police officers, the state effectively legitimizes the weapon as a symbol of authority. Whether or not this is pragmatic, it is an implied affirmation of the criminal sub-culture, which will accordingly be strengthened.\n\nThe argument about a rapid increase in gun crime in the UK depends upon a very limited and selective use of crime data. Recorded gun crime did indeed rise by close to 105% between 1998 (when handguns were banned in the UK after the Dunblane tragedy) and 2003, but a large proportion of that increase is attributable to air weapon misuse and non-firing replica weapons. [1] Since then the increase has largely stabilised and even fallen. A temporary trend, now brought under control, is not necessarily a strong argument for changing, for ever, the nature and character of British policing.\n\nBy this policy—especially in the absence of a Constitutional right for citizens to bear arms—the role of the police is essentially defined in opposition to at least part of the citizenry. This can be contrasted to the more common expectation that police and citizens operate under essentially common rules, for shared values and that policing is undertaken in a spirit of the minimum use of force and by ‘public consent’.\n\n[1] Squires, P. 2008 Gun Crime: a Review of Evidence and Policy, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/guncrime.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bea0993927edcc49dce93f36a380a330",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police The large majority of policewomen and men go through their whole career without handling firearms. The numbers in the firearms authorised officers are low, only 6780 in 2007-8 out of more than 100,000 police, [1] and even these have been criticised by SAS officers who stated “When the tension starts to rise and the adrenaline is flowing, the ‘red mist’ seems to descend on armed police officers who become very trigger-happy. This has been shown time and again in training exercises.” [2] Any expansion of the numbers of police carrying firearms could result in many more unsuitable police carrying guns.\n\n[1] Coaker, Vernon, ‘Statistics on police use of firearms in England and Wales 2007-08’, Home Office, 2 March 2009, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/non-personal-data/police/police-firearms-use-2007-2008?view=Standard&pubID=807224 , accessed 20 September 2011\n\n[2] Winnett, Robert, ‘SAS trainers denounce ‘gung ho’ armed police’, The Sunday Times’, 18 September 2005, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article567961.ece , accessed 20 September 2011 (original article is no offline but the quote was not picked up by other newspapers)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1dccedd462024b104b3aab1f6f0d667f",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Arming police would negatively impact the relationship between the police and the community – this is especially so in relation to some communities which feel that they bear the brunt of heavy, enforcement-led policing (for example young men in urban areas, ethnic minority groups). [1] Arming the police might delegitimise their role as community standard bearers. Many law-abiding citizens who have no connection to the criminal underworld are horrified by armed police, whom they regard as alien to their cultural frame of reference.\n\nGuns potentially place a distance between the people and the police and impact the relationship in a negative way. It impacts not only those who would perform potentially criminal activity, but even day to day police interaction such as breathalysing and spot checks on vehicles. The police would no longer be viewed as ‘upholding the peace’ but rather enforcing through threat.\n\nEven worse than the distancing effect, lethal weaponry is also a potent symbol of brutality. This can undermine the ability of the police to be seen as a key constituent part of civil society. This problem is exacerbated when this symbolic brutality is applied in ways that deviate from the expectations of civil society, for example through unfair racial profiling.\n\nFinally – arming the police may well alter the profile of police recruits. Police managers sometimes remark that the very last person to trust with a firearm is the one who wants one the most.\n\n[1] Jefferson, T. (1990) The Case against Paramilitary Policing, Milton Keynes, Open University Press; P. Scharf and A. Binder 1983 The Badge and the Bullet: Police Use of Deadly Force, New York, Praeger; Kraska, P. and Kappeler, V.E. 1997 Militarizing American Police: The Rise and Normalization of Paramilitary Units Social Problems, Vol. 44, No. 1 (Feb., 1997), pp. 1-18.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "959832e231e0cae6bf4abf8904ff1428",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police When a police officer carries a weapon, she faces the risk of having that weapon turned on her by a criminal. It is also more obvious to a criminal that they need to shoot first against an armed officer whereas against an unarmed one they may be more open to listening and less likely to try and pre-empt being shot. So arming the police can sometimes make the police more vulnerable, rather than more protected.\n\nIf, as the opposing argument suggests, legally owned guns are part of the risk profile facing the police, measures ought to be taken to reduce the risk and restrict levels of gun ownership. The police have had a National (legal) Firearms Database since 2006 allowing them to assess whether someone they will be dealing with is a gun owner or whether the premises they are attending contains licensed firearms. Criminal misuse of illegal firearms is a different matter although, as has been argued, protection and safety are not the same as ‘armed’ and more armed police will probably mean more shootings and, equally probably, more mistakes and armed confrontations. [1]\n\n[1] P. Squires and P Kennison 2010 Shooting to Kill: Policing, Firearms and armed response. Oxford, Wiley/Blackwell.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7ca04f781f5b786ee135e5ab5fb87353",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police The police themselves are calling for more routine arming in the United Kingdom, through both the unions that represent rank and file policemen, and the bodies which speak for the senior officers. If we want them to uphold law and order, we should trust the police's judgement about the tools they need to carry out their task. To the contrary, recruitment will also suffer if police officers are seen as too vulnerable, as easy targets for criminals because they have no proper means to defend themselves.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1cf14d87e99b74650dbaa6269c19eacf",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Arming police is not mutually exclusive with other policies that could deal with the whole spectrum of crime-related issues. This debate is not suggesting that other issues related to crime will not be dealt with. Rather that in order to facilitate a reduction in crime the criminal justice system will be served by police who are armed. It is untrue to suggest that simply because the police are armed, other integral parts of crime reduction will be ignored.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8bfaf0660d215f32b5ee2d74f7ebaabd",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Violence is already escalating and we need a robust response. Many communities are vulnerable to postcode gangs comprised of young people aged 14 and upwards who are armed and dangerous and making their areas unsafe to live in. Only a robust and proactive response from the police such as patrolling such territories with firearms so as to protect themselves and innocent civilians will address this problem.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fc6431987c1735b2b2f7e3a37009c35a",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Armed police already exist in a number of situations and a rise in mistaken shootings that the opposition fear is not evident in these areas.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0ff7a4aadded260befd4be283297790b",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police The police should be equipped to react to contemporary social problems\n\nThe old-fashioned notions of friendly neighborhood unarmed policing reflect the aspirations of a different age. As armed violence has increased sharply in parts of the developed world, the police need to redefine their role so that it is a more appropriate response to contemporary problems. In the UK, for example, gun crime almost doubled in the decade to 2008, [1] while the rise in London gun crime has tripled, the police need to be able to respond to this. [2] There is also danger in being a state with unarmed police when others states have armed police forces. The unarmed nation may be seen as a “soft touch” compared to other regional nations. This can encourage an importation of criminality.\n\n[1] Whitehead, Tom, 'Gun crime doubles in a decade', The Telegraph 27 October 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6438601/Gun-crime-doubles-in-a-decade.html\n\n[2] Bamber, David, ‘Gun crime trebles as weapons and drugs flood British cities’, The Telegraph, 24 February 2002, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1385843/Gun-crime-trebles-as-weapons-and-drugs-flood-British-cities.html , accessed 20 September 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fae3e43fb6c9e2c96c133a97e1d52ef1",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Arming the police is a necessary step\n\nPolice officers are routinely armed already in a variety of situations. This is a small step, as police officers are routinely armed already in a variety of situations, e.g. at airports and when providing security for political leaders or institutions. As mentioned earlier armed police have even been used before on routine patrols in areas where there has been gun crime. [1] Already rapid-response units of armed officers are available to deal with armed criminals, but these need to be specially summoned and authorised. Often, they arrive too late to do any good. The next obvious step would be to have many more police armed so as to make this response much faster.\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Armed police patrols withdrawn’, 7 February 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2734997.stm accessed 20 September 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7c1b8b7364ac9b6bfa51ca5c9c7e0464",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Policing is a dangerous job. Police officers should be allowed to arm themselves\n\nThere is a global increase in gun ownership, even in countries which did not traditionally think of themselves as having a large criminal gun culture. Presently 1.8 million legally held guns are accounted for in the UK. [1] This increases the risks to frontline police officers of being the victims of gun crime. Police officers should have a right to protect themselves. Fewer officers may die on duty if they were better able to protect themselves. Arming the police is essentially a matter of self-defence rather than being actively involved in regular firearms incidents. This is shown by the fact that most routinely armed police never fire their weapon on active duty in their whole career. [2] If being a police officer is a safer job, then there will be a larger applicant pool to choose from, and thus better, more qualified police forces.\n\n[1] Legal Community Against Violence, ‘Large Capacity Ammunition Magazines’, 2011, http://www.lcav.org/content/large_capacity_ammunition_magazines.pdf , accessed 20 September 2011\n\n[2] BBC News, ‘Q&A: Armed police in the UK’, 8 June 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10260298 , accessed 20 September 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2ab0e19beb6ce5b95e0af06535ad5cb7",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Arming the police makes communities feel safer\n\nArmed police reassure law-abiding citizens at a time when gun-related crime is increasing in most European countries and parts of North America. In the UK 28 gun crimes are committed every day. [1] Much public opinion holds that something must be done to tackle this. [2]\n\nThe sight of armed police officers patrolling the streets will not only deter gangs from harassing residents, but will instil in communities a confidence that they are being properly protected. Gangs are not interested in fighting the police; they are more concerned about attacks from other gangs in their area who are willing to break the law and attack them unprovoked.\n\nPeople feel safer when they see armed police, especially if they perceive them as a response to a heightened risk. Thus, for example, police officers at British airports routinely carry sub-machine guns, although there is no evidential pattern to suggest that this high-visibility weaponry offers any situational strategic advantage over a more subtle arming.\n\n[1] Hope, Christopher, ’28 gun crimes committed in UK every day’, The Telegraph, 24 January 2008, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576406/28-gun-crimes-committed-in-UK-every-day.html , accessed 20 September 2011\n\n[2] Shearing, Clifford et al., Lengthening the Arm of the Law: Enhancing Police Resources in the Twenty-First Century, (Cambridge Studies in Criminology, 2008)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "36b112eb802b9537429e22b586a348be",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police When the police are armed, mistakes will lead to innocent people getting shot\n\nEven with the special selection measures and intensive training given to firearms officers, mistakes sometimes occur, and innocent people are shot. This can happen either by mistake because the armed officers are acting on inaccurate information, or because they are bystanders caught in the cross-fire of a shoot-out. Arming all police officers would mean ditching the current stringent selection methods for who is armed, and would inevitably result in less training being provided, so mistakes would become much more common and more people would be wounded or killed. Such as the Amadou Diallo shooting in New York in 1999, or the shooting of Jean Charles De Menezes at Stockwell underground station in 2005. [1] Squires and Kennison, in their 2010 book, detail a number of case studies of mistaken police shootings, further details can be found on the IPCC Inquiry reports website. [2]\n\n[1] The New York Times, ‘Amadou Diallo’, http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/d/amadou_diallo/index.html , accessed 20 September 2011\n\n[2] P. Squires and P Kennison 2010 Shooting to Kill: Policing, Firearms and armed response. Oxford, Wiley/Blackwell.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "52579c38052d29fda0ef0e88f17b8612",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Arming the police does not deal with the causes underlying violence\n\nThe real issues that cause crime usually lie in societal issues and a lack of a proper rehabilitation effort in the justice system. The root problems are therefore not being solved by arming the police. This policy only masks the problems societies face. Governments need to make more long-term, sustainable investments. They should be attempting to change the culture that creates violence, providing jobs for those who are in poverty making sure that everyone feels they have a stake in society, rather than rely on a “quick fix” plan that tackles none of the real issues.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "edcfdd27dbfc5b9898e9211df2114cc5",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Recruitment will be adversely affected if the police are armed\n\nThe police are split on this issue at all levels, so it would be wrong to listen only to the loudest voices. The police should also be held firmly under civilian control. Policy areas such as the carrying of firearms or stop-and-search procedure should be subject to political decisions and accountability. Recruitment may well be adversely affected if the police are armed; many current officers opposed to this measure may leave, and others like them will not apply to join the force in the future. Do we want a police force largely composed of people who want to carry a gun every day? Japan’s police force are trained in combat without weapons and they some of the lowest crime rates in the world. The country has a steadily decreasing crime rate, with this year alone, overall crime has decreased by 1.4%. [1]\n\n[1] Eguchi, Arichika, and Kanayama, Taisuke, ‘Japan’s Challenge on the Increase in Crime in the New Century’, Police Policy Research Center, http://www.npa.go.jp/english/seisaku2/crime_reduction.pdf , accessed 20 September 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "05456a5872d94dbed258d8093119fc9c",
"text": "crime policing law general house would arm police Arming the police will cause an escalation in criminal violence\n\nThe British Crime Survey maintains that gun crime is very rare throughout the UK. The reason communities are so afraid is that the over-zealous media continually hype up individual incidences of gun crime in order to attract more readers. The statistics show that knife and gun crime are overrepresented in the news, with 25% of newspapers stories on average being dedicated to crime. [1] Because of this exaggerated coverage, there is a moral panic in which people think that if they are attacked it will be by a knife-wielding maniac. This is simply not true. There is more chance that you will be in a car accident than be attacked on the street.\n\nIntroducing guns onto the streets, even in a legal and well-intentioned manner is a trigger for increasing the number of guns that gangs and organised crime groups bring onto the street.\n\n[1] Media Awareness Network, ‘TV Crime Facts – Teaching Backgrounder’ http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/resources/educational/teaching_backgrounders/crime/tv_crime_facts.cfm , accessed 20 September 2011\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
dec2e53e40484888c0152896607fd9ad
|
Could be cheaper
While budget should not be the primary concern of the justice system, The death penalty, when applied properly, can be cheaper. A lethal injection, or a few bullets, costs far less than keeping a person incarcerated for a long time, especially if they need long term health or other care in old age. The longer someone is in jail the greater the cost to the state.
The costs of the implementation of the death penalty are driven up by anti-death penalty activists using the appeals system. Since the death penalty would only be applied to the worst of the worst when there is absolute moral certainty there would be less need for extensive appeals because there would be less marginal cases.
|
[
{
"docid": "c7641581c52fc067e4db6aec0d07dfcc",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst The reason why the death penalty is so expensive – 13 executions since 1978 in California costing around $4bn [1] - is the “super due process” that is necessary in capital cases, especially with the large flaws in the US justice system.\n\nBlacker makes no coherent proposal on how he would modify the appeals system. Removing or reducing it would make it very likely that more innocent people would be executed.\n\nTo accuse people who want to prevent criminals deaths of wasting money is more or less victim blaming.\n\n[1] Alarcon, Arthur and Mitchell, Paula, “Executing the will of the voters? A roadmap to mend or end the California legislature’s multi-billion dollar death penalty debacle”, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 2011, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/LoyolaCalifCosts.pdf\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "6cd3ce225e6dce31307e0ff4eac8e0c0",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Those who are murdered are not some public resource – they are not our relatives. We may feel sorrow for the victims and their family but uninvolved members of society have no reason to demand punishment on account of them being members of ‘our family’. What of all those who do not feel such resentment, should society enact a death penalty simply to gratify a part of the population that feels this way. This is not a rational grounds for a death penalty even for the very worst. In order to claim that the society wants the criminals' blood, you have to make sure that a)everyone does; b)the person killed deserves to be avenged.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eeff02b0cf1778c44953be5d2cb9a0db",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst While Blecker proposes a three step test in a draft statute, it does not feature much legal certainty – it features a large amount of jury discretion, which was deemed to be a violation of the US constitution [1] . Any such elastic definition would allow prosecutors to make an argument that pretty much any case is within such a category.\n\nIt also continues due use of “death qualified juries”, exclusively made up of death penalty supporters [2] , which are racially skewed toward being whiter. Would this then end up really being for the worst of the worst?\n\n[1] See Furman v Georgia, 408 US 238 (1972) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/408/238/case.html\n\n[2] See Witherspoon v Illinois, 391 US 510 (1968) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/391/510/case.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "609a4711c9adb7cc71faeda0de52bff0",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst By keeping a person locked up for life, which may well be appropriate for the “worst of the worst”, they are incapacitated for life. It similarly satisfied any retributive instinct, providing a total punishment, a form of internal banishment and total civil death – if one considers retributive justice desirable.\n\nMoreover this is inconsistent. If we are inflicting an eye for an eye because they deserve it then why should the death penalty reserved for the worst of the worst? Should it not be exactly proportional – which would mean all murderers should face the death penalty.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e741b013d6871ab95be1a25f43957cd9",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst The state using the legal process being trusted to do something is different between an individual doing so. The state executing people is the only way that justice can be achieved; there is a moral difference between execution in support of society and murder against society.\n\nThere is an immense difference between a murder and a lawful killing by the state. If the death penalty makes the state no better than a murderer then a soldier is one too. In a more absolutist view, if capital punishment devalues life, do fines for theft devalue property?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cfaa4201bfe4fe52201e4b25fccbd119",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Regardless of the categorisation there are some who are worst of the worst. It is up to individual states and societies to determine who qualifies as the worst of the worst for them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "14cf407a66e45a7c1d9a4603f71fcd4f",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst This is not a higher discrepancy than imprisonment, meaning the problems may well be socio-economic rather than justice related.\n\nA reason for this discrepancy may be the felony murder rule – that any death caused by a felony, even if it would normally amount to manslaughter, constitutes murder (in some cases, first degree murder) – if that is the case, the felony murder rule should be abolished. If capital punishment were reserved for the worst of the worst then this racial bias would be almost eliminated. [1]\n\n[1] Blecker, p.237\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7c9a95b1d8b63954bf5af8252ce0cdfd",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst As in any activity in life, a risk will exist in any justice system – many innocent people are in prisons. But there are also risks inherent in being too lenient and letting the worst of the worst out again in the future.\n\nHowever, capital punishment can be used less, and a higher standard of proof can be used in capital cases. “In the end, we must risk a minuscule possibility of error for the near certainty of justice.” [1]\n\n[1] Blecker, p.275\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "655967cd5568c6984735cb70579e2f55",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Can be reserved for the worst of the worst\n\nFor those who are concerned about some of the practical objections to the American death penalty, it is possible to restrict the death penalty to those most deserving of it: “the worst of the worst”, those like Anders Behring Breivik, Charles Manson and Harold Shipman. The death penalty should not be for people who are convicted as a result of three strikes - in 2004, someone was convicted of first degree murder with a whole life sentence for lending a friend a car [1] – it should not be a default sentence. [2]\n\n[1] Liptak, Adam, “Serving Life for Providing Car to Killers”, The New York Times, 4th December 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/us/04felony.html?_r=0\n\n[2] Blecker, p.210\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e61a5938de187c2876ee22ad3daf649b",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Necessary for punitive justice\n\nThe concept of punishment is inherently based on retribution. “We don’t punish to prevent crime or remake criminals. We inflict pain-suffering, discomfort-to the degree they deserve to feel it.” [1] Retribution can be distinguished from revenge – retribution does not always seek to impose punishment that is the same as the original act, and never more.\n\nThe punishment must fit the crime so capital punishment is therefore an appropriate punishment for the worst of the worst – an eye for an eye.\n\n[1] Blecker, p.28\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "213b403cd8af02b0955d2d6633408c32",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Killers must die to satisfy society\n\nThose who have damaged society by robbing it of one of its members must pay for their crime. Adam Smith argued “We feel that resentment which we imagine he ought to feel, and which he would feel, if in his cold and lifeless body there remained any consciousness of what passes upon earth. His blood, we think, calls aloud for vengeance.” [1] It is not just the wronged individual who needs there to be retribution but society as a whole. Everyone in society is wronged by particularly heinous crimes as Blecker says of two horrific crimes “Those were my children, my wife that Coker raped and murdered, my sister Speck killed”. [2]\n\n[1] Smith, Adam, ‘The theory of Moral Sentiments”, MetaLibri Sixth Edition, 1790, http://www.ibiblio.org/ml/libri/s/SmithA_MoralSentiments_p.pdf p.62\n\n[2] Blecker, p.30\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4abca6bc2fc823a95498f523804b8e87",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Too many innocents killed\n\nCapital punishment in the US kills too many innocent people. Over 143 people who were innocent were exonerated from death row since 1973 [1] . One person executed is too many – it has already happened in the US, with Carlos DeLuna [2] . It is likely that many innocent people have been executed in the US – it is a price not worth paying.\n\n[1] Death Penalty Information Centre, “Innocence list”, DPIC.org, 2013, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row\n\n[2] Pilkington, Ed, “The wrong Carlos: how Texas sent an innocent man to his death”, The Guardian, 15 May 2012, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/15/carlos-texas-innocent-man-death\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a18865cd1757dc4350fb05b1f7b1ffc5",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Who are the worst of the worst?\n\nKilling the worst of the worst is essentially arbitrary. Even with a list of aggravators balanced by mitigations the death penalty is hardly going to be left to just the very worst. In the case of Daryl Holton who killed his four children Blecker decides “I remain convinced, but not morally certain, that he deserved to die.” [1] This shows there will always be cases that are borderline. Moreover everyone’s views of the worst of the worst are different. Is Holton the “worst of the worst” or should that category be reserved for Hitler and Pol Pot?\n\n[1] Blecker, p.197\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "01c28591bf93c72985a048bc410952e9",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst Hypocrisy\n\nSuggesting the death penalty should be used as a deterrent is nothing other than arguing that people should be killed to show that people killing people is wrong. There is little evidence that it works; when Canada abolished the death penalty nationally in 1976, the homicide rate fell from 3.09 in 1975 to 2.31 in 1980. [1]\n\nIn that sense, imposing the death penalty makes the state no better than the murderer, and a murderer in itself by killing a person in such circumstances. If we are using the death penalty to punish the murderer then what should we use to punish the state for its actions?\n\n[1] Amnesty International, ‘Document – The Death Penalty, Questions and Answers’, accessed 3rd January 2014, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT50/010/2007/en/f45ed09c-d3a2-11dd-a329-2f46302a8cc6/act500102007en.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5f8cc316227506f08c37aa3ac6b5c843",
"text": "punishment house supports death penalty worst worst The death penalty is racist\n\nLike the rest of the American criminal justice system, capital punishment in America is institutionally racist: black men make up 6% of the US population as a whole but 40% of those on Death Row [1] . In the US, African-Americans and White people are murdered in almost equal numbers, but 80% of those executed since 1977 were convicted of the murder of a white [2] .\n\n[1] Blecker, p.237\n\n[2] Amnesty International, “United States of America: Death by Discrimination – the continuing role of race in capital cases”, Amnesty International, 2003, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/046/2003\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
b75ca583bcdfdd3f7c0da11ec2de2f5b
|
Only those who are guilty have anything to fear from systems that monitor and confirm identities
Law-abiding citizens who have not and do not intend to commit any crimes should not have a problem with this motion. Carrying a single card is not a huge burden to an individual. Rather they can reap the benefits of convenience to them personally, alongside the added security benefit to their whole nation which will help to keep them safe. As it is to be issued to everyone there will not even be the inconvenience of having to spend a long time applying for the card as it is in the government’s interest to make it as simple as possible with mobile offices taking the relevant biometrics where the people live so as to have the least impact on individual’s lives as possible.
|
[
{
"docid": "dce9b839ac2557f89a386647c5ae31b6",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards It is perfectly legitimate for an innocent citizen to oppose identity cards on the grounds of how they threaten to alter society. The oppressive measure of gaining and essentially holding to ransom everybody’s intimate personal details and biometric data is hardly a soft measure; it is radical and may completely change the way in which society functions. Moreover, the fear that their card will be lost or stolen [1] , or that their information could be hacked and used by somebody else, is more than ample reason to fear or oppose the introduction of identity cards.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.idcardandyou.co.uk/crime.html on 10/09/11.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "bb05a96868856f0bc0b3e084f7cc3809",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Just as some people have difficulty remembering so many passwords, so some people have difficulty remembering where they misplaced their belongings. This motion offers no solution if somebody should lose their identity card; given that it may be used to have access to a bank account, act as a travel card or simply be used to grant general access to the bearer, how could they possibly survive if they lost it? It is reasonable to assume that a biometric identity card might take as long or longer than a passport (which contains some biometric data) to be replaced. Given that in the UK it takes three weeks to receive a new passport if you lose it [1] and can cost between £77.50 and £112.50, this is simply too expensive and too slow for the average citizen to be able to continue with their daily life. A week without access to daily necessities such as your own bank account is too long to wait.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/howlongittakesandurgentappplications/DG_174148 on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "24f2b00b3fabc0014a9ded3af05a43e4",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards It’s perfectly fine to acknowledge that medical emergencies require fast action – but that’s the exact reason why we use medical alert bracelets [1] . We already have a simply, non-intrusive way of ensuring that somebody who suffers from an illness such as epilepsy or diabetes can be quickly identified – without the need for an expensive and illiberal measure such as identity cards. Moreover, in the need to contact a relative, why not simply use their mobile number? Even if mobile umbers were now required by the government at all times, this is still far less intrusive than the scheme which proposition proposes.\n\n[ 1 Accessed from http://medicsalertbracelets.com/ on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b8de43fce00e00c4d8dc4926bdb5e6d5",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Many illegal immigrants already take steps to avoid official identification. For example, they frequently take jobs which pay cash-in-hand [1] so that they do not have to set up and authorise a bank account, or have a social security number. There is not reason why this would not continue. Moreover, this measure simply provides more fuel for injustice. These is already a problem of police officers targeting minority groups for ‘stop-and-search- checks [2] ; under this motion, this injustice would be amplified under the guise of checking for illegal immigrants. This measure is contradictory to the notion of democracy.\n\n[1] BBC. ‘The British illegal immigrants’. Published 02/02/2005. Accessed from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4226949.stm on 10/09/11\n\n[2] BBC. ‘Police stop and search powers ‘target minorities’. Published 15/03/2010. Accessed from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8567528.stm on 10/09/11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "22336189ab2a01b673d2f848994a24ee",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Many countries – including America [1] and Britain [2] - already use biometric chips in passports to reinforce proof of identity when crossing national borders. If this data does not work in this case, especially since security has increased hugely since 9/11 [3] , there is no evidence to support the idea that it would suddenly be improved if this chip was in an identity card instead of an official national passport. Moreover, the biometric information on these cards has already been proved faulty. Experts have demonstrated that they could copy the biometric information provided on identity cards ‘in minutes’ [4] . Identity cards are unnecessary and will not help to prevent the crimes mentioned.\n\n[1] The Economist. ‘Have chip, will travel.’ Published 17/07/2009. Accessed from http://www.economist.com/node/14066895 on 10/09/11\n\n[2] Accessed from http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Passports/Applicationinformation/DG_174159 on 10/09/11\n\n[3] Accesssed from http://securitysolutions.com/news/security_airport_security_far/ on 10/09/11\n\n[4] The Times. ‘ “Fakeproof” e-passport is cloned in minutes.’ Published 06/08/2008. Accessed from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4467106.ece on 10/09/11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c47db3b03eb8c77ad8f18779aef7fcde",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Governments already have the majority of this information through passport applications [1] , social security numbers [2] and so on, without enormous objections by the public. Moreover, many have called for increased security since the rise of terrorist attacks [3] and comply with increased security at places like airports. This isn’t pre-emptively condemning people for criminal activity; it is, like all other security checks, a routine check to enhance the safety of the general population. There is not reason not to identify with that as a common aim.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Foreigntravel/AirTravel/DG_176737 on 10/09/11\n\n[2] Accessed from http://www.ssa.gov/ssnumber/ on 10/09/11.\n\n[3] Accessed from http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Exec.htm on 10/09/11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ef41130b78b9329e502abcf1ec299b0a",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards This point alludes to a potentially tiny minority of incidents. It is likely that most people, realising the importance of their card, would not lose it. In cases where it is used properly, it could be an enormous benefit to the user and increase their convenience.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eb163fecde3e10c09901b35f105ee342",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards While these crimes are obviously a problem, it doesn’t mean that other crimes which can be challenged by this scheme should be allowed to continue. Identity cards would at least make it more difficult for fraud to occur, which in cases of petty criminals would provide an active deterrent for them to try it in the first place.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ce8c862f935cac99ec49433f5983ba98",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards If anything, this is a reason to introduce better police training, not to abandon the concept of identity cards altogether. An unfortunate fact is that immigrants, who often come from poor backgrounds or have low levels of education, are more statistically likely to be involved in crime [1] . This ‘disproportionate’ [2] level of crime among immigrants provides a reason for the seemingly disproportionate targeting of minority groups by police authorities.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/crime/toc.html on 10/09/11.\n\n[2] Accessed from http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/crime/toc.html on 10/09/11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6eb4fdb7f6637c0a8f53c3c39f251bd4",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Identity cards confer advantages on their users\n\nThe average person is faced with numerous requisitions for identification every day, whether trying to access their own bank account, prove their age or prove their address. The identity card could easily incorporate all of this information to become one convenient for of identification and save the user the hassle of carrying so many documents around with them. Given that ‘the average person now has to remember five passwords, five PIN numbers, two number plates, three security ID numbers and three bank account numbers just to get through everyday life’ [1] , there is evidently a need for a single, concise form of identification. Moreover, it would help them to identify the people they have to interact with. There have been numerous cases of criminals posing as company officials such as gas workers in order to gain access to somebody’s home and steal from them [2] [3] . These identity cards would particularly help vulnerable citizens who are the most at risk of this kind of injustice. For this reason these cards should be compulsory, they would not be much use as identification if not everyone had one that could be checked by anybody.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/150874/too_many_passwords_or_not_enough_brain_power.html on 10/09/11\n\n[2] Accessed from http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/localnews/9235106.Edmonton_burglar_who_preyed_on_pensioners_jailed/ on 10/09/11\n\n[3] Accessed from http://www.westmercia.police.uk/news/news-articles/cash-stolen-by-distraction-burglars-in-kidderminster.html on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a3c08d6b56ca70f0adc42dbf8f993263",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Identity cards can assist in the efficient monitoring of immigration\n\nIllegal immigration is an enormous problem in Western nations. The UK estimates that there are more that one million illegal immigrants living in Britain [1] , likely around 2.2 million [2] . For America, this number could be as high as 11 million [3] . Identity cards would mean that, even if illegal immigrants did succeed in crossing the border, they would most likely be found out because they could not pass routine security checks required on an everyday basis because they would not have been issued an identity card. Given that illegal immigration is frequently linked to international crime such as trafficking [4] , this is clearly a problem which we need to address in a new way.\n\n[1] The Times. ‘UK home to 1m illegal immigrants.’ Published 25/04/2010. Accessed from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7107598.ece on 10/09/11.\n\n[2] The Times. ‘UK home to 1m illegal immigrants.’ Published 25/04/2010. Accessed from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7107598.ece on 10/09/11.\n\n[3] The New York Times. ‘Number of illegal immigrants in US fell, study says.’ Published 01/09/2010. Accessed from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/02/us/02immig.html on 10/09/11.\n\n[4] Accessed from http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/pub45270chap2.html on 10/09/11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "38381fda5f03ffcd58d50cda57ec879b",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Identity cards improve public safety\n\nIdentity cards could prove a key instrument to combat crime, terrorism and fraud. Given that terrorists have used fake passports to cross borders in the past [1] , a sophisticated identity card, possibly containing specific biometric information which cannot be easily faked, could be crucial in preventing terrorist acts in the future. In cases where the police were suspicious, they could rapidly check the identities of many people near a crime scene, which would make their investigation much swifter and more effective. The CBI also believes that ‘the creation of a single source of identity data’ [2] in the form of biometric identity cards would also decrease identity fraud. Given that identity fraud currently costs the UK £2.7 billion per year [3] , Canada over 10 million Canadian dollars per year [4] , and in America identity fraud relating to credit cards alone costs around $8.6 billion per year [5] , this is obviously a serious problem under the status quo. These crimes would be much more difficult if biometric data was required for financial transactions and other activities such as leaving or entering a country; identity cards are the best way forwards. The value of ID cards in combating terrorism and crime is much reduced if not everyone has them as the guilty would be less likely to want to get such cards unless they could somehow fake them.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010%5C08%5C10%5Cstory_10-8-2010_pg7_17 on 10/09/11\n\n[2] Accessed from http://www.citizenshipfoundation.org.uk/main/page.php?217#arguments_identity_fraud on 10/09/11\n\n[3] Accessed from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-public-bodies/nfa/ on 10/09/11\n\n[4] Accessed from http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/scams-fraudes/id-theft-vol-eng.htm on 10/09/11\n\n[5] Accessed from http://www.banking-gateway.com/microsites/oracle/US%20Card%20Fraud.pdf on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fc9f9b1f3b47b9c6a56da736bd11c581",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards Identity cards can be used to locate individuals who are in danger\n\nAs biometric identity cards would be able to store medical data, they could be instrumental in saving somebody’s life. For example, if somebody suddenly suffered an epileptic fit, it would be much faster for medical staff to find out their illness and medical history no matter where there medical records are held as everyone’s records would be linked to their ID card [1] , allowing them to be treated faster and more efficiently. It would also be easier to contact a friend or relative if they knew the last place where they had used their identity card, allowing faster unity of family in a medical emergency.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://ec.europa.eu/research/research-for-europe/science-eco-bite_en.html on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8d59b0ab4f12f14f8d7f183ec370b372",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards An identity card scheme is open to subversion and abuse\n\nDemanding identity cards has already been shown as a way for police officers and officials to harass minority groups by singling them out for questioning and searches [1] . This motion would simply serve as a thinly-veiled excuse for more intrusive searches which the law would not otherwise allow. This motion could also lead police to believe that those with a criminal record on their identity cards who just happen to be near a crime scene when a crime happens must be involved. This would lead to an unfair perversion of justice as those individuals are seen as the ‘usual suspects’, perhaps blinding the police eye to the real culprits if they did not previously have a criminal record.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.civilrights.org/publications/justice-on-trial/ on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a02a7b040095be3b62f55bfd5bfd8553",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards The scheme would cause inconvenience and public discontent\n\nThe more information which is incorporated into identity cards, the greater the problems if they are misplaced or stolen. You would be ‘required to report the theft at a police station’ [1] rather than being able to cancel by phone, because the only way to prove that you are the owner of the card would be to have your biological information – like your fingerprints - scanned [2] . Moreover, if your details were stolen online and used without your knowledge, the ‘illusion of security’ [3] surrounding the cards would make it very difficult to probe that it was not in fact you who was using the card. Jerry Fishenden of Microsoft also pointed out that ‘if core biometric details such as your fingerprints are compromised, it is not going to be possible to provide you with new ones’ [4] . It is also unreasonable to expect someone to carry this card on them at all times, particularly if police or other authorities are able to stop and search on demand. Overall, the introduction of biometric identity card would create enormous problems for the everyday user if the slightest thing went wrong.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.idcardandyou.co.uk/crime.html on 10/09/11\n\n[2] Accessed from http://www.idcardandyou.co.uk/crime.html on 10/09/11.\n\n[3] Accessed from http://www.idcardandyou.co.uk/crime.html on 10/09/11.\n\n[4] Accessed from http://www.idcardandyou.co.uk/crime.html on 10/09/11.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c9188b5032b758a98977f043a85bfc98",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards This motion represents an unacceptable intrusion into individual liberty\n\nIntroducing identity cards, and particularly biometric identity cards, would create a ‘Big Brother’ state where each individual is constantly being watched and monitored by the government. An identity card could potentially monitor the movements of each citizen, particularly if it had to be swiped to gain entry to buildings. Moreover, requiring the biometric information of each individual defies the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Under the status quo in the UK, biometric information is only taken during the process of creating a criminal record [1] - in short, we only take biometric data after somebody has been convicted of a crime. This motion presumes that everybody is or will become a criminal. This is obviously a huge injustice to the millions of innocent, honest and law-abiding citizens who would have their data pre-emptively taken. The need to carry this card at all times will only agitate the current problems of prejudicial stop-and-search programmes which already demonstrate bias against racial and ethnic minority groups [2] . Using such an extreme measure without due cause – as most nations are currently in peacetime – is an enormous overreaction and infringes upon individual rights.\n\n[1] Accessed from http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/postpn258.pdf on 10/09/11\n\n[2] Accessed from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8567528.stm on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0c2bf36870a09baf3cddccd425cb3b51",
"text": "human rights politics government house would introduce compulsory identity cards The scheme does not prevent forgery or identity theft\n\nThe entire premise of national security and crime prevention falls when biometric identity cards are in fact incredibly easy to falsify. Microchips have already been forged in a matter of minutes in an experiment to determine their security [1] , and biometric information can be gained remotely by computer through ‘cracking’, ‘sniffing’ and ‘key-logging’ [2] . Moreover, common crimes which would not require any kind of identification to be committed – vehicle theft, burglary, criminal damage, common assault, mugging, rape and anti-social behaviour [3] – would not be combated at all by this measure. Given that hackers have managed to penetrate even the highest-security sites such as the CIA database [4] , there is not only a danger that individual cards would be hacked, but that the greater database of information could be hacked. There is no such thing as an impenetrable security system. We would be far better off using the money which would potentially be funnelled into identity cards to increase computer security and police presence.\n\n[1] The Times. ‘ “Fakeproof” e-passport is cloned in minutes.’ Published on 06/08/2008. Accessed from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4467106.ece on 10/09/11.\n\n[2] Accessed from http://www.idcardandyou.co.uk/crime.html on 10/09/11\n\n[3] Accessed from http://www.idcardandyou.co.uk/crime.html on 10/09/11.\n\n[4] The Telegraph. ‘CIA website hacked by Lulz Security’. Published on 16/06/2011. Accessed from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8578704/CIA-website-hacked-by-Lulz-Security.html on 10/09/11\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
56538783c2bb32fa03603f28215cbc8f
|
ICC treats Africa differently
Africa and its leaders are treated far more contemptuously by the court. The prospect of prosecuting Barak Obama for the killing of civilians by drones which Amnesty International has suggested amount to war crimes [1] or George W. Bush for war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan is remote – yet Omar Al-Bashir and Uhuru Kenyatta have both been indicted as sitting leaders. The ICC will only prosecute if those who have committed war crimes are not going to be prosecuted locally but this is as much the case for western leaders as African ones. This points clearly to the ICC proselytizing what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ to Africans but not to other leaders – treating these leaders less respectfully and blatantly undermining African nations sovereignty in a way they would not, or would dare not, for others.
[1] ‘USA must be held to account for drone killings in Pakistan’, Amnesty International, 22 October 2013
|
[
{
"docid": "4b5350c4752f9f12f09a10ffd30681bd",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa The reason western leaders have not been indicted is firstly, because their domestic judiciaries are strong and independent enough to be able to prosecute abuses when they occur. The ICC has a principle of complementarity where the ICC will only prosecute if the state themselves are unwilling or unable to prosecute. This is not the case in western countries where there is no difficulty putting members of government on trial – in the UK for example the environment secretary Chris Huhne was sent to prison for perverting the course of justice. [1] Secondly however, there is no evidence that these leaders were involved or responsible for atrocities in the same way the African leaders were. Western leaders have not authorized individual killings of civilians, or massacres, genocides or other crimes that are prosecuted by the ICC.\n\n[1] Mr Justice Sweeney, ‘Chris Huhne and Vicky Price jailed: judge’s sentencing remarks in full’, The Telegraph, 11 March 2013\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "3e85d617edb13d9e5b6b282e2a1bd296",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa The need in most cases for a referral from the UNSC certainly makes it unlikely that those states will be investigated but this does not make the court biased against Africa. Some of the cases in Africa have involved countries or their judiciaries referring themselves. In the case of Kenya’s election violence in the five years after the violence occurred very little action occurred from the domestic forces; there was a commission lead by Philip Waki that recommended a special tribunal to prosecute those involved. [1] However this never happened as a result the Waki commission handed their report over to the UN and ICC for action [2] . Unsurprisingly the case of Kenyatta has seen accusations of witness intimidation on large scales, showing that a fair trial would have been very difficult to guarantee in Kenya itself [3] .\n\n[1] Waki Report, October 2008, (large pdf)\n\n[2] Wachira, Muchemi, ‘Annan did not ambush Kenya says Justice minister’, Daily Nation, 13 July 2009\n\n[3] ‘Perceptions and Realities: Kenya and the International Criminal Court’, Human Rights Watch, 14 November 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1c0ab40b4fb3b0f1bb7298c02718f244",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa While Africa is the only continent to face prosecutions, a number of other regions where atrocities have taken place are being heavily investigated, including Afghanistan, Colombia, Georgia, Honduras and South Korea [1] . These are expected to lead to prosecutions occurring. So while Africa has had the focus during the initial years of the ICC, its focus is expanding not just focused on African atrocities. It is not even solely focused on developing countries; a complaint about British actions in Iraq has been handed to the ICC. [2]\n\n[1] ‘Situations and cases’, International Criminal Court, accessed 13/2/2014\n\n[2] Owen, Jonathan, ‘Exclusive: Devastating dossier on ‘abuse’ by UK forces in Iraq goes to International Criminal Court’, The Independent, 12 January 2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "151aa31aedfa106d9c1b7508410dbc88",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa While these countries referred themselves, they did under enormous pressure from the ICC. The Prosecutors chose to ‘follow closely’ African cases to the exclusion of others and then actively invited these countries to refer themselves, under threat of seeking prosecutions on their own if the country did not comply [1] . Self-referral under pressure does not show that the ICC is not biased against Africa rather it shows either that the ICC has been more interested in Africa than elsewhere, or that it has put more pressure on African states to self-refer.\n\n[1] African Business\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a49c1c578b6caa4a47398a3f1297851a",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa That the ICC is investigating the conflicts that under some analyses may be the gravest within its jurisdiction does not mean it is not biased. Complementarity in itself shows bias; it allows countries that are considered more developed off the hook ensuring that the ICC will only look at the least developed. African states have signed up to the ICC but the result of their belief in international criminal justice has been that those who attempt to avoid international justice by not signing up to the statute have succeeded while those who accept some form of justice have been targeted.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4fbd47f994378bb42ff2633502e7f1f4",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa The point isn’t that the ICC has prosecuted in Africa; it’s that they have focused exclusively on Africa. This presents the rhetoric that Africa and Africans are somehow more violent and less moral then the rest of the world – or that Africans require more intervention than other places. This biases Africa again the rest of the world and marginalizes them in the international community.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "020f234133a8ba357a3da1d87cb39547",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa One of strongest current criticisms of the African Union is that the ICC is ignoring its opinions. In particular, the AU has very strong views on the treatment of the Kenyan President and his deputy by the ICC in the Kenyan investigation, which the ICC has failed to engage with. Tanzanian President, Jakaya Kikwete, said 'The ICC continues to ignore repeated requests and appeals by the African Union' and this 'attitude has become a major handicap that fails to reconcile the court's secondary and complementary role in fighting impunity' [1] . This has led to African Union seriously considering leaving the union – not evidence of them being an important part of the process. Having Africans as a part of the ICC itself does not mean it listens to the African states that are parties to it.\n\n[1] Dersso, Solomon, ‘Unplanned obsolescence: The ICC and the African Union’, AlJazeera, 11 October 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "47c1eaa44e8111116a51d665fcd340cc",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa ICC is controlled by the Security Council\n\nThe ICC can only investigate situations that are referred to it by either the host country, or the Security Council [1] . A power also exists for the prosecutor to seek investigation, though this has as yet only been used twice. As such, most atrocities that occur across the world are shielded from prosecution because such a prosecution would be against the interests of a member Security Council. Leaders do not seem to be brought for investigation until they offend the west; Charles Taylor was not prosecuted until he had a falling out with the USA, despite their soft support for him in overthrowing the Doe regime [2] . Another case in point is Uganda where the Lord’s Resistance Army has been charged, but not the Pro-US government forces, despite evidence existing they have also committed crimes [3] . It is clear then that the ICC makes decisions by broad external factors, which biases it against Africa which does not have any countries on the UNSC or any patrons sitting on the council.\n\n[1] States parties to Rome Statute, ‘Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court’, ICC, 2011\n\n[2] ‘Charles Taylor – preacher, warlord, president’, BBC News, 13 July 2009\n\n[3] ‘ICC, A Tool To Recolonise Africa’, African Business\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b46b985fb47039cd018457104f2c6220",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa Africa is overtly prosecuted\n\nAll of the twenty-four people currently indicted are African. Of the fifteen cases currently sitting before the court, all are African [1] . This in and of itself points to a large disparity between Africa and the rest of the world. It is also not at all true that Africa is the only place worthy of investigation – atrocities have occurred in the Middle East, Kosovo, Chechnya, Sri Lanka and North Korea, among others since the inception of the court. This is clearly because these other cases have powerful backers in the form of permanent Security Council members. The only conclusion to be drawn is that the ICC feels more comfortable targeting Africa then other regions where it is likely to run into opposition from powerful members of the international community.\n\n[1] ‘Situations and cases’, International Criminal Court, accessed 13/2/2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1c5d7fcbb5a09f3d50479670125b3dfe",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa Africa has a strong voice in the ICC\n\nThe ICC has gone to great lengths to involve all parts of the world in all aspects of its operations. Fatou Bensouda, from Gambia, was recently appointed Chief Prosecutor of the ICC. Moreover, Africans have twice been Vice-President of the court, and have had a fair representation of judges presiding over the court, with five of twenty-one current judges on the panel [1] . Moreover, the Africa Union played a large role in the negotiations over the Rome statute and the creation of the ICC, reflected in the large proportion of countries who are members. [2] As such, Africa’s voice is strongly heard in the ICC.\n\n[1] ‘Judge Sang-Hyun Song re-elected President of the International Criminal Court for 2012-2015; Judges Sanji Mmasenono Monageng and Cuno Tarfusser elected First and Second Vice-President respectively’, International Criminal Court, 11 March 2012\n\n[2] M urithi, Tim, ‘The African Union and the international Criminal Court: An Embattled Relationship’, IJR Policy Brief, no.8 March 2013, pp.1-2\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a88b9c6e2ac32cb4fb7d9a9185a2d93c",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa The ICC is pursuing the gravest situations within its jurisdiction\n\nThe ICC’s jurisdiction is limited to those countries that have ratified the Rome statute. This combined with the likelihood of deadlock in the UNSC, means that many of the worst conflicts are off limits for the ICC. Using data from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program and UNHCR database since the Rome Statute came into effect in July 2002 (up to 2011) Ben Shea of the UCLA Law School finds that there has been little bias against Africa.\n\nNot only have most of the gravest conflicts taken place in Africa but the countries that were not investigated are not party to the Rome Statute. This eliminates Algeria, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Palestine, Russia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Turkey, Yemen and Zimbabwe. Others such as Liberia, and the Philippines only signed up after their conflict had ended. Others such as Columbia, Georgia and Mexico can be eliminated due to Complementarity (where the states are willing to investigate themselves).\n\nIn conclusion “Despite the fact that several very grave conflicts outside of Africa have occurred sometime between 2003 and 2011, once taking into account the jurisdictional obstacles of the ICC, only one country remains: Afghanistan. The fact that Afghanistan has been under preliminary examination by the ICC suggests that the Court is not biased toward Africa.” [1]\n\n[1] Shea, Ben, ‘Is the International Criminal Court targeting Africa inappropriately’, ICCForum, 17 March 2013 , Ben’s analysis is much more detailed than we have room for here so do read it for yourself.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6a7a73f7f1155efbee8e7adc712145f2",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa Africa has invited ICC intervention\n\nFar from the ICC being biased against Africa it is Africa’s embrace of the ICC and the opportunity for international justice that has led to so many Africans being tried at the Hague. The reality is that the only nations to refer themselves to the ICC have been African –the DR Congo, Central African Republic, Mali and Uganda were all self-referred [1] . Likewise, the Ivory Coast referred itself to ICC jurisdiction, and referral of Darfur to the ICC from the Security Council was done so with the African Union’s support [2] . The ICC has clearly not as an institution been targeting Africa, rather it has been investigating, and then engaging in trials on situations that have been brought to it by the countries involved. Other regions of the world have not embraced the opportunity for justice in the same way so it is taking longer for investigations into war crimes in those situations by the ICC.\n\n[1] Clark, P. “Law, Politics and Pragmatism: The ICC and case selection in the DRC and Uganda” in Justice Peace and the ICC in Africa at 37.\n\n[2] Lamony, Stephen A., ‘Is the International Criminal Court really picking on Africa?’, African Arguments, 16 April 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c9cd2c5f0116c597bc2a6cda44494f2c",
"text": "rnational africa law international law house believes icc biased against africa African victims deserve ICC intervention to bring justice\n\nAt the most fundamental level, many of the world’s atrocities of recent times have occurred in Africa, where weak government and mass war are rampant. Taken per head of population Africa has the most conflicts of any continent and unlike Asia its most brutal conflicts have occurred in the last couple of decades. [1] As such, it is not surprising that a focus has existed in Africa from the ICC. That the ICC has not been as strong in other continents is not evidence of bias against Africa, rather that they have work to do in other areas. But the victims of atrocities in Africa deserve their perpetrators to be brought to justice. As such, Africa is not a ‘victim’ of the ICC, but the greatest beneficiary. Africa had the greatest desire and push for international assistance in obtaining justice, and are now receiving that. This simply shows that Africa is forging a path that other regions should follow in terms of its acceptance of international criminal law.\n\n[1] Straus, Scott, ‘Wars do end! Changing patterns of political violence in sub-Saharan Africa’, African Affairs, 111/143, March 2012, pp.179-201, p.186\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
2042eee6e848cf1d134bc364f73f8377
|
[Iran specific] Others, particularly Israel, would act if the United States did not
A failure of the United States to act would motivate Israel to do so. [1] Israel is under much more pressure to act as it would be the most affected by Iran going nuclear. The result would be catastrophic, as Iran would be able to portray itself as a victim of Israeli aggression, leading to a massive outpouring of pro-Iranian and anti-American sentiment in the middle east and central asia. It could easily spark a regional war across the middle east as Iranian proxies strike back against Israel and U.S. forces around the region. [2]
The US would get all the harms of direct intervention with none of the benefits, and efforts to fight Hezbollah and Hamas, both within Palestine and elsewhere, would be undermined by their newfound sympathy in the region and the need of Arab governments to pander to it.
[1] Ravid, Barak, ‘Report: U.S. preparing for an Israeli strike on Iran’, Haaretz.com, 14 January 2012, http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/report-u-s-preparing-for-a...
[2] Benhorin, Yitzhak, ‘Attack on Iran would ignite regional conflict’, ynetnews.com, 3 November 2011, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4143358,00.html
|
[
{
"docid": "eb6f8b3930349334ca33a4ff8217c343",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Forcing Israel to act would remove the United States from direct responsibility for the consequences, and allow the US to strategically “condemn” Israel’s actions.\n\nIran and Israel already have a terrible relationship, so a lot of the harms here are already sunk costs.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "00fcfc81d159a2f3ed271f2b8a00aeee",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent This would be an argument in favour of preventing countries from developing any deterrent at any time, because it would make them easier to invade. It presumes, firstly, that it would be a good thing for the United States to be able to invade countries that do things it does not like at will, and secondly that it assumes that deterrence will not deter the initial invasion in the first place.\n\nThe main reason why great powers involve themselves in wars, is because many smaller countries are not able to fight off larger ones using their own resources and so the great power expects an easy victory assuming it can avoid intervention by other great powers. Jammu and Kashmir could not stand up to the Indian army in 1947 and Kuwait could not stand up to Iraq; Georgian was unable to mount armed resistance against a Russian incursion and neither was Chechnya.\n\nNuclear Weapons are a great equalizer, and if one consequence of Iran developing Nuclear weapons is that all of her neighbours do so as well, then war will become far less likely, and US intervention will become unnecessary. As a consequence, in the long-run, Nuclear proliferation is a self-correcting problem.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c62e15d36122269efc79834992826083",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Ahmadinejad’s words were mistranslated, [1] and Iran’s position has been clarified by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who has repeated Khomeini’s exhortation that Islam prohibits the use of nuclear weapons. [2]\n\nOn the Presidential side, Esfandiar Mashaei, formerly Vice President in Ahmadinejad’s first term and now Presidential Chief of staff, suggested in 2008 that Iran is a friend of all peoples including Israelis. [3]\n\nFurthermore, Iran needs Israel to provide a bogeyman they can use to divide their anti-Iranian governments from their anti-Israeli people. Anti-Israel sentiment has allowed Iran to push anti-Persian sentiment in the Arab world to the backburner, something that would disappear along with Israel if Iran were to act on these ideas.\n\n[1] Bronner, Ethan, ‘Just How Far Did They Go, Those Words Against Israel?’, The New York Times, 11 June 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/weekinreview/11bronner.html?adxnnl=1&a...\n\n[2] BBC News, ‘Iran leader Khamenei brands US ‘nuclear criminal’, 17 April 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8627143.stm\n\n[3] Cohen, Dudi, ‘Iranian VP: We are friends of the nation in Israel’, ynetnews.com, 19 July 2008, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3570266,00.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9f988ca883f6ea256c2bb1683b595800",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent This is in fact a good thing. Nuclear weapons are a great equalizer between large and small countries. [1] One of the great problems of history for tiny nations like Georgia or the Baltic states is that they have consistently been at the mercy of Russia. Nuclear weapons will allow them to fight the Russians on an equal level, and therefore deter the Russians from intervening as actively as they have in the past.\n\nIn the case of Iran and its neighbours, Iran’s position would actually be weakened if everyone in the region acquired nuclear weapons as the United Arab Emirates or Bahrain cannot compete with Iran conventionally, but could compete in a nuclear arms race. Wider uptake of nuclear arms would reduce Iran’s power and influence.\n\nMoreover there is little evidence that this domino effect will happen. North Korea detonated its first nuclear weapon in 2006 but there has been no response from other countries in the region even though South Korea and Japan could have rapidly gone for nuclear breakout. [2]\n\n[1] Buchanan, Patrick J., ‘The Great Equalizer’, The American Conservative, http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2003/feb/10/00007/\n\n[2] Berganas, John, ‘The Nuclear Domino Myth’, Foreign Affairs, 31 August 2010, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66738/johan-bergenas/the-nuclear-...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "22c52cace194966e9b26421851fc9adf",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Preventing nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists is a serious concern, but terrorists tend to be stronger in weak states than strong ones. That is one reason why Pakistan has figured so prominently in weapons sales in the past.\n\nInvading a country like Iran would be more likely to destabilize things than stabilize them. This argument is underlined by analysis of the second Iraq war. Al Qaeda and Shi’a insurgent groups became a far stronger presence in Iraq following the coalition invasion than before the arrival of American and British troops. [1] As a consequence, it is unclear if invading these countries is a better way of preventing transfers of nuclear technology than sanctions and other methods of coercing their governments.\n\n[1] Mazzetti, Mark, ‘Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terroism Threat’, The New York Times, 24 September 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?pagewan...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9d15716dcf168865cbebd6748c28a235",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The reality is that it makes far more sense for the United States to legitimatise actions it might take to prevent a state like Iran from developing nuclear by making reference to the uses that might find for a nuclear device, rather than the fact that they are have breached the terms of highly tenuous body of law.\n\nWhile it may be true that the development of nuclear weapons is banned by international treaty, and that this treaty is recognised as a valid international legal instrument, it is far from clear whether it is in the United State’s interests to embrace either this specific version of International Law, or whether it should be the enforcer even if it does. For one thing, the current international legal system bans Iran from developing Nuclear weapons, but also bans Brazil from developing them. Consistency would obligate the US to actively prevent Brazil from developing a nuclear deterrent, by using threats and sanctions similar to those that have deployed against Iran. However,– common sense would argue that this would be both futile and counter-productive, since it would not only be difficult but result in enormous costs, both militarily and in terms of the reputation of the US. The alternative- granting an exception to Brazil, comparable to those previously granted to India, Pakistan and Israel-, India in particular now wishes to not just be an exception by join the NPT as a weapons state, would undermine those very legal standards that the government argues in favour of.1\n\nAfter all, Brazil is unlikely to use such weapons aggressively, and the acquisition of such weapons by a regional hegemon(like Brazil) is unlikely to change the balance of power. It should be noted that most of the rising “responsible” regional hegemon like Brazil and South Africa opposed sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, [2] out of risk of enshrining a legal precedent.\n\nFurthermore, even if the US chooses to cleave to the premise that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty should be enforced as a matter of law rather than of policy, it is unclear why the US alone should take on the burden of its enforcement. As Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated, even disarming and politically reforming countries that lack a nuclear deterrent is a financially and politically ruinous process – one that cannot be achieved without the support of allies and intergovernmental organisations. Furthermore, given the reaction against the US in international opinion, [3] it’s worth asking whether or not the cure is worse than the cold when it comes to American influence around the world.\n\n[1] Fidler, David P., and Ganguly, Sumit, ‘India Wants to Join the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a Weapons State’, YaleGlobal, 27 January 2010, http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/india-wants-join-non-proliferation-tr...\n\n[2] Charbonneau, Louis, ‘Q+A: How likely are new U.S. sanctions against Iran?’, Reuters, 9 November 2011, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/09/us-iran-nuclear-sanctions-idUS...\n\n[3] Pew Global Attitudes Project, ‘Opinion of the United States’, Pew Research Center, 2011, http://www.pewglobal.org/database/?indicator=1\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7f6c48f3283d313aa89eca685c27ff84",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Regardless of its origins, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty is the cornerstone of an international system that has prevented the rapid proliferation of Nuclear weapons for nearly half a century.\n\nThe dangers of Nuclear weapons, especially in the wrong hands, mean that the ownership of nuclear weapons is an issue which transcends moral standards of “fairness”. It may be true that the treaty should be revisited in the case of say India or Brazil, but this debate is not about the nuclear ambitions of fundamentally stable, democratic states that would willingly comply with all of the terms of the non-proliferation treaty if they were permitted to become signatories. Rather, the question of America’s right to act to enforce the treaty should focus on rogue states that present a significant danger to their neighbours, and whose acquisition of such weapons is likely to destabilize regional balances of power, and make the entire world less secure. Iran, Syria and Pakistan’s use of the language of anti-colonialism is a sign of nothing more than political opportunism.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e00e3ce75738c36b2757cadc0a799608",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent What is not at issue is whether Iran will invade anyone. No one expects that, at least not immediately. Rather, the harm of Iranian possession of nuclear weapons is that they will provide Iran with immunity from retaliation which will encourage it to escalate its Cold War against Saudi Arabia in the Gulf, and increase its assistance to Hezbollah and Hamas.\n\nAs noted above, Pakistan has in fact behaved in exactly this manner. Safe behind its nuclear shield, it has provided increasingly blatant backing to anti-Indian terrorist groups and opp is right to note that there is little that can be done about that. The best bet is not to allow Iran to do the same thing\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e97fb987526ac695ebaa50650b7b8e78",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Not all states are inherently rational, either by our standards or generally. North Korea is a xenophobic state based on the belief that they are racially and ideologically superior to all other states. [1] A government that does not consider its enemies fully human in its official propaganda is unlikely to blanch at the prospect of nuking them, even at their own expense. Even seemingly rational states make tactical mistakes, like Saddam Hussein did when he invaded Kuwait.\n\nNuclear Weapons raise the stakes, and have the potential to make the consequences of those errors far more serious and deadly.\n\nFurthermore, MAD does not operate solely due to the possession of Nuclear Weapons, but rather it requires that a state possess a “Second-Strike” ability. A “second Strike” ability means that a country has the capacity to nuke another country after it has already been attacked, whether through hardened silos or submarine launched warheads. Without such an ability, a state like Israel would risk losing its nuclear deterrent in an Iranian attack, and would therefore have every incentive to strike first if it thought such an attack might be about to occur. Iran, which is far less likely to be able to develop a “Second Strike” capability due to financial and technological limitations, would in turn almost constantly face a “use it or lose it” situation of its own.\n\n[1] Myers, B.R., ‘Excerpt: The Cleanest Race’, The New York Times, 26 January 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/books/excerpt-cleanest-race.html?pagew...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4dc8bbd52f4ccb6c7776ad73b1178175",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The United States would ideally move with the backing of the world community, but even if that is not present, we think that the United States is more than capable of making clear that it is not anyone’s puppet and that it is intervening solely to uphold international law.\n\nAny military action whether justified or not will cause resentment, but this not a reason to let genocide run amok or dictators get away with invasions nor is it a reason to let the same dictators get their hands on nuclear weapons, security is a vital interest whereas being liked by the rest of the world is not.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6aefec5ee2f56e35118d9e41bc183011",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The possession of nuclear weapons by some states drives others to militarize, creating arms races.\n\ner, the government possesses nuclear weapons it can threaten to use them, and thereby deter a counter-invasion or prevent the International community from being able to intervene to depose it.\n\nThis can be seen in the relative coddling Pakistan has received both from its political and territorial opponent India, and from the United States since its development of Nuclear Weapons. [3] Actions that previously would have led to sanctions or worse, such as aid to the Taliban, assistance to the Nuclear Programs of Rogue States – most famously through the A.Q. Kahn network that supplied Libya, Iran and North Korea, [4] and complicity in terrorist attacks in India are brushed off with empty words [5] and meaningless semi-sanctions, India itself is deterred from making any response. [6] Indeed, US policy in recent years has been to try to buy off Pakistan rather than to coerce it.\n\n[1] Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, Fifth ed., 1978, pp.4-15, http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/morg6.htm\n\n[2] Kaplan, Robert D., ‘Why John J. Mearsheimer Is Right (About Some Things)’, the Atlantic, January/February 2012, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/01/why-john-j-mearsheim...\n\n[3] Miglani, Sanjeev, ‘Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, a deterrent against India, but also United States?’, Reuters, 9 April 2011, http://blogs.reuters.com/afghanistan/2011/04/09/pakistans-nuclear-weapon...\n\n[4] Kerr, Paul K., and Nikitin, Mary Beth, ‘Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues’, Congressional Research Service, 30 November 2011, pp.20-23, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34248.pdf\n\n[5] The Associated Press, ‘India reluctant to blame Mumbai blasts on Pakistan’, CBCnews, 15 July 2011,\n\n[6] Narang, Vipin, ‘Pakistan’s Nuclear Posture: Implications for South Asian Stability’, Harvard Kennedy Sc http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/07/15/mumbai-explosions-attacks-... Belfast Center for Science and International Affairs Policy Brief, January 2010, http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Pakistans_Nuclear_Posture_poli...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9e4ede633f58ca5a101424deaf0efc3f",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent [Iran specific] Iran has threatened to destroy Israel\n\nIran has explicitly threatened to destroy Israel, President Ahmadinejad described Israel as a \"disgraceful blot\" that should be \"wiped off the face of the earth\". [1] Such a prospect would be disastrous, not just in its initial consequences, but for the entire region. Even an unsuccessful attack on Israel would provoke a counter strike. The US would take much of the blame for the casualties of such a strike even if it counselled Israel against it. The United States must prevent Iran from ever being able to put such threats into action which may mean having to engage in military action to prevent Iran gaining the capability.\n\n[1] MacAskill, Ewen, and McGreal, Chris, ‘Israel should be wiped off map, says Iran’s president’, The Guardian, 27 October 2005, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e231248a1d93999d6075ad4dad477c0c",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Nuclear weapons can fall into the wrong hands.\n\nEven if states do not use nuclear weapons themselves, or attempt to threaten their neighbours, they can sell their technology to other, less savoury states and individuals.\n\nThis was a particular problem with Pakistan. The former head of the Pakistani nuclear program, AQ Khan, sold technology on detonation mechanisms and Uranium enrichment to North Korea and Iran. [1] Iran is also likely to be willing to pass on its own nuclear information to other states, particularly Assad’s Syria. [2]\n\nSuch weapons could also find their way into the hands of terrorists. Iran has close links to Hezbollah and Hamas which it funds substantially, and a strong desire to hurt Israel. [3] North Korea has close links to a number of nasty groups ranging from drug cartels to Islamist terrorists.\n\n[1] Kerr, Paul K., and Nikitin, Mary Beth, ‘Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues’, Congressional Research Service, 30 November 2011, pp.20-23, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34248.pdf\n\n[2] Gekbart, Jonathan, ‘The Iran-Syria Axis: A Critical Investigation’, Stanford Journal of International Relations, Vol. XII, No. 1, Fall 2010, http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjir/12-1/fall10-final_5.pdf\n\n[3] Bruno, Greg, ‘State Sponsors: Iran’, Council on Foreign Relations, 13 October 2011, http://www.cfr.org/iran/state-sponsors-iran/p9362\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5f4445bc0011bfe5f5c5cca19be4e5b3",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The United States has an obligation to protect international stability due to its unique military strength.\n\nThe Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is one of the lynchpins on which the current Western-led international political and diplomatic order is dependent.1,2 Just as any normal legal system requires laws that are predictable and enforceable, so too does the international system. The Non-Proliferation Treaty provides this level of consistency and control over states’ nuclear assets.\n\nIn particular, one of those key principles is the assumption that once a country enters a treaty it will abide by its terms. If a country can leave a treaty at will, it means that no policy can be made with any degree of predictability. States are not able to formulate plans for future policies and development strategies if analysts and politicians are prevented from making reliable predictions about neighbouring state’s behaviour, economic policies and territorial ambitions.\n\nThis is particularly important with treaties relating to armaments, and of vital importance when it comes to Nuclear Weapons, because other countries choose to participate in military alliances and actions based on such assumptions.\n\nHistorically, arms build-ups and wars have occurred when the Great Powers fail to uphold the international legal system – fail to regard it as binding and inherently valuable and consequential. For example Germany’s willingness to disregard Czechoslovakian sovereignty prior to World War II. For that reason the United States has a vested interest in upholding the principles of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This is because the US is the major beneficiary of the present international system, both economically and politically.\n\nEconomically, the major loser in any upheaval around the world is almost guaranteed to be the United States or its corporations. However, the political incentives for the USA to continue upholding the non-proliferation treaty- by force if necessary- are far greater. A failure on its part to act will not just lead to nuclear proliferation, but also undermine other treaties banning chemical weapons and guaranteeing human rights as nations’ realize they are only pieces of paper.\n\n1. ‘The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons’, 2005 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), 1 July 1968, http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2005/npttreaty.html\n\n2. Kasprzyk, Nicholas, ‘Nuclear Non-proliferation and Regional Changing Strategic Balances: How Much Will Regional Proliferation Impinge Upon the Future of the NPT?’, in Krause, Joachim and Wenger, Andreas eds., Studies in Contemporary History and Security policy, 2001, http://kms2.isn.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/EINIRAS/343/ichaptersection_...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "226b51643e8bc9299b6f9a2757c734f8",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The development of nuclear weapons creates a self-perpetuating cycle of proliferation among other states.\n\nThe development of nuclear weapons encourages other countries to develop them as well. Rationally governed states without a nuclear deterrent are unlikely to allow themselves to be placed in a position where a nuclear armed neighbour can mount attacks against them with impunity. They therefore feel that they too need nuclear weapons in order to prevent the new nuclear power from taking advantage of their new capability.\n\nFor instance, the presence of an Iranian weapon would immediately threaten the Gulf States. Already unable to compete with Iran on a conventional level due to the vast disparity in size and population, states like the UAE would have every reason and motive to develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent. [1] A Saudi Prince actually floated the idea in 2011 that if Iran developed Nuclear Weapons, Saudi Arabia might follow. [2]\n\nAs more countries develop Nuclear weapons, the likelihood that someone will use them, either deliberately or by accident, goes up substantially.\n\n[1] Lindsay, James M., ‘After Iran Gets the Bomb’, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2010, http://www.cfr.org/united-states/after-iran-gets-bomb/p22182\n\n[2] Burke, Jason, ‘Riyadh will build nuclear weapons if Iran gets them, Saudi prince warns’, guardian.co.uk, 29 June 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/29/saudi-build-nuclear-weapons-...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "18d0c3ab0044e466588490ff9ac37836",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent No country has an inherent right to invade or use aggression against another.\n\nGiven the moral bankruptcy of the NPT, and existing views of the United States in much of the developing world, [1] any move by the United States to prevent other nations from developing nuclear weapons by force will be seen for what it is: an act of neo-colonialism. This would be the case with any act to enforce a treaty that is considered unfair towards most of the world.\n\nThis is especially true in areas where there is a long history of US support for regional actors who are less than popular. In moving against Iran, the United States will be perceived as a stalking horse for Israel, whilst any efforts to invade North Korea Would cause great alarm in China as well as in neighbouring South Korea despite being a U.S. ally where some Koreans believe the US is more of a threat to the nation than the North. [2] In both cases, the image of the US in the region will be badly damaged, and the United States will face a hostile insurgency within the countries that they invade.\n\n[1] Pew Global Attitudes Project, 2011, http://www.pewglobal.org/database/?indicator=1\n\n[2] Larson, Eric V. et al., Ambivalent Allies? A Study of South Korean Attitudes Towards the U.S., RAND Corporation, March 2004, p.93 http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2005/RAND_TR141.pdf (n.b. before north detonated nuclear bomb)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "dcd1417660d4b56bb4ec0d4369ba662c",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent [Iran specific] Iran has not invaded any other country in three and a half centuries; the same cannot be said for US allies including Israel, Pakistan, etc.\n\nFor all the censure Iran has faced as a rogue state, it has not, in fact, invaded another country for more than three centuries and despite internal aggression against western embassies the Iranian revolution seems to have made little difference. On the other hand, it has faced invasion on numerous occasions, whether from Russia, Britain or Iraq. Both Britain – whom the Iranians are still extremely suspicious off due to events such as the 1953 coup against Prime Minister Mosadeq [1] – and Russia – who together with Britain occupied Persia during world war II [2] - are nuclear weapons states.\n\nIran therefore has legitimate defensive reasons for developing Nuclear weapons. While Iran’s current government has pursued destabilizing policies in Lebanon and Israel/Palestine, the presence of Russia on its northern border and tensions with the United States justify their development. This is one reason why Iran’s nuclear program predates the current government and in fact goes all the way back to the Shah’s time. [3] Rather than being the product or continuation of Iran’s policies in the region, the nuclear program is independent of them, and justified on those basis.\n\n[1] Abrahamian, Ervand, ‘The 1953 Coup in Iran’, Science & Society Vol. 65, No. 2, Summer 2001, pp.182-215, http://www.webcitation.org/5kg6nFIXE\n\n[2] Globalsecurity.org, ‘Azerbaijan crisis (1945-1948)’, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/azerbaijan.htm\n\n[3] Milani, Abbas, ‘The Shah’s Atomic Dreams’, Foreignpolicy.com, 29 December 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/12/29/the_shahs_atomic_dreams\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9fc0928962c637ac45d6399428cdde62",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Existing international treaties that grant nuclear weapons to the US and other countries no longer reflect the changing global balance of power.\n\nThe Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty is inherently unfair, in that it prevents countries that did not have nuclear weapons as of 1964 from developing them, but makes no effort to force those who already possess nuclear devices to disarm.\n\nThe result is that the list of countries with such weapons, the United States, Russia, Britain, France, and China, represents the balance of power as it existed at the time that the non-proliferation treaty was drafted. Countries that have entered the club subsequently, like India and Pakistan, did so in violation of the treaty and international law.\n\nAny sort of treaty that seeks to limit access to nuclear arms has to provide opportunities for countries like Brazil to enter the “club” as they gain political or economic power. In the absence of any such mechanism the current treaty system is nothing more than a tool of Western dominance in order to keep the status quo which is favorable to the current nuclear powers something which is bound to build up resentment.\n\nThis would in effect offer not only to the pursuit of nuclear weapons by the targeted regimes, but to the rest of their policies. States like South Africa and Brazil already find it difficult to support a strong international line against Iran [1] due to seeing the inequality of allowing some countries nuclear weapons programmes but seeking to punish others, especially when the nuclear weapons states that are signatories to the NPT have not moved towards disarmament as the treaty stipulates. [2] This would in effect alienate them completely.\n\nSecond, even if the harm was justifiable by the ends, it would seem that in the long run, invading- or even censuring- every country that attempts to develop Nuclear Weapons in violation of the NPT is impractical as the United States and the rest of the world have de facto admitted by ending sanctions on Pakistan and India in 2001, two years after their nuclear tests. [3] As such, there needs to be a political means that can separate states like Brazil from states like Iran, lest the policy collapse under its own weight.\n\nThe West, rather than using force, should attempt to repair the existing non-proliferation treaty framework, such that the standards for possession of nuclear weapons are based on behaviour rather than history.\n\n[1] Charbonneau, Louis, ‘Q+A: How likely are new U.S. sanctions against Iran?’, Reuters, 9 November 2011, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/09/us-iran-nuclear-sanctions-idUSTRE7A86Z220111109\n\n[2] Spektor, Matias, ‘How to Read Brazil’s Stance on iran’, YaleGlobal, 16 March 2010, http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/how-read-brazils-stance-iran\n\n[3] BBC News, ‘US lifts India and Pakistan sanctions’, 23 September 2001, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1558860.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "08000e595df10c1de47bc7dba3dc2ce4",
"text": "international law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The principle of Mutually Assured Destruction makes war less likely.\n\nStates are fundamentally rational, and as such, nuclear proliferation has generally made war less likely, by promulgating the principle of mutually assured destruction (MAD).\n\nStates go to war with other states when they think they can win the conflict they will provoke. By making victory impossible, MAD makes wars unprofitable, and thereby prevents them from beginning in the first place. The Cold War never turned hot partially for this reason, and it is possible that the Israeli-Iranian relationship could be stabilized by both states possessing a nuclear deterrent. North Korea may well desire to Nuke the United States and Japan, and may well feel that there would be no moral issues with doing so, but they have refrained from doing so. As they have refrained from invading the South since 1950. There is substantial evidence that even the most irrational regimes can be deterred. No matter how dictatorial and authoritarian a state government, the prospect of complete nuclear annihilation will be effective in restraining its ambitions. [1]\n\nIn the case of Iran, the threat to Iranian cities by the Iraqi army moving on to the offensive and using chemical weapons motivated Khomeini to make peace in 1988. [2] It is worth noting that they have not explicitly attacked Israel themselves, preferring to work through proxies. It would seem unlikely that Iran, if it were to become the only nuclear power in the Islamic world, could avoid responsibility if Hamas or Hezbollah were to utilize a weapon.\n\n[1] Kenneth Waltz, “The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May Better,” I, Number 171 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1981), http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/waltz1.htm\n\n[2] Globalsecurity.org, ‘Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988)’, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/iran-iraq.htm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
222e08528b39da9ec6ba0e04dfdb3fbe
|
The historical significance of artefacts extends beyond their culture of origin
Artefacts have a historical and symbolic meaning that transcends their origins; over the years they acquire a connection with the place that they are housed. For example, the Egyptian obelisk that stands in the Piazza di San Pietro in Rome was brought to Italy in the reign of Caligula. [1] It is no longer merely an ‘Egyptian’ artefact - it has become a symbol of Roman dominance in the ancient world and the European Christian culture that succeeded it. During the Middle Ages it was believed that the ashes of Julius Caesar were contained in the gilt ball at the top [2] .
Further, all artefacts are part of a world-wide collective history. Olduvai handaxes (from countries in Eastern Africa such as Tanzania) are held in the British Museum [3] - but the people who made them are our ancestors just as much as they are the ancestors of local people. Holding these in London encourages us to see the common ground we hold with people everywhere in the world, whereas keeping them only in their local country only highlights our differences and tribal identities. “Culture knows no political borders. It never has. It’s always been mongrel; it’s always been hybrid; and it’s always moved across borders or bears the imprint of earlier contact” [4] .
[1] Saintpetersbasilica.org, ‘The Obelisk’.
[2] Wikipedia, ‘List of obelisks in Rome’, And Wikipedia, ‘Saint Peter’s Sqaure’, (Both have useful links and pictures.)
[3] The British Museum, ‘Highlights Olduvai Handaxe’.
[4] Cuno, James, author of ‘Who Owns Antiquity? Museums and the Battle over our Ancient Heritage’, quoted in Tiffany Jenkins, ‘Culture knows no political borders’, The Spectator July 2008.
|
[
{
"docid": "a306ee08a2b2dde5f38cb72e26fb0cce",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Artefacts often have unique religious and cultural connections with the place from where they were taken, but none for those who view them in museum cases. To the descendants of their creators it is offensive to see aspects of their spirituality displayed for the entertainment of foreigners. Meanings may have accumulated around artefacts, but their true significance is rooted in its origins.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "230483967c57b7583ac0412fb98daedc",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property If the artefacts are of sufficient historical and cultural interest, scholars will travel to any location in order to study them. Indeed, the proximity of artefacts in developing countries may even stimulate intellectual curiosity and increase the quality of universities in there, which would be beneficial for world culture.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c9557ffd34962e176f28388aeea7ca48",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Returning artefacts to their original locations would in the past have been an unfeasible project simply because of the risk of transporting everything. Now, however, transport is much quicker and easier and we have improved technology to make the transit less damaging to the artefact; for instance, temperature-controlled containers.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3cfe1371df16e92c9275bc37f7afe168",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Many people from an artefact's country of origin never get to see them because they cannot afford to travel to a foreign museum; as such the cost of access to that museum is a very small part of the total cost. These artefacts are part of their cultural history and national identity, and it is important that local people are given the opportunity to see them. It is not all about quantity of visitors; those closest to the artefacts have the greatest right to see them. For others, it should be a privilege not a right.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7e3c1a7cec47b3bab8864e548aa3cc0c",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property For whatever reason the treasures were first collected, we should not rewrite history. There is no reason to politicise this argument; museums have no 'political' agenda but merely wish to preserve historical objects for their intrinsic value. Their reasons for keeping these items may be financial, or in the interests of keeping the artefacts safe and accessible to the public; whatever they may be, they are not political. Don’t the nations who have expended resources protecting and preserving these artefacts deserve in return the right to display them?\n\nAdditionally, not all artefacts held outside their country of origin are the result of imperial or exploitative relationships. The original Medieval Crown of England is held in Munich [1] . Artistic exchange has nothing to do with politics anymore.\n\n[1] Bayerische Verwaltung der staatlichen Schlösser, Gärten und Seen, ‘Treasury (Schatzkammer)'\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c2bd14a252c3073f4858131653bb0c53",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property In the case of the Parthenon marbles, Lord Elgin’s action in removing them was an act of rescue as the Parthenon was being used as a quarry by the local population. [1] The Parthenon had already been destroyed by an explosion in 1687. [2] Having been removed the result was that the British protected them between 1821 and 1833 during the Greek War of Independence was occurring and the Acropolis was besieged twice. [3] Furthermore, if they had been returned upon Greek independence in 1830, the heavily polluted air of Athens would have caused extensive damage to such artefacts that would be open to the elements and Greek attempts at restoration in 1898 were as damaging as the British. [4] Today economic austerity lends new uncertainty to Greece’s commitment to financing culture.\n\nSimilar problems face the return of artefacts to African museums; wooden figures would decay in the humid atmosphere. Artefacts in Northern Africa are at risk because of the recent revolts and civil wars [5] . Wealthier countries sometimes simply have better resources to protect, preserve and restore historical artefacts than their country of origin. Our moral obligation is to preserve the artefact for future generations, and if this is best achieved by remaining in a foreign country then that must be the course of action.\n\n[1] Beard, Mary, ‘Lord Elgin - Saviour or Vandal?’, BBC History, 17 February 2011.\n\n[2] Mommsen, Theodor E., ‘The Venetian in Athens and the Destruction of the Parthenon in 1687’, American Journal of Archaeology, Vol 45, No. 4, Oct-Dec 1941, pp. 544-556.\n\n[3] Christopher Hitchens, The Elgin Marbles: Should They Be Returned to Greece?, 1998,p.viii, ISBN 1-85984-220-8\n\n[4] Hadingham, Evan, ‘Unlocking Mysteries of the Parthenon’ Smithsonian Magazine, February 2008.\n\n[5] Parker, Nick ‘Raiders of the Lost Mubarak’, , The Sun, 1st Feburary 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0458bfaedab7ae6e23a427ef3d7f08da",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Although some treasures may have been acquired illegally, the evidence for this is often ambiguous. Experts agree that Greece could mount no court case because Elgin was granted permission by what was then Greece's ruling government. Lord Elgin’s bribes were the common way of facilitating any business in the Ottoman Empire, and do not undermine Britain’s solid legal claim to the Parthenon marbles, based upon a written contract made by the internationally-recognised authorities in Athens at the time. The veracity of the document can never be fully dismissed as it is a translation. And while some Benin bronzes were undoubtedly looted, other “colonial trophies” were freely sold to the imperial powers, indeed some were made specifically for the European market.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "25425491faed64ed1cb9731a44fda0c6",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property The artefacts' place of origin has more often than not changed dramatically since they were in situ there. It is therefore unconvincing to argue that the context of modern Orthodox Greece aids visitors’ appreciation of an ancient pagan relic. Too much has changed physically and culturally over the centuries for artefacts to speak more clearly in their country of origin than they do in museums, where they can be compared to large assemblies of objects from a wide variety of cultures. Similarly, a great many cultural treasures relate to religions and cultures which no longer survive and there can be no such claim for their return. Technology has also evolved to the point that Ancient Greece can be just as accurately evoked virtually as it could be in modern Greece [1] .\n\nCountries with cultural heritage retain the attraction of being the original locations of historical events or places of interest even without all the artefacts in place. The sanctuaries of Olympia and Delphi in Greece are a good example of this; they are not filled with artefacts, but continue to attract visitors because the sites are interesting in themselves. In 2009 2,813,548 people visited Athens, with 5,970,483 visiting archaeological sites across Greece [2] , even without the Parthenon marbles. Also, people who have seen an artefact in a foreign museum may then be drawn to visit the area it originated from. It is the tourist trade of the nations where these artefacts are held (mostly northern European nations, like Britain and France) which would suffer if they were repatriated. Lacking the climate and natural amenities of other tourist destinations they rely on their cultural offerings in order to attract visitors\n\n[1] Young Explorers, ‘A brief history of…’ The British Museum.\n\n[2] AFP, ‘New Acropolis Museum leads rise in Greek Museum visitor numbers for 2009’, Elginism, June 8th 2010. (Breakdown of visitor figures according to major destinations. )\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ed1812a845ab633b1d1c03ba362daee2",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property In many cases, returning an artefact may prove to be unreasonably expensive\n\nEven with modern transport links and technology, transporting every artefact in a foreign museum back to its original location would be an impractically mammoth task. The risk of damage to artefacts would be unavoidable, not to mention the possibility of theft or sabotage en route. Important artefacts in transit would be an ideal public target for acts of terrorism. Moreover, the infrastructure of developing countries is probably not sufficient to cope with that volume. Greece may have spent $200m developing a new museum but relatively it is one of the more wealthy countries of origin for artefacts in the British Museum; places such as Nigeria are unlikely to put such emphasis on cultural investment.\n\nMuseums all over the world do loan out their collections [1] . Just because they are held in another country’s museum does not mean that the place of origin would not be able to access artefacts. Creating a generous and dynamic network of sharing relics between museums would be a much more realistic way of sharing and ensuring that all could benefit from seeing them.\n\n[1] The British Museum, ‘Tours and loans’.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5ffcf51c3f169bbf21b3b2fa876bc9ca",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Scholars will have better access to artefacts, and more opportunities for study and collaboration, if they are stored in the west\n\nIf the Rosetta Stone had not been taken by the British in 1801, the deciphering of the ancient hieroglyphic language of the ancient Egyptian civilizations would have been near impossible. The British Museum is within just hours, and in some cases minutes, of such world-renowned institutions as Cambridge, Oxford, UCL, and Edinburgh. The scientific research that occurs in stable developed countries and scientifically excelling countries is of the highest degree, and parallels to this high level of study are simply non-existent in many underdeveloped countries.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7b0b1fa0d0b91b247e7185bcd8a79b13",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Artefacts should be made accessible to the largest possible number of visitors\n\nArt treasures should be accessible to the greatest number of people and to scholars, because only then can the educational potential of these artefacts be realised. In response to a question about whether museums have any social responsibility, Richard Armstrong, director at the Guggenheim, said “Absolutely, it began with the French Revolution. It is the more than a 200-year-old quest to have the most powerful cultural artefacts available to the greatest number of people. One could say it is the project of democratizing beauty” [1] . In practice this means retaining them in the great museums of the world. Further some of the world great museums, such as those in Britain and the Smithsonian in Washington D.C. are free of charge.\n\n[1] Boudin, Claudia, ‘Richard Armstrong on the Future of the Solomon R Guggenheim Foundation’, 4th November 2008.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bcc3dc48f78275fdd0de6ce0a3615537",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Retaining artefacts is a relic of imperialist attitudes to non-occidental cultures\n\nDisplay of cultural treasures in Western museums may be seen as a last hangover from the imperial belief that “civilised” states such as Britain were the true cultural successors to Ancient Greece and Rome, and that the ‘barbarian’ inhabitants of those ancient regions were unable to appreciate or look after their great artistic heritage. Whether that was true in the 19th century is open to doubt; it certainly is not valid today and the display of imperial trophies in institutions such as the British Museum or the Louvre is a reminder to many developing nations of their past oppression. For instance, the British Museum is refusing to return 700 of the Benin Bronzes to Nigeria despite repeated requests by the Nigerian government [1] . The Rosetta stone has been the subject of demands by the Egyptian government but remains in London. These artefacts become almost souvenirs of Imperialism, a way of retaining cultural ownership long after the political power of Britain has faded. Returning them would be a gesture of goodwill and cooperation.\n\n[1] “The British Museum which refuses to state clearly how many of the bronzes it has is alleged to be detaining has 700 bronzes whilst the Ethnology Museum, Berlin, has 580 pieces and the Ethnology Museum, Vienna, has 167 pieces. These museums refuse to return any pieces despite several demands for restitution.” From Opoku, Kwame, ‘France returns looted artefacts to Nigeria: Beginning of a long process or an isolated act?’ 29th January 2010\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5efa9dd2ec86d93d839f5eee8451ca20",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Many artefacts resting in western museums were acquired illegally. Western states have a duty to retain them.\n\nArtefacts were often acquired illegally. Elgin, for instance, appropriated the Parthenon Marbles from the Ottoman authorities who had invaded Greece and were arguably not the rightful owners of the site; he took advantage of political turmoil to pillage these ancient statues. Doubt has even been cast on the legality of the 1801 document which purportedly gave Elgin permission to remove the marbles [1] . The Axum obelisk was seized from Ethiopia by Mussolini as a trophy of war; fortunately the injustice of this action has since been recognised and the obelisk was restored to its rightful place in 2005 [2] .\n\nUNESCO regulations initially required the return of artefacts removed from their country of origin after 1970,when the treaty came into force, but did not deal with any appropriations before this date due to deadlock in the negotiations for the framing of the convention that prevented inclusion of earlier removals. . However, the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects essentially removes the ambiguity about time limitations of UNESCO’s 1970 convention. Here, nations are required, in all cases, to return cultural artefacts to their countries of origin if those items were once stolen or removed illegally [3] . International law is thus on the side of returning artefacts.\n\n[1] Rudenstine, David, 'Did Elgin cheat at marbles?' Nation, Vol. 270, Issue 21, 25 May 2000.\n\n[2] BBC News, ‘Who should own historic artefacts?’, 26th April 2005,\n\n[3] Odor, ‘The Return of Cultural Artefacts to Countries of Origin’.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "92f25aabb58503e706b81b1aff1439c6",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Cultural artefacts are enriched when displayed in the context from which they originated\n\nCultural treasures should be displayed in the context in which they originated; only then can they be truly valued and understood. In the case of the Parthenon marbles this is an architectural context which only proximity to the Parthenon itself can provide. In the British Museum they appear as mere disconnected fragments, stripped of any emotional meaning. It may also be useful for academics to have a cultural property in its original context in order to be able to understand it, for example a carved door may be a beautiful artefact but it cannot be truly understood unless we know what the door was used for, where it leads too something for which it is necessary to see the context.\n\nCultural and historical tourism is an important source of income for many countries, and is especially important for developing countries. If their artefacts have been appropriated by foreign museums in wealthy nations then they are being deprived of the economic opportunity to build a successful tourist trade. Both the treasures themselves are being devalued as is the experience of seeing the treasures.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "59e9812697ca8c22f3d7525e812e7342",
"text": "aditions education teaching university house would return cultural property Developing countries are able to guard and preserve their own cultural treasures\n\nIt may have been true that countries such as Greece were not capable of looking after their heritage in the past, but that has now changed. Since 197\n\n5 Greece has been carefully restoring the Acropolis and Athens now has a secure environment to maintain the marbles. The state-of-the-art New Acropolis Museum, which cost $200m, has now been completed to house the surviving marbles [1] , and even contains a replica of the temple, thus the marbles would appear as being exactly the same as on the real temple. Pollution control measures (such as installing pollution monitoring stations throughout metropolitan Athens and ensuring that motor vehicles must comply with emission standards [2] ) have reduced sulphur-dioxide levels in the city to a fifth of their previous levels.\n\nAt the same time the curatorship of institutions such as the British Museum is being called into question, as it becomes apparent that controversial cleaning and restoration practices may have harmed the sculptures they claim to protect. In the 1930s the British museum’s attempt to clean them using chisels caused irreparable damage. [3] They have also been irresponsible when it comes to protecting the fate of many of its artefacts: “The British Museum has sold off more than 30 controversial Benin bronzes for as little as £75 each since 1950, it has emerged”; “The museum now regrets the sales” [4] .\n\n[1] Acropolis museum, Home page.\n\n[2] Alexandros.com, ‘Greece’.\n\n[3] Smith, Helena, ‘British damage to Elgin marbles ‘irreparable’’, The Guardian, 12 November 1999.\n\n[4] BBC News, ‘Benin bronzes sold to Nigeria’, 27th March 2002.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
0f21acd7bcb59d447fd82892a18bab09
|
Individuals should only be held responsible for the consequences of their own actions
In any free and democratic society, criminal law should only hold people accountable for the things they do, not for the actions of others. We are all autonomous, moral agents who make decisions and have to live with their consequences and the consequences of our actions. While it might be justified to punish bullies for their bullying behavior, if it breaks the law, we cannot hold them accountable for another person’s decision to commit suicide.
|
[
{
"docid": "cf31a3b8aa01b1e8de325b32e4bc4bc1",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally Under this law, bullies would be held accountable for their own actions, not those of the victim. The law wouldn’t have to equate them with murderers, punish them as harshly, or suggest they bear sole and full responsibility for the victim’s death. But it would make it clear they bear some responsibility for the outcome, and that they should be punished for their role. If they are children, they can be prosecuted as juvenile offenders and given less harsh punishments, like community service.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "734b0ce503bbfe79f556b7d08e2cb7b8",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally Prosecutions of bullies responsible for suicides, and improved safety in schools are not mutually exclusive goals. Programmes need to be set up that stop bullying early on, give victims support, and people to turn to when they are in need. Schools and their administrators can and should also be held accountable to their boards, and the community. But in those cases where tragedies still happen in spite of such measures, the culprits should be held to account.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5805ee00126b1f9714b9a2aa04653b13",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally Of course there will always be ambiguous cases. That is why we have trials, and rights for the defendant. The weight of the evidence presented in court should establish what degree of culpability, if any, the bullies had. If the prosecution does not have a solid case to present, it may even choose not to prosecute. But the law should be in place for those cases where it is needed.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "59430ed83bb977bbe3288b193893a67a",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally We criminalize behaviour when it is truly harmful. Especially when it is so harmful that it leads to someone losing her life. Eye rolling and gossip are not harmful enough to be criminal offences. Nor would they be under this law. What would become a criminal offence would be the sustained and prolonged torment of another person to the point of pushing her to committing suicide, whatever forms that torment takes, whether it’s gay slurs, or physical threats and insults. It has also long been established that there are limits to the freedom of speech or expression we enjoy, if that can result in the direct harm of others. For example, we don’t allow people to incite violence against others.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "62163f65dbf493e1cce257b52193609f",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally Bullies are often children, most of them in their teens. However, they are at an age where they do know right from wrong and can, therefore, be held accountable for their actions. Neither their young age nor their own suffering can justify bearing responsibility for someone else’s death. Most criminal justice systems recognize that children are liable for their behaviour, by allowing children as young as 10, in the UK for example, to be charged with criminal offences. Their age and personal situation can, nevertheless, be taken into account in deciding what punishment they should receive (prison, community service, a fine, etc.). And there is no reason why rehabilitation and education cannot be part, or even the focus, of that punishment.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb0b2903a43f93f6618da174f3cf8517",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally There is a fundamental difference between someone’s actions directly resulting in another person’s death and the case of bullying. In the case of manslaughter, the victim never had a choice. The perpetrator is solely responsible for what happened. But some victims of bullying take a decision to kill themselves, while others do not. The bully cannot be held responsible for someone else’s decision and action, only for her own.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ed699905cba0824e59538f3cb46c5a24",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally The laws are inadequate because it is very hard to define bullying. Almost any act or gesture can constitute bullying depending the victim’s subjective experience of it. Criminalizing bullying would lead to criminalizing behaviour that would be considered normal by most standards.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d97cfcf1407e023d487b6db7ecc5bcd",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally We should always focus on stopping the behaviour before it escalates to the point of the victim’s suicide. Bullies should be held to account early on. We shouldn’t wait until someone dies before they are punished. If victims know there will be early intervention, they will be far less likely to even consider suicide. If they know the bullies won’t be punished until after their death, it might even encourage some distraught victims to kill themselves in the hope of exact vengeance on their tormenters. Early intervention is a much better outcome for everyone.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4e84f60b85e36d9d8b6ea946c2ffe0d5",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally The law should only punish people for their own actions, not those of others. It’s fine to punish bullies for their bullying behaviour, if it is against the law. But ‘bullycide’ implies the bully bears individual responsibility for the death of the victim, just like in the case of murder or manslaughter. But the bully did not pull the trigger, the victim did. While the bully may have intended to harm or berate the victim, she made no attempt on the victim’s life, and cannot be treated like a murderer, who intentionally took the life of another.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "70ddfb3d5f9af53866c48cd14f74be4f",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally Bullys are frequently as disturbed and victimised as those they target\n\nAccording to studies, bullies are often children who are plagued by their own problems: a troubled family situation, feeling of inadequacy, depression, or pressure to fit in [1] . Their bullying behaviour might just be a coping mechanism and a cry for help. These children might need as much support and care as those they bully. Putting them through the harrowing experience of a criminal trial, and potentially throwing them in prison will further damage them. Destroying one young life as retribution for another is a model of justice that should find no place in a compassionate society.\n\n[1] Carroll, Linda. ”Kids with ADHD may be more likely to bully”. MSNBC. 29 January 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22813400/#.Tvmm8iNWoVc\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4aa24435401e5b2b818b809641f4c268",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally Conduct offence\n\nDefining bullying would be nearly impossible. Spreading rumours, giving someone the silent treatment, inviting all your classmates but one to a party, expressing a religious belief about someone’s sexuality, eye rolling, making faces, these can all be hurtful and perceived as bullying [1] . Yet this is perfectly legal behaviour. Criminalizing bullying would amount to criminalizing these acts. They may be offensive, they may even be hurtful, but these gestures should never, ever constitute criminal behaviour in any society that is concerned with human rights, freedom of speech, and of expression. Throwing someone in prison for spreading rumours or eye rolls might be worthy of a totalitarian state, but not a liberal democracy.\n\n[1] Bolton, José, and Stan Graeve. No Room for Bullies: from the Classroom to Cyberspace. Boys Town Press. 2005.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6668013e7c6f3d3d53b0eb6937195168",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally Making bullying a legal issues does not incentivise robust enforcement of anti bullying rules by schools\n\nSchools are educational establishments that parents trust to protect and educate their children. Teachers and school administrators are those who should be keeping a watchful eye on the students in their care and intervene before harm comes to them. If bullying occurs at school, then that school has failed in its duties. In fact, in cases where suicides occurred, it has often later come to light that a bullying culture was widely tolerated at the school, and that school staff that knew about it did nothing to prevent it, with tragic results [1] . To prosecute the bullies would shift responsibility from the woeful failure of the adults around them, who should have known better and done more than the children in their care.\n\n[1] Bazelon, Emily. “What Really Happened to Phoebe Prince? Entry 1”. Slate. July 20. 2010. http://www.slate.com/articles/life/bulle/features/2010/what_really_happe...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9fbf54282683c00f87472ab79abaa86a",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally It is difficult to make a direct, legally sound link between a bully's behaviour and a victim's suicide\n\nMany of the children and adolescents who take their own lives allegedly as a result of bullying have a far more complicated background. Some already struggle with depression, and have unstable family situations that make it hard to turn to their parents for help with their problems. Phoebe Prince, for example, was taking anti-depressants, was devastated by her parents’ divorce, was self harming, and had already attempted suicide after a break up. And that was long before she was allegedly bullied to death [1] . She was a very troubled young woman, and anything could have pushed her over the edge. It would be hard to find the bullies criminally responsible for her death.\n\n[1] Bazelon, Emily. “What Really Happened to Phoebe Prince? Entry 2”. Slate. July 20. 2010. http://www.slate.com/articles/life/bulle/features/2010/what_really_happe...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "561fcce6a79bdcda5d90d200d7851b0a",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally The bully's intentions are irrelevant\n\nIn criminal law, the establishment of culpability does not always depend on the intentions of the perpetrator. If, during a fight on a train platform, I shove someone and that person falls on the tracks and is killed by a train, I will be guilty of manslaughter, whether I intended to kill the person or not, because the harm caused by my actions is so great [1] . The same applies to bullying. Bullies try to hurt their victims through their actions, either physically or psychologically. Whether the bully intended for the victim to die or not, is irrelevant. The bully’s actions were responsible for the victim taking her own life.\n\n[1] Ashworth, Andrew. Principles of Criminal Law, Chapter 7.5. Oxford University Press. 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "391b1a43da8eb486101d5abd80339050",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally The damage wrought by bullying is cumulative\n\nBullying is truly dangerous when it becomes persistent. Any one incident of it, while unpleasant, may be entirely tolerable for the victim. But being unrelentingly subjected to this treatment for months on end can make life truly unbearable and lead that person to suicide. In the case of Phoebe Prince, an Irish immigrant who was bullied at her US high school, she was called expletives, threatened, and even hit with a beverage container before she finally took her life [1] . She may have survived any one of those taunts, but it was their cumulative effect that was too much to bear. Conversely, punishing her bullies for any one act will fail to acknowledge the much greater extent of the overall harm. A different, special offence is needed to recognize the magnified level of harm caused by bullying.\n\n[1] Eckholm, Eric; Zezima, Katie. “Documents Detail a Girl’s Final Days of Bullying”. The New York Times. April 8, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/09/us/09bully.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fc4a67952d7596b7229de19a5b391fa5",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally The law should always punish actions that inflict serious harm - whether physical or psychological\n\nBullying can inflict serious psychological harm on its victims, especially in the case of young people. It leads to low self-esteem, depression, and for some kids it leads to suicide [1] . Bullied children are almost 6 times more likely to think about or attempt suicide [2] . This phenomenon has been termed ‘bullycide’ and the law should recognize it. Many forms of behaviour that result in the death of another person are criminal, from murder to negligence. It is the duty of the law to brand such behaviour as unacceptable, deter future incidents, punish the perpetrators, and offer comfort to victims: in this case, the families of those who lost their life to bullying.\n\n[1] O'Moore, Mona, “Understanding School Bullying: A Guide for Parents & Teachers”, Veritas, 1, Dublin, 2010\n\n[2] Kim YS, Leventhal BL, Koh YJ, Boyce WT “Bullying Increased Suicide Risk: Prospective Study of Korean Adolescents”. Arch Suicide Res. Vol. 13, No. 1, pp15-30. 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8c1c1b6ba7c08225e9ae02fb34f90153",
"text": "ucation education general law law general house would hold students legally The current legal regime is not able to prevent or adequately punish bullying\n\nEven when bullies are sometimes prosecuted, they are charged with offences that constitute individual components of the bullying behaviour, like harassment, stalking, causing bodily harm [1] , or invasion of privacy [2] . But these offences were not designed with bullying in mind and fail to capture its overall impact and the harm it causes. While bullies may be charged with several of these offenses this will still not capture the kind of harm being done and would not be as effective as a specifically tailored offense. We need laws that recognize that harm and which punish those who inflict it adequately.\n\n[1] Eckholm, Erick. “Two Students Plead Guilty in Bullying of Teenager.” The New York Times. May 4, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/us/05bully.html\n\n[2] Foderaro, Lisa W. “Private Moment Made Public. Then a fatal Jump.” The New York Times. September 29. 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/nyregion/30suicide.html\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
7cbc89deb241c8a6f6567b25eeaceaf4
|
Individuality and creativity should be encouraged
Article 19 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression"[18]. Children's freedom of expression is restricted by school uniforms, because children who have to wear the same clothing as every other child in their school are not able to express their individuality and creativity. We should get rid of school uniform so that all children can express themselves freely.
|
[
{
"docid": "deed6ed8a480a57a1d2f02dd24f404c4",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior Schools can foster creativity and individuality without getting rid of school uniform. There are many schools with a uniform which still support creativity and individuality with \"Child Initiated Independent Learning\", and other schemes which encourage children to think for themselves [19, 20]. Also, if children are participating in creative activities like art, it is surely better for them to wear sensible clothes, and it's easier to make sure all children are wearing sensible clothes if they all have to wear the same uniform.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "4e445c3bb0a64c3f1f2cf985bb43f965",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior Dress codes are a half-way house that does not work. It does not make students look at all uniform and it does not show what school they are from. In the United States there has been a move away from allowing either no uniform or dress codes towards having school uniforms.[6]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ebc80a5cb95de9b389b2b46f023bcc3d",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior In many countries, parents can apply for help with the cost of school uniform. For example, in the U.K., parents who don't earn a lot of money can get money from the government to help pay for their child's school uniform[13] . In Australia, the Australian Scholarships Group, which specialises in helping parents save money when it comes to their children's education, has tips for parents to get their child's uniform cheaper.[14]\n\nAlso, parents would probably have to spend a lot more money if their children didn't wear a uniform to school, because they would have to buy them more casual clothes. Since children don't like to wear the same thing too often (in case they get bullied), parents would have to spend a lot of money making sure their children have lots of different outfits.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6035cbc73509c9629d997d675f4175d1",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior A lot of schools have a choice of uniform so that children can wear what they feel most comfortable in. For example, in Australia, which is a very hot country, schools often have a summer uniform of clothes that are more comfortable in the hot weather [9]. This means that in summer, children might be allowed to wear shorts instead of trousers and short-sleeved instead of long-sleeved shirts.\n\nIf children were allowed to choose their own clothes to wear to school, instead of a uniform, they might choose impractical clothes themselves, like baggy tee shirts or long skirts, or jeans with chains hanging from them. To make sure that children are all wearing sensible clothes in which they will be able to take part in all their school activities, there needs to be one uniform that all children at the school wear.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c2851d27ab931f461b7338fe0a7ee3fd",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior Some schools do have different rules for religious students, so that those students can express their beliefs. For example, a school might let Muslim girls wear some of their religious items of clothing mixed with the school uniform (e.g., Reading Girls' School)[2].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d467f3d03b516c0a3ec3b57d3697552",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior There will always be teasing between children. If it's not based on what clothes the kids are wearing, it'll be because of their hair colour[4], or the fact that they wear glasses [5]. Children need to learn from an early age that everyone is different, or how can they learn to accept that? The differences between people should be embraced; in making students wear a uniform, schools are wrongly teaching children that everyone should look the same.\n\nWhen it comes to the opposition's evidence it should be remembered that opinion polls themselves are slippery, depending on the question asked, as is something like a belief in the benefits of school uniforms. There is also no evidence to link parent's belief that it promotes equality to whether it really does.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "069dd68905da82514cf244ffe9b47b55",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior Researchers have actually found that having to wear a school uniform does not make children better behaved. For example, Brunsma and Rockquemore[22] looked at data for more than 4,500 students and found that those who wore a school uniform did not have fewer behavioural problems or better attendance. School uniform does not encourage discipline, so there is no need to make children wear one.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b208a8f1e96e53c989dc7f5cd1ba4929",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior School uniforms might help improve the feeling of unity within schools, but pride in one's school is dependent on being distinct and different from another school. This can lead increase rivalry between schools (already present from school sports matches). There are many examples of school rivalry (often made worse by the fact that children from different schools are made to wear different uniforms) leading to children being beaten up or worse. For example, in New Zealand, a boy was beaten up by boys from a rival school; he said that the boys told him he should be shot because he went to a different school, which they could see from his uniform[17]. Because of this rivalry, it might be better for students not to wear school uniforms on outings, where they might encounter children from other schools. Schools can use other things to make sure children don't get lost on school trips, like buddy schemes where each child has a buddy, and having plenty of teachers or assistant teachers. 1 TVNZ, 2007. Boy beaten as school rivalry heats up [online] 21 October.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "75a668c7b8d23df4fad30e06bc53ab25",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior Dress Codes instead of school uniform\n\nRather than having school uniform, why not have a dress code instead? This has all the benefits of uniform without the many disadvantages. While uniforms force all children to wear the same clothes, dress codes give students a lot of choice what to wear. Only a few unsuitable things are banned - for example, gang colors, very short skirts, crop tops, bare shoulders, etc\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "42293c62c46398bdf1abe35748a66604",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior School uniforms are often impractical or uncomfortable\n\nSchool uniforms are often not very comfortable or practical. In state schools (schools for which parents don't have to pay fees) in the U.K., for example, girls often have to wear dresses or skirts, when they might feel more comfortable in trousers, and boys often have to wear button-up shirts and ties, which can also be uncomfortable for active children[7]. In independent schools, uniforms are often even more impractical and uncomfortable, with blazers or even tailcoats for the children to wear[8].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "25a147e812a3e573051dac3df8a289b8",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior Students should be allowed to wear religious dress\n\nIf children are religious, they should be allowed to wear the clothes that express their religion, but school a uniform can often restrict this. Religious beliefs can be extremely valuable and important to many children, giving their lives a great deal of meaning and structure and inspiring them to work hard and behave compassionately in a school environment. Some religions place a great deal of value upon worn symbols of faith, such as turbans, headdresses and bracelets. When a school demands that a child remove these symbols, it inadvertently attacks something central to that child’s life. This may cause the child to see her school and her faith as mutually exclusive institutions[1]. Vulnerable young people should not be forced into an adversarial relationship with their school, as close, collaborative involvement with teaching and learning techniques will greatly effect a child’s ability to adapt, learn and acquire new skills in the future.\n\nFor example, school skirts are often not long enough for Muslim girls, who believe that they should cover most of their bodies. To allow children to express their religions, we should get rid of school uniforms.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d3c8a8395c1c1ab31ea9803c00cbb24",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior School uniforms are often expensive\n\nIf a school has a uniform, parents are expected to buy it, and then buy a new one every time their child outgrows the last. This can be expensive. It has been reported that parents in South Africa[10], Australia[11], and the U.K[12]. have to pay a lot of money for their children's school uniforms, and it is probably the same in other countries too.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0f5817ef8b2e10a0c525ad54e4911b9e",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior School uniforms contribute to the sense of school unity\n\nSchools that have a uniform often say that they do so because wearing a uniform helps their students feel a sense of unity and pride in their school (e.g., Sacred Heart Catholic School, 2010)[15]. The headmistress of Fulham Cross School in London, England, has been quoted as saying that introducing a uniform at her school gave students \"an incredible sense of pride\"; after the introduction of a school uniform, GCSE passes at her school rose from 42 to 53 per cent[16].\n\nThis sense of unity is especially important on school trips, where teachers need to be able to tell which children belong to their school, so that no one gets lost.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eeace09252deabd86bab391b726d4fb1",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior School uniforms create a sense of equality\n\nSchool catchment areas are diverse and in private schools, some children are there on a scholarship. So, without uniforms there are clear indicators of wealth between what children wear. This makes poorer children stand out, (or even possibly the reverse). Children can then be bullied for being different, which diminishes a child's enjoyment of school. A study in New York has shown that 84% of parents think uniforms promote equality, and 89% of guidance counselors think uniforms help teach children to be more accepting of others who are less fortunate[3]. This perception among parents will help create the same perception among their children. This is also likely to translate to the teachers who will therefore treat their pupils more equally.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a47ba883afae6c39bdbe95ecfbe2da18",
"text": "education general house would ban school uniforms junior School uniforms encourage discipline\n\nHaving to wear smart clothes encourages children to respect their school and their teachers and behave themselves. This is because of the association between smart clothes and work. Casual wear at school can also make students feel over-relaxed and 'at home,' meaning they don't focus as much on work. A lot of schools are bringing back school uniform because they want to improve discipline[21].\n\nMoreover, school uniform can actively encourage students to enter into an adversarial relationship with the curriculum and their teachers. Exercising arbitrary control over children in the interests of “discipline” is likely to convince them that the very sensible, rational principles of learning and critical thought that they acquire during the school day are equally arbitrary and meaningless. By refusing to allow children to participate in enjoyable, beguiling processes of discovery and understanding unless they comply with unjustified and meaningless rules about dress, schools risk being seen as oppressive and capricious by their students.\n\n1 The Telegraph, 2009. School uniforms return in drive to improve school discipline [online] 1 October.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
11d888ef76cc5f7d14e109b31616c127
|
Students need to study the basics of language not a complex form such as poetry
According to a report published in 2011 [3] a great number of pupils in England are struggling after starting secondary school and 3 out of 10 pupils are not making enough progress in English. If pupils are not making the required progress in basic English then it is difficult to understand the motivation behind teaching complex poetry. If a student is unable to do basic multiplication it makes no sense to ask them to do complicated mathematic equations. The same is true in English: pupils who struggle with things like grammar and vocabulary should not be expected to tackle complicated poetic structures.
|
[
{
"docid": "9fdf13af75403ea15f06e7d637283159",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry should not be seen as something that one studies after learning English but should, instead, be seen as a way to help students grasp the English language. Many aspects of English are improved through the study of poetry. Learning poetry involves repetitive reading and an exploration of vowels and syllables. Students also explore a variety of sentence structures and are given the opportunity to explore the creativity and flexibility available in language. Furthermore, by reading poetry students can improve their reading ability and public speaking skills.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "1cfd742a9a4d86b3a703b721eda32d95",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Musicians have, for some time, been awarded poet status. Early in his career Bob Dylan was described as being “as good as Keats [an early 19th Century British poet].\" [7] Musicians must be allowed the chance to develop their poetic style and be recognized for their lyrical writing skills.\n\nRap gives the listener an insight into the plight of the artist. It shows the harsh conditions in which people live and gives a voice to those that we otherwise might not hear. William Blake’s famous poem ‘London’ is often described a social protest, a voice of discontent with the conditions of life in 1790’s London. Rap does the same thing; social protest, put to music, and designed to describe the racial and economic inequalities that exist within society. Rap, even with its sometimes offensive lyrics reflects the society the artist sees and it should be accepted as it is.\n\nWe must not judge the poetry on the basis of the poet’s life Dylan Thomas, Wales’ national poet, was an adulterer and an alcoholic. However, this does not make his poetry any less worthy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7dfedfb240e5eaff8fa6da6d35ca7add",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior While great poetry may deal with adult experiences there is poetry that targets a younger audience and methods available to teach this type of poetry. Children’s poetry, for instance, is not complex or dark in subject matter and uses very regular rhythm and rhyme schemes, which young students will enjoy. If age-appropriate poetry is taught in schools then it gives young people the chance to develop an appreciation for poetry and its various techniques. This means that in later years young people will have the skills necessary to properly understand great poetry.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df421f5b21b7787965ba6776ba6b4a9e",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior History books can tell us more about the horrors of the First World War than any poetry can. War poetry is based on the opinions of one person’s experiences whereas a history book can give an account of all the events and horrors that occurred. Because history books have been written after the war they can gather accounts from many different people and can tell the full story of the war. Shellshock in the First World War helped make many mad; Sassoon himself was nicknamed “Mad Jack” for near suicidal exploits. [10] War poetry may thus be an unreliable source, and it is only one among many that should teach history.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "91736e69d3fe7c55bffe80ee7e74f671",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Learning the basics of literature and language is not designed to be fun or enjoyable, it is an essential requirement. It is important that students can get to grips with the basics of their home language. A standard ‘look, cover, write, check’ method is an effective way to learn spelling and vocabulary as it requires the learner to write the words themselves. Simply reading them is not enough, especially not in the context of a poem which can be complex and difficult for a pupil whose priority is to learn writing and reading. It is much more effective to develop the pupils reading skills through standard literature where the structure is easier to follow.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "95838fad4b615857774a9733d2aaf652",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior We must be realistic in education; we need to prepare our students for the difficulties of the real world. It is those subjects that are vocational in nature and/ or life skills, home language (not literature), mathematics, science, modern languages, business studies and law that must take priority in schools. We must equip and train the new generation to successfully gain employment. Therefore, artistic subjects like poetry do not take priority.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "29de9d359128ca7d951a88ed310fc713",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is hardly the only way to teach people how to express themselves; if we are interested in self-expression for democratic purposes then children should be taught politics. If they are to express their ideas about nature then other art forms are just as important. Unfortunately poetry as a form of self-expression can only be crippled as a result of students’ lack of knowledge of the basics of language. The priority of government should be to achieve a basic level of literacy for all students; only then can the luxury of teaching art be introduced. There is no use in children being able to effortlessly quote Shakespeare if they have no idea how to spell his name.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "adbd3c217988ea85f63c0e6b27a83e7a",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Rappers; modern day poets\n\nMany people believe that rap is a form of modern day poetry and as such it should be taught in schools [4]. Sir Andrew Motion, Professor of Creative Writing at Royal Holloway, University of London, said that: “Poetry is a house of many mansions. It does pupils a disservice only to tell them things they already know. Rap has its own challenges and opportunities – but so do many other kinds of poetry, many of which are neglected in schools.\" [5] However, many rappers use lyrics that are homophobic, violent, sexist, and promote violence and crime. To teach rap in schools is to give a voice to these values and expose children to views that education must not support. [6]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1feea56b6c78963c20ae921b66a6aafe",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is too difficult for school students\n\nThere are people who dedicate their lives to studying poetry and still have trouble understanding its meaning. If these people constantly debate the nature of poetry how can school children be expected to properly understand it? It is difficult to teach because poetry can have multiple meanings; “[U]ntil education theory asks itself what poetry itself is, and therefore what the teacher is trying to get across, poems will continue largely to figure as teaching aids, exercises and – for teenagers – increasingly tedious, somewhat arbitrary puzzles\" [2] and therefore poetry will remain of little worth in the classroom.\n\nThe greatest poets write about adult experiences, e.g, love, work, history, politics, solitude etc. As a result great poetry requires an adult mind to grasp its full meaning and teaching it in schools means that students develop a disliking for poetry before they are even fully capable of appreciating it.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c1622dc33b05ce566053d959206a5c32",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry allows people to express and understand themselves\n\nEducation should not just be about learning basic skills but should, instead, be about exploring what it means to be human. Poetry teaches pupils to think deeply about themselves and others and encourages them to explore the ways in which their ideas can be expressed. Ideas help to change, and improve, the world we live in. Encouraging students to express themselves and their ideas is important because the heart of democracy involves the ability to express ideas. If individuals cannot express themselves they do not have a voice.\n\nTherefore, by teaching poetry we allow pupils the opportunity to express their own ideas on a huge variety of subjects. Many poets, such as William Wordsworth, have written poetry about nature in order to “see into the life of things.\" [11] Giving children the tools to express ideas about the world in a variety of ways is crucial to the development of both the individual and society as a whole.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "97cab5f601f4c04addc3f531d0df9c04",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior As an artistic form of a core subject poetry offers a creative method of teaching English\n\nPupils in schools must learn English and poetry offers a creative outlet for a subject that would otherwise be repetitive and boring. Poetry also introduces the reader to new concepts which hold the learner’s interest and improve vocabulary and spelling.\n\nPoetry offers a fun method of teaching subjects that can otherwise be exhaustive and repetitive. For example, Shirley Hughes’ poems for young readers such as ‘Best Friends’ introduce young readers to the vowel sounds of English and Zoe’s Earrings by Kit Wright teaches pre-GCSE students about accents. [8]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df4e539c9cae26fcfcf0c3af9b4e491b",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is cross-curricular\n\nPoetry has benefits beyond the English curriculum by teaching about other subjects. In History for example war poetry offers the modern reader the chance to understand the horrors of war. Poet Wilfred Owen suffered from shellshock as a result of fighting in the First World War. In his poem ‘Mental Cases’ he describes his time and experiences at Craiglockhart psychiatric hospital in Scotland where he and Siegfried Sassoon (another World War 1 poet) were treated: “[W]ho are these? Why sit they here in twilight? Wherefore rock they, purgatorial shadows[9]” While we might never be able to properly understand the terrifying experiences that people go through during war we must read their poetry helps bring us closer to how they related to and coped with the experience in a way that simply learning the history does not.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b6070e8c646371cc5947a7bfe33f1586",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Education is about teaching culture, the arts, and creativity\n\nWe want cultured people to graduate from schools. It would be terrible if high school graduates had no understanding of the arts and had no desire to explore cultural places like museums and art galleries. The arts inspire learning and encourage human curiosity; removing this cultural aspect from schools means that we produce people without the creativity necessary for society to grow. At present the only cultural GCSE subject that is compulsory is English Literature; as such, it is important to include as much culture in it as possible i.e. novels and poetry.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
501c477ed64ed5f6ade36cb63dde0a2a
|
As an artistic form of a core subject poetry offers a creative method of teaching English
Pupils in schools must learn English and poetry offers a creative outlet for a subject that would otherwise be repetitive and boring. Poetry also introduces the reader to new concepts which hold the learner’s interest and improve vocabulary and spelling.
Poetry offers a fun method of teaching subjects that can otherwise be exhaustive and repetitive. For example, Shirley Hughes’ poems for young readers such as ‘Best Friends’ introduce young readers to the vowel sounds of English and Zoe’s Earrings by Kit Wright teaches pre-GCSE students about accents. [8]
|
[
{
"docid": "91736e69d3fe7c55bffe80ee7e74f671",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Learning the basics of literature and language is not designed to be fun or enjoyable, it is an essential requirement. It is important that students can get to grips with the basics of their home language. A standard ‘look, cover, write, check’ method is an effective way to learn spelling and vocabulary as it requires the learner to write the words themselves. Simply reading them is not enough, especially not in the context of a poem which can be complex and difficult for a pupil whose priority is to learn writing and reading. It is much more effective to develop the pupils reading skills through standard literature where the structure is easier to follow.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "df421f5b21b7787965ba6776ba6b4a9e",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior History books can tell us more about the horrors of the First World War than any poetry can. War poetry is based on the opinions of one person’s experiences whereas a history book can give an account of all the events and horrors that occurred. Because history books have been written after the war they can gather accounts from many different people and can tell the full story of the war. Shellshock in the First World War helped make many mad; Sassoon himself was nicknamed “Mad Jack” for near suicidal exploits. [10] War poetry may thus be an unreliable source, and it is only one among many that should teach history.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "95838fad4b615857774a9733d2aaf652",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior We must be realistic in education; we need to prepare our students for the difficulties of the real world. It is those subjects that are vocational in nature and/ or life skills, home language (not literature), mathematics, science, modern languages, business studies and law that must take priority in schools. We must equip and train the new generation to successfully gain employment. Therefore, artistic subjects like poetry do not take priority.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "29de9d359128ca7d951a88ed310fc713",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is hardly the only way to teach people how to express themselves; if we are interested in self-expression for democratic purposes then children should be taught politics. If they are to express their ideas about nature then other art forms are just as important. Unfortunately poetry as a form of self-expression can only be crippled as a result of students’ lack of knowledge of the basics of language. The priority of government should be to achieve a basic level of literacy for all students; only then can the luxury of teaching art be introduced. There is no use in children being able to effortlessly quote Shakespeare if they have no idea how to spell his name.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9fdf13af75403ea15f06e7d637283159",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry should not be seen as something that one studies after learning English but should, instead, be seen as a way to help students grasp the English language. Many aspects of English are improved through the study of poetry. Learning poetry involves repetitive reading and an exploration of vowels and syllables. Students also explore a variety of sentence structures and are given the opportunity to explore the creativity and flexibility available in language. Furthermore, by reading poetry students can improve their reading ability and public speaking skills.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1cfd742a9a4d86b3a703b721eda32d95",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Musicians have, for some time, been awarded poet status. Early in his career Bob Dylan was described as being “as good as Keats [an early 19th Century British poet].\" [7] Musicians must be allowed the chance to develop their poetic style and be recognized for their lyrical writing skills.\n\nRap gives the listener an insight into the plight of the artist. It shows the harsh conditions in which people live and gives a voice to those that we otherwise might not hear. William Blake’s famous poem ‘London’ is often described a social protest, a voice of discontent with the conditions of life in 1790’s London. Rap does the same thing; social protest, put to music, and designed to describe the racial and economic inequalities that exist within society. Rap, even with its sometimes offensive lyrics reflects the society the artist sees and it should be accepted as it is.\n\nWe must not judge the poetry on the basis of the poet’s life Dylan Thomas, Wales’ national poet, was an adulterer and an alcoholic. However, this does not make his poetry any less worthy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7dfedfb240e5eaff8fa6da6d35ca7add",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior While great poetry may deal with adult experiences there is poetry that targets a younger audience and methods available to teach this type of poetry. Children’s poetry, for instance, is not complex or dark in subject matter and uses very regular rhythm and rhyme schemes, which young students will enjoy. If age-appropriate poetry is taught in schools then it gives young people the chance to develop an appreciation for poetry and its various techniques. This means that in later years young people will have the skills necessary to properly understand great poetry.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c1622dc33b05ce566053d959206a5c32",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry allows people to express and understand themselves\n\nEducation should not just be about learning basic skills but should, instead, be about exploring what it means to be human. Poetry teaches pupils to think deeply about themselves and others and encourages them to explore the ways in which their ideas can be expressed. Ideas help to change, and improve, the world we live in. Encouraging students to express themselves and their ideas is important because the heart of democracy involves the ability to express ideas. If individuals cannot express themselves they do not have a voice.\n\nTherefore, by teaching poetry we allow pupils the opportunity to express their own ideas on a huge variety of subjects. Many poets, such as William Wordsworth, have written poetry about nature in order to “see into the life of things.\" [11] Giving children the tools to express ideas about the world in a variety of ways is crucial to the development of both the individual and society as a whole.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df4e539c9cae26fcfcf0c3af9b4e491b",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is cross-curricular\n\nPoetry has benefits beyond the English curriculum by teaching about other subjects. In History for example war poetry offers the modern reader the chance to understand the horrors of war. Poet Wilfred Owen suffered from shellshock as a result of fighting in the First World War. In his poem ‘Mental Cases’ he describes his time and experiences at Craiglockhart psychiatric hospital in Scotland where he and Siegfried Sassoon (another World War 1 poet) were treated: “[W]ho are these? Why sit they here in twilight? Wherefore rock they, purgatorial shadows[9]” While we might never be able to properly understand the terrifying experiences that people go through during war we must read their poetry helps bring us closer to how they related to and coped with the experience in a way that simply learning the history does not.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b6070e8c646371cc5947a7bfe33f1586",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Education is about teaching culture, the arts, and creativity\n\nWe want cultured people to graduate from schools. It would be terrible if high school graduates had no understanding of the arts and had no desire to explore cultural places like museums and art galleries. The arts inspire learning and encourage human curiosity; removing this cultural aspect from schools means that we produce people without the creativity necessary for society to grow. At present the only cultural GCSE subject that is compulsory is English Literature; as such, it is important to include as much culture in it as possible i.e. novels and poetry.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7148fc2633e202b139e358df1ff695af",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Students need to study the basics of language not a complex form such as poetry\n\nAccording to a report published in 2011 [3] a great number of pupils in England are struggling after starting secondary school and 3 out of 10 pupils are not making enough progress in English. If pupils are not making the required progress in basic English then it is difficult to understand the motivation behind teaching complex poetry. If a student is unable to do basic multiplication it makes no sense to ask them to do complicated mathematic equations. The same is true in English: pupils who struggle with things like grammar and vocabulary should not be expected to tackle complicated poetic structures.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "adbd3c217988ea85f63c0e6b27a83e7a",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Rappers; modern day poets\n\nMany people believe that rap is a form of modern day poetry and as such it should be taught in schools [4]. Sir Andrew Motion, Professor of Creative Writing at Royal Holloway, University of London, said that: “Poetry is a house of many mansions. It does pupils a disservice only to tell them things they already know. Rap has its own challenges and opportunities – but so do many other kinds of poetry, many of which are neglected in schools.\" [5] However, many rappers use lyrics that are homophobic, violent, sexist, and promote violence and crime. To teach rap in schools is to give a voice to these values and expose children to views that education must not support. [6]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1feea56b6c78963c20ae921b66a6aafe",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is too difficult for school students\n\nThere are people who dedicate their lives to studying poetry and still have trouble understanding its meaning. If these people constantly debate the nature of poetry how can school children be expected to properly understand it? It is difficult to teach because poetry can have multiple meanings; “[U]ntil education theory asks itself what poetry itself is, and therefore what the teacher is trying to get across, poems will continue largely to figure as teaching aids, exercises and – for teenagers – increasingly tedious, somewhat arbitrary puzzles\" [2] and therefore poetry will remain of little worth in the classroom.\n\nThe greatest poets write about adult experiences, e.g, love, work, history, politics, solitude etc. As a result great poetry requires an adult mind to grasp its full meaning and teaching it in schools means that students develop a disliking for poetry before they are even fully capable of appreciating it.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
11644715fecb2fae36341c6a64627304
|
Poetry is cross-curricular
Poetry has benefits beyond the English curriculum by teaching about other subjects. In History for example war poetry offers the modern reader the chance to understand the horrors of war. Poet Wilfred Owen suffered from shellshock as a result of fighting in the First World War. In his poem ‘Mental Cases’ he describes his time and experiences at Craiglockhart psychiatric hospital in Scotland where he and Siegfried Sassoon (another World War 1 poet) were treated: “[W]ho are these? Why sit they here in twilight? Wherefore rock they, purgatorial shadows[9]” While we might never be able to properly understand the terrifying experiences that people go through during war we must read their poetry helps bring us closer to how they related to and coped with the experience in a way that simply learning the history does not.
|
[
{
"docid": "df421f5b21b7787965ba6776ba6b4a9e",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior History books can tell us more about the horrors of the First World War than any poetry can. War poetry is based on the opinions of one person’s experiences whereas a history book can give an account of all the events and horrors that occurred. Because history books have been written after the war they can gather accounts from many different people and can tell the full story of the war. Shellshock in the First World War helped make many mad; Sassoon himself was nicknamed “Mad Jack” for near suicidal exploits. [10] War poetry may thus be an unreliable source, and it is only one among many that should teach history.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "91736e69d3fe7c55bffe80ee7e74f671",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Learning the basics of literature and language is not designed to be fun or enjoyable, it is an essential requirement. It is important that students can get to grips with the basics of their home language. A standard ‘look, cover, write, check’ method is an effective way to learn spelling and vocabulary as it requires the learner to write the words themselves. Simply reading them is not enough, especially not in the context of a poem which can be complex and difficult for a pupil whose priority is to learn writing and reading. It is much more effective to develop the pupils reading skills through standard literature where the structure is easier to follow.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "95838fad4b615857774a9733d2aaf652",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior We must be realistic in education; we need to prepare our students for the difficulties of the real world. It is those subjects that are vocational in nature and/ or life skills, home language (not literature), mathematics, science, modern languages, business studies and law that must take priority in schools. We must equip and train the new generation to successfully gain employment. Therefore, artistic subjects like poetry do not take priority.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "29de9d359128ca7d951a88ed310fc713",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is hardly the only way to teach people how to express themselves; if we are interested in self-expression for democratic purposes then children should be taught politics. If they are to express their ideas about nature then other art forms are just as important. Unfortunately poetry as a form of self-expression can only be crippled as a result of students’ lack of knowledge of the basics of language. The priority of government should be to achieve a basic level of literacy for all students; only then can the luxury of teaching art be introduced. There is no use in children being able to effortlessly quote Shakespeare if they have no idea how to spell his name.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9fdf13af75403ea15f06e7d637283159",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry should not be seen as something that one studies after learning English but should, instead, be seen as a way to help students grasp the English language. Many aspects of English are improved through the study of poetry. Learning poetry involves repetitive reading and an exploration of vowels and syllables. Students also explore a variety of sentence structures and are given the opportunity to explore the creativity and flexibility available in language. Furthermore, by reading poetry students can improve their reading ability and public speaking skills.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1cfd742a9a4d86b3a703b721eda32d95",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Musicians have, for some time, been awarded poet status. Early in his career Bob Dylan was described as being “as good as Keats [an early 19th Century British poet].\" [7] Musicians must be allowed the chance to develop their poetic style and be recognized for their lyrical writing skills.\n\nRap gives the listener an insight into the plight of the artist. It shows the harsh conditions in which people live and gives a voice to those that we otherwise might not hear. William Blake’s famous poem ‘London’ is often described a social protest, a voice of discontent with the conditions of life in 1790’s London. Rap does the same thing; social protest, put to music, and designed to describe the racial and economic inequalities that exist within society. Rap, even with its sometimes offensive lyrics reflects the society the artist sees and it should be accepted as it is.\n\nWe must not judge the poetry on the basis of the poet’s life Dylan Thomas, Wales’ national poet, was an adulterer and an alcoholic. However, this does not make his poetry any less worthy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7dfedfb240e5eaff8fa6da6d35ca7add",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior While great poetry may deal with adult experiences there is poetry that targets a younger audience and methods available to teach this type of poetry. Children’s poetry, for instance, is not complex or dark in subject matter and uses very regular rhythm and rhyme schemes, which young students will enjoy. If age-appropriate poetry is taught in schools then it gives young people the chance to develop an appreciation for poetry and its various techniques. This means that in later years young people will have the skills necessary to properly understand great poetry.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c1622dc33b05ce566053d959206a5c32",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry allows people to express and understand themselves\n\nEducation should not just be about learning basic skills but should, instead, be about exploring what it means to be human. Poetry teaches pupils to think deeply about themselves and others and encourages them to explore the ways in which their ideas can be expressed. Ideas help to change, and improve, the world we live in. Encouraging students to express themselves and their ideas is important because the heart of democracy involves the ability to express ideas. If individuals cannot express themselves they do not have a voice.\n\nTherefore, by teaching poetry we allow pupils the opportunity to express their own ideas on a huge variety of subjects. Many poets, such as William Wordsworth, have written poetry about nature in order to “see into the life of things.\" [11] Giving children the tools to express ideas about the world in a variety of ways is crucial to the development of both the individual and society as a whole.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "97cab5f601f4c04addc3f531d0df9c04",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior As an artistic form of a core subject poetry offers a creative method of teaching English\n\nPupils in schools must learn English and poetry offers a creative outlet for a subject that would otherwise be repetitive and boring. Poetry also introduces the reader to new concepts which hold the learner’s interest and improve vocabulary and spelling.\n\nPoetry offers a fun method of teaching subjects that can otherwise be exhaustive and repetitive. For example, Shirley Hughes’ poems for young readers such as ‘Best Friends’ introduce young readers to the vowel sounds of English and Zoe’s Earrings by Kit Wright teaches pre-GCSE students about accents. [8]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b6070e8c646371cc5947a7bfe33f1586",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Education is about teaching culture, the arts, and creativity\n\nWe want cultured people to graduate from schools. It would be terrible if high school graduates had no understanding of the arts and had no desire to explore cultural places like museums and art galleries. The arts inspire learning and encourage human curiosity; removing this cultural aspect from schools means that we produce people without the creativity necessary for society to grow. At present the only cultural GCSE subject that is compulsory is English Literature; as such, it is important to include as much culture in it as possible i.e. novels and poetry.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7148fc2633e202b139e358df1ff695af",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Students need to study the basics of language not a complex form such as poetry\n\nAccording to a report published in 2011 [3] a great number of pupils in England are struggling after starting secondary school and 3 out of 10 pupils are not making enough progress in English. If pupils are not making the required progress in basic English then it is difficult to understand the motivation behind teaching complex poetry. If a student is unable to do basic multiplication it makes no sense to ask them to do complicated mathematic equations. The same is true in English: pupils who struggle with things like grammar and vocabulary should not be expected to tackle complicated poetic structures.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "adbd3c217988ea85f63c0e6b27a83e7a",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Rappers; modern day poets\n\nMany people believe that rap is a form of modern day poetry and as such it should be taught in schools [4]. Sir Andrew Motion, Professor of Creative Writing at Royal Holloway, University of London, said that: “Poetry is a house of many mansions. It does pupils a disservice only to tell them things they already know. Rap has its own challenges and opportunities – but so do many other kinds of poetry, many of which are neglected in schools.\" [5] However, many rappers use lyrics that are homophobic, violent, sexist, and promote violence and crime. To teach rap in schools is to give a voice to these values and expose children to views that education must not support. [6]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1feea56b6c78963c20ae921b66a6aafe",
"text": "primary secondary teaching poetry should not be taught schools junior Poetry is too difficult for school students\n\nThere are people who dedicate their lives to studying poetry and still have trouble understanding its meaning. If these people constantly debate the nature of poetry how can school children be expected to properly understand it? It is difficult to teach because poetry can have multiple meanings; “[U]ntil education theory asks itself what poetry itself is, and therefore what the teacher is trying to get across, poems will continue largely to figure as teaching aids, exercises and – for teenagers – increasingly tedious, somewhat arbitrary puzzles\" [2] and therefore poetry will remain of little worth in the classroom.\n\nThe greatest poets write about adult experiences, e.g, love, work, history, politics, solitude etc. As a result great poetry requires an adult mind to grasp its full meaning and teaching it in schools means that students develop a disliking for poetry before they are even fully capable of appreciating it.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
662eb4cdcd2e640d0304dda2c7849f92
|
Most parents do not have any teaching qualifications.
If parents are not trained or qualified teachers how can they provide a better or equivalent quality of education than a professional teacher at a school. Even if a parent or tutor excels in one area, will they cover all the things a school does? Even if they tried to, they would not do so adequately due to sheer lack of experience and training. The point of a curriculum is that these are things we have decided as a society that children need to learn, and in order to learn they require the support of qualified teachers1. Support groups and educational text books can help, but they alone cannot turn a parent into a good teacher. 1 National Curriculum Website
|
[
{
"docid": "dcf2834b36c7190c0fde6bdd3864befe",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling It is wrong to assume that home schooling will necessarily be of poor quality. Many parents will be fantastic teachers with or without a formal qualification. One parent says that it is often teacher themselves that recognise that teaching qualification are not necessarily the most important factor: 'the more people– mainly teachers – we spoke to, the more it began to seem like school could actually be a damaging place to be.’1 In addition, there are extensive support networks that are capable of providing a range of skills and knowledge that a parent might be lacking. The internet makes these connections increasingly viable as well as providing better research facilities than any school library had ten years ago.\n\n1 ‘Honey, I think we're home-schooling the kids’ from the Guardian website\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "895e3e1a4161134947f489123e7ce0e2",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Schools are often of poor quality and are failing the children. Parents have the right to withdraw their children from bed state schools. If the quality of education is sufficiently low in their eyes, they are entitled to be allowed to make the considerable sacrifice involved in becoming a 'home schooler'. It is reasonable that a parent should want to reject such educational theories and if they pass the inspection process then should not be denied that chance. \"Homeschool freedom works. Homeschoolers have earned the right to be left alone.\"1 1 'Academic Statistics on Homeschooling', Home Schooling Legal Defense Association, (October 22, 2004)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "92ea06d9b883610f4dfea3b4654055d3",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling The state education curriculum offers only a very limited view of history and as such is itself a form of indoctrination. For example, in the UK, a proud history of achievement and creation goes untaught whilst the sins of colonialism and the faults of class structure are emphasised to pupils year after year. Parents do not necessarily have to have extreme or radical political views to want to home school their child and indoctrinate them. They often actually want to allow them to have broader historical and political education than offered by the narrow curriculum1. If parents are determined to prejudice their children it is unlikely that being in school will prevent that. And these parents who wish to teach tolerance shouldn't be penalised by a minority. 1'Prescriptive national curriculum restricts teachers', Jessica Shepherd, Guardian.co.uk (2009)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5c18dabfd5f4abed1c0e02a0b306602f",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Homeschooling is not mutually exclusive from social interaction1. Interaction happens outside the classroom, where it belongs instead of acting as distractions to learning. In addition, homeschooling events involve children of all different ages as well as adults and in this way children learn to interact with a greater range of individuals than they would come across in a class just containing children of their own age and often makes them more confident in interacting with adults in a relationship that is not just a simple teacher and pupil relationship2. Parents still select schools for their children on the basis of common values, cultures and achievements - and even go as far as to move closer to the school they want to fall into its catchment area.\n\n1Mike Fortune-Wood, ‘The “S” Word Socialisation’ from Home Education UK\n\n2‘Civic Involvement’ HSLDA http://www.hslda.org/research/ray2003/Civic.asp\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eacd0db2d7851aa16884dbd0dfd52bb4",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Schools have significantly better facilities and a much more appropriate and segregated learning atmosphere than the home. The state system pools facilities to allow access for all children to sports and science facilities1. Parents are very unlikely to be wealthy enough to provide the plethora of things necessary to a well-rounded education. Teaching within the home asks children to switch between 'learning' and 'play' mode in the same environment which is confusing especially for young children. Schools provide a specific environment that is dedicated to learning. Homes are more complex environments, ill-suited to teaching and the concentration required to learn. 1 'The Cons and Arguments against Home Schooling' in Educate Expert (2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b124754593256049d062c38cb03fb627",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Merely ensuring the registration of a child as being home-schooled does not fulfill the state's right to ensure that all children are given a satisfactory education. Inspections will help, but parents will nevertheless be unable to provide to their children the opportunities present in a school environment. The inspections should require that parents offer their children at least an equivalent level of teaching to that he or she would receive at a school, yet how is a parent going to teach practical science? How are they going to dissect animals? The inevitable result of such a policy therefore would be the acceptance of inadequate education. The only policy that respects and protects a child's right to education is to ban home-schooling altogether.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "57a5915d3cddf96e7d4b0726294177e3",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling A school education is not mutually exclusive with family bonding. Just because a child attends school does not mean that their parent loses all influence upon their moral development. It is important for children to have a variety of different role models around them1. There is also no guarantee that the moral structure that parents might be instilling in their children away from any effective monitoring is beneficial. 1 'Why a Positive Role Model Is Important for Children', Caitlin Erwin, LiveStrong.com (2010)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "55db716b51d6685905d48faa8c8f11b6",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Home-schooling is not the best option for exceptional students. The state does not ignore or abandon individuals that have special needs and those with special needs are those that most need the state's enormous resources to focus on their requirements. Once a student has needs of such a magnitude that demands it, they are educated in special schools specifically intended to help them, with staff trained to possess skills beyond that of a parent's instinct. Even if it were the case that home-schooling is better for the specific needs of exceptional students, the benefits of education in a wider context override the objection to class-based education. The experience of growing up alongside less and more able students produces individuals with greater understanding of their society1. 1'Teacher perceptions of mainstreaming/inclusion, 1958-1995: a research synthesis' Scruggs, Thomas E. Mastropieri, Margo A. Exceptional Children (1996)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "52a8ec4e0ef69313b2a2b81ff0053f30",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Interaction with other pupils is a crucial element of a child's development and involvement in clubs is not a substitute for the social skills learnt in school. Teaming building, working towards goals, being forced to confront problems with and live alongside individuals one might not like, or come from different backgrounds, is clearly done best in a school environment1. Those that seek to cocoon their offspring from the outside world merely delay the time when their children have to deal with it. Education is about more than academic teaching, it's about educating the whole person, and that is best achieved by educating them within a school with their peers. 1 'School as a context of early adolescent's academic and social-emotional development: A summary of research findings' RW Roeser, JS Eccles, The Elementary School Journal (2000)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c727fd9b565dbc506dd57fca80d80334",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Those that wish to be educated in a religious environment have the chance to send them to a religious school the quality of which can be monitored by the state1. There are great dangers involved in exclusivity of faith. The adherents of all religions shouldn't shut themselves away, but rather engage in society as a whole, and understand other people's beliefs and points of view. 1'Gove defends faith schools', Riazat Butt, Guardian.co.uk (2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "48d3b7dda460de9c412d498663ed4183",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Danger of parents indoctrinating their children.\n\nHomeschooling allows the possibility of parents removing their child from wider society and indoctrinating them with their own beliefs. State schools teach history and social interaction within a framework agreed on by w wide variety of bodies within the social spectrum. If a parent's world view if so far detached from that perspective that he wishes to remove his child from school it is likely that those alternative view are questionable at best. These beliefs can involve can include gross intolerance for particular minority groups supported by false information. These ideas can still reach the child out of school, but the government has a duty to protect children from a regressive upbringing by at least offering a more constructive perspective. 'Andy Winton, the chair of the National Association of Social Workers in Education, said: \"School is a good safety net to protect children.\"' 1 1'Get tough on home tuition to weed out abuse, says review' from Guardian website\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1b56b40c52168ed853bac08771cd168e",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling The state operates a system of quality control run by experts.\n\nHundreds of experts and researchers ensure the quality of public schools. It is presumptuous for a parent to think they know how to teach a child better than that accumulated wisdom. Just because the child is a product of that individual does not mean that the education knowledge of the parent surpasses that of professionals in that field who have spent years training1. Furthermore, even the best teachers can be improved by the insight of a third-party; such evaluations are not accessible to home-schooling parents. The danger is that 'From the government's perspective, the world of home education is full of unknowns'; there are not sufficient measures of quality control in place to protect the child and their right to a comprehensive education. 1'Home truths: do we need yet another inquiry into home education?' from Guardian website\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3bf2f15f9a0e29efe3644e2248b558f5",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Diversity of school is necessary for social development.\n\nBeing forced to confront problems and individuals from different backgrounds is vital as a preparation for the future as a microcosm of the society they will later enter. Parents and children spending day after day at home re sometimes subject to a phenomenon sociologists call the 'hothouse' relationship the closeness between them becomes exclusive, with reaction to outsiders almost aggressive by instinct. This relationship makes it even more difficult for the child to adapt to life in the wider world.1 While there maybe attempts by parents to socialize their children through other means these organizations and club are centred around similarity. School is a mixture that does not filter out students, and there is an inherent social value to such a mix.\n\n1‘The Cons and Arguments against Home Schooling’ in Educate Expert (2011) www.educate expert.com\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "59ed4fe7a99ac5d5bbb685dba80bc38c",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling The home is an ideal learning environment.\n\nHome schooling allows children to learn in an environment that has the needs of one or a very few number of students as the focus of the educative process. Parents are willing to invest in their children and can provide targeted provision that prioritises the learning needs of those individuals1. Therefore, specific textbooks that are tailored to the child's mode of learning can be purchased. State schools, in contrast, are often very ill-equipped and under-funded, leading to standardized text books and teaching methods. The home also lacks the many distractions and disadvantages of schools: peer pressure, social stigma attached to achievement, bullying, show-offs and general rowdiness. 1'Virtues in to Vices' in The Journal Of Home Education\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "33f0c9f13b5455d1dfd919287a726fab",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Parents should be permitted to home-school their children provided they register the fact and submit to inspections\n\nParents who take their children out of school, or choose to home-school due to apprehensions over the quality of state education, should be entitled to do so provided the child is better off as a result. To ensure they are not neglected, parents hoping to home-school must both register the fact they are home-schooling their child and submit to regular, state inspections of the child's progress. If the child is deemed to be falling behind his age group, the parent may be forced to return the child to a school. The parent should be given standards of teaching that they must adhere to before the inspections occur, and the standards should be sufficiently flexible to reflect children learn at different speeds and that not all children's development reflects fairly on their teacher.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9d67860872706d1e0047265cb71b9bc3",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Home schooling is often the best option for catering for the needs of exceptional or disabled students.\n\nClassroom-based education must, by necessity, cater for the needs of the group as a whole which leaves those the very bright unchallenged and those with special needs falling behind and unsupported1. The state often takes years to recognise the needs of students and they lose years of education in the process2. In addition, even if those needs are identified 'special schools' are underfunded and stigmatised. For many students with identifiable problems that affects their capacity to learn within mainstream schooling but is not severe enough to merit a place within the special needs sector, homeschooling can benefit such students by shaping the learning environment to cater for their needs by being flexible to adapt. 1 'Every Child is Special\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "60ad8874761480a0e68e7f05d3f58d5b",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Homeschooling allows for the accommodation of faith practices.\n\nThe state constantly fails those with greatest faith needs in schools. There are numerous examples of failure of accommodation: ignorant provision for prayer times, banning of religious dress, unwitting subjection of students to religious festivals that are manifestly unsuitable1. If parents want to avoid such perils altogether, and teach their child within an environment that caters for their religious need then that is and should be their right. 1'Rise in racism in the playground' BBC News (2007)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8b2aea0f79ff13195d278cbe41d31421",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling Home schooling involves good community involvement and social interaction.\n\nHomeschooling families do not operate in isolation. There are extensive support networks (particularly in the USA the nation with the largest proportion of the population homeschooling) that exist to provide companionship, promote sports events and social functions. In addition, standard social provisions for children in civic society – scout movements, sports club – are open to homeschoolers. Homeschooling is not a removal from society but just from state schools.1 Homeschooled children often engage with their local community to a greater extent than their schooled peers.\n\n1 ‘Home Schooling: From the Extreme to the Mainstream’ Patrick Basham, Public Policy Sources http://www.homeschoolersguide.ca/pdf/Homeschooling.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bab22ddef3feb62aeea396349b8d323d",
"text": "education general teaching youth house supports home schooling COUNTERPOINT Home-schooling is not the best option for exceptional students. The state does not ignore or abandon individuals that have special needs and those with special needs are those that most need the state's enormous resources to focus on their\n\nFamily bonding is a massively important element of a child's development and is prioritised by home schooling1. The value of the family is constantly undermined in modern society; positive parental role models are found less and less frequently. If a parent is judged by a state vetting process to be good enough it is enormously beneficial for society as a whole to approve is an environment that cements both a positive role model and family bonding. 1'The Role of Interpretation Processes and Parental Discussion in the Media's Effects on Adolescents' Use of Alcohol' Erica Weintraub Austen, Bruce E. Pinkelton, Yuki Fujioka, Paediatrics, (2000)\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
077746dfe7f52e7e48db7754646ad2ce
|
Homework provides a link between child, school and the home
Education is a partnership between the child, the school and the home 1. Homework is one of the main ways in which the student’s family can be involved with their learning. Many parents value the chance to see what their child is studying and to support them in it. It has been described as the ‘window into the school’ for parents, the area in which schools, parents and students interact daily 2. And schools need parents’ support in encouraging students to read at home, to help with the practising of tables, and to give them opportunities to research new topics.
1 Walker, et. al, 2004 2 Gill & Schlossman, 2003
|
[
{
"docid": "437f5217b854f78c559f61e4233c78b0",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework is a class issue. In school everyone is equal, but at home some people have advantages because of their family background. Middle-class families with books and computers will be able to help their children much more than poorer ones can. This can mean poorer children end up with worse grades and more punishments for undone or badly done homework. David Baker, a researcher, believes too much homework causes parents and children to get angry with each other and argue, destroying the child’s confidence 1. On the other hand pushy parents may even end up doing their kids’ homework for them – cheating and not helping the student learn at all.\n\n1 Britt , 2005\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "9eeccabec6cb0df0604a6319a0139ccc",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Setting homework does little to develop good study skills. It is hard to check whether the homework students produce is really their own. Some students have always copied off others or got their parents to help them. But today there is so much material available on the internet that teachers can never be sure. It would be better to have a mixture of activities in the classroom which help students to develop a whole range of skills, including independent learning. Furthermore, if teachers want to develop independence in their students, students should be given a choice in the matter of homework. Otherwise, they’re not using their judgement and therefore they aren’t being independent at all 1.\n\n1 Sorrentino , 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7ef362deb1face61920e0aeac0838a7c",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework is not an essential part of information. If what was to be learnt from homework was that essential, it would not be left to the child to learn on their own and away from school. In fact, many teachers admit to simply setting homework because they are expected to set it, not because they think it will be helpful 1. The best environment for learning is in a classroom, where the student is able to ask for assistance if stuck and the teacher is available to help. .\n\n1 BBC News, 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87288f9a4280256d001235fe3f11baa8",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework does not ensure that students practise what they are taught at school. Teachers often give pupils the end of the exercise they were doing in class to complete at home, it tends to be the harder questions towards the end of the exercise and if a teacher or a tutor is not present to explain or help then it causes the pupil to doubt their ability. To practise what a student has been taught requires the presence of a teacher or tutor who can guide the student if they get something wrong. Homework, done by the student on their own, offers little support and is only a source of stress. If confused, the student may only come to dislike the topic or subject, which will only further reduce their ability to remember what they were taught.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3be79a8b1e2206a8c9f505f58abf0eb0",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Teachers accept that marking student work is an important part of their job. Well planned homework should not take so long to mark that the rest of their job suffers, and it can inform their understanding of their students, helping them design new activities to engage and stretch them. As for recruitment, although teachers do often work in the evenings, they are not alone in this and they get long holidays to compensate.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "550f606157e7e7da1ac90a511156d447",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Setting homework with the intention of encouraging students to do well at tests is beneficial to students as much as it is to teachers and schools. National tests are a way of assessing whether students are at the level they should be, if they do well on the tests, that is a good thing. Therefore, a 'win' for the teachers and schools is also a great deal of learning for the student, the two need not be separated.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b75372dcec6c17f9007d5f8b99beaca9",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework If homework puts students off learning, then it has been badly planned by the teacher. As Linda Darling-Hammond, a professor of Education notes, 'many teachers lack the skills to design homework assignments that help kids learn and don't turn them off to learning' .1 The best homework tasks engage and stretch students, encouraging them to think for themselves and follow through ideas which interest them. Over time, well planned homework can help students develop good habits, such as reading for pleasure or creative writing. The research however suggests that homework is not in fact putting students off learning. Rather studies in Britain indicate that 'most children are happy (and) most are achieving a higher level than before'.2 Homework cannot be blamed for a problem that does not exist. Poor children may indeed lack support to do their homework, but this just means that schools need to do more to provide the help they need.\n\n1 Strauss, 2006 2 BBC News, 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "249c72038ba804fb253c2916902dd90a",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework has not prevented students doing other activities; it takes very little time to complete. Recent American surveys found that most students in the USA spent no more than an hour a night on homework. That suggests there does not seem to be a terrible problem with the amount being set. Furthermore, British studies have shown that 'more children are engaging in sport or cultural activities' than ever before.1 As such, there is no clear evidence to suggest that students are stuck at home doing their homework instead of doing other activities. In addition, concerns over how busy children are suggest that parents need to help their children set priorities so that homework does not take a back seat to school work.\n\n1 BBC News, 2008\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7fdc2b04a829bdb15514cdc6eb8abe5e",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework has a lot of educational value, the reason it has not shown this is because teachers do not set the right kind of homework or they set the wrong amount of it. Some teachers believe homework is for reviewing material, others think it is better for learning new concepts. The result is 'confusion for students'.1 If the homework was consistent however, and related specifically to what is learnt in the classroom, it would have a great deal of educational value by helping them remember their lessons and increase students' confidence in how much they are learning.\n\nFurthermore, Professor Cooper of Duke University has shown that by the high schools years, there is a strong and positive relationship between homework and how well students do at school. There are two main reasons why this relationship does not appear in elementary school: 1) Elementary school teachers assign homework not so much to enhance learning, but in order to encourage the development of good study skills and time management;2 2) young children have less developed cognitive skills to focus and concentrate on their work.3 Thus, they are more easily distracted from their homework assignments.\n\n1 Strauss, 2006 2 Muhlenbruck, Cooper, Nye, & Lindsey, 2000 3Hoover-Dempsey et al., 2001\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2baf9b90b683b91718843184a689af20",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Many states do not in fact have a structured school inspection system that could enforce such a ban. The United States, for example, has one of the largest student bodies in the world but the state does not have a formal inspection system that could enforce a ban on homework. Therefore any ban would only prove a recommendation at best, and could not possibly hope to be enforced.\n\nFurthermore, even in those states that do have inspection bodies, the regularity of inspections allows school principals to prepare for their arrival. Students might be forced by their teachers to lie to inspectors, otherwise they would receive even more homework. Furthermore, the school inspections are partly so that they can test the ability of students – therefore teachers are encouraged to give their students homework so that they do better on these inspections.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "97112b751dfd2d21e827c224f86b2db4",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework ensures that students practise what they are taught at school\n\nHaving homework also allows students to really fix in their heads work they have done in school. Doing tasks linked to recent lessons helps students strengthen their understanding and become more confident in using new knowledge and skills. For younger children this could be practising reading or multiplication tables. For older ones it might be writing up an experiment, revising for a test and reading in preparation for the next topic. Professor Cooper of Duke University, has found that there is evidence that in elementary school students do better on tests when they do short homework assignments related to the test 1. Students gain confidence from such practise, and that shows when they sit the tests.\n\n1 Strauss, 2006\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fdf3408ba44d62833565d7f63972350a",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework is an essential part of education, allowing students to learn information beyond that which they are taught at school.\n\nHomework is a vital and valuable part of education. There are only a few hours in each school day – not enough time to cover properly all the subjects children need to study. Setting homework extends study beyond school hours, allowing a wider and deeper education. It also makes the best use of teachers, who can spend lesson time teaching rather than just supervising individual work that could be done at home. Education is about pushing boundaries, and the learning should not stop at the entrance to the classroom – students should take skills learnt in the classroom and apply them at home. Homework allows this to happen, encouraging students to go above and beyond what they do in school. Reading is the best example, students learn how to read at school, but in order to get better, they need to practise and that is best done at home, with the support of parents and at the right pace for the student.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "52aab1474c93336e46973f5e06034a8f",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework encourages students to work more independently (by themselves)\n\nHomework encourages students to work more independently, as they will have to at college and in their jobs. Everyone needs to develop responsibility and skills in personal organization, working to deadlines, being able to research, etc. If students are always “spoon-fed” topics at school they will never develop study skills and self-discipline for the future. A gradual increase in homework responsibilities over the years allows these skills to develop 1. For instance, to read a novel or complete a research project, there is simply no time at school to do it properly. Students have to act independently and be willing to read or write, knowing that if they struggle, they will have to work through the problem or the difficult words themselves. Diane Ravitch points out that a novel like Jane Eyre cannot be completed if it is not read at home – students have to work through it themselves 2. When given the choice of homework or no homework most students would chose not to do it. But by doing homework they are effectively taught independence in finding their own ways to explain and understand the topic.\n\n1 Bempechat, 2004\n\n2 Ravitch , 2007\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "99a139316cff4025101c684d200dfcf2",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Marking homework reduces the amount of time teachers have to prepare good lessons\n\nIrrespective of homework's educational value, marking it takes up much of teachers' time. Australian teachers have complained that 'homework marking can result in four extra hours of work a day and they are rarely rewarded for their effort'.1 This leaves teachers tired and with little time to prepare effective, inspiring lessons. If the lessons aren't to the standard they should be, the point of homework is lost as the students have little to practise in the first place. The heavy workload also puts young graduates off becoming teachers, and so reduces the talent pool from which schools can recruit.\n\n1 Speranza, 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8ed5799fafd798608bfdecd88a65be98",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework is about 'winning' on tests, not learning\n\nMany governments make their schools give students a national test (a test taken by all students of the same age). After the tests, they compare schools and punish the schools and teachers whose students do badly. Because schools and teachers are therefore scared about their students doing poorly, they give them more homework, not in the hope they learn more but simply to do better on the tests.1 As such, homework is not designed to help the student, just their teachers and schools who want them to 'win' the test and make them look good, not learn for the students' own benefit.\n\n1 Sorrentino\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ce562c3294ae395574fc5a4447305ce3",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework reduces the amount of time for students to do other activities\n\nHomework takes a lot of time up. In America, they encourage the '10 minute rule', 10 minutes homework for every grade, meaning that high-school students are all doing more than an hour's worth of homework each night.1 Being young is not just about doing school work every night. It should also about being physically active, exploring the environment through play, doing creative things like music and art, and playing a part in the community. It is also important for young people to build bonds with others, especially family and friends, but homework often squeezes the time available for all these things.\n\n1 Associated Press, 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d1efd0639c3954889aea4a30d0cf53b2",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework The ban on homework could be easily enforced through school inspections\n\nIn many countries public schools require regular school inspections to ensure students are receiving a relatively equal level of education. In Britain for example, Ofsted is a public body that exists specifically to inspect public schools.1 A ban on homework would thus not require a level of trust between the state and individual school principals, for state inspectors could very quickly work out whether homework was being given out by asking the children themselves. Children, who don't like homework at the best of times, would not lie.\n\n1 Ofsted, 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4c651e01163c05576d1f40fb6fdbfbc6",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework has little educational worth, and therefore is a waste of students' time\n\nHomework has little educational worth and adds nothing to the time spent in school. Some schools and some countries don't bother with homework at all, and their results do not seem to suffer from it. Studies show that homework adds nothing to standardised test scores for primary/ elementary pupils. As Alfie Kohn notes, no study has ever found a link between homework and better tests results in elementary school, and there is no reason to believe it is necessary in high school.1 International comparisons of older students have found no positive relationship between the amount of homework set and average test scores - students in Japan and Denmark get little homework but score very well on tests.2 If anything, countries with more homework get worse results!\n\n1 Sorrentino , 2011\n\n2 Britt , 2005\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e46f9382fd156853d60c6d966a118e30",
"text": "primary secondary teaching house would ban homework Homework puts students off learning\n\nHomework puts students off learning. Studies have shown that many children find doing homework very stressful, boring and tiring. Often teachers underestimate how long a task will take, or set an unrealistic deadline. Sometimes because a teacher has not explained something new well in class, the homework task is impossible. So children end up paying with their free time for the failings of their teachers. They also suffer punishments if work is done badly or late. After years of bad homework experiences, it is no wonder that many children come to dislike education and switch off, or drop out too early. Teachers in Britain fear that poor children, because they lack the support to do their homework, will be turned off school 1.\n\n1 BBC News, 2008\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
6ffd027b2bf40fbbc6935e1fb964062b
|
Language acquisition is no less vital than competence in mathematics and english
A high number of students failing to succeed in languages is not a valid reason to make the subject optional. This mentality opens the gate to making English and math options, simply to eradicate the effort of improving pass rates. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) reports that in the UK “A quarter of secondary pupils (aged 11 and over) fail to reach their potential in math(s) and a quarter are making insufficient progress in English”. [1] Still, optional English and math is unthinkable; these are core subjects- languages should also be considered as such. Those who want to transfer students energies from foreign languages to English are ignoring the possibility that learning a foreign language may actually be useful for learning the first language. [2] Students failing in core subjects must be helped to improve, not have the subject eradicated.
[1] BBC News, ‘Third of England pupils fail to reach maths potential’, 9 June 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-13710417
[2] Leons, Eve, Herbert, Christie and Gobbo, Ken. 2009. “Students with Learning Disabilities and AD/HD in the Foreign Language Classroom” Foreign Language Annals 42(1): 42-54.
|
[
{
"docid": "2f95fbf50cb030e9dbc5b34ff9b9c7dc",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils The overwhelming number of students who struggle with reading and writing in their own language cannot be expected to acquire a second, foreign one. The vast number of students failing to master basic arithmetic and competency in their mother language is to be addressed as a matter of urgency. This is a primary concern for schools, not second language learning.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "55b5c1fc97c5c203f96d363f49c52ce6",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Languages are not the only economically beneficial skills; sciences, law, humanities, creative studies are favourable. However, skills alone are not enough; people with hands-on experience in their field are needed to work a stable economy. It is immoral that a government makes its people take posts using languages that aid the country’s economy and not the individual’s job satisfaction. At the same time in terms of benefits to the economy of their home country those who have studied languages are more likely to work abroad constituting a brain drain.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "10ba5f439dc6fcd02e0241ceecb95c9d",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Learning its target language is not fundamental to embracing any foreign culture. Many people can be very open to foreign cultures without learning their language(s). Indeed it may be necessary for most to keep the two separate. [1] No one can learn every foreign language and many would not have the time to learn more than a few but that should not prevent learning about and enjoying that culture, its music, its art and even in many cases through translation its literature.\n\nIf a student is forced to learn a language against his/her will, then the negative stereotype of the target culture will only be strengthened, fuelled by ill feeling and negative experiences. In the words of Albert Einstein, “It is easier to split an atom than break a prejudice” and realistically language learning will not help combat this sad truth.\n\n[1] Erlbaum, ‘Understanding Second Language Difficulties, 1996, p.140\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0c18d898e63e66cc92529af5c4e9645d",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils It is still a mystery why, as Robert C. Gardner puts it “that some people can learn a second or foreign language so easily and so well and while others, given what seem to be the same opportunities to learn find it almost impossible?” [1] No audio-visual suite, no matter how high tech and expensive, will be able to raise the grades of students who find it impossible to hold the complexity of grammar rules in their heads.\n\n[1] Gardner, R.C., Lambert, W.E, Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language Learning, Newbury House Publishers, Massachusetts, 1972, p. 131\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5a00dc5ea11cb8491d3fdb553606e3fe",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Again, language is not the only skill that government officials are required to possess in order to ensure that a state is able to adequately protect its citizens and its borders from foreign threats. Those with knowledge and experience working in different states of different cultures can use this to enhance knowledge available to the government or officials. People of different backgrounds are also employed in order to gain insight and for this reason a varied skill set of experiences and knowledge can work together in securing a state.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a8e2e4e8a13e617473102cfc1f8dde3a",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Allowing students to study what they want or what they consider themselves to be good at would be a mistake. The point of education before university is to provide a good broad grounding that provides all the necessary life skills. This has to include harder subjects that would not be the first choice of the students. In the UK it has been suggested that the high pass rate for soft subjects like Media Studies of 98% has helped cause a decline in foreign language learning at A-level (16-18 years old). [1] Scientific research has shown how a second language can aid us past school years, for example the American Association for the advancement of science’s latest research shows the symptoms of alzheimer’s to occur later on in life in those who are bilingual in comparison to those who speak one language. The ability to speak more than one language enables people to communicate better and for longer. [2]\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Media Studies. Discuss’, 18 August 2005, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4158902.stm\n\n[2] Wheeler, David L., ‘Being Bilingual: Beneficial Workout for the Brain’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 20 February 2011, http://chronicle.com/article/Being-Bilingual-Beneficial/126462/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "baf7681d71829e59d90b2b74921062d7",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils A lack of people who could quickly become qualified foreign language teachers is not a problem. There are a high number of unemployed language graduates, many of whom are already engaged in teaching, particularly as private tutors teaching languages. [1]\n\n[1] McElvoy, Anne, ‘The tutor trap: the rise and rise of private lessons’, London Evening Standard, 22 January 2010, http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23798201-the-tutor-trap-the-rise-and-rise-of-private-lessons.do\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b8497927f14bc0f38671084d9d64a873",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils While it is undeniable that at the moment English is the most used international language this is not a reason to be complacent. Just because English is currently dominant does not mean it will remain so. In the 18th, 19th and into the 20th Centuries French was the international language and before that Latin was in Europe. It is as likely that the dominance of the English language will decline as that it will continue to increase. Students should be taught other languages to take advantage of changes that may occur within their lifetimes.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6bcb3cd02b72f6901488a317f6a23c45",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils This is once again down to the way languages are taught. The quality of teaching needs to be high so that those who struggle more are motivated to overcome this divide. This is also the case with grammar, both learner and teacher need to have patience and be willing to engage. [1] The critical age for learning a language must also be taken into consideration, it is believed by many experts in the field that it is easier for people to learn languages at a very early age, as it greatly improves ones accent and their ability to learn quickly. Thus the gap between those who progress and those who don’t will be greatly reduced if all students had to learn another language starting from an early primary school age.\n\n[1] Gardner, Attitudes and motivation in Second-Language learning, 1972, p.135\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "34a968e9b001c5722854ee3dca966d68",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Students not exceling in a subject is not a reason for not teaching that subject. Even a basic understanding of another language is useful. Anxiety is something the students will have to work through and may well be affected in other subjects as well, students who are anxious about learning foreign languages will never be willing to attempt to learn them if they are not compulsory at school.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ddb077b7e516038991923ed16453e837",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Workers with advanced language skills increase the competitiveness of the economies they participate in\n\nLanguages are extremely beneficial to the economy in two senses. Firstly, language skills improve a job candidate’s chances of selection, which keeps unemployment down. The National Centre for Languages (CILT) reports on its website that “36% of employers recruit people with languages”, “49% of employers are dissatisfied with school leavers’ language skills” and that “95% of London employers think that language skills are important for the London economy”. [1] Secondly, a high number of employees with language skills enhance companies’ abilities to engage in trade and to expand their business abroad, in turn enhancing exports.\n\n[1] CILT The National Centre for Languages, ‘Employers value language skills’, accessed 17 November 2011, http://www.cilt.org.uk/home/valuing_languages/employers_value_language_skill.aspx\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "700058d905d05f1e46fae282ac830cc8",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Learning languages promotes understanding of other cultures\n\nTo refuse to learn foreign languages is narrow-minded, ignorant and blinkered. Language is a means not only of asserting identity but, more importantly of “heritage culture maintenance”. To refuse to learn a foreign language is to disallow anyone’s culture apart from one’s own to be upheld. When this happens, “the dominant groups force ethnic groups into particular… niches”. [1] This is particularly likely to be a problem in multicultural societies or indeed any society that is not homogeneous. By refusing to learn foreign languages, one refuses to recognise that other cultures even exist.\n\nFor this reason learning a foreign language helps to tackle xenophobia. Negative stereotyping is sadly still prevalent in the modern world. “American students in Maine view persons speaking standard French as shorter, less leaderlike (sic), less thoughtful, less intelligent, less honest, less self-confident, less dependable, less generous, less kind, less ambitious, less stable and with less character than English Speakers”. [2] Such stereotypes lead to prejudices, xenophobia and, in extreme cases, hate crime. Learning foreign languages is a good way to combat such prejudices, because the students learn about the foreign culture for themselves, meet and converse with its people, and have a first-hand introduction to a foreign people. This will leave them more open minded towards other cultures so less likely to be xenophobic towards other cultures whose language they have not learnt. As Reynolds explains, “discounting stereotypes involves denying cultural differences” [3] such as the ability to communicate through the same language.\n\n[1] Reynolds, Allan G., Bilingualism, Multiculturalism and Second Language Learning, Lawrence Newbury Publishers, New Jersey, 1990, p.10\n\n[2] Gardner, R.C., Lambert, W.E, Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language Learning, Newbury House Publishers, Massachusetts, 1972, p.99\n\n[3] Reynolds, Allan G., Bilingualism, Multiculturalism and Second Language Learning, Lawrence Newbury Publishers, New Jersey, 1990, p.5\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a19315b969e1854d9f96acf88ec31555",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Learning a language is a sign of good diplomacy.\n\nThe call for students to learn a foreign language not only stems from economic needs but also from the need of improved security and diplomacy, in particular a better understanding of cultures and languages in order to better understand threats to the state and improved foreign services are needed. [1] In many Anglophone countries even in the role of a diplomat there are worrying numbers who do not have the language skills they need, for example in Canada “only 16% of the 180 foreign service officers who were required to have advanced foreign languages skills for their positions, could speak the needed language.” [2] As a 2007 National Academy of sciences report warns us “the pervasive lack of knowledge of foreign languages and cultures threatens the security of the united states as well as its ability to compete in the global marketplace and produce an unformed citizenry”. [3] Since the increased security post 9/11 the government accountability office (GAO) have reported that there are a shortage of foreign language expertise within the government and for this reason may undermine national security.\n\nMuch of the population of mainland Europe go to great lengths to learn foreign languages, especially the dominant English. English speakers should reciprocate the efforts made by their foreign counterparts; Nicolas Sarkozy for example is aiming to make France into a bilingual nation. [4] Across Europe at least 20% of third-level students claim to be proficient in at least two foreign languages. However, in countries where English is a major language, this is not the case; in Ireland, for example the figure is only 5%. [5] In the United States the situation is similar only 31% of US elementary schools and 24% of public schools teach foreign languages. [6] Expecting foreign countries to communicate through dominant English is a lazy and arrogant attitude to language and should not be permitted. Therefore learning languages up to the age of sixteen should be compulsory.\n\n[1] Kollipara, Puneet, ‘Government still trying to catch up on foreign language capabilities’, The Hill, 12 June 2010, http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/102833-government-still-trying-to-catch-up-on-foreign-language-capabilities\n\n[2] Raj, Althia, ‘Canadian diplomats don’t have necessary foreign language skills’, Toronto Sun, 3 September 2010, http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/09/02/15229446.html\n\n[3] Mary Ellen O’Connell and Janet L. Norwood ed. ‘International Education and Foreign Languages: Keys to Securing America's Future’ National Academy of Sciences, 2007, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11841\n\n[4] Agence Bretagne Presse, ‘Nicolas Sarkozy veut faire de la France une nation bilingue’, 12 September 2007, http://www.agencebretagnepresse.com/fetch.php?id=7905&title=Nicolas%20Sarkozy%20veut%20faire%20de%20la%20France%20une%20nation%20bilingue\n\n[5] Irish Independent, ‘Only 5 percent at third-level able to speak two foreign languages’, CareersPortal.ie, 16 June 2011, http://www.careersportal.ie/news/news.php?Heading=Only+5+percent+at+third-level+able+to+speak+two+foreign+languages&ID=16061102\n\n[6] Washington Times, ‘Analysis: U.S. must strengthen foreign language education’, 26 December 2008 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/26/us-must-strengthen-foreign-language-education/?page=all\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4dbdc809552d38f65f27f1544d6eb191",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Students should be free to choose to play to their strengths.\n\nStudents should have a fundamental freedom of choice when it comes to all but the most necessary subjects. If students want to specialise in for example Science and drop foreign languages in order to be able to do this then they should have this option, a choice which is likely to be beneficial for their chosen career. Students’ progress in their most successful subjects should not be hindered by the burden of language learning. It is not the case that students do not desire to engage in languages because they are lazy, narrow-minded or blinkered. Rather, because they demonstrate real strength in other subjects they do not wish to be constrained in those subjects by ones where they do not excel.\n\nA standard complaint is quoted by Ehrman; “(learning languages) affects (all study) a lot! I’m finding it just depressing to have to study, when my only reason for being here is to meet a requirement…it really annoys me to have to waste my time on this, when I could be learning something I’ll use after graduation…The pressure’s just too much for me!” [1]\n\nStudents should be allowed and encouraged to channel all their energy and enthusiasm into the subjects they are best at and most enthusiastic towards.\n\n[1] Ehrman, ‘Understanding Second Language Difficulties’, 1996, p.136\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "20258f04e2f8752bf0110b18d9352440",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils The solution is more teaching of languages not less.\n\nThe problems students face when learning languages are the fault of teaching methods, not language ability. Madeline Ehrman observes that the root of this problem is that the “student is “out of sync” with the methodology, the teacher.” Therefore, the antidote is more modern learning styles; “there are some quick fixes that can be made when adaptations are needed”. [1] Languages should not be abandoned when students find them boring rather the curriculum and methods of teaching need to be changed to make the learning more interesting and more relevant. For example students struggle even with their own grammar so an emphasis on making themselves understood rather than correct grammar may be more useful.\n\n[1] Ehrman, Madeline E., Understanding Second Language Difficulties, SAGE Publications, California, 1996. ISBN: 0-7619-0191-4. P.126\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7da77af4b708de6efa0be0f38e336efc",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils Not everyone will succeed in learning languages even if compulsory.\n\nThere are many people who will never excel in languages whether they are forced to learn it or not, and if they are not going to succeed then why waste all the time trying to make them succeed. With learning foreign languages there is a problem of anxiety in the classroom. This is particularly disabling as students must be able to speak up and be heard, usually by the whole class, in order to make progress. This anxiety is likely to be closer to panic than it would be in other subjects. [1] This not only affects those who are anxious but holds back those who are more able.\n\nThis will be even more pronounced with dyslexic children. They struggle with the written word and so will necessarily do even worse when studying foreign languages. Yet they can excel in other subjects such as mathematics. [2] It is therefore not sensible to make languages mandatory.\n\n[1] Ehrman, ‘Understanding Second Language Difficulties, 1996, p.149\n\n[2] ‘Dyslexia and Numeracy’, http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/files/DFS%20pack%20English.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c07cc6f80eae12945f8868065d1aa836",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils There is much less need to learn foreign languages for countries where English is the first language.\n\nFor those from countries where English is not the first language English is an obvious language to study, it is a language which is useful all over the world, not just in countries where English is the native language because so many people speak it as a second language. There is not the same obvious second language for native English speakers. It is undeniable that English is increasingly a global language; it is the language of technology and global communication. English is likely to be used in a conversation between for example a German Scientist and an Italian Politician. [1] It is therefore being realistic for English speakers to believe that any other language they learn will have less utility than their own.\n\n[1] English Online Learners, ‘English the Global Language’, British Council, http://www.englishonline.org.cn/en/learners/english-for-work/business-bites/global-language#\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4336608b546b7d01c7cb288586c50aab",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils In many countries it would not be practical to have foreign languages as mandatory.\n\nIt would not always be practical to increase foreign language teaching to being mandatory for all students. In the United Kingdom for example there is a shortage of foreign language teachers already with 73% of Local Education Authorities struggling to find teachers, particularly for Maths and Languages. [1] At the same time in many countries there are worries about their competitiveness in the world due to the success of East Asian countries in education. The PISA tests shows that East Asian countries, particularly China (Shanghai and Hong Kong), South Korea and Singapore far exceed countries where English is the first language in Maths and Science leading to a need to improve those subjects first. [2]\n\n[1] MailOnline, ‘Teacher shortage reaching crisis levels’, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-16644/Teacher-shortage-reaching-crisis-levels.html\n\n[2] PISA, ‘What Students now and can do: Student Performance In Reading, Mathematics and Science’, OECD, 2009, http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/12/46643496.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d43288a5d2d79e5afd058d37e9e7192c",
"text": "secondary house would make lessons foreign language compulsory school pupils There is a large gap between those who make progress in languages and those who do not.\n\nThere is a gulf between people who do make progress in languages and those who do not. Those able in languages struggle to deconstruct the difficult concepts and explain them to learners who cannot understand. Teachers cannot empathise with students who struggle. Expecting students who have great difficulty in learning languages to be able to do so from those who cannot even explain linguistic concepts successfully is far too much to ask. This one reason why in the UK Ofsted (Office for Standards in Education) considers language teaching in secondary schools to be weak. [1]\n\nThere are similar problems with grammar between those who are bilingual and those who are not. People who are bilingual due to their background do not think in grammar. If they do not know why certain grammatical constructions are used when and why, how is an absolute beginner struggling with languages supposed to understand such grammar rules? [2]\n\n[1] Webb, Lauren, ‘Ofsted reports poor language teaching in UK’, Veritas, http://www.veritaslanguagesolutions.com/ofsted-reports-poor-language-teaching-in-uk\n\n[2] Reynolds, ‘Bilingualism, Multiculturalism and Second Language Learning’, 1990, p.164\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
dd905ac5829b6b3c81b37cb0ec895411
|
All high schools accepting state funding should accept military recruiters once a year
The relationship between the state and the schools that it establishes and funds goes both ways; if schools accept state funding, the state is entitled to use schools as a platform for the military to appeal to future recruits. All state-funded schools, irrespective of location and student demographics but only high schools, would be expected to accept military recruiters once a year to speak to the entire student body. The event would be a condition of further funding for the school, however there would be no limits placed on a minimum number of students that needed to enlist as a result.
|
[
{
"docid": "119aa23ac6cfbb0f3d6e6c2cdb665974",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace To only ask state-funded schools to accept military recruiters ensures that those entering the military out of school are disproportionally from state-schools rather than privately-funded schools, and therefore more likely to be middle and lower-class. Furthermore, there should be no quid pro quo regarding the funding of schools, conditions for further funding should be related to the success of students and the quality of teaching, not whether the school has furthered the state's desire to see its military substantiated. Schools should in fact protect students, not expose them annually to military recruiters who can incrementally pressurize them into a military career.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "28f374ed3cdd92a168640f08984fd17c",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The need for recruits, however genuine, does not necessitate recruitment within schools. There will of course be certain students who would be attracted voluntarily to a role in the armed services, however these students can be reached through means other than their schools. Furthermore, if the motivation of recruits is paramount, then recruits can do no more to prove their motivation than actively and independently seek out a role in the armed services, rather than having it forced upon them through visits to their schools.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "637268cad38aecca5eed0c0491b5b773",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people are not aware and are, in many cases, deliberately misled as to the risks of military service. School children, conditioned by modern television, film and video games as to the heroism of military service, do not often ponder the dangers inherent in conflict. Modern video games, in which war deaths are the norm and immediate 're-spawning' dulls all sensitivity to death, do not serve to educate the youth about the risks but downplay them to the point of banality. Studies indicate that military recruiters, whilst not actively seeking to downplay risks or obscure the truth, are reluctant to volunteer information that would dissuade potential recruits 1. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d7daf0670a81244a4f15a4c4f8260a53",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace However it is dressed up, all the military is interested in schools for is the chance to recruit students. The various educational materials (not always clearly marked as coming from the military) and courses on offer are all intended to interest students in a military career. Such methods are dishonest and should not be allowed in schools; Paul McGarr, a teacher in East London, stated that 'only when recruiting materials gave a true picture of war would he welcome them into his school'1. If students are genuinely interested in joining the military, they can go along to a recruitment centre outside school, potentially with their parents, and ask the necessary questions there. 1 Goff, H. (2008, March 25). Teachers reject 'Army propaganda'. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from BBC News:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1e2fe681da874a30e56c311ac5fca637",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The armed services have no right to preach to the youth, particularly when they are in a trusting environment like a school. To permit any organization to advertise to schoolchildren about job prospects is misguided at a time when their critical faculties are nascent and they are endowed with the belief that what is taught at school is to be imbibed with little rebuttal. Mandated school activities like the Lord's Prayer and Pledge of Allegiance do serve to promote nationalism, but do not do so in such a way as to threaten the lives or disrupt the career paths of school children. School children must be protected from organizations that have the potential to put pressure on them and guilt trip them into signing away the rest of their young adult life. If their choices are to be respected, they must be left to develop their critical faculties and then permitted to use information available to the general public to make a decision.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "73a05416c7c08544ca06e79efbbcd035",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace School children are not targeted for military service; the intention is to raise awareness about the work that the military do. A Ministry of Defence spokesman in the UK stated that they 'visit about 1,000 schools a year only at the invitation of the school – with the aim of raising the general awareness of their armed forces in society, not to recruit’. Furthermore, children interested in a military career are not instantly signed up, they are granted the time until they turn 18 to decide. In addition, before official enlistment, all potential recruits are sent away on a six-week camp to find out what a career in the army will be like1\n\n1 Goff, H. (2008, March 25). Teachers reject 'Army propaganda'. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7311917.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f9fab9b9817d8edfeca99cd9f07b22c7",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is not illegal in the United States for they have not signed the relevant documents. The USA has not signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child referred to opposite, although it has signed the UN's Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (United Nations General Assembly , 2000). However, the US military does not recruit under-18s anyway, so it is keeping to it's agreement. In any case, neither of these agreements stops recruiters visiting schools in order to make students aware of military career options once they turn 18.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e2d0b51d80643184cae935e9318879ef",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military presentations in schools are not designed to be propaganda for their institutions, or the state as a whole, but educate the school children as to the undeniably important role that they play. State survival invariably is dependent upon the existence of a strong, well-trained armed force filled with motivated volunteers. Furthermore, demonstrations of modern technology and smart uniforms do not paint an unfair or inaccurate image of contemporary warfare. Such examples in fact illustrate the honesty of militaries in their portrayal to school children of modern combat. They act as not merely an educational tool, but a life lesson, demonstrating that the world of their video games is, in conflict zones at least, very much real.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "52d5f202f5adfa934e0c97f1e6b75385",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Recruiters do not minimise the risks of a military career, rather the armed forces have a good story to tell and they don't prevent themselves from saying so. Furthermore, it is policy for recruitment staff to 'explain the recruits' rights and responsibilities and the nature of the commitment to the Armed Forces'1. There really are great opportunities for keen, talented young people in the military, and almost all soldiers, etc. find it a very satisfying life. And compared with the past, soldiers today are much better looked after in terms of physical, medical and psychological wellbeing. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "88029ee5195c3812cc69417c53f471df",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The military is an all-volunteer force and needs a percentage of school-age recruits each year\n\nOur military is an all-volunteer force and must recruit openly to keep up its numbers. The army, navy and air force need well-educated and motivated recruits; as the pool of potential recruits shrinks, efforts to attract young people must be permitted to 'intensify and diversify' 1 The alternative is a return to the conscription and national service that offers those recruits little choice. Military recruitment in schools permits the recruitment of only those with an interest in the armed forces, allowing those who wish to pursue other endeavours that opportunity. As such, visits to schools are not about forcing militaristic propaganda on children, but about making sure that 16-18 year olds know about the military as a potential career choice. After all, college representatives and local employers are allowed to make presentations to students, so it would be unfair to keep just the military out. If you accept that we need armed forces, then you must allow them to recruit openly. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7d372bbd4b78ea9a1cddc0774523a008",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The purpose of the military entering schools is not solely recruitment but awareness\n\nMilitaries provide a public service that too often goes unnoticed and underappreciated; school visits raise the level of understanding for the important job they do. In the UK the army publicly states that it does not directly recruit in schools but does visit many each year \"with the aim of raising the general awareness of the armed forces in society\"1They always visit by invitation of the Head teacher. Compared to the USA fewer young people have local or family connections with the military, so it is important for them to learn about the role the armed forces play in our country. And in both the UK and the USA the military offers other services to schools, from educational materials to leadership courses and team-building exercises. Sgt. Maj. Jerome DeJean, of the U.S. Army's 2nd Recruiting Brigade, describes their role as 'a partner in education\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f342be8dbf11576b0ef6cf8cf3893743",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people should hear of the opportunities available in the armed services whilst in school\n\nSchool children are entitled, as part of their education, to a wide range of careers information, including potential roles in the military. It is a school's duty to offer not only paths to employment, but opportunities to engage with future employers like the military. With university places now increasingly competitive, schools must remain more vigilant than ever that they do not encourage purely academic paths to future careers. Furthermore, nationalism is a powerful factor in school curriculums worldwide, and permitting militaries into schools to talk to students is not an extension of already-permitted activities like the recital of the Lord's Prayer in British state schools or the Pledge of Allegiance in American schools. As such, it comes as little surprise that the predominant reason given for enlistment is service to country1. If schools are asked to ensure that such activities are carried out to foster national sentiment, it follows that military service should be, if not actively encouraged, respected sufficiently to grant the armed services an opportunity to engage with students. 1 Accardi, M. (2011, June 15) Army recruiters become a 'partner' In education Retrieved June 16, 2011, from The Huntsville Times:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cd853bebc14bbc1e399b91d7006f3010",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people are aware of the risks of military service and therefore would not be easily misled by military personnel\n\nYoung people are not stupid – they know that there are risks involved in joining the military. In fact the media usually focuses on the bad news coming out of Afghanistan and Iraq, ignoring the good work of our military there. A career in the military also offers young people a lot of benefits, and it is only right that they should get to hear about those as well. As Donald Rumsfeld noted, ‘for some of our (US) students, this may be the best opportunity they have to get a college education’1. In addition, no one is signed up on the spot in the classroom; they always get the chance to think about it over a few months or more, and to discuss the decision carefully with parents and peers. As such, military recruitment in schools should be seen as no less unethical than the visits to schools of policemen, for whom there is similar risk but little public conjecture.\n\n1Vlahos, K. B. (2005, June 23). Heavy military recruitment at high schools irks some parents. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160406,00.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "718ee9acbf8b5ac0dec3b020efc0b71d",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruiters downplay the risks of a military career, tempting schoolchildren into a career they would not have chosen with honest information.\n\nRecruitment officers often make highly misleading pitches about life in the military. They play up the excitement and chances to travel, as well as the pay and benefits such as college fees and training in special skills. They don't talk about the dangers of military life, the casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the thousands of young soldiers who have lost limbs or been emasculated in recent years. And they don't mention the impact of war on soldiers' mental health, or the lack of support when they leave the military. If we must have the military in our schools, then they should be made to give a much more realistic view of military life. Evidence suggests that 'whilst staff are generally willing to answer questions honestly, information that might dissuade potential recruits from enlisting is not routinely volunteered'1. If we are to accept the military in schools, they must similarly accept the moral necessity of presenting the risks of the career in a fair and truthful manner. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "84b87372d2ed0896bd265d1f15ef10c6",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is illegal\n\nRecruitment in schools is against parts of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. A set of rules that the USA signed up to in 2002 forbids the recruitment of children under the age of 181. Despite this, the American Civil Liberties Union has found that US military recruiters target children as young as 11, visiting their classrooms and making unfair promises to them2. Though the military would argue that its school visits do not constitute recruitment, if recruitment of those under 18 is wrong, then advertising to those under 18 should similarly be considered wrong. In order to live up to its pledge in 2002, the USA should stop trying to recruit in schools. 1 United Nations General Assembly . (2000, May 25). Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: 2 American Civil Liberties Union. (2008, May 13). Military recruitment practices violate international standards, says ACLU. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from American Civil Liberties Union:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df588512243bf0a2ecfddeed40166ccb",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace School children are too young to target for military service\n\nSchool children should be protected from targeted appeals for jobs they are unprepared for, both physically and emotionally. The army is short of manpower due to high casualty rates and the unwillingness of current soldiers to reenlist. This means that they are very keen to get into schools to sign up young people. But it is not right to let them get at students who are too young to vote, or even drive. 16 and 17 year olds are not grown-up enough to make life and death decisions, like joining the army. They may not be able to see through exciting presentations or resist a persuasive and experienced recruitment officer. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, military recruiters collect data on 30 million students. The act 'grants the Pentagon access to directories of all public high schools to facilitate contact for military service recruitment'1. A huge database contains their personal details, including social security numbers, email addresses and academic records. The purpose of this is to allow recruiters to pester young people with messages, phone calls and home visits. Schools should be safe places to grow and learn, not somewhere to sign your life away before it has even properly begun. Upon enlisting, recruits enter a contract that legally binds them to the Armed Forces for up to six years2; school children should not be exposed to pressure to sign their young adolescence away. 1 Berg, M. (2005, February 23). Military recruiters have unrivaled access to schools. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Common Dreams: 2 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "36bada00b8885950b93c16369a36a4c7",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is less education than propaganda\n\nAllowing members of the military into schools is a form of propaganda. They promote the military and make war seem glamorous. Soldiers in smart uniforms come into classes with specially-made videos and powerful weapons, making violence and state-organised murder seem cool. A recent report into the practice stated 'key messages are routinely tailored to children's interests: military roles are promoted as glamorous…(and) warfare is portrayed as game-like and enjoyable.’1 This encourages young people to support aggressive action abroad. It also promotes an unthinking loyalty to the state, whether its actions are right or wrong. By allowing the military in, schools are signalling to their students that these things are OK.\n\n1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice: http://www.informedchoice.org.uk/informedchoice/index.php\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
5d348070f05224eca11ec52e9358266f
|
Military recruitment in schools is less education than propaganda
Allowing members of the military into schools is a form of propaganda. They promote the military and make war seem glamorous. Soldiers in smart uniforms come into classes with specially-made videos and powerful weapons, making violence and state-organised murder seem cool. A recent report into the practice stated 'key messages are routinely tailored to children's interests: military roles are promoted as glamorous…(and) warfare is portrayed as game-like and enjoyable.’1 This encourages young people to support aggressive action abroad. It also promotes an unthinking loyalty to the state, whether its actions are right or wrong. By allowing the military in, schools are signalling to their students that these things are OK.
1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice: http://www.informedchoice.org.uk/informedchoice/index.php
|
[
{
"docid": "e2d0b51d80643184cae935e9318879ef",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military presentations in schools are not designed to be propaganda for their institutions, or the state as a whole, but educate the school children as to the undeniably important role that they play. State survival invariably is dependent upon the existence of a strong, well-trained armed force filled with motivated volunteers. Furthermore, demonstrations of modern technology and smart uniforms do not paint an unfair or inaccurate image of contemporary warfare. Such examples in fact illustrate the honesty of militaries in their portrayal to school children of modern combat. They act as not merely an educational tool, but a life lesson, demonstrating that the world of their video games is, in conflict zones at least, very much real.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "73a05416c7c08544ca06e79efbbcd035",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace School children are not targeted for military service; the intention is to raise awareness about the work that the military do. A Ministry of Defence spokesman in the UK stated that they 'visit about 1,000 schools a year only at the invitation of the school – with the aim of raising the general awareness of their armed forces in society, not to recruit’. Furthermore, children interested in a military career are not instantly signed up, they are granted the time until they turn 18 to decide. In addition, before official enlistment, all potential recruits are sent away on a six-week camp to find out what a career in the army will be like1\n\n1 Goff, H. (2008, March 25). Teachers reject 'Army propaganda'. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7311917.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f9fab9b9817d8edfeca99cd9f07b22c7",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is not illegal in the United States for they have not signed the relevant documents. The USA has not signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child referred to opposite, although it has signed the UN's Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (United Nations General Assembly , 2000). However, the US military does not recruit under-18s anyway, so it is keeping to it's agreement. In any case, neither of these agreements stops recruiters visiting schools in order to make students aware of military career options once they turn 18.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "52d5f202f5adfa934e0c97f1e6b75385",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Recruiters do not minimise the risks of a military career, rather the armed forces have a good story to tell and they don't prevent themselves from saying so. Furthermore, it is policy for recruitment staff to 'explain the recruits' rights and responsibilities and the nature of the commitment to the Armed Forces'1. There really are great opportunities for keen, talented young people in the military, and almost all soldiers, etc. find it a very satisfying life. And compared with the past, soldiers today are much better looked after in terms of physical, medical and psychological wellbeing. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "119aa23ac6cfbb0f3d6e6c2cdb665974",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace To only ask state-funded schools to accept military recruiters ensures that those entering the military out of school are disproportionally from state-schools rather than privately-funded schools, and therefore more likely to be middle and lower-class. Furthermore, there should be no quid pro quo regarding the funding of schools, conditions for further funding should be related to the success of students and the quality of teaching, not whether the school has furthered the state's desire to see its military substantiated. Schools should in fact protect students, not expose them annually to military recruiters who can incrementally pressurize them into a military career.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "28f374ed3cdd92a168640f08984fd17c",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The need for recruits, however genuine, does not necessitate recruitment within schools. There will of course be certain students who would be attracted voluntarily to a role in the armed services, however these students can be reached through means other than their schools. Furthermore, if the motivation of recruits is paramount, then recruits can do no more to prove their motivation than actively and independently seek out a role in the armed services, rather than having it forced upon them through visits to their schools.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "637268cad38aecca5eed0c0491b5b773",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people are not aware and are, in many cases, deliberately misled as to the risks of military service. School children, conditioned by modern television, film and video games as to the heroism of military service, do not often ponder the dangers inherent in conflict. Modern video games, in which war deaths are the norm and immediate 're-spawning' dulls all sensitivity to death, do not serve to educate the youth about the risks but downplay them to the point of banality. Studies indicate that military recruiters, whilst not actively seeking to downplay risks or obscure the truth, are reluctant to volunteer information that would dissuade potential recruits 1. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d7daf0670a81244a4f15a4c4f8260a53",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace However it is dressed up, all the military is interested in schools for is the chance to recruit students. The various educational materials (not always clearly marked as coming from the military) and courses on offer are all intended to interest students in a military career. Such methods are dishonest and should not be allowed in schools; Paul McGarr, a teacher in East London, stated that 'only when recruiting materials gave a true picture of war would he welcome them into his school'1. If students are genuinely interested in joining the military, they can go along to a recruitment centre outside school, potentially with their parents, and ask the necessary questions there. 1 Goff, H. (2008, March 25). Teachers reject 'Army propaganda'. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from BBC News:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1e2fe681da874a30e56c311ac5fca637",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The armed services have no right to preach to the youth, particularly when they are in a trusting environment like a school. To permit any organization to advertise to schoolchildren about job prospects is misguided at a time when their critical faculties are nascent and they are endowed with the belief that what is taught at school is to be imbibed with little rebuttal. Mandated school activities like the Lord's Prayer and Pledge of Allegiance do serve to promote nationalism, but do not do so in such a way as to threaten the lives or disrupt the career paths of school children. School children must be protected from organizations that have the potential to put pressure on them and guilt trip them into signing away the rest of their young adult life. If their choices are to be respected, they must be left to develop their critical faculties and then permitted to use information available to the general public to make a decision.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "718ee9acbf8b5ac0dec3b020efc0b71d",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruiters downplay the risks of a military career, tempting schoolchildren into a career they would not have chosen with honest information.\n\nRecruitment officers often make highly misleading pitches about life in the military. They play up the excitement and chances to travel, as well as the pay and benefits such as college fees and training in special skills. They don't talk about the dangers of military life, the casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the thousands of young soldiers who have lost limbs or been emasculated in recent years. And they don't mention the impact of war on soldiers' mental health, or the lack of support when they leave the military. If we must have the military in our schools, then they should be made to give a much more realistic view of military life. Evidence suggests that 'whilst staff are generally willing to answer questions honestly, information that might dissuade potential recruits from enlisting is not routinely volunteered'1. If we are to accept the military in schools, they must similarly accept the moral necessity of presenting the risks of the career in a fair and truthful manner. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "84b87372d2ed0896bd265d1f15ef10c6",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is illegal\n\nRecruitment in schools is against parts of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. A set of rules that the USA signed up to in 2002 forbids the recruitment of children under the age of 181. Despite this, the American Civil Liberties Union has found that US military recruiters target children as young as 11, visiting their classrooms and making unfair promises to them2. Though the military would argue that its school visits do not constitute recruitment, if recruitment of those under 18 is wrong, then advertising to those under 18 should similarly be considered wrong. In order to live up to its pledge in 2002, the USA should stop trying to recruit in schools. 1 United Nations General Assembly . (2000, May 25). Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: 2 American Civil Liberties Union. (2008, May 13). Military recruitment practices violate international standards, says ACLU. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from American Civil Liberties Union:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df588512243bf0a2ecfddeed40166ccb",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace School children are too young to target for military service\n\nSchool children should be protected from targeted appeals for jobs they are unprepared for, both physically and emotionally. The army is short of manpower due to high casualty rates and the unwillingness of current soldiers to reenlist. This means that they are very keen to get into schools to sign up young people. But it is not right to let them get at students who are too young to vote, or even drive. 16 and 17 year olds are not grown-up enough to make life and death decisions, like joining the army. They may not be able to see through exciting presentations or resist a persuasive and experienced recruitment officer. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, military recruiters collect data on 30 million students. The act 'grants the Pentagon access to directories of all public high schools to facilitate contact for military service recruitment'1. A huge database contains their personal details, including social security numbers, email addresses and academic records. The purpose of this is to allow recruiters to pester young people with messages, phone calls and home visits. Schools should be safe places to grow and learn, not somewhere to sign your life away before it has even properly begun. Upon enlisting, recruits enter a contract that legally binds them to the Armed Forces for up to six years2; school children should not be exposed to pressure to sign their young adolescence away. 1 Berg, M. (2005, February 23). Military recruiters have unrivaled access to schools. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Common Dreams: 2 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "209eed5dc550189a36fc68d5c624bd25",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace All high schools accepting state funding should accept military recruiters once a year\n\nThe relationship between the state and the schools that it establishes and funds goes both ways; if schools accept state funding, the state is entitled to use schools as a platform for the military to appeal to future recruits. All state-funded schools, irrespective of location and student demographics but only high schools, would be expected to accept military recruiters once a year to speak to the entire student body. The event would be a condition of further funding for the school, however there would be no limits placed on a minimum number of students that needed to enlist as a result.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "88029ee5195c3812cc69417c53f471df",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The military is an all-volunteer force and needs a percentage of school-age recruits each year\n\nOur military is an all-volunteer force and must recruit openly to keep up its numbers. The army, navy and air force need well-educated and motivated recruits; as the pool of potential recruits shrinks, efforts to attract young people must be permitted to 'intensify and diversify' 1 The alternative is a return to the conscription and national service that offers those recruits little choice. Military recruitment in schools permits the recruitment of only those with an interest in the armed forces, allowing those who wish to pursue other endeavours that opportunity. As such, visits to schools are not about forcing militaristic propaganda on children, but about making sure that 16-18 year olds know about the military as a potential career choice. After all, college representatives and local employers are allowed to make presentations to students, so it would be unfair to keep just the military out. If you accept that we need armed forces, then you must allow them to recruit openly. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7d372bbd4b78ea9a1cddc0774523a008",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The purpose of the military entering schools is not solely recruitment but awareness\n\nMilitaries provide a public service that too often goes unnoticed and underappreciated; school visits raise the level of understanding for the important job they do. In the UK the army publicly states that it does not directly recruit in schools but does visit many each year \"with the aim of raising the general awareness of the armed forces in society\"1They always visit by invitation of the Head teacher. Compared to the USA fewer young people have local or family connections with the military, so it is important for them to learn about the role the armed forces play in our country. And in both the UK and the USA the military offers other services to schools, from educational materials to leadership courses and team-building exercises. Sgt. Maj. Jerome DeJean, of the U.S. Army's 2nd Recruiting Brigade, describes their role as 'a partner in education\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f342be8dbf11576b0ef6cf8cf3893743",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people should hear of the opportunities available in the armed services whilst in school\n\nSchool children are entitled, as part of their education, to a wide range of careers information, including potential roles in the military. It is a school's duty to offer not only paths to employment, but opportunities to engage with future employers like the military. With university places now increasingly competitive, schools must remain more vigilant than ever that they do not encourage purely academic paths to future careers. Furthermore, nationalism is a powerful factor in school curriculums worldwide, and permitting militaries into schools to talk to students is not an extension of already-permitted activities like the recital of the Lord's Prayer in British state schools or the Pledge of Allegiance in American schools. As such, it comes as little surprise that the predominant reason given for enlistment is service to country1. If schools are asked to ensure that such activities are carried out to foster national sentiment, it follows that military service should be, if not actively encouraged, respected sufficiently to grant the armed services an opportunity to engage with students. 1 Accardi, M. (2011, June 15) Army recruiters become a 'partner' In education Retrieved June 16, 2011, from The Huntsville Times:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cd853bebc14bbc1e399b91d7006f3010",
"text": "education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people are aware of the risks of military service and therefore would not be easily misled by military personnel\n\nYoung people are not stupid – they know that there are risks involved in joining the military. In fact the media usually focuses on the bad news coming out of Afghanistan and Iraq, ignoring the good work of our military there. A career in the military also offers young people a lot of benefits, and it is only right that they should get to hear about those as well. As Donald Rumsfeld noted, ‘for some of our (US) students, this may be the best opportunity they have to get a college education’1. In addition, no one is signed up on the spot in the classroom; they always get the chance to think about it over a few months or more, and to discuss the decision carefully with parents and peers. As such, military recruitment in schools should be seen as no less unethical than the visits to schools of policemen, for whom there is similar risk but little public conjecture.\n\n1Vlahos, K. B. (2005, June 23). Heavy military recruitment at high schools irks some parents. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160406,00.html\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
d6255861aa5c4ca9c8f33440e4c22fce
|
There should be rewards for success in school, versus punishment for failure to attend.
This problem could be addressed by subsidizing school supplies or rewarding good attendance records with additional cash. Cutting benefits will only hurt the children we are trying to help, with their families deprived of the resources to feed them or care for them. Free breakfast programs in the US feed 10.1 million children every day1. Providing meals, mentors, programs that support and help students are ways to help them get along better in schools. There are already 14 million children in the US that go hungry, and 600 million children worldwide that are living on less than a dollar a day2. Why punish those families that have trouble putting their kids in school, which only hurts those children more? There should be rewards for good grades, and reduction to the cost of school and above all programs so that children don't have to sit in school hungry and confused. 1 United States Department of Agriculture, "The School Breakfast Program",[Accessed July 21, 2011]. 2 Feeding America (2010), "Hunger in America: Key Facts", [Accessed July 21, 2011]. and UNICEF, "Goal: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger", [Accessed July 21, 2011].
|
[
{
"docid": "df959e7e599660bdb3d38b6f3cbfa35f",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare There is nothing that says the two are mutually exclusive. Linking welfare to school attendance could be instituted next to other reforms that overall would create greater incentives for children to do well in school.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "ee1f10768ea115cd1975324892d12906",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare It is perfectly just to ask people to adjust behavior in exchange for funds. In fact, if the tax payers' dollars were being poured into an unchanging situation that would be unfair and unproductive. For a long time the US, and countries around the world, have struggled with making welfare a program that can lift people up. Connecting it to schools can help children.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "83899f5fdae4863a8519352939703a32",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare Yet if kids aren't going to school anyway it doesn't matter if the schools are inadequate. Getting kids in schools is the first step to improving the education situation and the dropout rate. As long as we look at the education system in the US and around the world as dismal and overwhelming, nothing will change.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "420795349ff654dabbded3fbe1fd7889",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare If families have incentives to send their children to school, and raise their children with a value of education, stressing the need for them to go to school they are more likely to finish high school and lift themselves out of these environments. The reason why some children would rather work then go to school is because they have been raised in an atmosphere that does not stress education and the necessity to finish high school. This type of program would push parents to change their children's values as they grow up. Additionally, a child's sense of duty to their family because of welfare payments being connected to their school attendance would give them further reason not to drop out, even if they do not like or value school.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4df6b60ca982395e5ae3cb8d9c1460e1",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare If school is so expensive, than shouldn't the government be subsidizing school costs instead of forcing parents to send kids to school when they can't afford the books and clothes? It is also unfair to assume that parents on welfare on neglectful and do not value education. Supporting meal programs in schools and subsidizing other costs are much more likely to draw children than forcing parents to send children to school when the kids are hungry and embarrassed1. 1 United States Department of Agriculture, \"The School Breakfast Program\",[Accessed July 21, 2011].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "304fb446f07e27c5528bda6399f52224",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare Just because students attend school does not mean that they are going to receive a quality education. The best educated children are those whose parents are involved heavily in their school, helping them with their homework, and pushing them to excel1. Without involved parents, students can become just as easily discouraged. There really need to be programs to involve parents more in school, and provide good mentors and role models for students who don't have them. Schools also need to be improved. Just sending kids to school doesn't mean that they are going to learn and be determined to better themselves. Additionally particularly in the third world if children don't have good schools and qualified teachers, then what is the point of going to school? 1 Chavkin, Nancy, and Williams, David (1989), \"Low-Income Parents' Attitudes toward Parent Involvemet in Education\", Social Welfare, [Accessed July 21, 2011].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9af00755e6f246e60b5852b300ae42e2",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare The purpose of welfare is not to better society per se; it is to support those who have fallen into bad times and need extra help. Expecting people to render a service in exchange for help is demeaning and it undermines the purpose of welfare which is to help people get back on their feet versus tell them what they have to do to be considered beneficial to society.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "195c11889d353e981f19412101fdc33b",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare But the program in Brazil is biased towards rural communities versus cities. In the two largest cities in only 10% of families are enrolled versus 41% in the rural areas of Brazil [1] . To consider the program effective it needs to work equally with all members of the poor, which it does not.\n\n[1] 'How to get children out of jobs and into school', The Economist, 29 July 2010, http://www.economist.com/node/16690887\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7c7ff2b12867c0350b6e6e3d3771de9f",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare Connecting welfare to failure of parents is unfair.\n\nThis policy requires that parents be held accountable and punished for the actions of their children. It suggests that their failure in instilling good values is because they care less than middle-class, educated parents. That is a broad and stereotypical assumption. Such parents, many of whom are single mothers, find it harder to instill good values in their children because they live in corrupt environments, surrounded by negative influences[1]. They should be aided and supported, not punished for an alleged failure. Just encouraging putting children in schools does not recognize the larger problems. Some families cannot control their children, who would rather make money than go to school. And caps on the number of children these programs can apply to, as is the case in Brazil, creates problems as well for the families[2]. People are doing their best, but the environment is difficult. Providing safer and more low income housing could be a solution versus punishing people for what is sometimes out of their control. 1 Cawthorne, Alexandra (2008), \"The Straight Facts on Women in Poverty\", Center for American Progress, [Accessed July 21, 2011]. 2\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7bd355072e6fc9522a6cd4323efb1270",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare It is unjust to make welfare conditional\n\nWelfare should not be used as a tool of social engineering. These are people who cannot provide even basic necessities for their families. Asking them to take on obligations by threatening to take away their food is not requiring them to be responsible, it's extortion. It is not treating them as stakeholders and equal partners in a discussion about benefits and responsibilities, but trying to condition them into doing what the rest of society thinks is good for them and their families. There is a difference between an incentive and coercion. An incentive functions on the premise that the person targeted is able to refuse it. These people have no meaningful choice between 'the incentive' or going hungry. This policy does not respect people's basic dignity. There is no condition attached to healthcare and Medicaid that says people have to eat healthily or stop smoking, so why should welfare be conditional? Allowing them and their children to go without food if they refuse is callous. Making welfare conditional is taking advantage of people's situation and telling them what they need to do to be considered valuable to society; it is inherently wrong. It impedes on people's rights to free choice and demeans them as worthless.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ab1d6df9d4636ceadd69df8ea789fb6c",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare School does not an education make\n\nSchool attendance is not a positive outcome in and of itself. It should be encouraged only if it is conducive to learning and acquiring the meaningful education needed to break out of the poverty trap. Blaming the poverty cycle on kids failing to attend school ignores the fact that schools are failing children. Public schools are often overcrowded, with poor facilities and lacking the resources necessary to teach children with challenging backgrounds. In 2011, 80% of America's schools could be considered failing according to Arne Duncan who is the secretary of education1. Schools in developing countries often lack qualified teachers, and can suffer from very high staff absenteeism rates2. A more effective school system would result in fewer kids dropping out, not the other way around. Additionally, involved parents are integral to effective education3. Simply blackmailing them with money to do the right thing will not work. In fact, you might actually experience backlash from parents and kids, who'll see school as a burdensome requirement that is met just so you can keep the electricity on. Throwing kids into school where they do not have confidence, support, and the necessary facilities is not productive. 1 Dillon , Sam (2011), \"Most Public Schools May Miss Targets, Education Secretary Says\", New York Times, [Accessed July 21, 2011]. 2 World Bank, \"Facts about Primary Education\",[Accessed July 21, 2011]. 3 Chavkin , Nancy, and Williams, David (1989), \"Low-Income Parents' Attitudes toward Parent Involvemet in Education\", Social Welfare, [Accessed July 21, 2011].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e4cbfd3b4072096bd38e49804f404217",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare Parents on welfare are more likely to need the incentives to take on the costs of sending children to school.\n\nParents on welfare benefits are the most likely to need the extra inducements. They generally tend to be less educated and oftentimes be less appreciative of the long-term value of education. In the late 90's, 42% of people on welfare had less than a high school education, and another 42% had finished high school, but had not attended college in the US. Therefore they need the additional and more tangible, financial reasons to send their children to school. Children living in poverty in the US are 6.8 times more likely to have experienced child abuse and neglect1. While attendance might not be a sufficient condition for academic success, it is certainly a necessary one, and the very first step toward it. Some parents might be tempted to look at the short-term costs and benefits. Sending a child to school might be an opportunity cost for the parents as lost labor inside or outside the homes (especially in the third world) the household, or as an actual cost, as paying for things like supplies, uniforms or transportation can be expensive. Around the world there are an estimated 158 million working children, who often need to work to contribute to their family's livelihood2. In the UK it is estimated that sending a child to public school costs up to 1,200 pounds a year. If they lose money by not sending children to school, this would tilt the cost-benefits balance in favor of school attendance. 1 Duncan, Greg and Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne (2000), \"Family Poverty, Welfare Reform, and Child Development\", Child Development, [Accessed July 21, 2011] 2 http://www.unicef.org/protection/index_childlabour.html [Accessed July 13, 2011].\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a806bdd43013838b157d543b1db45aa9",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare It is morally acceptable to make welfare conditional.\n\nWhen society has to step in and provide for those who've proved themselves unable to provide for themselves that should reasonably create certain expectations on the part of those being helped. In almost every aspect of life, money is given in return for a product, service or behavior. It is the same with welfare payments; money in exchange for children being put in school. We expect parents to do a good job in their role as parents. Ensuring that their children attend school is a crucial part of parental responsibility. Children on welfare in the US are 2 times more likely to drop out of school, however studies have shown that children who are part of early childhood education are more likely to finish school and remain independent of welfare1. Thus, when a parent is a welfare recipient, it is entirely reasonable to make it conditional on sending their kids to school. If tax payers' dollars are being spent on those who cannot provide for themselves, there needs to be a societal return. One of the greatest complaints about welfare is that people work hard for the money that they earn, which is then handed to others with no direct benefit to society. If children of people on welfare are in school it increases the likelihood that they will finish high school, maybe get a scholarship and go to college, and have the necessary tools to contribute to the work force and better society.\n\n1 Heckman, James (2000), \"Invest in the Very Young\", Ounce of Prevention and the University of Chicago, [Accessed July 25, 2011]. and Duncan, Greg and Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne (2000), \"Family Poverty, Welfare Reform, and Child Development\", Child Development, [Accessed July 21, 2011]\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3c592ec3533dcbd70e4fa474e72b95ec",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare The policy has been effective in the past\n\nThe main goal of this program is increasing school enrollment overall. If it was too much to expect from families, then the program would have failed in the cases that it was instituted. However, the opposite has been the case. 12.4 million families in Brazil are enrolled in a program called Bolsa Familia where children’s attendance in school is rewarded with $12 a month per child. The number of Brazilians with incomes below $440 a month has decreased by 8% year since 2003, and 1/6 of the poverty reduction in the country is attributed to this program [1] . Additionally it is much less expensive than other programs, costing only about .5% of the country’s GDP [2] . Considering that this program has been affordable and successful in both reducing poverty and increasing school enrollment it is worth using as an incentive in more programs around the world.\n\n[1] 'How to get children out of jobs and into school', The Economist, 29 July 2010, http://www.economist.com/node/16690887\n\n[2] 'How to get children out of jobs and into school', The Economist, 29 July 2010, http://www.economist.com/node/16690887\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5cf106b97a4b7dbce4d8a34c98ba63dc",
"text": "onomic policy education education general house believes payment welfare Requiring school attendance allows welfare to be the hand-up that it is meant to be, and keep children out of crime.\n\nIn the US, girls who grow up in families receiving welfare handouts are 3 times more likely to receive welfare themselves within three years of having their first child than girls who's families were never on welfare1. Children living in poverty were 2 times more likely to have grade repetition and drop out of high school and 3.1 times more likely to have children out of wedlock as teenagers2. They are 2.2 times more likely to experience violent crimes. Children of welfare recipients are more likely to end up on welfare themselves. Welfare should be a hand up, not a handout that leads to dependency on the state. It is the latter if we are only leading people to fall into the same trap as their parents. Education is the way to break the vicious cycle. Through education, children will acquire the skills and qualifications they need in order to obtain gainful employment once they reach adulthood, and overcome their condition. In the developing world, primary education has proven to reduce AIDS incidences, improve health, increase productivity and contribute to economic growth3. School can empower children, and give them guidance and hope that they may not receive at home. Getting kids in school is the first step to equipping them with the skills to better their situations, and if encouraged by their parents they might consider scholarships to college or vocational school. The program does not guarantee this for all, but it is likely more effective than the leaving parents with no incentive to push their children. Benefits are supposed to promote the welfare of both parents and children. One of the best ways to ensure that welfare payments are actually benefiting children is to make sure they're going to school. This is simply providing parents with an extra incentive to do the right thing for their children and become more vested in their kids' education. 1 Family Facts, \"A Closer Look at Welfare\", [Accessed July 21, 2011]. 2 Duncan , Greg and Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne (2000), \"Family Poverty, Welfare Reform, and Child Development\", Child Development, [Accessed July 21, 2011] 3http World Bank, \"Facts about Primary Education\",[Accessed July 21, 2011].\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
e063c7b9287a2cddfc9427396e4665a8
|
Children See Violent Video Games
Whilst it might be agreed that violent video games in the hands of a person who is old enough to see them and be able to understand the context in which the violence is being wrought is acceptable, this may not be true of younger people who acquire games.
Games with violent content are often easily acquired by players too young to purchase them. They may also gain access to them at home from older siblings. Because children do not have fully developed mental faculties yet, and may not clearly separate fantasy from reality, exposure to violent games can have a large impact upon children. This has a greater impact than children seeing films that feature realistic violence because whilst a child might get bored with films owing to the lack of interaction with the medium, this is much less likely to be the case with, for example, a military shooting game, which a child might play over and over
As such, all violent video games should be banned to prevent their acquisition by young children either by accident, or owing to parental ignorance. [1]
[1] Anderson, Craig et al. The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2003, 4:81-110
|
[
{
"docid": "4d8691d36de4c9091bd5131b4dfe92ce",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video This is empirically false\n\nAgain, the crux of opposition counter-argument is that the evidence in this regard is strongly behind opposition.\n\nIn April 2011, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission undercover shopper survey found that video game retailers continue to enforce the ratings by allowing only 13% of underage teenage shoppers to buy M-rated video games, a statistically significant improvement from the 20% purchase rate in 2009. By contrast, underage shoppers purchased R-rated movies 38% of the time, and unrated movies 47% of the time.\n\nGiven that children are able to easily access violent content in other visual media, and there is no evidence that video games are more harmful than other media, this argument falls. Further, there is a long tradition of exposing children to extremely violent content in the form of fairy tales.\n\nFurther, with greater education regarding the harms of videogames to parents (and with more parents having played video games themselves) many are becoming savvier about appropriate restrictions on their children’s video game play. Given the lack of evidence that video games are clearly or uniquely harmful, but acknowledging society’s interest in protecting vulnerable children, investing in additional parent education is a more logical response than attempting to ban all violent games. [1]\n\n[1] Federal Trade Commission. FTC undercover shopper survey on enforcement of game ratings finds compliance worst for retailers of music CDs and the highest among video game sellers. News release, 20 April 2011. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/04/violentkidsent.shtm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "f497e30da91ad79601bea9e5e8dc5a9d",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The facts are against the premise again.\n\nResearch does not support the idea that young people who play violent video games have decreased social ability. This is refuted most notably in studies by Anderson and Ford (1986), Winkel et al. (1987), Scott (1995), Ballard and Lineberger (1999), and Jonathan Freedman (2002). More recently, Block and Crain (2007) claim that in a critical paper by Anderson (and his co-author, Bushman), data was improperly calculated and produced fallacious results. Additional meta-analyses (reviews of research that attempt to statistically combine data from multiple studies for more powerful results) by other researchers, such as by Ferguson and Kilburn (2009) and Sherry (2007) have failed to find any causal link between video game violence and aggression, as have recent reviews by the Australian Government (2010) and the US Supreme Court (June, 2011).\n\nThe question of whether violent games that only allow violence as a solution to problems could negatively affect young people in subtle ways deserves further study. However, there are many aspects of video games, such as puzzle solving, that are intrinsic parts of even the basest first person shooters. Many first-person shooters themselves require tactical deployment and thinking—all of which are able to stimulate thought in people, albeit in a different manner than negotiation might do. [1] Further, newer military games are more sophisticated, often requiring the player to take one side of a conflict and then the other in different levels of the game, or forcing the player to face moral dilemmas that affect the game’s storyline or outcome.\n\n[1] Freedman, Jonathan L. Media violence and its effect on aggression: assessing the scientific evidence. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002. ISBN 0802084257\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4569bb25b4f354a667991238b71a6e5a",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The facts are strongly against the Proposition’s analysis\n\nThe proposition’s arguments fail to stand up in the real world. Several major studies published in The Journal of Adolescent Health, The British Medical Journal and The Lancet (among others) have shown no conclusive link between video game usage and real-life violent behaviour. The Federal Bureau of Investigation found no evidence linking video game use to the massacre at Columbine (or other highly publicized school shootings). [1] There is no evidence to support the idea that people exposed to violent video game (or other violent media content) will then go on to commit crimes. [2]\n\nFurther, if violent video games were causing violent behaviour, we would expect to see rates of violent crime increase as games with realistic portrayals of violence became more widely available on popular game consoles. Instead, violent crime has decreased in recent years. Some economists have argued (based on time series modelling) that increased sales of violent video games are associated with decreases in violent crime. [3]\n\nIn Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do, researchers/authors Lawrence Kutner, PhD, and Cheryl K. Olson, ScD of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital’s Center for Mental Health and Media refute claims of violent behaviour increase caused by violent video games. The researchers' quantitative and qualitative studies (surveys and focus groups) found that young adolescents view game behaviour as unrelated to real-life actions, and this is why they can enjoy criminal or violent acts in a game that would horrify them in reality. They also found evidence that those relatively few adolescents who did not play video games at all were more at-risk for violent behaviours such as bullying or fighting (although the sample size was too small for statistical significance). The authors speculated that because video game play has gained a central and normative role in the social lives of adolescent boys, a boy who does not play any video games might be socially isolated or rejected.\n\nFinally, although more study is needed, there is some evidence to suggest that violent video games might allow players to get aggressive feelings out of their system (i.e., video game play might have a cathartic effect), in a scenario that does not harm anyone else. [4] , [5] , [6]\n\n[1] O’Toole, Mary Ellen, ‘The School Shooter: A Threat Assessment perspective’, Critical Incident Response Group, www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/school-shooter\n\n[2] Editorial. Is exposure to media violence a public-health risk? The Lancet, 2008, 371:1137.\n\n[3] Cunningham, Scott, et al., ‘Understanding the Effects of Violent Video Games on Violent Crime’, 7 April 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1804959\n\n[4] Kutner, Lawrence & Cheryl K. Olson. Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do. Simon and Schuster, 2008\n\n[5] Bensley, Lillian and Juliet Van Eenwyk. Video games and real-life aggression: A review of the literature, Journal of Adolescent Health, 2001, 29:244-257.\n\n[6] Griffiths, Mark. Video games and health. British Medical Journal, 2005, 331:122-123.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7bf3e5e57b48b9299d5a99ac982d8ea9",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video There is a generation gap\n\nChildren in this age have grown up with computers and digital media devices where their parents have not. Whilst some parents are able to readily adapt to new technology, there are a large proportion that are unable to do so.\n\nEven if parents have adapted to the digital age, there are still lots of things their children know about that parents simply cannot keep up with. It is entirely feasible for a child to be able to keep the presence of a violent video game hidden from his or her parents through use of the various “Home” menus that all the major games consoles now possess. Further, on the computer, a user can simply Alt+Tab out of any application they are in to avoid detection.\n\nGiven there are many ways for children to avoid their parents and given the generation gap, it seems unfair to expect parents to be able to monitor their children in this way.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f6cc3df159163c7ed780c91388bac4c1",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Video games teach people to deal with frustrations in the wrong way.\n\nIn dealing with frustrations and aggression by using video games as an outlet, players of these games often assume that the problem is gone or dealt with.\n\nThis is often not the case, with many sources of frustration being ones which repeat day in and day out.\n\nGiven that this is the case, video games prevent people from dealing with the root causes of their problems and thus leave people more susceptible to frustration in the future.\n\nFurther, playing back into the first point on proposition, they teach players only one method of dealing with their problems, which is resorting to violence, so should they seek to deal with their frustrations in the real world, often the solutions they do engage with are ones which are suboptimal.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4665e82623ca869f62e8a3670437481a",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The skills learnt within video games are skills that could be learnt elsewhere without the negative problems that have been associated with video games.\n\nAll of the benefits listed are thusly moot in this context because things such as team sports are able to develop many of the skills team shooters do, whilst also improving fitness and other areas of well-being. More tactical sports can have a great impact on somebody’s intellectual well-being as well as their physical well-being.\n\nAdditionally, videogames in general might be able to improve some skills, but we are discussing violent videogames in particular. There are other, much less violent, videogames that allow people to further increase their skills.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6e813a3882825aacfcf032a44f5c2c85",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Violent Video Games Cause Social Interaction Problems\n\nVideo games of a violent nature tend to fail to offer many solutions to a problem. Most military shooters have no form of negotiation with enemies; players are asked to simply kill as many nameless terrorists as possible. Given this, social interaction problems can be caused because people are presented with problems and then told that they must be solved with violence instead of other methods. In other words, physical violence is portrayed as the first-choice (and often only-choice) solution to a conflict.\n\nThis lack of portrayal of alternate solutions can stifle growth of other skills, especially amongst children and adolescents, specifically skills important to making friends and engaging in negotiation in times of conflict or pressure. Further, it encourages children to see people who oppose them as “others,” and thus presents them psychologically as enemies instead of as people who are simply different to the player and thus might have other grievances. This can lead to increases in aggression among players.\n\nThis is especially true given the relatively simplistic portrayal of conflicts within areas such as the Middle East and Afghanistan. [1]\n\n[1] \"Violent Video Games May Increase Aggression in Some But Not Others, Says New Research\". apa.org. American Psychological Association. 27 September 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "88b9bfce5bc91c463b32083cd36c9b6a",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Violent Video Games cause Violent Behaviour\n\nVideo games exist as an interactive medium. The player has control over their character and many of their character’s actions whereas in a book or movie, the audience does not. This means that the player can become invested emotionally in characters to a greater extent because of the autonomy afforded to each character.\n\nGiven that this is true it becomes more difficult to ensure dissociation between the real world and the game world with which the player interacts. With the growing drive towards realism of videogame graphics, game environments are able to look incredibly similar to real life, further blurring the distinction.\n\nIf this is the case, then a person who visits violence upon another person within a game universe feels the same emotions as someone who does so within real life, and therefore may be desensitised to real-life violence. Whilst game producers would claim that is not their aim and that their games do not cause this desensitisation, many have been actively pursuing technologies that allow for greater immersion within their game-worlds.\n\nIf this is the case then acts of violence may fail to register the same level of shock or revulsion in a person than they usually do. Given that this is true, people who play video games become more able to harm others or less likely to intervene to prevent harm.\n\nIn terms of actual evidence, there is very little to back up this analysis. Most studies supporting the concept have been debunked by others. [1]\n\n[1] Anderson, Craig & Bushman, Brad. Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 2001, 12: 353-359\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "46407a13940d7ee23ceba8076e8fdfb5",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Video games Improve Skills\n\nFirst, the claims of harm caused by video games have not been proven.\n\nThe most criticised violent video games are generally military shooters. However, these games generally focus much more strongly on multiplayer components of the game.\n\nThese multiplayer components often require significant levels of teamwork in order for one side to be successful over the other. As such, many of these video games end up teaching players core teamwork skills as well as often teaching leadership skills when players become part of organised gaming groups.\n\nFurther, numerous researchers have proposed potential positive effects of video games on aspects of social and cognitive development and psychological well-being. It has been shown that action video game players have better hand-eye coordination and visuo-motor skills, such as their resistance to distraction, their sensitivity to information in the peripheral vision and their ability to count briefly presented objects, than non-players. Video games also promote the development of intellectual skills such as planning and problem-solving, and social games may improve the social capabilities of the individual. [1]\n\nGiven then that video games provide these benefits, banning violent games would harm the industry overall, causing many of the developers of other games which encourage these kinds of skills to lose their funding from game publishers. Put simply, the banning of violent video games would lead to fewer games overall being published and if these games have the effects listed above then a great net benefit is lost in the process. [2]\n\n[1] Green, C. Shawn & Daphne Bavelier. Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature, 2003, 423:534-537. http://www.mendeley.com/research/action-video-game-modifies-visual-selective-attention/\n\n[2] Olson, Cheryl K. Children’s motivations for video game play in the context of normal development. Review of General Psychology, 2010, 14: 180-187.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "937406a5eb43c4dbf2c58752763b97f3",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The Responsibility Lies With Parents\n\nIn the digital age, young people are almost certain to be exposed to violent media content, including violent video games, even if parents attempt to restrict children’s exposure to such content in the home. Parents therefore have an obligation to educate themselves about video games (many government, industry and private websites provide such information) and to help their children become “media literate” regarding the content and context of games.\n\nThe state places responsibility on parents for the welfare of a child and in doing so the state can allow things that would potentially be dangerous for children, anything from skateboards to R-rated films, as long as parents can supervise their children. Parents need not know how to skateboard to supervise such activity, but should know about potential risks and safety equipment. This same logic applies to video games.\n\nTo not confer this responsibility on parents is to further undermine their status as role models for their children, as it assumes that parents are incapable of ensuring the safety of their children.\n\nPractically speaking, this could affect the respect they get from their children, with “The government says I can’t,” being a much weaker response when questioned about violent video games than an actual explanation of the harms behind them. [1]\n\n[1] American Psychological Association. \"Violent Video Games — Psychologists Help Protect Children from Harmful Effects\", 8 June 2004, http://www.apa.org/research/action/games.aspx\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "91c220fab1aac37b1a076a58e58d2e3d",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Violent Video Games Prevent Violent Behaviour\n\nIn most people’s lives there are instances where they might like to react to a situation with a level of aggression. However, owing to a number of reasons such a solution is often impossible and undesirable.\n\nIt has been theorised by psychologists that pent up frustrations with the world are the root of many psychological problems. Given that this is true then, an outlet for frustrations is required in society such that aggressive behaviour in individuals can be avoided.\n\nVideo games in this situation provide such an outlet for aggression and frustrations. Firstly aggression is dealt with through the simple act of defeating enemies within games and frustration is dealt with through the completion of goals within the video games, allowing players a sense of satisfaction upon their completion.\n\nHence, one could argue that this may result in comparatively lower levels of aggressive behaviour among video game players. This is supported by research conducted by Dr. Cheryl Olson and her team at Harvard. Studying a sample of 1,254 students aged 12 to 14 years, she found that over 49% of boys and 25% of girls reported using violent games such as Grand Theft Auto IV as an outlet for their anger.\n\nShe suggests that instead of a blanket ban on M-rated game use by young adolescents, parents should monitor how much time children spend playing games and how they react to specific game content. [1]\n\n[1] Olson, Cheryl K., et al., ‘Factors Correlated with Violent Video Game Use by Adolescent Boys and Girls’, Journal of Adolescent Health, Vol.41 no.1, pp77-83, July 2007, http://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(07)00027-4/abstract\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
85b5f89ff3096e9ff0b87dfee4f31b7d
|
Video games Improve Skills
First, the claims of harm caused by video games have not been proven.
The most criticised violent video games are generally military shooters. However, these games generally focus much more strongly on multiplayer components of the game.
These multiplayer components often require significant levels of teamwork in order for one side to be successful over the other. As such, many of these video games end up teaching players core teamwork skills as well as often teaching leadership skills when players become part of organised gaming groups.
Further, numerous researchers have proposed potential positive effects of video games on aspects of social and cognitive development and psychological well-being. It has been shown that action video game players have better hand-eye coordination and visuo-motor skills, such as their resistance to distraction, their sensitivity to information in the peripheral vision and their ability to count briefly presented objects, than non-players. Video games also promote the development of intellectual skills such as planning and problem-solving, and social games may improve the social capabilities of the individual. [1]
Given then that video games provide these benefits, banning violent games would harm the industry overall, causing many of the developers of other games which encourage these kinds of skills to lose their funding from game publishers. Put simply, the banning of violent video games would lead to fewer games overall being published and if these games have the effects listed above then a great net benefit is lost in the process. [2]
[1] Green, C. Shawn & Daphne Bavelier. Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature, 2003, 423:534-537. http://www.mendeley.com/research/action-video-game-modifies-visual-selective-attention/
[2] Olson, Cheryl K. Children’s motivations for video game play in the context of normal development. Review of General Psychology, 2010, 14: 180-187.
|
[
{
"docid": "4665e82623ca869f62e8a3670437481a",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The skills learnt within video games are skills that could be learnt elsewhere without the negative problems that have been associated with video games.\n\nAll of the benefits listed are thusly moot in this context because things such as team sports are able to develop many of the skills team shooters do, whilst also improving fitness and other areas of well-being. More tactical sports can have a great impact on somebody’s intellectual well-being as well as their physical well-being.\n\nAdditionally, videogames in general might be able to improve some skills, but we are discussing violent videogames in particular. There are other, much less violent, videogames that allow people to further increase their skills.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "7bf3e5e57b48b9299d5a99ac982d8ea9",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video There is a generation gap\n\nChildren in this age have grown up with computers and digital media devices where their parents have not. Whilst some parents are able to readily adapt to new technology, there are a large proportion that are unable to do so.\n\nEven if parents have adapted to the digital age, there are still lots of things their children know about that parents simply cannot keep up with. It is entirely feasible for a child to be able to keep the presence of a violent video game hidden from his or her parents through use of the various “Home” menus that all the major games consoles now possess. Further, on the computer, a user can simply Alt+Tab out of any application they are in to avoid detection.\n\nGiven there are many ways for children to avoid their parents and given the generation gap, it seems unfair to expect parents to be able to monitor their children in this way.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f6cc3df159163c7ed780c91388bac4c1",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Video games teach people to deal with frustrations in the wrong way.\n\nIn dealing with frustrations and aggression by using video games as an outlet, players of these games often assume that the problem is gone or dealt with.\n\nThis is often not the case, with many sources of frustration being ones which repeat day in and day out.\n\nGiven that this is the case, video games prevent people from dealing with the root causes of their problems and thus leave people more susceptible to frustration in the future.\n\nFurther, playing back into the first point on proposition, they teach players only one method of dealing with their problems, which is resorting to violence, so should they seek to deal with their frustrations in the real world, often the solutions they do engage with are ones which are suboptimal.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f497e30da91ad79601bea9e5e8dc5a9d",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The facts are against the premise again.\n\nResearch does not support the idea that young people who play violent video games have decreased social ability. This is refuted most notably in studies by Anderson and Ford (1986), Winkel et al. (1987), Scott (1995), Ballard and Lineberger (1999), and Jonathan Freedman (2002). More recently, Block and Crain (2007) claim that in a critical paper by Anderson (and his co-author, Bushman), data was improperly calculated and produced fallacious results. Additional meta-analyses (reviews of research that attempt to statistically combine data from multiple studies for more powerful results) by other researchers, such as by Ferguson and Kilburn (2009) and Sherry (2007) have failed to find any causal link between video game violence and aggression, as have recent reviews by the Australian Government (2010) and the US Supreme Court (June, 2011).\n\nThe question of whether violent games that only allow violence as a solution to problems could negatively affect young people in subtle ways deserves further study. However, there are many aspects of video games, such as puzzle solving, that are intrinsic parts of even the basest first person shooters. Many first-person shooters themselves require tactical deployment and thinking—all of which are able to stimulate thought in people, albeit in a different manner than negotiation might do. [1] Further, newer military games are more sophisticated, often requiring the player to take one side of a conflict and then the other in different levels of the game, or forcing the player to face moral dilemmas that affect the game’s storyline or outcome.\n\n[1] Freedman, Jonathan L. Media violence and its effect on aggression: assessing the scientific evidence. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002. ISBN 0802084257\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4569bb25b4f354a667991238b71a6e5a",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The facts are strongly against the Proposition’s analysis\n\nThe proposition’s arguments fail to stand up in the real world. Several major studies published in The Journal of Adolescent Health, The British Medical Journal and The Lancet (among others) have shown no conclusive link between video game usage and real-life violent behaviour. The Federal Bureau of Investigation found no evidence linking video game use to the massacre at Columbine (or other highly publicized school shootings). [1] There is no evidence to support the idea that people exposed to violent video game (or other violent media content) will then go on to commit crimes. [2]\n\nFurther, if violent video games were causing violent behaviour, we would expect to see rates of violent crime increase as games with realistic portrayals of violence became more widely available on popular game consoles. Instead, violent crime has decreased in recent years. Some economists have argued (based on time series modelling) that increased sales of violent video games are associated with decreases in violent crime. [3]\n\nIn Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do, researchers/authors Lawrence Kutner, PhD, and Cheryl K. Olson, ScD of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital’s Center for Mental Health and Media refute claims of violent behaviour increase caused by violent video games. The researchers' quantitative and qualitative studies (surveys and focus groups) found that young adolescents view game behaviour as unrelated to real-life actions, and this is why they can enjoy criminal or violent acts in a game that would horrify them in reality. They also found evidence that those relatively few adolescents who did not play video games at all were more at-risk for violent behaviours such as bullying or fighting (although the sample size was too small for statistical significance). The authors speculated that because video game play has gained a central and normative role in the social lives of adolescent boys, a boy who does not play any video games might be socially isolated or rejected.\n\nFinally, although more study is needed, there is some evidence to suggest that violent video games might allow players to get aggressive feelings out of their system (i.e., video game play might have a cathartic effect), in a scenario that does not harm anyone else. [4] , [5] , [6]\n\n[1] O’Toole, Mary Ellen, ‘The School Shooter: A Threat Assessment perspective’, Critical Incident Response Group, www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/school-shooter\n\n[2] Editorial. Is exposure to media violence a public-health risk? The Lancet, 2008, 371:1137.\n\n[3] Cunningham, Scott, et al., ‘Understanding the Effects of Violent Video Games on Violent Crime’, 7 April 2011, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1804959\n\n[4] Kutner, Lawrence & Cheryl K. Olson. Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth About Violent Video Games and What Parents Can Do. Simon and Schuster, 2008\n\n[5] Bensley, Lillian and Juliet Van Eenwyk. Video games and real-life aggression: A review of the literature, Journal of Adolescent Health, 2001, 29:244-257.\n\n[6] Griffiths, Mark. Video games and health. British Medical Journal, 2005, 331:122-123.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4d8691d36de4c9091bd5131b4dfe92ce",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video This is empirically false\n\nAgain, the crux of opposition counter-argument is that the evidence in this regard is strongly behind opposition.\n\nIn April 2011, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission undercover shopper survey found that video game retailers continue to enforce the ratings by allowing only 13% of underage teenage shoppers to buy M-rated video games, a statistically significant improvement from the 20% purchase rate in 2009. By contrast, underage shoppers purchased R-rated movies 38% of the time, and unrated movies 47% of the time.\n\nGiven that children are able to easily access violent content in other visual media, and there is no evidence that video games are more harmful than other media, this argument falls. Further, there is a long tradition of exposing children to extremely violent content in the form of fairy tales.\n\nFurther, with greater education regarding the harms of videogames to parents (and with more parents having played video games themselves) many are becoming savvier about appropriate restrictions on their children’s video game play. Given the lack of evidence that video games are clearly or uniquely harmful, but acknowledging society’s interest in protecting vulnerable children, investing in additional parent education is a more logical response than attempting to ban all violent games. [1]\n\n[1] Federal Trade Commission. FTC undercover shopper survey on enforcement of game ratings finds compliance worst for retailers of music CDs and the highest among video game sellers. News release, 20 April 2011. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/04/violentkidsent.shtm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "937406a5eb43c4dbf2c58752763b97f3",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video The Responsibility Lies With Parents\n\nIn the digital age, young people are almost certain to be exposed to violent media content, including violent video games, even if parents attempt to restrict children’s exposure to such content in the home. Parents therefore have an obligation to educate themselves about video games (many government, industry and private websites provide such information) and to help their children become “media literate” regarding the content and context of games.\n\nThe state places responsibility on parents for the welfare of a child and in doing so the state can allow things that would potentially be dangerous for children, anything from skateboards to R-rated films, as long as parents can supervise their children. Parents need not know how to skateboard to supervise such activity, but should know about potential risks and safety equipment. This same logic applies to video games.\n\nTo not confer this responsibility on parents is to further undermine their status as role models for their children, as it assumes that parents are incapable of ensuring the safety of their children.\n\nPractically speaking, this could affect the respect they get from their children, with “The government says I can’t,” being a much weaker response when questioned about violent video games than an actual explanation of the harms behind them. [1]\n\n[1] American Psychological Association. \"Violent Video Games — Psychologists Help Protect Children from Harmful Effects\", 8 June 2004, http://www.apa.org/research/action/games.aspx\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "91c220fab1aac37b1a076a58e58d2e3d",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Violent Video Games Prevent Violent Behaviour\n\nIn most people’s lives there are instances where they might like to react to a situation with a level of aggression. However, owing to a number of reasons such a solution is often impossible and undesirable.\n\nIt has been theorised by psychologists that pent up frustrations with the world are the root of many psychological problems. Given that this is true then, an outlet for frustrations is required in society such that aggressive behaviour in individuals can be avoided.\n\nVideo games in this situation provide such an outlet for aggression and frustrations. Firstly aggression is dealt with through the simple act of defeating enemies within games and frustration is dealt with through the completion of goals within the video games, allowing players a sense of satisfaction upon their completion.\n\nHence, one could argue that this may result in comparatively lower levels of aggressive behaviour among video game players. This is supported by research conducted by Dr. Cheryl Olson and her team at Harvard. Studying a sample of 1,254 students aged 12 to 14 years, she found that over 49% of boys and 25% of girls reported using violent games such as Grand Theft Auto IV as an outlet for their anger.\n\nShe suggests that instead of a blanket ban on M-rated game use by young adolescents, parents should monitor how much time children spend playing games and how they react to specific game content. [1]\n\n[1] Olson, Cheryl K., et al., ‘Factors Correlated with Violent Video Game Use by Adolescent Boys and Girls’, Journal of Adolescent Health, Vol.41 no.1, pp77-83, July 2007, http://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(07)00027-4/abstract\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6e813a3882825aacfcf032a44f5c2c85",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Violent Video Games Cause Social Interaction Problems\n\nVideo games of a violent nature tend to fail to offer many solutions to a problem. Most military shooters have no form of negotiation with enemies; players are asked to simply kill as many nameless terrorists as possible. Given this, social interaction problems can be caused because people are presented with problems and then told that they must be solved with violence instead of other methods. In other words, physical violence is portrayed as the first-choice (and often only-choice) solution to a conflict.\n\nThis lack of portrayal of alternate solutions can stifle growth of other skills, especially amongst children and adolescents, specifically skills important to making friends and engaging in negotiation in times of conflict or pressure. Further, it encourages children to see people who oppose them as “others,” and thus presents them psychologically as enemies instead of as people who are simply different to the player and thus might have other grievances. This can lead to increases in aggression among players.\n\nThis is especially true given the relatively simplistic portrayal of conflicts within areas such as the Middle East and Afghanistan. [1]\n\n[1] \"Violent Video Games May Increase Aggression in Some But Not Others, Says New Research\". apa.org. American Psychological Association. 27 September 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "88b9bfce5bc91c463b32083cd36c9b6a",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Violent Video Games cause Violent Behaviour\n\nVideo games exist as an interactive medium. The player has control over their character and many of their character’s actions whereas in a book or movie, the audience does not. This means that the player can become invested emotionally in characters to a greater extent because of the autonomy afforded to each character.\n\nGiven that this is true it becomes more difficult to ensure dissociation between the real world and the game world with which the player interacts. With the growing drive towards realism of videogame graphics, game environments are able to look incredibly similar to real life, further blurring the distinction.\n\nIf this is the case, then a person who visits violence upon another person within a game universe feels the same emotions as someone who does so within real life, and therefore may be desensitised to real-life violence. Whilst game producers would claim that is not their aim and that their games do not cause this desensitisation, many have been actively pursuing technologies that allow for greater immersion within their game-worlds.\n\nIf this is the case then acts of violence may fail to register the same level of shock or revulsion in a person than they usually do. Given that this is true, people who play video games become more able to harm others or less likely to intervene to prevent harm.\n\nIn terms of actual evidence, there is very little to back up this analysis. Most studies supporting the concept have been debunked by others. [1]\n\n[1] Anderson, Craig & Bushman, Brad. Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 2001, 12: 353-359\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b770bd9975d5df8696c99679b1d2a8af",
"text": "deo games education general internet house would ban sale violent video Children See Violent Video Games\n\nWhilst it might be agreed that violent video games in the hands of a person who is old enough to see them and be able to understand the context in which the violence is being wrought is acceptable, this may not be true of younger people who acquire games.\n\nGames with violent content are often easily acquired by players too young to purchase them. They may also gain access to them at home from older siblings. Because children do not have fully developed mental faculties yet, and may not clearly separate fantasy from reality, exposure to violent games can have a large impact upon children. This has a greater impact than children seeing films that feature realistic violence because whilst a child might get bored with films owing to the lack of interaction with the medium, this is much less likely to be the case with, for example, a military shooting game, which a child might play over and over\n\nAs such, all violent video games should be banned to prevent their acquisition by young children either by accident, or owing to parental ignorance. [1]\n\n[1] Anderson, Craig et al. The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2003, 4:81-110\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
16fb056388e91a06f708ec10237dcf51
|
Translation gives access to students to learn valuable information and develop their human capital and to become academically and economically competitive
The ability to access the wealth of knowledge being generated in the developed world would greatly impact the ability of students and budding academics in the developing world to develop their human capital and keep abreast of the most recent developments in the various fields of academic research. Lag is a serious problem in an academic world where the knowledge base is constantly developing and expanding. In many of the sciences, particularly those focused on high technology, information rapidly becomes obsolete as new developments supplant the old. The lag that occurs because developing countries' academics and professionals cannot readily access this new information results in their always being behind the curve. [1] Coupled with the fact that they possess fewer resources than their developed world counterparts, developing world institutions are locked in a constant game of catch-up they have found difficult, if not impossible, to break free of. By subsidizing this translation effort, students in these countries are able to learn with the most up-to-date information, academics are able to work with and build upon the most relevant areas of research, and professionals can keep with the curve of knowledge to remain competitive in an ever more global marketplace. An example of what can happen to a country cut off from the global stream of knowledge can be found in the Soviet Union. For decades Soviet academics were cut off from the rest of the world, and the result was a significant stunting of their academic development. [2] This translation would be a major boon for all the academic and professional bodies in developing countries.
[1] Hide, W., ‘I Can No Longer Work for a System that Puts Profit Over Access to Research’, The Guardian. 2012. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2012/may/16/system-profit-access-research
[2] Shuster, S. “Putin’s PhD: Can a Plagiarism Probe Upend Russian Politics?”. Time. 28 February 2013, http://world.time.com/2013/02/28/putins-phd-can-a-plagiarism-probe-upend-russian-politics/
|
[
{
"docid": "50a7484fcb2f04078a8d3ecb977309fb",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation While the world is globalizing, it is still in the interest of states to retain their relative competitive advantages. After all, the first duty of a state is to its own citizens. By translating these works and offering them to academics, students, and professionals, the developed world serves to erode one of its only advantages over the cheaper labour and industrial production markets of the developing world. The developed world relies on its advantage in technology particularly to maintain its position in the world and to have a competitive edge. Giving that edge up, which giving access to their information more readily does, is to increase the pace at which the developed world will be outmatched.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "bb0ff5fc920b42a169731a491f79861b",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation This translation effort does not pave the future with gold. Intellectual property law still persists and these countries would still be forced to deal with the technologies' originators in the developed world. By instead striving to engage on an even footing without special provisions and charity of translation, developing countries' academics can more effectively win the respect and cooperation of their developed world counterparts. In so doing they gain greater access to, and participation in, the developments of the more technologically advanced countries. They should strive to do so as equals, not supplicants.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a3bc5921942279acfc8d8d61ced6c591",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation Translating academic work for the developed world will not succeed in creating a dialogue between developed and developing world because the effort is inherently unidirectional. The developing world academics will be able to use the translated work, but will lack the ability to respond in a way that could be readily understood or accepted by their developed world counterparts. The only way to become a truly respected academic community is to engage with the global academic world on an even footing, even if that means devoting more resources to learning the dominant global academic languages, particularly English. This is what is currently happening and is what should be the trend for the future. [1] So long as they rely on subsidized work, the academics of the developing world remain subject and subordinate to those of the developed world.\n\n[1] Meneghini, Rogerio, and Packer, Abel L., ‘Is there science beyond English? Initiatives to increase the quality and visibility of non-English publications might help to break down language barriers in scientific communication’, EMBO Report, February 2007, Vol.8 No.2, pp.112-116, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1796769/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cac428fb7722120dd89eefa34182b506",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation If it is true that people cannot easily get jobs in the developed world for lack of language skills then there will surely still be a pressure to learn the language or languages of international discourse. What this policy offers is access by a much wider audience to the various benefits that expanded academic knowledge can offer. It will expand the developing world's knowledge base and not in any way diminish the desire to learn English and other dominant languages. It should be remembered that it is not just academics that use academic papers; students do as well, as do professionals in everyday life. Clearly there cannot be an expectation that everyone learns English to be able to access research. While there may be fewer languages in academic use there is not such a narrowing of language for everyone else.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0413bcd775cfaebf87a9077ba87e579e",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation In the status quo there is already some translation, due largely to current demands and academic relationships. Even if translation of all academic work the world over could not be translated into every conceivable language, expanding the number of articles and number of languages is certainly a good thing. While cost will limit the extent of the policy, it is still worth pursuing to further open the world of academic discourse.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e0fc2985b6be1f6b7975a7394daae732",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation Wealthy states do feel an obligation to less fortunate countries, as is demonstrated through their frequent use of aid and loans to poorer governments. This is a way to help countries stop being dependent on aid and hand-outs and instead develop their own human capital and livelihood by being able to engage with the cutting edge of technology and research.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e5374808193683c07a269adf88d3d073",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation Translation expands the knowledge base of citizens to help solve local problems\n\nIt is often the case that science and technology produced in the developed world finds its greatest application in the developing world. Sometimes new developments are meant for such use, as was the case with Norman Borlaug's engineering of dwarf wheat in order to end the Indian food crisis. Other times it is serendipitous, as academic work not meant of practical use, or tools that could not be best applied in developed world economies find ready application elsewhere, as citizens of the developing world turn the technologies to their needs. [1] By translating academic journals into the languages of developing countries, academics and governments can open a gold mine of ideas and innovation. The developing world still mostly lacks the infrastructure for large scale research and relies heavily on research produced in the developed world for its sustenance. Having access to the body of academic literature makes these countries less dependent on the academic mainstream, or to the few who can translate the work themselves. Having access to this research allows developing countries to study work done in the developed world and look at how the advances may be applicable to them. The more people are able to engage in this study the more likely it is that other uses for the research will be found.\n\n[1] Global Health Innovation Blog. ‘The East Meets West Foundation: Expanding Organizational Capacity”. Stanford Graduate School of Business. 18 October 2012, http://stanfordglobalhealth.com/2012/10/18/the-east-meets-west-foundation-expanding-organizational-capacity/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d077eeff126c6244d41bc0dfc44a4da0",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation Translation allows greater participation by academics in global academia and global marketplace of ideas\n\nCommunication in academia is necessary to effectively engage with the work of their colleagues elsewhere in the world, and in sciences in particular there has become a lingua franca in English. [1] Any academic without the language is at a severe disadvantage. Institutions and governments of the Global North have the resources and wherewithal to translate any research that might strike their fancy. The same is not true for states and universities in the Global South which have far more limited financial and human capital resources. By subsidizing the translation of academic literature into the languages of developing countries the developed world can expand the reach and impact of its institutions' research. Enabling access to all the best academic research in multiple languages will mean greater cross-pollination of ideas and knowledge. Newton is supposed to have said we “stand upon the shoulders of giants” as all ideas are ultimately built upon a foundation of past work. [2] Language is often a barrier to understanding so translation helps to broaden the shoulders upon which academics stand.\n\nBy subsidizing the publication of their work into other significant languages, institutions can have a powerful impact on improving their own reputation and academic impact. Academic rankings such as the rankings by Shanghai Jiao Tong University, [3] and the Times Higher Education magazine [4] include research and paper citations as part of the criteria. Just as importantly it opens the door to an improved free flowing dialogue between academics around the world. This is particularly important today as the developing world becomes a centre of economic and scientific development. [5] This translation project will serve to aid in the development of relations between research institutes, such as in the case of American institutions developing partnerships with Chinese and Indian universities.\n\n[1] Meneghini, Rogerio, and Packer, Abel L., ‘Is there science beyond English? Initiatives to increase the quality and visibility of non-English publications might help to break down language barriers in scientific communication’, EMBO Report, February 2007, Vol.8 No.2, pp.112-116, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1796769/\n\n[2] Yong, Ed, ‘Why humans stand on giant shoulders, but chimps and monkeys don’t’, Discover, 1 March 2012, http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/03/01/why-humans-stand-on-giant-shoulders-but-chimps-and-monkeys-dont/#.UaYm_7XVB8E\n\n[3] ‘Ranking Methodology’, Academic Ranking of World Universities, 2012, http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU-Methodology-2012.html\n\n[4] Baty, Phil, ‘World University Rankings subject tables: Robust, transparent and sophisticated’, Times Higher Education, 16 September 2010, http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-11/world-ranking/analysis/methodology\n\n[5] ‘Science and Engineering Indicators, 2012’. National Science Foundation. 2012, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c5/c5h.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9cdcf8b2ad65334b6ff635654f1d56aa",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation The West has no particular obligation to undergo such a sweeping policy\n\nGovernments and academic institutions have no special duty to give full access to all information that they generate and publish in academic journals to anyone who might want it. If they want to make their research public that is their prerogative, but it does not follow that they should then be expected to translate that work into an endless stream of different languages. If there is a desire by governments and institutions to aid in the academic development of the developing world, there are other ways to go about it than indiscriminately publishing their results and research into developing world languages. Taking on promising students through scholarships, or developing strategic partnerships with institutions in the global south are more targeted, less piecemeal means of sharing the body of global knowledge for example the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences funds junior scientists from the developing world working in their labs. [1] States owe their first duty to their own citizens, and when the research they produce is not only made available to citizens of other countries but translated at some expense, they are not serving that duty well. It will prove to be a fairly ineffective education policy.\n\n[1] ‘Building Research Capacity in Developing Nations’, Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol 114, No. 10, October 2006, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1626416/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "95d7bb575625a4ade81e700103f84e22",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation It is better to have fewer languages in common use in global academic and economic interrelations\n\nA proliferation of languages in academia will serve to fracture the interrelations of academics, not unify them. As more and more academics and innovators interested in new academic developments find it possible to obtain information wholly in their native languages, then the impetus toward unification in a primary language of academia and commerce will be slowed or entirely thwarted. Through history there have been movements toward this sort of linguistic unity, because it reduces the physical and temporal costs of information exchange; for example scholars throughout Early Modern Europe communicated in Latin. [1] This policy serves only to dampen this movement, which will, even if helpful to people in the short-run, serve to limit the capacity of developing world academics to engage with the developed world. Today English has become the definitive language of both international academic discourse and commerce. In France for example, a country known for its protective stance towards its language, journals have been changing to publishing in English rather than French; the journal Research in Virology changed in 1989 as almost 100% of their articles were submitted in English compared to only 15% in 1973. [2]\n\nThe trend towards one language is a positive one, because it has meant more movers and shakers in various countries have all been able to better and more quickly understand one another's desires and actions leading to more profitable and peaceful outcomes generally. [3] Also important is the fact that while academics and other interested parties in the developing world may be able to grapple with academic work more effectively once translated for them, they now have a greater disadvantage due to the enervating effects this translation produces. Without the positive impetus to learn the major language or languages of international discourse, developing world academics will never be able to get posts and lectureships at institutions in the developed world, or to take part in joint research in real time. The convergence of language ultimately serves to promote common understanding, which means people from the developing world can more effectively move between their home country and others. It also helps build a common lexicon of terms that will be more robust for international use, as opposed to translations, which are often imperfect due to divergences of linguistic concepts and thus susceptible to mistake.\n\n[1] Koenigsberger, H. G., Mosse, George L., and Bowler, G. Q., Europe in the Sixteenth Century, London, 2nd Edn, 1989, p.377\n\n[2] Garfield, Eugene, ‘The English Language: The Lingua Franca Of International Science’, The Ceisntist, 15 May 1989, http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/10374/title/The-English-Language--The-Lingua-Franca-Of-International-Science/\n\n[3] Bakopoulos, D. ‘English as Universal Academic Language: Good or Bad?’. The University Record, 1997, Available: http://www.ur.umich.edu/9697/Jan28_97/artcl18.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "970ba1824a4a8deec233118e267c2f61",
"text": "university digital freedoms access knowledge house would subsidise translation It is prohibitively expensive to translate everything and difficult to prioritize what to translate\n\nUltimately any policy of translation of academic work must rely on a degree of prioritization on the part of the translators since there is no way that all academic work of any kind could be translated into other major languages, let alone into all the multitude of languages extant in the world today. In 2009, for example, the number of published research papers on science and technology exceeded 700,000. [1] That is a gigantic amount of research. Translating all of these articles seems to be an obvious waste of time and resources for any government or institution to pursue and increasingly so when one considers the more than 30,000 languages in current use today. Translations today currently exist for articles and research that is considered useful. Any blanket policy is infeasible. The end result will be only a small number of articles translated into a finite number of languages. This is the status quo. Expanding it only serves to further confuse the academic community and to divert useful energies away from positive research to the quixotic task of translation.\n\n[1] ‘Science and Engineering Indicators, 2012’. National Science Foundation. 2012, http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c5/c5h.htm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
772b52d00e868c685854cf0446e3bc30
|
Online courses are more convenient for students than traditional university
The vast popularity of MOOCs can be explained by the fact that people are finding it easier to learn this way. The best feature of online learning that it can be done in the privacy of one's home, which is more convenient than having to move cities or even countries for a university degree. Moreover, online courses are inherently more flexible. Lectures can be watched and tests taken at any time a person desires (within the deadlines), unlike with scheduled lectures and tests at the traditional university. Not only this means a more personal approach to studying, it also provides people with more flexibility to manage their other commitments, such as work and childcare. Such personal and flexible approach to learning will overtake the rigidity of the traditional university.
|
[
{
"docid": "88293eb3718b280c842ce37826e30060",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses are popular not because they are flexible, but because they provide an opportunity to expand one's knowledge on a variety of subjects. For example, the most common reason for people taking Coursera courses are professional development and lifelong learning, the latter being essentially pleasure learning [9]. While there is nothing wrong with people taking courses to expand their knowledge or add to what they already know, it nevertheless indicates that MOOCs are not really used for furthering one's academic knowledge. This objective is and will remain the field of traditional universities.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "6dd1191d266bc3f858f17254ddb2a1c4",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house MOOCs primarily reach already educated and thus privileged people. Roughly 80% of people who took Coursera courses already have a Bachelor' degree [12]. This statistic shows that the less-advantaged do not prefer online courses over the traditional university nor do they find them more convenient to take. At the least it shows MOOCs are just reaching the same people as universities. Even if universities drop tuition fees, which does not seem likely, the argument is entirely based on the idea that poorer people would find it easier to do courses from home. However, many of the poor do not even have access to internet at home, including an estimated 100 million poor Americans [13], not to mention much larger numbers of poorer people from less developed countries.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d82e58f7698cda72f0835299898d8c18",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Though it is good for personal development opportunities to access educational material don’t mean anything in the labour market that requires verification of understanding through grading. As regards to universities cooperating; that might actually result in the same course being offered by many smaller universities, which decreases the room for free thinking and interpretation, which is an integral part of academic development [17]. Moreover, if with MOOCs prestigious universities can accept more students, this might mean an end to many less prestigious universities altogether as they would not be able to compete. This could actually diminish access to university education for many people who cannot make the cut for the prestigious universities.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0dbe071fceaa4f94584c9ae4941d1153",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house It is questionable whether universities would be able to substantially cut administrative costs and facilities. They will have to spend substantially more on IT support for running courses, as well as adapting courses for the online format. Then it is likely that universities would have to spend substantially more on hiring teaching and research assistants to manage increased numbers of students enrolled. While student accommodation support is going away, the normal academic student support for questions about studies is not, and its workloads actually increase due to higher student numbers. At the end of the day, administrative expenses just have to be spent on different administrative tasks.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0d922071ba07e8c3912745f6231ab376",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses enables universities to accept virtually unlimited numbers of students regardless of presence of tuition fees. If universities keep tuition fees, it makes sense to admit more students because they are no longer limited by availability of physical space; if they drop tuition fees, they still should accept more students because their revenues would depend on how popular they are. What this means is that instead of picking just the brightest of the applying lot, universities can now accept pretty much everyone who meets the basic standard criteria. Not only this decreases the quality of professionals and academia, it decreases the value of a university degree.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "167e9ea06803274f6ee225bcb114aa78",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house It is false to assume that MOOCs platforms would be the only or even the main way to provide university courses. The Open University uses its own resources for online and distance learning. This proves that, given advantages of online learning, universities can switch to digital learning themselves without any intermediaries. This also means that there is no reason for states to cut funding for universities as university learning would simply go digital, everything else staying the same. Even though some universities at the moment offer online courses for credit that are very cheap, these are not degrees, and it is unlikely to imagine that universities would offer cheap online degrees that would threaten their own existence.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a354786448203837f495e011cc1b3e35",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house While there would no longer be a traditional university campus to carry out these activities, it does not mean these activities would disappear. Given the popularity of societies with students, it is expected that other platforms would spring up to fill in the gap. For instance, student clubs can be established in cities or regions, provided either by for-profit entrepreneurs (as in MOOCs platforms) or self-managed by students themselves. The only difference would be that these new platforms might no longer be affiliated to a university but rather be geographically based. This, however, is not a bad development as students would still have an opportunity to join societies. Students can easily be recruited into them via social media and the internet. Maybe not every student will have an option of the society they'd like to join, but that is also the case in lots of traditional universities.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a156049da26fb0711643ede8d21ef6e6",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house It is not true that online communications cannot be as good as real life communications. MOOCs platforms already are addressing student and professor involvement via such means as discussions in internet forums, Google hang-outs etc. This communication can be expanded to other means that the internet provides, such as Skype chats, conference calls, instant messaging, and even broadcasting live podcasts where people can ask questions online. Plus, it is not true that students would not be able to communicate among themselves given the possibilities of social media. Sure, they probably won't meet other students in real life, but that does not mean they cannot try to get to know each other online, especially since this is the only option. The internet has the capability to promote inclusive dialogue between students and professors, this capability just is not used to the fullest at the moment.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87f66d7c066c85a32d2e22eeb643131a",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house It is highly unlikely to believe that people can easily find other people to go through the degree for them on the massive scale, no matter how dedicated of a friend that person is. And even if that friend or a relative is a professional in the degree area, it does not mean they could successfully pass the degree as universities update their examinations and degree materials yearly. Besides, there are ways to prevent such fraud. For instance, Coursera charges fees for certificates that verify a person's identity by using a webcam while the person is taking the course [21]. In terms of having essays and papers written by someone else, this problem is no different from the traditional universities, as they cannot easily verify that the person themselves wrote those either.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "88df175956e5436059ee0f9369db37d5",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house This is exactly as saying that people who did not go to universities are not independent enough. We know this to be wrong in practice and this is so because independence is not obtained in a fixed set of circumstances. There are different ways to foster independence (e.g. part-time work, personal relationships parents don’t necessarily know about, etc.) that are also very much dependent on the persons' character rather than their circumstances. Besides, rites of passages are a subjective and culturally defined – if people no longer leave for universities, a new type of passage into independence is likely be constructed.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2f0378277f9c426c33f48e49728cc209",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses broadens access to education\n\nOnline courses can expand access to university education. University education is based on the idea of merit - that the brightest people should be enabled to learn - however in real life many different circumstances play a role in one's ability to attend university. The result is that lots of stellar people from less-affluent backgrounds do not even apply to the best universities due to costs and anxiety involved in leaving home. In the United States the bottom 50 percent of the income distribution comprise just 14 percent of the undergraduates at top universities [10]. Online courses allow more bright people to go to a university by definitely removing accommodation and travel costs, and, as some predict, even by lowering or dropping tuition fees [11]. This argument is made even stronger by inherent flexibility of online courses, which means that people can combine studies with work and family obligations better. This improves access to education for the poor within the country and in particularly for those in less developed countries, which then improves meritocracy of the university system.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "54842faf691f8abcbc1fb2be76709b05",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses encourage sharing of academic information\n\nOne of the technical features of MOOCs is that content of courses can easily be shared between universities and learners (as content is freely downloadable). This is useful in two ways. First, people who are not earning credit from the course can have full access to educational materials, which expands knowledge of those not enrolled in the university. Second, less prestigious universities can benefit by learning how to design courses better, so they can offer better services. MOOCs even offer opportunities for universities to cooperate together to offer shared courses that would decrease duplication and increase quality of education [16], which would be of even greater benefit to financially stressed institutions. Shared educational resources would expand access to education even further and drive educational standards higher through university cooperation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6d383a3b50198b2d1a8cad2c6e3f869d",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses are a way to higher academic excellence\n\nRelocating to the best universities is a budgetary concern, but also family and social relations concern for many people, which prevents all the best people from even applying to universities that would suit them the best. Online courses can recruit students from anywhere in the world much easier than traditional universities can because students don't need to travel far away for the best education. This then ensures that universities have better access to the brightest people. For instance, Stanford University's online course on Artificial Intelligence enabled people from 190 countries to join, and none of students receiving a score of 100 percent where from Stanford [14]. Improving the pool of students would automatically result in better academics, professionals and science, which would benefit the society better.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "dccb96e0134d7244634b14f5b44df0bd",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses would allow universities to use more resources on teaching and research\n\nTraditional Universities are forced to spend a lot on administration and facilities, such as renting and maintaining buildings and parking lots, providing student support for accommodation, renting student halls, subsiding transports costs and meals, supervising university areas and so on. Across 72 US public universities the average administrative cost was about 8% of spending with the highest, at the University of Connecticut at 17% [15]. All these costs can be cut or abandoned all together if universities move to online teaching. There would be no need for lecture halls and student accommodation as students would just work from home, and even professors could mostly work from home. Even if some of administrative costs remain, that would still substantially increase the amount of resources to be spent entirely on teaching and research. This allows universities to improve their academic credentials and their academic output, which benefits the students and the society.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "aab91bd7a389505774016c148cd1c730",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Traditional universities are a rite of passage to independent life\n\nFor many students leaving for a university is a passage to an independent life, as they often move out out of their parents’ home and even their countries. This means they have to start learning or practically using lots of skills of independent adults, such as financial management, cooking, being crime-aware, networking, and solving communication problems on their own. With online courses students do not leave homes, and essentially do not start using these skills. This takes away an important practice in being an independent adult before the real life, which might leave students less equipped for the real life.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "aac6352283266da7ff0cb98660a838e9",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses make it impossible to ensure academic honesty\n\nWith online courses, unlike with actual tests and lectures, there is no way to ensure the person is not cheating on the other side of the screen. There is no way to ensure that essays and papers are written by people who will be getting degrees, and especially that tests and examinations are taken by the people who will be getting the degrees. But even if they are the same people, there is no way to prevent cheating during tests and examinations, as people can just have the cheat sheets in front of them and there are no supervisors to stop them from doing so. The crucial point about university degrees is that they ensure that the person is the professional. With online courses, that is not possible, which undermines the whole idea of the university degree.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0a56cdfec040566964c8db2745f47f63",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses undermine society life of the university\n\nUniversity is not just a place for learning. A big part of student life is participating in societies and other activities, such as sports, debating, political, philosophical or other interest groups. These provide them with opportunity to explore their talents, do the things they like and also build connections that could be useful after the university. But you cannot do most of these things online as they, unlike studying, are not based on studying materials you can upload. This is why students with online courses would be deprived of these opportunities to develop themselves, build useful connections and get ideas for their further life. This is important for society too as students historically have often been an important political and social actor (e.g. see 1968 France, Athens Polytechnic uprising etc.).\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1d5f726a68b5d9decaecf3ad5eebcf47",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Financial model of online courses is unsustainable\n\nAt the moment some MOOC platforms are non-profit, while even for-profit ones do not pay universities, nor do universities pay MOOC platforms, they might only divide revenue if a revenue stream appears [18]. This essentially means that MOOCs have to rely on traditional financial models of universities to survive – they need the universities to provide materials and the academics and traditional models that are based on the fact that lots of students do not take online courses. However, MOOCs might undermine traditional university funding. For instance, Princeton professor Mitchell Duneier withdrew from Coursera claiming that states use MOOCs as a justification to withdraw state funding from universities [19]. Moreover, some MOOCs consider providing chargeable courses for credit but for a substantially lower price (around 100 dollars for a course), which might draw students away from traditional universities further undermining their existence [20]. This means a depletion of universities financial sources that MOOCs themselves rely on. At the moment there is no way for MOOCs to replace traditional university learning.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "33d076caf171d0132b838e01c2f3e08a",
"text": "n education general teaching university science computers phones internet house Online courses undermine live communication with professors and other students\n\nOnline courses impair live communication between students and professors and among students. For instance, Coursera professors ask students not to email them because due to high numbers of students taking the course meaning they cannot reply [22]. Moreover, due to pre-recorded lectures, there is no option of asking professors questions. There are no live class discussions. Sure students could email each other, but it is more difficult to freely communicate with people you do not know and never met. It is also difficult to imagine that, given their numbers, students could get personal feedback on their progress from professors themselves, and not, say, teaching assistants (as Coursera does) or even from computers. Lack of personal feedback and engagement with professors and other students in discussions of the material decreases the quality of education.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
2f2eb132ed6a9655164484c1e6245dc7
|
State-sponsored space programs can utilize the infrastructure built up in the last half-century, and therefore be substantially cheaper
Since Sputnik was launched in 1957, the space race has given rise to an infrastructure, particularly in the United States and Russia, which can be exploited for economies of scale. The cost of developing shuttles and training astronauts is far cheaper in Cape Carnarvon where the necessary equipment and skills lie to do so. Furthermore, the International Space Station costs upwards of $100 billion, however it serves as a terminal where shuttles can thereafter be pointed to any corner of the universe1. The potential therefore is to save costs by using the existence of the ISS as a stepping stone to elsewhere. To not use fifty years of space development and technology is to render all that investment meaningless. 1 Kaku, M. (2009, July 16) The Cost of Space Exploration. Retrieved June 22, 2011 from Forbes
|
[
{
"docid": "123a08cde741133a524d679b0764fa84",
"text": "computers phones evolution science general genetics universe house would explore If only it were true. The typical shuttle mission to the International Space Station costs $500-700 million. Private individuals, space tourists, have managed it for just $20 million a head1. Therefore, there is little in the argument that the existing space infrastructure is driving costs down. Furthermore, whilst the ISS has been justified as a terminal for the shuttles, the shuttles themselves have been justified as means to reach the space shuttle; a circular argument that offers little hope to the space explorer. Moreover, despite over fifty years of investment, NASA specifically has maintained a shuttle program at the expense of new materials, new fuels and innovative concepts1. As such, the technology has not advanced significantly since the original missions to the Moon between 1969 and 1972. The infrastructure, in this case, appears to have been more of a hindrance and intellectual barrier to development and cost-cutting than an aid. 1 Kaku, M. (2009, July 16) The Cost of Space Exploration. Retrieved June 22, 2011 from Forbes\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "d5ee62e1dabd5216e09d6032cd6a45b6",
"text": "computers phones evolution science general genetics universe house would explore Since the \"historic handshake in space\" when a US Apollo and Soviet Soyuz capsules docked in 1975, the two countries have in fact grown increasingly close. This relationship involves sharing technology (which is almost all 'dual use' i.e. it could be used for military purposes as well as civilian, thus requiring a high degree of trust), scientific knowledge and working side-by-side to build and support the ISS. With the involvement of the 11 member states of the European Space Agency as well as Canada, Japan and Brazil in the project, space is one of the few spheres where governments have been able to put aside their differences in pursuit of something more fundamentally important to humanity.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "81577de9021bc2e6d73e51c65c6f580f",
"text": "computers phones evolution science general genetics universe house would explore Space exploration gives back more than it takes from the treasury. Dr. Joan Vernikos, a former head of NASA Life Sciences, argues ‘economic, scientific and technological returns of space exploration have far exceeded the investment…royalties on NASA patents and licenses currently go directly to the U.S. Treasury, not back to NASA.' Furthermore, as Keith Cowing points out, the funding for space exploration is insignificant compared to our other discretionary spending: ‘Americans spent more than $154 billion on alcohol (in 2006); We spend $10 million a month in Iraq; all of America’s human space flight programs cost around $7 billion a year.\" Cowing also points out the fact that ‘the money is spent on the earth – it creates jobs and provides business to companies, just as any other government program does’ (Dubner, 2008). [1\n\n[1] Dubner, S. J. (2008, January 11). Is Space Exploration Worth the Cost? A Freakonomics Quorum. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from Freakonomics\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9e8a8824ad0a263b1a2c2f58aa4cfd56",
"text": "computers phones evolution science general genetics universe house would explore The positive benefits of space exploration are innumerable and profound. As Joan Vernikos describes, '43 countries now have their own observing or communications satellites in Earth orbit.' Such satellites provide the G.P.S that directs our transport, meteorological forecasts, global monitoring of the environment, as well as surveillance and intelligence for our national security1. Furthermore, the common misconception that NASA has a huge budget is just that; in 2007, the NASA budget of $16.3 billion was dwarfed by the overall G.D.P of $13 trillion1. 1 Dubner, S. J. (2008, January 11). Is Space Exploration Worth the Cost? A Freakonomics Quorum. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from Freakonomics:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b64f78852d2412fddc80f7434dc9f3cb",
"text": "computers phones evolution science general genetics universe house would explore The cost of space exploration exceeds the positive benefits\n\nNASA during the 1990s spent over a third of its budget simply keeping the ISS manned and the Space Shuttle working1; it will now spend $60 million per seat to use Russian transport to the ISS2. The vast majority of its spending on scientific research comes through ground based research, telescopes and unmanned missions. China has made no claims that there is a scientific benefit to its manned mission and nor has Russia in recent years. There are few experiments so important that they can justify the huge cost needed to allow them to be carried out by humans in zero gravity. NASA made a lot of noise about growing zero-gravity protein crystals as a potential cure for cancer when it was trying to justify building the ISS but has since dropped the claims as experiments have shown the claims were overstated. There are few experiments so important that they can justify the huge cost needed to allow them to be carried out by humans in zero gravity. 1 New York Times. (1995, March 6). Is NASA Among the Truly Needy? Retrieved May 19, 2011, from New York Times 2 Stein, K. (2011, May 18). Critical juncture for U.S. human spaceflight. Retrieved May 19, 2011, from The Examiner:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7f0d0cd8adb13713825cf708016aef44",
"text": "computers phones evolution science general genetics universe house would explore The 'space race' fuels nationalistic sentiment and antagonism\n\nSending humans into space or to other planets so that they can erect the flag of a particular nation is a distinctly nationalistic act and one that is likely to create aggressive 'races' in the future just as it has before. China's manned program is openly intended to challenge the US dominance of space for the Communist regime's huge propaganda benefit. George W. Bush's pledge to boost spending on NASA and to restart the manned mission to Mars program was a direct response. This is damaging not only because of the potential for space race conflicts to escalate into greater international hostility, but also because of the way such races could result in the militarization of space, thereby turning something which should be preserved for the common good of humankind into a neo-colonial battlefield.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4249d6934af217117688ec68505dea27",
"text": "computers phones evolution science general genetics universe house would explore Space exploration takes resources away from more worthy causes\n\nHigh ideals are all well and good, but not when they come at the expense of the present. Our world is marred by war, famine, and poverty; billions of people are struggling simply to live from day to day. Our dreams of exploring space are a luxury they cannot afford; U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman stated in the wake of President Bush's 2004 proposals that money was needed 'right here on Earth to give health care that's affordable to everybody, to improve our education system and do better on veterans' benefits and homeland security.'1 Instead of wasting our time and effort on macho prestige projects such as the space programme, we must set ourselves new targets. The money spent on probes to distant planets would be better invested in the people of our own planet. A world free from disease, a world where no-one lives in hunger, would be a truly great achievement. 1 Pop, V. (2004, January 19). Is Space Exploration Worth the Cost? Retrieved May 19, 2011, from Space Daily:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "38b033efb4b82f9d220fbcefb6eea208",
"text": "Gaddafi was not deliberately killing civilians but rather targeting armed rebels fighters who were targeting his government. In his words he said he would show no mercy to rebels and did not speak about civilians.\n\nWhen pro Gaddafi forces regained control of Brega and Zawiyah, there was no bloodshed reported or any conflict harming civilians [1]. We don’t know what would have happened had Gaddafi regained control of Benghazi, but it is likely there would have been no bloodbath.\n\n[1] RT news, ‘Gaddafi gaining ground in battle, losing on information front’, rt.com, 11 March 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c265a073fd0cfd0883c113d3e6914f88",
"text": "This again is a myth routinely put forward by the right. Governments already distinguish between regulations that should apply to all companies and those, more onerous ones, that apply to larger companies only. There are certain standards in terms of health and safety of foodstuffs, products and so forth. However, there is clearly a different role when it comes to regulating larger companies such as banks, insurance companies and major employers.\n\nThere are particular sectors that require more regulation than others but the bulk of regulation is there to protect both staff and customers and it is part of the reality of doing business.\n\nThe idea that regulation harms small business is simply absurd as they benefit from the regulation of larger businesses who may be either their suppliers or customers are also regulated.\n\nEqually start-up companies benefit from the fact that regulation evens up the playing field with more established competitors. If nobody is allowed to cut corners or perform other mildly criminal acts it is clearly an advantage to the new starters.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d22627ff3b12457b546f5987dd0256c3",
"text": "Syria has not lived up to its commitments\n\nSyria is falling well behind on handing over its weapons. The deadliest chemicals were supposed to be removed by 1st January and the rest by 6th February. Neither happened. The Syrian government blamed the lack of protective equipment as well as the security situation but the OPCW says it has handed over the necessary equipment. [1] Under a new timetable Syria has pledged to remove all chemical weapons by 13th April, but by the end of March had only removed just over half. [2] If Syria continues to fail to meet deadlines there have to be consequences, including abandoning the mission.\n\n[1] Blanford, Nicholas, ‘Months of stalling preceded Syria’s latest chemical weapons handover’, CS Monitor, 4 March 2014, http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/2014/0304/Months-of-stalling-preceded-Syria-s-latest-chemical-weapons-handover\n\n[2] AlJazeera, 2014, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/03/watchdog-half-syria-chemicals-removed-2014327235384570.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6b92c4f963d3af4898b92cbc51c7307d",
"text": "One way to deal with this argument is by noting that this would be one tool in a school’s arsenal. If it proves to be obviously counterproductive, then it will not be employed, in the same way that other disciplinary tactics schools/society can impose will not be used if they are seen to be adverse or ineffective.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a8fba51a51d2ed289a4578a4411424e3",
"text": "Remarriage rate shows that even people who go through failed marriages retain faith in the institution of marriage\n\n50% of all divorcees in the UK go on to remarry. (National Office for Statistics 1999) This shows that, although their own marriage failed, they retain faith in the institution of marriage. The fact that, even when marriage has failed to work for them once, many people wish to give it another go shows that it is still meaningful to society. If an institution is so meaningful and relevant to modern society in this way, it cannot possibly be outdated.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb50fbc25ff1de705da7ae7258a8eb0e",
"text": "Universal migrant “protections” are an affront to state sovereignty.\n\nInternational law, like the U.N. Migrant Rights Convention, and any international regulatory body that requires the nations of the world to increase protections for migrants would be a violation of state sovereignty. Not all international law is necessarily bad, but these protections go too far, because they force a huge burden on certain nations, and not others. It is fair for an international body to say that all nations should treat their citizens with equality and respect, but it is not fair to say that certain countries should have to provide for many citizens from less-well-off ones.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "81131a2154ef0e07108b905452b2d58f",
"text": "The freedom of movement the Schengen area allows increases the difficulties of controlling immigration\n\nThe borderless nature of the Schengen Area makes it increasingly difficult to track and detain illegal immigrants. It is often easier for illegal immigrants to enter through countries such as Italy or Greece (and, as is feared when Bulgaria and Romania eventually join, Eastern European countries) and then continue on to countries like France and Germany [1] . For example, Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi's decision to grant temporary residence permits to more than 20,000 Tunisian migrants fleeing the violent uprisings in April, was made in the knowledge that many of the migrants would end up travelling to France, the former colonial ruler where many of the migrants have relatives [2] . France accused Italy of abusing the Schengen Agreement.\n\n[1] Lipics, Laszlo, ‘Focal points on the external borders of Schengen’, AARMS, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2010 pp.229-239, http://www.zmne.hu/aarms/docs/Volume9/Issue2/pdf/03.pdf has a map of focal points of pressure of illegal immigration, all of which are in Eastern Europe\n\n[2] ‘France and Italy call for tighter border controls’, theparliament.com, 27th April 2011 http://www.theparliament.com/latest-news/article/newsarticle/france-and-...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "124dea6e837215d53014895daa97e3c2",
"text": "We are at the top of the animal hierarchy and should treat other animals accordingly in order to further our own species.\n\nWe have always been superior to animals. Just as a lion can kill antelope and a frog can kill insects, so too human beings have struggled their way to the top of the food chain. Why then can we not exercise the power we have earned? Animals exercise their power and we should do the same. It is our natural obligation to do so.\n\nThe reason we have always killed animals is because we need them. We need meat to be healthy and we need to test medicines on animals to protect our own race. We use animals to further our own race. This too is surely a natural obligation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bb1f87820ba813cf0d69307da244a3ff",
"text": "Who commits sexual offences?\n\nAs alluded to in Counterargument Four above, sexual offences are typically committed within relationships, or by someone the victim knows; around 80% according to some studies1. These proportions are also probably larger, in that rape by an acquaintance is less likely to be reported, as a victim is better able to normalise the incident as a misunderstood sexual interaction.\n\nThis indicates that a deterrent effect is less likely to work, because of the lower chance of the offence being reported, and the relative power within any such relationship. The offender is less likely to respond to that deterrent, as they perceive it as so unlikely to occur to them.\n\n1 National Center for Victims of Crime, \"Acquaintance Rape\", 2008,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1921e65f6c0cedd2dc116b55919d7da6",
"text": "This is mostly speculation. The proposition takes a more optimistic view of US-EU relations after the creation of a European Defence Force. America will more than welcome a strong friend in the region, anything to calm the instability in the near regions of North Africa and the Middle East, not to mention the global markets.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
27961f31f78b24ce6e3b4ab83522a6d6
|
Other parental controls are more practical and reasonable to administer.
Monitoring would be extremely tedious and time-consuming. Many teens send over 100 texts a day, it would clearly be very time consuming to read them all along with all other digital communication.[1] By contrast content filtering, contact management, and privacy protection parental controls, which can be used to block all incoming and outgoing information, require only minimal supervision. Parents who meanwhile deem their children immature when it comes to social networking and gaming can instead impose user restrictions on the relevant websites and devices. [2] Administering these alternative parental controls leave for more quality time with children. In this case, only when children acquire sufficient digital maturity and responsibility can these controls be lifted. As they have learnt to be mature in the digital environment the children would most likely continue to surf safely even when the parental controls are lifted.
[1] Goldberg, Stephanie, “Many teens send 100-plus texts a day, survey says”, CNN, 21 April 2010
[2] Burt, David. “Parental Controls Product Guide.” 2010 Edition. n.d. PDF File. Web. May 2013.
|
[
{
"docid": "378541bb09666564c50ed738c79cca80",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents While it is practical to use these parental controls, it is not always realistic to set such limited parameters to the digital freedom of children. Children need to understand that they have the capacity to breach their parents’ trust. [1] This not only allows a child to understand how to interact sensibly with the internet, but to experience taking an initiative to actually obey parents in surfing only safe sites. Selectively restricting a child’s digital freedom does not help in this case. Thus, monitoring is the only way for children to experience digital freedom in such a way that they too are both closely guided and free to do as they wish. Moreover, this is also self-contradictory because opposition claimed that children are capable of circumvention which children would be much more likely to do when blocked from accessing websites than simply monitored.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "505289ab0a1fb5846060341c0d64c5f7",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents The individual right to privacy must certainly encompass the digital realm as proposition says. It is also undeniable that individual privacy enhances individuality and independence. However, this privacy can and should be regulated lest parents leave children ‘abandoned’ to their rights. [1] “One cannot compare reading a child’s journal to accessing his or her conversations online or through text messages,” says Betsy Landers, the president of the National Parent-Teacher Association of the US and explains, “It’s simply modern involvement.” [2] Thus, Hillary Clinton argues, “children should be granted rights, but in a stage-by-stage manner that accords with and pays attention to their physical and mental development and capacities.” [1] Applying this principle, children should be given digital privacy to an equitable extent and regulated whereby both conditions depend upon the maturity of the child.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] Landers, Betty. “It’s Modern Parental Involvement.” New York Times. 28 June 2012: 1. New York Times. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b63ac9fe5ffddfb4cd26a0d557e7edfa",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents It is true that trust is a cornerstone of relationships. Admittedly, the act of monitoring may initially stimulate feelings of distrust which are particularly destructive in relationships. But nonetheless, trust is earned, not granted. The only proactive way to gauge how much trust and responsibility to give a child in the digital world is monitoring. By monitoring a child, parents come to assess the initial capability of the child in digital responsibility and ultimately the level of trust and the level of responsibility he or she deserves and to be assigned subsequently. Ideally, the initial level of monitoring and follow-through should be maximum in order to make clear to the child that he is being guided. Only when a child proves himself and grows in digital maturity can monitoring and follow-through be gradually minimized and finally lifted. [1]\n\n[1] Bodenhamer, Gregory. Parents in Control. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995 Inc. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1bab4c60134a73f6ecef787bfcc4b144",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Opposition claims that monitoring is ‘laziness’. Admittedly, monitoring makes digital parenting more efficient and comprehensive. But, such technology makes parenting practical, not ‘lazy’. As it is, many people blame technology for their own shortcomings. [1] Thus, parents need to know that monitoring will not do all the work for them. It is not lazy to monitor your children, it is clearly essential that children are monitored when involved in activities such as sports. The internet is a dangerous environment just as the sports field is and should have similar adult supervision.\n\n[1] Bradley, Tony. “Blaming Technology for Human Error: Trying To Fix Social Problems With Technical Tools.” About. About. 30 Mar 2005.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "52abd307c7909702b022017e99e5b20f",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Certainly parents should help their children to make most of their time with the computer and their phone. However, monitoring children in order to do so is lazy, or more precisely a form of ‘remote-control parenting’. Parents abuse of their children’s inherent right to privacy and feel that they have satisfactorily fulfilled their parental role when instead they are just lazy and unwilling to talk to their child personally about being a responsible netizen. [1] How are children to develop a healthy relationship to sharing information and privacy protection if they are constantly being surveilled by their own parents? More effective parents would instead choose to personally and positively teach their children about time management.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "728dbdcfa9a17de170c56bb9157ed3e5",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents While it is certainly beneficial for parents to immerse themselves in the digital world, it may not be good for them to be partially and informally educated by simple monitoring. Especially for parents who are not already familiar with the internet, monitoring may simply condition them to a culture of cyberstalking and being excessively in control of the digital behavior of their children. As it is, a number of children have abandoned Facebook because they feel that their parents are cyberstalking them. [1] Besides, there are other ways of educating oneself regarding ICT which include comprehensive online and video tutorials and library books that may cater to an unfamiliar parent’s questions about the digital world.\n\n[1] “Kids Are Abandoning Facebook To Flee Their Cyber-Stalking Parents.” 2 Oceans Vibe News. 2 Oceans Vibe Media. 11 Mar 2013. Web. May 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6df45c46107d8d065ff310cdfddbbb90",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Indeed it is important to consider that children do not receive or send sexually disturbing media. However, as proposition has already stated parents are much less likely to be digitally savvy than their children. Should they wish to learn children are likely to be able to penetrate any elaborate digital monitoring set by a parent. As it is, Defcon, one of the world’s largest hacker conventions, is already training 8- to 16-year olds to hack in a controlled environment. [1] That pornography is so widely available and so desirable is the product of a culture the glorifies sexuality and erotic human interaction. The effects on childrens well-being are by no means clear, indeed it can be argued that much of what parents are no able to communicate to their children in the way of sexual education is communicated to them through Internet pornography. While this brings with it all manner of problems, aside from the outrage of their parents there is little scientific data to suggest that mere exposure to pornography is causing wide-scale harm to children. Instead, it may be that many of the ‘objects’ of these debates on the rights of children are themselves quite a bit more mature than the debates would suggest..\n\n[1] Finkle, Jim. “Exclusive: Forget Spy Kids, try kiddie hacker conference.” Reuters. Thomas Reuters. 23 Jun 2011. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "83722c81a40910c39fc1bd944c4ccde2",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents While cyberbullying is indeed a danger to children, it is not an excuse to invade their personal life-worlds. The UNCRC clearly states that “(1) No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation,” and that, “(2) The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attack.” These ‘interferences’ or ‘attacks’ not only apply to third parties but to parents as well. [1] Moreover in less traditional ‘offline’ spaces children have far greater ability to choose which information they share with their parents and what they do not. As online spaces are not inherently more dangerous than those offline, it seems reasonable to suggest that similar limitations and restrictions on invasions of privacy that apply online should also apply offline. What a parent can do is to be there for their children and talk to them and support them. They should also spend time surfing the Internet together with them to discuss their issues and problems. But the child should always also have the opportunity to have his or her own protected and private space that is outside the every watchful surveilant eye of the parent..\n\n[1] United Nations Children’s Fund. Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Fully revised 3rd edition. Geneva. United Nations Publications. Google Search. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a07e36802e1558f022d0d24253755c64",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring is lazy parenting.\n\nThe proposition substitutes the good, old-fashioned way of teaching children how to be responsible, with invasions of their privacy, so violating an inherent rights [1]. Such parenting is called remote-control parenting. Parents who monitor their children’s digital behavior feel that they satisfactorily fulfil their parental role when in fact they are being lazy and uninvolved in the growth of their child. Children, especially the youngest, are “dependent upon their parents and require an intense and intimate relationship with their parents to satisfy their physical and emotional needs.” This is called a psychological attachment theory. Responsible parents would instead spend more time with their children teaching them about information management, when to and when not to disclose information, and interaction management, when to and when not to interact with others. [2] That parents have the ability to track their children is true, but doing so is not necessarily likely to make them better adults [3]. The key is for parents and children to talk regularly about the experiences of the child online. This is a process that cannot be substituted by parental monitoring.\n\n[1] United Nations Children’s Fund. Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Fully revised 3rd edition. Geneva. United Nations Publications. Google Search. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n\n[3] “You Can Track Your Kids. But Should You?” New York Times. 27 June 2012: 1. New York Times. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8b4340f948f82ffa1b972228316533f2",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring is a hindrance to forming relationships both outside and inside the family.\n\nIf children are being monitored, or if it seems to children that they are being monitored, they would immediately lose trust in their parents. As trust is reciprocal, children will also learn not to trust others. This will result in their difficulty in forging human connections, thereby straining their psychosocial growth. For them to learn how to trust therefore, children must know that they can break their parents’ trust (as said by the proposition before). This will allow them to understand, obey, and respect their parents on their own initiative, allowing them to respect others in the same manner as well. [1] This growth would only be possible if parents refuse this proposition and instead choose to educate their children how to be responsible beforehand.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c6050f20c978e302187a7bcafe35e1a9",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents This proposal is simply an invasion of privacy.\n\nChildren have as much right to privacy as any adult. Unfortunately there is yet to be a provision on the protection of privacy in either the United States Constitution or the Bill of Rights, though the Supreme Court states that the concept of privacy rooted within the framework of the Constitution. [1] This ambiguity causes confusion among parents regarding the concept of child privacy. Many maintain that privacy should be administered to a child as a privilege, not a right. [2] Fortunately, the UNCRC clearly states that “No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation,” [3] making child privacy an automatic right. Just as children should receive privacy in the real world, so too should they in the digital world. Individual rights, including right to privacy, shape intrafamilial relationships because they initiate individuality and independence. [1]\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013. P.764\n\n[2] Brenner, Susan. “The Privacy Privilege.” CYB3RCRIM3. Blogspot. 3 April 2009. May 2013.\n\n[3] United Nations Children’s Fund. Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Fully revised 3rd edition. Geneva. United Nations Publications. Google Search. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ca9cf033eb5ff4b9da00e7d171b71474",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring allows parents to correct children who are wasting their time.\n\nParents also need to monitor their children to ensure that they are properly using the time they have with the computer and the mobile phone. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation 40% of 8- to 18-year olds spend 54 minutes a day on social media sites.[1] and that “when alerted to a new social networking site activity, like a new tweet or Facebook message, users take 20 to 25 minutes on average to return to the original task” resulting to 20% lower grades. [2] Thus, parents must constantly monitor the digital activities of their children and see whether they have been maximizing the technology at their disposal in terms of researching for their homework, connecting with good friends and relatives, and many more.\n\n[1] Foehr, Ulla G., Rideout, Victoria J., and Roberts, Donald F., “Generation M2 Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds”, The Kaiser Family Foundation, January 2010, p.21\n\n[2] Gasser, Urs, and Palfrey, John, “Mastering Multitasking”, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, March 2009, p.17\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "681e634ca2ed17b22ecc06e4ace09ed2",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring decreases children’s involvement with pornography.\n\nA 2005 study by the London School of Economics found that “while 57 per cent of the over-nines had seen porn online, only 16 per cent of parents knew.” [1] That number is almost certain to have increased. In addition sexting has also become prevalent as research from the UK suggests “over a third (38%) [of] under 18’s have received an offensive or distressing sexual image via text or email.” [2] This is dangerous because this digital reality extends to the real world. [3] W.L. Marshall says that early exposure to pornography may incite children to act out sexually against other children and may shape their sexual attitudes negatively, manifesting as insensitivity towards women and undervaluing monogamy. Only with monitoring can parents have absolute certainy of what their children are doing on the Internet. It may not allow them to prevent children from viewing pornography completely, but regulating the digital use of their children in such a way does not have to limit their digital freedoms or human rights.\n\n[1] Carey, Tanith. “Is YOUR child watching porn? The devastating effects of graphic images of sex on young minds”. Daily Mail. Daily Mail and General Trust. 25 April 2011. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] “Truth of Sexting Amongst UK Teens.” BeatBullying. Beatbullying. 4 Aug 2009. Web. May 2013.\n\n[3] Hughes, Donna Rice. Kids Online: Protecting Your Children in Cyberspace. Michigan: Fleming H. Revell, 1998. ProtectKids. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d64e9c6ee55de3dbae091fc6d12f8dfa",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring prevents cyberbullying.\n\nSocial approval is especially craved by teens because they are beginning to shift focus from family to peers. [1] Unfortunately, some teens may resort to cyberbullying others in order to gain erroneous respect from others and eliminate competitors in order to establish superficial friendships. Over the last few years a number of cyberbullying cases have caused the tragic suicides of Tyler Clementi (2010), Megan Meier who was bullied online by a non-existent Josh Evans whom she had feelings for (2006), and Ryan Halligan (2003) among others. [2] Responsible parents need to be one step ahead because at these relevant stages, cognitive abilities are advancing, but morals are lagging behind, meaning children are morally unequipped in making informed decisions in cyberspace. [1] One important way to make this guidance more effective would be if parents chose to monitor their children’s digital behavior by acquiring their passwords and paying close attention to their social network activity such as Facebook and chat rooms, even if it means skimming through their private messages. Applying the categorical imperative, if monitoring becomes universal, then cyberbullying will no longer be a problem in the cyberspace as the perpetrators would be quickly caught and disciplined.\n\n[1] Bauman, Sheri. Cyberbullying: a Virtual Menace. University of Arizona, 2007. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] Littler, Chris. “8 Infamous Cases of Cyber-Bullying.” The Sixth Wall. Koldcast Entertainment Media. 7 Feb 2011. Web. May 2013 .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a372698e89a244e34f72254b93e7679d",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring raises digital awareness among parents.\n\nParents who are willing to monitor their children’s digital communications also benefit themselves. By setting up the necessary software and apps to secure their children’s online growth, parents familiarize themselves with basic digital skills and keep up with the latest in social media. As it stands there is a need to raise digital awareness among most parents. Sonia Livingston and Magdalena Bober in their extensive survey of the cyber experience of UK children and their parents report that “among parents only 1 in 3 know how to set up an email account, and only a fifth or fewer are able to set up a filter, remove a virus, download music or fix a problem.” [1] Parents becoming more digitally involved as a result of their children provides the added benefit of increasing the number of mature netizens so encouraging norms of good behavior online.\n\n[1] Livingstone, Sonia, and Magdalena Bober. “UK Children Go Online: Surveying the experiences of young people and their parents.” UK Children Go Online. Second Report (2004): 1-61.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
80a1ef855c1c8a62a9c65f8dc443e93d
|
A winter cup would harm media revenue
At the beginning of each year, every media company, especially the big ones, try and make a plan to see which of the sporting events, they should cover in order to maximize their ratings. As the broadcasting rights of these types of events cost hundreds of millions of dollars, this is a very sensitive issue.
One of the most important factors when deciding which events to and not to broadcast is the date in which it takes place. Every media company wants to create a system in which it has continuity of sporting events in their grid, by televising competitions throughout the year, and not just in some periods. By doing this, the channel becomes known for its sports coverage resulting in increased ratings.
This proposal of changing the World Cup date is at least problematic, as the televising-rights have already been sold. American TV network Fox, which paid £265m for rights to 2018 and 2022(2) World Cup for North America, “is understood to be concerned over the commercial implications of any move that would see any clash with the NFL season, let alone the Super Bowl”.(1) James Murdoch, the son of 21st Century Fox Inc. Chairman Rupert Murdoch, and other network executives told FIFA that “moving the competition by several months from its usual June start to the winter would clash with National Football League games”.(3)
Unfortunately for FIFA, this could create a precedent for future events, as there will always be doubt whether the date of the events will be changed or not after the televising rights are sold. This lack of trust will translate into a lower price which media companies are willing to pay for broadcasting FIFA’s competitions. Because we are talking about huge amounts, it will have a harmful impact upon FIFA’s competitions beyond 2022.
Let us not forget that FIFA is involved in campaigns against racism, discrimination and many others which help raise awareness and ameliorate a wide variety of problems. Therefore, a drop in funds will translate not only into worse football competitions, but also damage these campaigns which would likely be the first place for the cuts axe to fall.
(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821
(2) Robin Scott-Elliot “World Cup Q&A: How did the 2014 tournament in Qatar end up as a winter of discontent?”, Independent, 03 October 2013 http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/world-cup-qa-how-did-the-2014-tournament-in-qatar-end-up-as-a-winter-of-discontent-8857479.html
(3) Tariq Panja “Fox Said to Oppose FIFA Plan to Shift 2022 Soccer World Cup”, Bloomberg, Sep 17 2013 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-16/fox-said-to-oppose-fifa-plan-to-reschedule-2022-soccer-world-cup.html
|
[
{
"docid": "3fcaf5f6ebc9944620ddb6840a3efbb0",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter It is true that the change of dates might constitute a problem for media companies, but there are a few points due to which this change wouldn’t be unfair towards them.\n\nFirst of all, it was clear from the beginning that the dates could change and that the final decision belonged to the FIFA Organising Committee. As a result, this risk should’ve been taken into consideration when deciding the offer.\n\nSecondly, ratings are ratings. Media companies’ main concern is attracting more and more people to watch their program so that they can ask for higher prices for companies who want to advertise on their channel. As a result, it doesn’t matter that the World Cup takes place in winter or summer, as the broadcasters that are showing the world cup will have the same increase in ratings. They will still be drawing viewers from other channels so as far as they are concerned, the effects should be similar.\n\nFinally, even if these highly unlikely harmful effects do exist, the normal response would be to renegotiate the broadcasting-rights with all the media channels and reorganize the auction. In that way, all the broadcasters could take into consideration the price they would pay for a winter World Cup and so they won’t be exposed to these downsides caused by the date change.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "fccc6a8d6b1e3eac954c1980cc10f7a5",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter It is sad that all these bidders invested millions of dollars from taxpayer’s money in trying to create the most appealing bid for hosting the World Cup and they weren’t selected, but that constituted no reason to make unjustified demands.\n\nIn was clear from the very beginning that the date of the event wasn’t pinned down and there existed a possibility of changing it. A FIFA spokeswoman said \"As part of the bidding documents all bidders, including the FA Australia, accepted that the format and dates of the staging of the FIFA World Cup and FIFA Confederations Cup, though initially expected to be in June/July, remains subject to the final decision of the FIFA Organising Committee.\"(1) Because every single one of the bidding countries knew about this possibility, they were all exposed to the same risks and thus they were all subjected to the same criteria. As a result, the bidding race was an equal and fair competition which the Qataris rightfully won.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson “ FIFA tells Australia to forget about £25m World Cup bid compensation” The Guardian, 17 September 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/17/fifa-australia-world-cup-2022\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b8fb86ceed1a056bf5527c596ea985b4",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter The November and December 2022 slot favoured by Blatter and his secretary general, Jérôme Valcke, remains “the most likely option because it avoids a clash with the Winter Olympics and takes in two international breaks so would cause marginally less disruption.”(1) That time-frame is the most likely to be chosen as the alternate date for the World Cup, so there would be no clash with the Winter Olympics and the ICC.\n\nAs far as the national championships are concerned, there should be no worries there. If indeed the World Cup is played in November-December, then the national federations would just have to enter the winter break a bit earlier than it was scheduled. This would of course mean that the championships would last a bit longer in summer, but this shouldn’t be considered a problem. The summers in most of the countries around the globe are less harsh than Qatar’s, so the players wouldn’t have any problems with this. If we were to talk about countries from the Middle East and regions alike, they could play games more often during the year, start the whole championship earlier or a combination of the two. Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, the chairman of the European Club Association, which represents the top teams, clearly thinks it would not pose too much of a problem to his clubs having said “It is probably better to play it in winter.”(2)\n\nIn the end, there are a lot of possibilities to juggle around this sort of situations and have both a great World cup and successful national championship, while maintaining a spotless relationship with the ICC.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson “ World Cup 2022: Sepp Blatter paves way for winter tournament in Qatar”, The Guardian, 3 October 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/oct/03/world-cup-2022-sepp-blatter-winter-qatar\n\n(2) “Qatar World Cup 2022: Top clubs 'open' to winter tournament”, BBC, 10 September 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24035098\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c92175ae5b56ec99e3a1a0a88670f9b6",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter In its bid for hosting the World Cup, the Qatar chairman Sheikh Mohammed bin Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani Al-Thani said the stadiums would have \"zero carbon cooling equipment utilising solar technology to ensure the temperature is no higher than 27 degrees Celsius, ensuring optimum playing conditions and a comfortable environment for fans. This same environmentally friendly, carbon-neutral technology will ensure training sites, fan fest and fan zones are also cool and comfortable.\"(1)\n\nThis type of technology will ensure that the fans are protected from the intense summer heat at all times. It is true that they won’t spend most of the time in stadiums, but where they will spend most of the time are fan zones. In those areas bars, restaurants and shops will be installed, thus creating an environment where fans will be encouraged to spend large quantities of time.\n\nIt would be only reasonable to assume that in that $200 billion that Qatar will invest a significant part of it will be apportioned to assuring the well-being of the supporters. Even if the Qataris won’t be able to build artificial cooling-spots for everyone, the fans themselves will want to search for spots which will protect them from the sun, like hotels, pools or cafes.\n\nAs a result, due to the capacities of the organizers and the inner disposition of humans to shelter themselves from harmful environments, there are no reasons to worry about the health of the fans.\n\n(1)” Qatar 2022 World Cup Bid Reveals New Stadium Plans and Cooling Technologies”, World Football Insider, April 28, 2010 http://www.worldfootballinsider.com/Story.aspx?id=33206\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8216af68eda72376f08b05538ccd8064",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter It is clear that Qatar will get more recognition, fame and respect from the international community if it proves itself able to solve a range of problems which were considered to be too difficult for anyone to handle.\n\nIn the past, all the other countries that hosted the World Cup were engaged in all sorts of social campaigns designed to solve multiple problems, and the Qataris will be no exception. But if they want to set themselves apart from the others they must prove they are able to solve even more difficult problems, such as their ferocious heat. Once they manage to solve this by introducing state-of-the-yard technologies, they will differentiate themselves from previous hosts and receive more respect.\n\nAnother reason why Qataris will receive more respect is because they will open the road for organizing sporting events in places which were previously considered to be ineligible. They will be the ones who will spur the development of the technology necessary to ensure the optimal temperature for this event, a technology which could be used in the future. As a result, they won’t just be the first Arab country which organized the World Cup, but the nation which blazed a path to enable Arab countries to host major sporting events in the summer.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5a291b5d6350317a1e071a5c8cbc6820",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Qatar’s successful bid to host the World Cup marked a historic moment for the country and brought huge responsibilities to the organizing committee. Qatar will be the first Arab nation to host this event, this meaning that they are under a lot of pressure to prove to the world that they have the necessary skills and capabilities to do this job. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that they will not let anything derail this event, let alone something as easily to control as temperature. It promised revolutionary air-cooling technology to counter the summer heat in its bid; this has been reiterated in a statement that they are prepared to host the tournament at anytime.(1)\n\nMoreover, the small country’s officials guaranteed that the system, which will harness the power of the sun's rays to provide a cool environment for players and fans by converting solar energy into electricity, will be able to reduce temperatures from 45 to 25 degrees Celsius. As a result, there should be no worries regarding this aspect, as the Qataris won’t risk anything to stain the image of this event in which they will invest about $200 billion(2).\n\nHaving analyzed the preparations which have been planned for this event, Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore is adamant the 2022 World Cup should go ahead in Qatar in the summer.(3)\n\n(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n\n(2) Nick Schwartz ” Qatar will spend $200 billion on the 2022 World Cup” , USA Today, July 9, 2011 http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/07/qatar-will-spend-200-billion-on-the-2022-world-cup/\n\n(3)” Qatar World Cup: Richard Scudamore wants summer event” , BBC, 15 August 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23719835\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c4396920bf4a646f456e6e216ecd4e75",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Moving now would be unfair to the other bidders\n\nQatar beat bids from Australia, South Korea, the U.S. and Japan to win the right to stage the 2022 World Cup. Moving it to another date other than the one they all had to include in their bidding offers would be unfair towards the losers of that bidding process.\n\nWhen submitting their bids to FIFA for hosting the World Cup, every nation has to consider a lot of factors in order to decide the budget, the venues, etc. One of the biggest and most important factors is of course the date of the World Cup. Each country had to take into consideration the events that happened in that respective time frame in their area, how long it would take to build the facilities, the organizing staff’s availability and many other factors. As a result others bidding offers would have been different if the event were to take place in winter, instead of summer. The FFA chairman, Frank Lowy broke cover to call on the world game's ruling body to promise that \"just and fair compensation should be paid to those nations that invested many millions, and national prestige, in bidding for a summer event if the tournament is shifted to Qatar's winter\".(1) As the race was extremely close, any change in the parameters that determined the winner could have a significant impact on the outcome of the race. Football League chairman Greg Clarke, who was part of England's 2018 bid delegation three years ago when Qatar won the vote for 2022, said “FIFA should run the vote again rather than switch the tournament to the winter”.(2)\n\nUndoubtedly, it is fairness and equality that must be prioritized in deciding the winner of such a big event, which would bring a lot of social and economic benefits to the winner. As a result, there mustn’t be any room for error, but changing the date of the World Cup creates exactly such a problem and looks like favouritism.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson “FIFA tells Australia to forget about £25m World Cup bid compensation” The Guardian, 17 September 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/17/fifa-australia-world-cup-2022\n\n(2) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "daf96e553ec820203013b3fe43dbf6ec",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter It would Interfere with other competitions\n\nOne of the biggest downsides that this shift of dates would have is the creation of a clash if schedules all around the sports world, fuelling tensions and controversies. No matter in which month the Cup would be played, purposeless conflicts would emerge from this.\n\nAmong other potential conflicts if the organizers decide to move it in winter, this being the most endorsed proposal, then there could be a conflict with the Winter Olympics. The International Olympic Committee has warned FIFA against creating a clash with that year's Olympic Winter Games.(1) It would be only in FIFA’s advantage to maintain an open and respectful relation with the IOC. Such a move would create some tensions which could be detrimental for the world of sports.\n\nIf, however, the officials decide to move it in anytime during the year, this would create conflicts with the national championships. This could have a tremendous impact upon them, as the World Cup is a long competition. If you add the pre-preparations and the exhaustion that players feel at the end of it, you realize of its impact upon national championships.\n\nThis is very important as it will create purposeless conflicts between national federations and FIFA. This will happen due to the lose-lose situation that the federations will be put in. They either end the season abruptly for the world cup, resulting in an extended season (ironically) pushing some games into the summer heat or continue with it as it is. This would be also problematic, as top teams which have players who are also in national teams would be extremely disadvantaged by the sudden loss of their most valuable assets. As a result, conflicts will be created even between football clubs and national teams, as the clubs might refuse to let certain players go to play at the World Cup.\n\nNo matter the situation, the shift will bring a lot of disadvantages to FIFA and its partners. The best solution is to leave it in summer where it doesn’t interfere with any other sporting competitions.\n\n(1) “FIFA confirm winter World Cup talks”, ESPN, September 23, 2013 http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/240933.html#4k6ZFUrWKW1R2LXv.99\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4763c185797901332648d0757858ae97",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter A sporting event in the heat of a desert summer will not be a pleasant experience for the fans\n\nOne of the most important parts of the game is the fans. They are the ones who watch the sport, they are the ones to which football owes its popularity. Not only are they the ones who pay for the sport they are also a vital part of any competition. Without the choreographies made by the supporters and the impressive cheering, football becomes nothing more than a silent, mediocre sport. As a result, we must take into consideration how well these hundreds of thousands of supporters from all over the world who will come to Qatar feel during the World Cup.\n\nLet us not forget, that they will spend most of the time outside the stadia; on the streets, in the gruelling heat, or they will be forced indoors. Unfortunately, for many of them this experience will be overshadowed by the constant heat-caused discomfort when engaging in the kind of socialising and watching matches at outdoor screens that usually creates the atmosphere of the cup. It is even more worrying when you take into consideration the fact that supporters of all ages and health conditions come here, some of them will be exposing themselves to heat related risks. Heatstroke can potentially cause death. Taking this into consideration, UEFA’s 54 member associations have already backed a switch, while Europe's leading clubs have said they are \"open\" to the possibility of a winter World Cup in Qatar.(1)\n\nThe 2022 World Cup in Qatar must switch to winter, according to FIFA’s own medical chief. Michel D'Hooghe, the chairman of the FIFA’s medical committee, will advise that the risks posed to supporters by extreme heat are too great. \"I am sure the Qataris have the technical skill to organise a tournament where teams could play and train in a stable, acceptable temperature, but it's about the fans. They will need to travel from venue to venue and I think it's not a good idea for them to do that in temperatures of 47C or more.\"(2)\n\n(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n\n(2) “2022 World Cup in Qatar must be played in winter”, BBC, 16 September 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24114961\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87d49c09b0e8bcf94b5067e6f124a0c9",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Moving to the winter would benefit Qatar\n\nThere a lot of advantages for you as a country if you are selected to organize a World Cup, a European Cup or any kind of major sport event. They range from fame and international recognition to money and influence in the administrative bodies. Therefore, it is in Qatar’s interest that this event goes as smoothly as possible in order to prove its organizing capabilities and thus allowing them to increase its chance for hosting any kind of future sporting event. By hosting the event in summer, Qatar is exposing itself a lot of unnecessary risk – and probable bad publicity.\n\nThe most obvious is someone getting injured or even worse, dying during the World Cup. This would be extremely problematic especially if we are talking about a football player participating in the event. It would not only stain Qatar’s image because it happened during the World Cup organized there, but it would also destroy any credibility that it has as an organiser of events after so many assurances that the heat will not be a problem.\n\nMoreover if the cup were to be held in winter, some of the billions that would be used to build such complex systems of air conditioning could be used to serve other purposes. The Qataris could invest it in better publicity, more social campaigns such as discouraging racism in sports or many other areas. In that way, not only they would receive the recognition for being the organizers of the World Cup, but they would get extra credit from the international community for being involved in the social benefits of sports for example.\n\nIn conclusion, the Qataris do have the administrative support for a change of schedule, as even Sepp Blatter, FIFA’s President has recognised “After many discussions, deliberations and critical review of the entire matter, I came to the conclusion that playing the World Cup in the heat of Qatar's summer was simply not a responsible thing to do” and they should take advantage of this situation.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson” World Cup 2022: Sepp Blatter paves way for winter tournament in Qatar” The Guardian, 3 October 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/oct/03/world-cup-2022-sepp-blatter-winter-qatar\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0e71760e1ee0dc52f7f8aa758de5588a",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Heat will damage player's health\n\nIn order to fully understand the implications of this motion, one must see what participating in the FIFA World Cup means to a football player.\n\nFirst of all, it means an intense and sustained physical effort for a significant amount of time. Do not forget that the Cup itself lasts for a couple of weeks, and there are plenty of weeks of training before it in order to get the players in the best shape possible. This means they are exposed to a lot of physical stress and have to play or train no matter of the weather conditions or temperature.\n\nSecondly, with temperatures ranging from 35C to 40C during the summer it would be torture to force the players to train and play in those conditions. Former France, Fulham, Manchester United and Everton striker Louis Saha told BBC Sport he thought it was impossible for players to handle the Middle Eastern country's extremely high summer temperatures. (1) \"I was in Qatar recently and it was 48C,\" he said. \"Believe me, it is impossible to have a proper game down there.\" It is not only the players who get hurt, but also the game itself, as you cannot expect the same show from fatigued, light-headed and exhausted players.\n\nMost of all, FIFA’s top priority should always be the protection of player’s health, as, at the end of the day, despite money, show or spectators, no one should risk their life or be obliged to work in unsafe conditions. Studies show the immense risks of heat-related illnesses and their potentially deadly outcome.(2) Being aware of these issues, FIFA’s vice-president Jim Boyce, from Northern Ireland, is prepared to back a decision in principle to move the World Cup to the winter.(1)\n\n(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n\n(2) Erik Brady “Heat-related illness still deadly problem for athletes”, USA Today, 8/15/2011 http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/2011-08-15-heat-stroke-still-causing-death-in-athletes_n.htm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
a4910b88fde9d681bb40d9dcdd521363
|
It would Interfere with other competitions
One of the biggest downsides that this shift of dates would have is the creation of a clash if schedules all around the sports world, fuelling tensions and controversies. No matter in which month the Cup would be played, purposeless conflicts would emerge from this.
Among other potential conflicts if the organizers decide to move it in winter, this being the most endorsed proposal, then there could be a conflict with the Winter Olympics. The International Olympic Committee has warned FIFA against creating a clash with that year's Olympic Winter Games.(1) It would be only in FIFA’s advantage to maintain an open and respectful relation with the IOC. Such a move would create some tensions which could be detrimental for the world of sports.
If, however, the officials decide to move it in anytime during the year, this would create conflicts with the national championships. This could have a tremendous impact upon them, as the World Cup is a long competition. If you add the pre-preparations and the exhaustion that players feel at the end of it, you realize of its impact upon national championships.
This is very important as it will create purposeless conflicts between national federations and FIFA. This will happen due to the lose-lose situation that the federations will be put in. They either end the season abruptly for the world cup, resulting in an extended season (ironically) pushing some games into the summer heat or continue with it as it is. This would be also problematic, as top teams which have players who are also in national teams would be extremely disadvantaged by the sudden loss of their most valuable assets. As a result, conflicts will be created even between football clubs and national teams, as the clubs might refuse to let certain players go to play at the World Cup.
No matter the situation, the shift will bring a lot of disadvantages to FIFA and its partners. The best solution is to leave it in summer where it doesn’t interfere with any other sporting competitions.
(1) “FIFA confirm winter World Cup talks”, ESPN, September 23, 2013 http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/240933.html#4k6ZFUrWKW1R2LXv.99
|
[
{
"docid": "b8fb86ceed1a056bf5527c596ea985b4",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter The November and December 2022 slot favoured by Blatter and his secretary general, Jérôme Valcke, remains “the most likely option because it avoids a clash with the Winter Olympics and takes in two international breaks so would cause marginally less disruption.”(1) That time-frame is the most likely to be chosen as the alternate date for the World Cup, so there would be no clash with the Winter Olympics and the ICC.\n\nAs far as the national championships are concerned, there should be no worries there. If indeed the World Cup is played in November-December, then the national federations would just have to enter the winter break a bit earlier than it was scheduled. This would of course mean that the championships would last a bit longer in summer, but this shouldn’t be considered a problem. The summers in most of the countries around the globe are less harsh than Qatar’s, so the players wouldn’t have any problems with this. If we were to talk about countries from the Middle East and regions alike, they could play games more often during the year, start the whole championship earlier or a combination of the two. Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, the chairman of the European Club Association, which represents the top teams, clearly thinks it would not pose too much of a problem to his clubs having said “It is probably better to play it in winter.”(2)\n\nIn the end, there are a lot of possibilities to juggle around this sort of situations and have both a great World cup and successful national championship, while maintaining a spotless relationship with the ICC.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson “ World Cup 2022: Sepp Blatter paves way for winter tournament in Qatar”, The Guardian, 3 October 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/oct/03/world-cup-2022-sepp-blatter-winter-qatar\n\n(2) “Qatar World Cup 2022: Top clubs 'open' to winter tournament”, BBC, 10 September 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24035098\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "fccc6a8d6b1e3eac954c1980cc10f7a5",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter It is sad that all these bidders invested millions of dollars from taxpayer’s money in trying to create the most appealing bid for hosting the World Cup and they weren’t selected, but that constituted no reason to make unjustified demands.\n\nIn was clear from the very beginning that the date of the event wasn’t pinned down and there existed a possibility of changing it. A FIFA spokeswoman said \"As part of the bidding documents all bidders, including the FA Australia, accepted that the format and dates of the staging of the FIFA World Cup and FIFA Confederations Cup, though initially expected to be in June/July, remains subject to the final decision of the FIFA Organising Committee.\"(1) Because every single one of the bidding countries knew about this possibility, they were all exposed to the same risks and thus they were all subjected to the same criteria. As a result, the bidding race was an equal and fair competition which the Qataris rightfully won.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson “ FIFA tells Australia to forget about £25m World Cup bid compensation” The Guardian, 17 September 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/17/fifa-australia-world-cup-2022\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3fcaf5f6ebc9944620ddb6840a3efbb0",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter It is true that the change of dates might constitute a problem for media companies, but there are a few points due to which this change wouldn’t be unfair towards them.\n\nFirst of all, it was clear from the beginning that the dates could change and that the final decision belonged to the FIFA Organising Committee. As a result, this risk should’ve been taken into consideration when deciding the offer.\n\nSecondly, ratings are ratings. Media companies’ main concern is attracting more and more people to watch their program so that they can ask for higher prices for companies who want to advertise on their channel. As a result, it doesn’t matter that the World Cup takes place in winter or summer, as the broadcasters that are showing the world cup will have the same increase in ratings. They will still be drawing viewers from other channels so as far as they are concerned, the effects should be similar.\n\nFinally, even if these highly unlikely harmful effects do exist, the normal response would be to renegotiate the broadcasting-rights with all the media channels and reorganize the auction. In that way, all the broadcasters could take into consideration the price they would pay for a winter World Cup and so they won’t be exposed to these downsides caused by the date change.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c92175ae5b56ec99e3a1a0a88670f9b6",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter In its bid for hosting the World Cup, the Qatar chairman Sheikh Mohammed bin Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani Al-Thani said the stadiums would have \"zero carbon cooling equipment utilising solar technology to ensure the temperature is no higher than 27 degrees Celsius, ensuring optimum playing conditions and a comfortable environment for fans. This same environmentally friendly, carbon-neutral technology will ensure training sites, fan fest and fan zones are also cool and comfortable.\"(1)\n\nThis type of technology will ensure that the fans are protected from the intense summer heat at all times. It is true that they won’t spend most of the time in stadiums, but where they will spend most of the time are fan zones. In those areas bars, restaurants and shops will be installed, thus creating an environment where fans will be encouraged to spend large quantities of time.\n\nIt would be only reasonable to assume that in that $200 billion that Qatar will invest a significant part of it will be apportioned to assuring the well-being of the supporters. Even if the Qataris won’t be able to build artificial cooling-spots for everyone, the fans themselves will want to search for spots which will protect them from the sun, like hotels, pools or cafes.\n\nAs a result, due to the capacities of the organizers and the inner disposition of humans to shelter themselves from harmful environments, there are no reasons to worry about the health of the fans.\n\n(1)” Qatar 2022 World Cup Bid Reveals New Stadium Plans and Cooling Technologies”, World Football Insider, April 28, 2010 http://www.worldfootballinsider.com/Story.aspx?id=33206\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8216af68eda72376f08b05538ccd8064",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter It is clear that Qatar will get more recognition, fame and respect from the international community if it proves itself able to solve a range of problems which were considered to be too difficult for anyone to handle.\n\nIn the past, all the other countries that hosted the World Cup were engaged in all sorts of social campaigns designed to solve multiple problems, and the Qataris will be no exception. But if they want to set themselves apart from the others they must prove they are able to solve even more difficult problems, such as their ferocious heat. Once they manage to solve this by introducing state-of-the-yard technologies, they will differentiate themselves from previous hosts and receive more respect.\n\nAnother reason why Qataris will receive more respect is because they will open the road for organizing sporting events in places which were previously considered to be ineligible. They will be the ones who will spur the development of the technology necessary to ensure the optimal temperature for this event, a technology which could be used in the future. As a result, they won’t just be the first Arab country which organized the World Cup, but the nation which blazed a path to enable Arab countries to host major sporting events in the summer.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5a291b5d6350317a1e071a5c8cbc6820",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Qatar’s successful bid to host the World Cup marked a historic moment for the country and brought huge responsibilities to the organizing committee. Qatar will be the first Arab nation to host this event, this meaning that they are under a lot of pressure to prove to the world that they have the necessary skills and capabilities to do this job. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that they will not let anything derail this event, let alone something as easily to control as temperature. It promised revolutionary air-cooling technology to counter the summer heat in its bid; this has been reiterated in a statement that they are prepared to host the tournament at anytime.(1)\n\nMoreover, the small country’s officials guaranteed that the system, which will harness the power of the sun's rays to provide a cool environment for players and fans by converting solar energy into electricity, will be able to reduce temperatures from 45 to 25 degrees Celsius. As a result, there should be no worries regarding this aspect, as the Qataris won’t risk anything to stain the image of this event in which they will invest about $200 billion(2).\n\nHaving analyzed the preparations which have been planned for this event, Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore is adamant the 2022 World Cup should go ahead in Qatar in the summer.(3)\n\n(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n\n(2) Nick Schwartz ” Qatar will spend $200 billion on the 2022 World Cup” , USA Today, July 9, 2011 http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/07/qatar-will-spend-200-billion-on-the-2022-world-cup/\n\n(3)” Qatar World Cup: Richard Scudamore wants summer event” , BBC, 15 August 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23719835\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "64011310ad2b6a01d912b76f7a114484",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter A winter cup would harm media revenue\n\nAt the beginning of each year, every media company, especially the big ones, try and make a plan to see which of the sporting events, they should cover in order to maximize their ratings. As the broadcasting rights of these types of events cost hundreds of millions of dollars, this is a very sensitive issue.\n\nOne of the most important factors when deciding which events to and not to broadcast is the date in which it takes place. Every media company wants to create a system in which it has continuity of sporting events in their grid, by televising competitions throughout the year, and not just in some periods. By doing this, the channel becomes known for its sports coverage resulting in increased ratings.\n\nThis proposal of changing the World Cup date is at least problematic, as the televising-rights have already been sold. American TV network Fox, which paid £265m for rights to 2018 and 2022(2) World Cup for North America, “is understood to be concerned over the commercial implications of any move that would see any clash with the NFL season, let alone the Super Bowl”.(1) James Murdoch, the son of 21st Century Fox Inc. Chairman Rupert Murdoch, and other network executives told FIFA that “moving the competition by several months from its usual June start to the winter would clash with National Football League games”.(3)\n\nUnfortunately for FIFA, this could create a precedent for future events, as there will always be doubt whether the date of the events will be changed or not after the televising rights are sold. This lack of trust will translate into a lower price which media companies are willing to pay for broadcasting FIFA’s competitions. Because we are talking about huge amounts, it will have a harmful impact upon FIFA’s competitions beyond 2022.\n\nLet us not forget that FIFA is involved in campaigns against racism, discrimination and many others which help raise awareness and ameliorate a wide variety of problems. Therefore, a drop in funds will translate not only into worse football competitions, but also damage these campaigns which would likely be the first place for the cuts axe to fall.\n\n(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n\n(2) Robin Scott-Elliot “World Cup Q&A: How did the 2014 tournament in Qatar end up as a winter of discontent?”, Independent, 03 October 2013 http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/world-cup-qa-how-did-the-2014-tournament-in-qatar-end-up-as-a-winter-of-discontent-8857479.html\n\n(3) Tariq Panja “Fox Said to Oppose FIFA Plan to Shift 2022 Soccer World Cup”, Bloomberg, Sep 17 2013 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-16/fox-said-to-oppose-fifa-plan-to-reschedule-2022-soccer-world-cup.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c4396920bf4a646f456e6e216ecd4e75",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Moving now would be unfair to the other bidders\n\nQatar beat bids from Australia, South Korea, the U.S. and Japan to win the right to stage the 2022 World Cup. Moving it to another date other than the one they all had to include in their bidding offers would be unfair towards the losers of that bidding process.\n\nWhen submitting their bids to FIFA for hosting the World Cup, every nation has to consider a lot of factors in order to decide the budget, the venues, etc. One of the biggest and most important factors is of course the date of the World Cup. Each country had to take into consideration the events that happened in that respective time frame in their area, how long it would take to build the facilities, the organizing staff’s availability and many other factors. As a result others bidding offers would have been different if the event were to take place in winter, instead of summer. The FFA chairman, Frank Lowy broke cover to call on the world game's ruling body to promise that \"just and fair compensation should be paid to those nations that invested many millions, and national prestige, in bidding for a summer event if the tournament is shifted to Qatar's winter\".(1) As the race was extremely close, any change in the parameters that determined the winner could have a significant impact on the outcome of the race. Football League chairman Greg Clarke, who was part of England's 2018 bid delegation three years ago when Qatar won the vote for 2022, said “FIFA should run the vote again rather than switch the tournament to the winter”.(2)\n\nUndoubtedly, it is fairness and equality that must be prioritized in deciding the winner of such a big event, which would bring a lot of social and economic benefits to the winner. As a result, there mustn’t be any room for error, but changing the date of the World Cup creates exactly such a problem and looks like favouritism.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson “FIFA tells Australia to forget about £25m World Cup bid compensation” The Guardian, 17 September 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/17/fifa-australia-world-cup-2022\n\n(2) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4763c185797901332648d0757858ae97",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter A sporting event in the heat of a desert summer will not be a pleasant experience for the fans\n\nOne of the most important parts of the game is the fans. They are the ones who watch the sport, they are the ones to which football owes its popularity. Not only are they the ones who pay for the sport they are also a vital part of any competition. Without the choreographies made by the supporters and the impressive cheering, football becomes nothing more than a silent, mediocre sport. As a result, we must take into consideration how well these hundreds of thousands of supporters from all over the world who will come to Qatar feel during the World Cup.\n\nLet us not forget, that they will spend most of the time outside the stadia; on the streets, in the gruelling heat, or they will be forced indoors. Unfortunately, for many of them this experience will be overshadowed by the constant heat-caused discomfort when engaging in the kind of socialising and watching matches at outdoor screens that usually creates the atmosphere of the cup. It is even more worrying when you take into consideration the fact that supporters of all ages and health conditions come here, some of them will be exposing themselves to heat related risks. Heatstroke can potentially cause death. Taking this into consideration, UEFA’s 54 member associations have already backed a switch, while Europe's leading clubs have said they are \"open\" to the possibility of a winter World Cup in Qatar.(1)\n\nThe 2022 World Cup in Qatar must switch to winter, according to FIFA’s own medical chief. Michel D'Hooghe, the chairman of the FIFA’s medical committee, will advise that the risks posed to supporters by extreme heat are too great. \"I am sure the Qataris have the technical skill to organise a tournament where teams could play and train in a stable, acceptable temperature, but it's about the fans. They will need to travel from venue to venue and I think it's not a good idea for them to do that in temperatures of 47C or more.\"(2)\n\n(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n\n(2) “2022 World Cup in Qatar must be played in winter”, BBC, 16 September 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24114961\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87d49c09b0e8bcf94b5067e6f124a0c9",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Moving to the winter would benefit Qatar\n\nThere a lot of advantages for you as a country if you are selected to organize a World Cup, a European Cup or any kind of major sport event. They range from fame and international recognition to money and influence in the administrative bodies. Therefore, it is in Qatar’s interest that this event goes as smoothly as possible in order to prove its organizing capabilities and thus allowing them to increase its chance for hosting any kind of future sporting event. By hosting the event in summer, Qatar is exposing itself a lot of unnecessary risk – and probable bad publicity.\n\nThe most obvious is someone getting injured or even worse, dying during the World Cup. This would be extremely problematic especially if we are talking about a football player participating in the event. It would not only stain Qatar’s image because it happened during the World Cup organized there, but it would also destroy any credibility that it has as an organiser of events after so many assurances that the heat will not be a problem.\n\nMoreover if the cup were to be held in winter, some of the billions that would be used to build such complex systems of air conditioning could be used to serve other purposes. The Qataris could invest it in better publicity, more social campaigns such as discouraging racism in sports or many other areas. In that way, not only they would receive the recognition for being the organizers of the World Cup, but they would get extra credit from the international community for being involved in the social benefits of sports for example.\n\nIn conclusion, the Qataris do have the administrative support for a change of schedule, as even Sepp Blatter, FIFA’s President has recognised “After many discussions, deliberations and critical review of the entire matter, I came to the conclusion that playing the World Cup in the heat of Qatar's summer was simply not a responsible thing to do” and they should take advantage of this situation.\n\n(1) Owen Gibson” World Cup 2022: Sepp Blatter paves way for winter tournament in Qatar” The Guardian, 3 October 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/oct/03/world-cup-2022-sepp-blatter-winter-qatar\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0e71760e1ee0dc52f7f8aa758de5588a",
"text": "team sports house would move 2022 football world cup winter Heat will damage player's health\n\nIn order to fully understand the implications of this motion, one must see what participating in the FIFA World Cup means to a football player.\n\nFirst of all, it means an intense and sustained physical effort for a significant amount of time. Do not forget that the Cup itself lasts for a couple of weeks, and there are plenty of weeks of training before it in order to get the players in the best shape possible. This means they are exposed to a lot of physical stress and have to play or train no matter of the weather conditions or temperature.\n\nSecondly, with temperatures ranging from 35C to 40C during the summer it would be torture to force the players to train and play in those conditions. Former France, Fulham, Manchester United and Everton striker Louis Saha told BBC Sport he thought it was impossible for players to handle the Middle Eastern country's extremely high summer temperatures. (1) \"I was in Qatar recently and it was 48C,\" he said. \"Believe me, it is impossible to have a proper game down there.\" It is not only the players who get hurt, but also the game itself, as you cannot expect the same show from fatigued, light-headed and exhausted players.\n\nMost of all, FIFA’s top priority should always be the protection of player’s health, as, at the end of the day, despite money, show or spectators, no one should risk their life or be obliged to work in unsafe conditions. Studies show the immense risks of heat-related illnesses and their potentially deadly outcome.(2) Being aware of these issues, FIFA’s vice-president Jim Boyce, from Northern Ireland, is prepared to back a decision in principle to move the World Cup to the winter.(1)\n\n(1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821\n\n(2) Erik Brady “Heat-related illness still deadly problem for athletes”, USA Today, 8/15/2011 http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/2011-08-15-heat-stroke-still-causing-death-in-athletes_n.htm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
e5bd13c5b8be82de37d35f26cc22fe04
|
There is no distinction between "natural" and synthetic methods of performance enhancement
The natural/unnatural distinction is untenable. Already athletes use all sorts of dietary supplements, exercises, equipment, clothing, training regimes, medical treatments, etc. to enhance their performance. There is nothing ‘natural’ about taking vitamin pills, wearing whole-body Lycra suits, having surgery on ligaments, spending every day in a gym pumping weights or running in shoes with spikes on the bottom. Diet, medicine, technology, and even just coaching already give an artificial advantage to those athletes who can afford the best of all these aids. Since there is no clear way to distinguish from legitimate and illegitimate artificial aids to performance, they should all be allowed. So taking these drugs is no more unnatural than what happens today.
A practical example of an unnatural aid is the Speedo worn in 2008 at the Beijing Olympics. FINA, the world governing body of swimming was concerned about the extraordinary statistics in Beijing where swimmers wearing the Speedo LZR Racer swimsuit won 90 per cent of all available medals and broke 23 world records. Since Speedo launched the suit in 2008, 108 world records have fallen (until February 2009) (1).
Simon Hart, Swimwear giant Speedo hit back at 'unfair advantage' claims, 02/19/2009,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/swimming/4699498/Swimwear-giant-Speedo-hit-back-at-unfair-advantage-claims.html ,accessed 15/05/2011
|
[
{
"docid": "40e12446898329701c46096e333aa72c",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance It is true that it is difficult to decide where to draw the line between legitimate and illegitimate performance enhancement. However we should continue to draw a line nonetheless. This line should be drawn at protecting athletes from harmful drugs and preserving the spirit of fair play and unaided competition between human beings in their peak of natural fitness.\n\nThe special diet and sport training equipment, which may seem very hard and exeptional, have been designed based on serious scientific research proved and tested to fit with long-term training of athletes. Hard practice to achieve the best performance with help of these professional methods is completely a different from taking steroids and growth hormones for immediate result.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "dfc8111b6daf364101a10a07465aa059",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance There will always be a black market for cheaper or for new untested drugs that will give an athlete an edge before others have a chance to try it. Legalization is therefore unlikely to result in large health benefits as the competitiveness of sport will always result in athletes being willing to take a risk.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3afd41bdadaa0c45d5c6b1ac4b6935e3",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Rich athletes from wealthier countries will always have access to the latest, highest quality performance enhancers. On the other side, athletes from poorer countries which do not have the same medical and scientific advances will not be able to keep up. They will always be at a disadvantage regardless of whether performance enhancing drugs are legal or not.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ee266416539baf228806b1b2ce9089cf",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Simple analogy: If a person were to kill himself for the sake of entertaining the crowd, this act would still be considered illegal by the government and efforts to hinder and discourage it would be created.\n\nAn appropriate example is the one of dangers of alcohol and tobacco, which were not known until after they had become normalized in society. Once the dangers were known, the public were so used to it, that they wouldn’t condone a ban by the State. If alcohol were introduced tomorrow it would be banned, as shown by the attitude towards narcotics and steroid use has shown. Governments have tried to reduce sales by having high levels of tax on tobacco and alcohol anyway. Moreover many states are restricting choice in tobacco and alcohol by introducing limited bans, such as on smoking in public places. The proposition cannot use the fact that tobacco and alcohol are legal as a defense of the use of drugs. This should be seen as an equally detrimental act and thus illegal.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "59679773137a924ed93c6979eeb63227",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Sport is also about the spectacle for spectators.\n\nSport has become a branch of the entertainment business and the public demands “higher, faster, stronger” from athletes. If drug-use allows world records to be continually broken, and makes American Football players bigger and more exciting to watch, why deny the public what they want, especially if the athletes want to give it to them?\n\nThe criterion that athletes should only be applying their ‘natural abilities’ runs into trouble. The highly advanced training technologies, health programs, sports drinks, use of such things as caffeine pills, and other energy boosters seem to defeat the notion that athletes are currently applying only their 'natural abilities'. Performance enhancing drugs would not go too far beyond the current circumstances for athletes.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f3923864136a3665825977052b61c125",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance The temptation of youth to try illegal substances is not just a problem in sports. In all environments you will have age restrictions.\n\nTo say that we should uphold the ban for the sake of children is as if we would advocate a ban of alcohol for everyone, because some teenagers like to socialize with adults who are legally able to drink alcohol. There is always going to be an age restriction and it is the duty of institutions, trainers and athletes to uphold it, so that later in life as adults, athletes can make an informed decision.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "06e3dfe91fae896ee9647a176671b3a1",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Sport is dangerous. Today’s athletes decide to endanger their lives by participating in sports all the time. They decide to participate in sports with the informed decision that they might get hurt as it is part of the sport. Performance enhancing drugs are no different.\n\nIn the USA every year there are nearly 300,000 sports-related traumatic brain injuries (TBIs). Athletes involved in sports such as football, hockey and boxing are at significant risk of TBI due to the high level of contact inherent in these sports. Head injuries are also extremely common in sports such as cycling, baseball, basketball and skateboarding. Many head injuries acquired, playing these sports, lead to permanent brain damage or worse. Yet we do not impose a law to ban athletes from participating in those sports. We trust their assessment of risk (1).\n\nAll about Traumatic Brain Injuries: http://www.allabouttbi.com/sports-related-traumatic-brain-injury/ , accessed 05/15/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ef62705d2fc3162c0aebc1c2d6b4ecbe",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance There is no such thing as a forced decision. Everyone has complete control over their own body and their own decisions. Everyone has an absolute right to possession of one’s own body. If you own your body then you can choose what to do with it, and any exchange, such as money to an employer in exchange for use of your body (labour) is justified, because it was a voluntary exchange and you still possess yourself. If you choose to take drugs, you have not been forced into it no matter the peer pressure you may be under or that other having taken the drugs may make you uncompetitive.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d3ff2c3c4a2d4c7c8dfd9e906c5c4e04",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Controlling, rather than ignoring, performance enhancing substances will improve competitive standards in sport\n\nThe use of performance enhancing drugs is based on advances in science. When new drugs and therapies are found, athletes turn to them and as a result are much of the time ahead of the anti-doping organizations, which need to develop methods of athlete testing whenever a new drug that is meant to be untraceable is created. In 2008 it was a big shock when Riccardo Ricco (a cyclist) was caught using the performance-enhancing drug Mircera, which had been considered undetectable for a number of years.\n\nThe fact is that a ban of performance enhancing drugs enables mainly athletes from wealthy countries and teams that can afford the newest technology to go undetected, whilst others are disadvantaged (1). So because it gives an unfair advantage to the wealthy one who can pay for the undetectable drugs, we should legalize it.\n\nMillard Baker, Riccardo Ricco Tests Positive\n\nfor Undetectable New Drug Mircera at 2008 Tour de France, 07/18/2008, http://steroidreport.com/2008/07/18/riccardo-ricco-and-mircera-pegylated-epo/ , accessed 05/20/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "71f5ae592905bd2e83ad7a6ca2f9a72e",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Athletes should be free to take risks when training and competing\n\nFreedom of choice: If athletes wish to take drugs in search of improved performances, let them do so. They harm nobody but themselves and should be treated as adults, capable of making rational decisions upon the basis of widely-available information.\n\nEven if there are adverse health effects in the long-term, this is also true of tobacco, alcohol and boxing, which remain legal. We allow world class athletes to train for 23 hours a week (on average), adjust their diets and endanger themselves by pushing the boundaries of their body. We let them do it, because it is what they chose which is best for them. According to the NFL Player Association the average life expectancy of an NFL player is 58 years of age (1). Thus already we allow athletes to endanger their lives, give them the choice of a lifestyle. Why not also extend this moral precedent to drugs?\n\nJudd Bissiotto, 15 Surprising facts about world athletes,\n\nhttp://strengthplanet.com/other/15-surprising-facts-about-world-class-athletes.htm , accessed 05/18/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "13e266a0ede6781e5097587547a8aa77",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Improving safety standards in sport\n\nIt does not take a lot for chemists to produce performance enhancing drugs, the Scientific American reports: “Rogue scientists start with testosterone or its commercially available analogues and then make minor structural modifications to yield similarly active derivatives.” The underground chemists make no effort to test their creations for effectiveness or safety, of course. Production of a simple new steroid compound would require \"lab equipment costing maybe $50,000 to $100,000,\". Depending on the number of chemical reactions needed for synthesis, \"some of them could be made in a week or two. Others might take six months to a year.\"(1) As a result of legalizing performance-enhancing drugs a backstreet industry can become regulated as a result there will be much more control and testing to ensure the health and safety of the athletes who take the drugs.\n\nSteven Ashley, Doping by Design, Scientific American 01/12/2004, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=doping-by-design , accessed 05/19/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "96dd01f755b6516dc55972002ed965f4",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Permitting the use of performace enhancers would have a coercive effect on athletes who would otherwise avoid drug use\n\nOnce some people choose to use drugs to enhance their performance, other athletes have their freedom of choice infringed upon: if they want to succeed they have to take drugs too. Athletes are very driven individuals, who would go to great lengths to achieve their goals. The chance of a gold medal in two years’ time may out-weigh the risks of serious health problems for the rest of their life. We should protect athletes from themselves and not allow anyone to take performance-enhancing drugs. An example of the pressure is cycling. The American Scientific magazine explains: “Game theory highlights why it is rational for professional cyclists to dope: the drugs are extremely effective as well as difficult or impossible to detect; the payoffs for success are high; and as more riders use them, a “clean” rider may become so noncompetitive that he or she risks being cut from the team.” (1)\n\nMichael Shermer, The Dopping Dillema, 03/31/2008, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-doping-dilemma accessed 05/15/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c041cac96781db3cd98ed1255428d486",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Protecting young and vulnerable athletes\n\nEven if performance-enhancing drugs were only legalized for adults, the definition of this varies from country to country, something which would be problematic for sports that are global. Teenage athletes train alongside adult ones and share the same coaches, so many would succumb to the temptation and pressures to use drugs, if these were widely available and effectively endorsed by legalization. Not only are such young athletes unable to make a fully rational, informed choice about drug-taking, the health impacts upon growing bodies would be even worse than for adult users. It would also send a positive message about drug culture in general, making the use of “recreational drugs” with all their accompanying evils more widespread.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "55f303c2205919fb24e40b3fdbc9b04c",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Drugs will undermine the central philosophy of sport\n\nThe show and the celebration of human physical achievement is what makes sport enjoyable to the public. The reason people enjoy sport is because it is a demonstration of what other fellow human beings can achieve and what humans can achieve collectively, as a species.\n\nA spectacle is designed to amaze. It doesn’t need to be human achievement to be amazing (no one would call monster truck driving a sport). So, when humans start taking drugs to improve performance, it is no longer a sport, it is a spectacle, because there is no human physical achievement, but instead a chemical achievement.\n\nIt also becomes a celebration not of human physical achievement, but of human intellectual achievement, of who can design the best drugs. Even with fancy running shoes, we are still celebrating human achievement, which will not happen once you take it to the extreme of allowing drug use.\n\nThis doesn’t benefit athletes in the long run. Athletes won’t be celebrated but scientists will!\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eb0fe07cd2d5a9e16a77b09ac6b69c1d",
"text": "e health crime policing science sport olympics house would permit use performance Protecting the health of athletes\n\nLaws should in general protect people from making uninformed decisions. Due to the potential severe consequences the ban has to be upheld. An analogy with the seatbelt can be used: the government forces people to use them, because of the possibility of severe injury in case we do not use it.\n\nThe use of performance-enhancing drugs is the opposite – use can lead to severe health problems.\n\nThus, if all people are treated as equals under law, then the law should equally protect athletes as the law does other would- be drug users.\n\nEquality before law also means athletes can’t be exempt from the moral standards we have for others. Firstly due to value of life and secondly because many times athletes themselves are not aware of the severe consequences of performance enhancing drugs.\n\nBBC Drugs and Sports (GCSE Bitesize): http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/pe/performance/1_performance_drugsinsport_rev1.shtml , accessed 05/15/2011\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
3876861a463c2c5b376d129b89a13534
|
Restrictions would prevent the poaching of the best youngsters from poor nations
This plan would be good for world football. At present poorer nations (e.g. in Africa or South America), or those where football isn’t as well developed (e.g. Australia, the USA), lose all their best players at an early age to the rich European leagues. This weakens their own leagues and can lead to the public losing interest in football. Poor quality games and loss of public support for domestic clubs also means little money comes into the game from ticket sales, television or sponsorship, so nothing goes into grounds, training or youth systems. It is also hard to put a good national side together when the best players hardly ever spend any time in their own country.
|
[
{
"docid": "600028642f9fa3dc35615fbac2d062bc",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football The youngsters from poor nations who excel in Europe do so because of their move, not irrespective of it. It is a fallacy to suggest that all players develop in a vacuum, that their ability is irrespective of their development opportunities. For the best youngers in poor and under-developed nations, being poached by the rich European clubs is a way out, a means to realising their obvious talent. Taking away that source risks wasting not only a precocious young talent but also denying him the opportunity to escape the cycle of poverty. Furthermore, it can be expected that the poached youngsters will give back to their host countries, in the form of national team appearances and domestic league endorsements, later in their careers.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "ab6a975f346d11ef10772945ed1a98a8",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football The top sides field many overseas players because they think they are better than most home-grown ones. The fact that the England football team has done badly has much more to do with poor management and coaching than the large number of foreigners in the Premier League. It also is an indictment on the school programs in place and youth football as a whole. It has little to do with a lack of opportunity at club-level, for clubs will always look locally for cheap, ready-made talent. They are forced to look overseas because foreign-born players are proving to be better bets. Furthermore, these foreigners thereafter assist the few local-born players who have made the grade. Therefore, if you removed some of the best foreigners and replaced them with less good local players, it will actually weaken both club football and the national team.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "98daf8a15e6108f7d83cc45a423e6ecd",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football Sporting organizations, of which FIFA is merely a more powerful example, cannot and will not be permitted to introduce a rule that denies otherwise-qualified persons from maximizing their income by moving overseas. Furthermore, and regarding the six-plus-five criteria specifically, the five foreigner-limit applies only to those which are not home-grown, encouraging the bigger clubs to look abroad for younger talent to bring into their academies. Once in the academy, they will gain home-grown status and therefore not count as one of the five foreigners. Therefore, FIFA’s proposal does not fix the problem but exacerbate the fears of exploitation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2622262f0d6728068b721b714aa4cdbe",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football Local loyalties went out of the game years ago – it isn’t just overseas players who change clubs often in search of higher wages. Everyone agrees that when teams were only full of local boys the standard of play was worse. And strong local loyalties aren’t always good – they used to spill over into hooliganism as the fans from rival clubs fought. More overseas players in football, many with different colour skins, have helped reduce nationalism and racism in society.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8d36cfbc0b7a26fcedc57c9f35a9f15b",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football Limiting the number of foreign players will weaken the quality of domestic football. Seeing many of the best footballers from around the world competing against each other every week raises the standard of the whole game. Fans want to see their team playing exciting football and winning games – they don’t care whether the players are local boys or not. Youngsters are inspired by foreign heroes and work hard in order to follow in their footsteps, no matter where they were born.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "69642a1008fb0fa44c5f24295146c48d",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football The six-plus-five plan is not banned under EU law. Although it would be illegal to stop clubs in Europe from employing as many overseas players as they wish, this is not what the plan proposes. It simply puts a limit of five on how many foreign players can start a game – so clubs can employ as many foreigners as they want, they just can’t play more than five of them at the same time. Given the tactical use of reserves and the squad rotation common in modern football, clubs are likely to keep signing overseas players. But under FIFA’s plan domestic players will still be given more of a chance than they are now. As the head of the Institute of European Affairs states: \"The key aim of the six-plus-five rule in the view of the experts is the creation and assurance of sporting competition. The six-plus-five rule does not impinge on the core area of the right to freedom of movement. The rule is merely a rule of the game declared in the general interest of sport in order to improve the sporting balance between clubs and associations\" [1]\n\n[1] Times Online. (2009, February 26). Fifa's six-plus-five rule is not illegal, claims report. Retrieved May 10, 2011, from Times Online: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/article58...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b56b9f78df971a6c85f45d9b0c333e48",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football There is already a problem with talented teenagers from Africa and other poorer countries being recruited by rich European clubs to train at their academies. This takes them far away from family and friends and ties them into long contracts they don’t understand – some have called it a form of slavery. And if they get injured or turn out to be not quite good enough, then they can be thrown out without proper support. At the same time, poorer footballing countries are deprived of many of their most promising players, without even getting the transfer money paid when adult players move to a new club overseas. The FIFA plan is a step towards preventing such exploitation, the fact it doesn’t solve the problem completely does not prevent it from being a good first step.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "947968179c163d945283dff9ca71f72d",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football Competition would actually improve if foreign players were less common. At the moment the richest clubs can buy up all the best global players and so dominate domestic competitions – often no more than two or three teams have a real chance of winning the big European leagues. This makes tournaments predictable and boring, while clubs become the playthings of billionaire owners. Even international club competitions like the European Champions League are now dominated by just a few teams – in 2008 three of the four semi-finalists and both finalists were English. Forcing clubs to develop home-grown talent would level the playing field, make money less vital, and give more teams a chance to compete for top honours. This would inadvertently drive players to get better, because there would be fewer short-term fixes available to a team’s poor form.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1a262bcd02a21497edfea7f3e1e62858",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football It will improve the quality of the national team\n\nReducing the number of foreign players would be good for the national team. Current rules mean that only a few domestic players get a chance to compete at the highest level, and the national side suffers as a result. So while, for example, English clubs with the ability and clout to sign foreign players have done very well in the Champions League recently, the English national team has performed badly. English youth are consistently overlooked for places in the best sides in favour of more talented, more experienced foreigners who offer short-term success. Limiting the number of foreigners would force clubs to give more local players a chance to develop, and subsequently improve the quality of the national side.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fba1a204240fb10729d52d015c917c52",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football The sport’s governing body, FIFA, wishes to implement a ‘six plus five’ that would be enforced by each member association\n\nThe six-plus-five rule, first tabled by FIFA in 2008, would require all side to have six home-grown players in all starting elevens. As the sport’s governing body, if the proposal was voted in by member states all state football associations would be forced to hand out penalties, whether financial or points, to teams that did not meet the criteria of the new rule. The rule purports to increase both the protection and development of local players in local environments, whilst also permitting the transfers of high-profile foreigners that have been attributed with the rise in prestige and profile of many of the European leagues and clubs.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "500c42f62fa5b6ad35c7bf0b1c6c71b0",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football It will encourage fans to support their local clubs\n\nA focus on domestic football and domestic footballers would encourage the public to get around their local sides. Therefore, this plan would be fruitful for club football and its relationship with the local community. Once the local team was a real source of local identity, with many home-grown players proud to wear the shirt of the club they grew up with. Now players have no local feeling and move often in search of higher wages or European experience. Loyalty is an undervalued trait in modern football. How can fans identify with a club full of overseas players who will be gone in a season or two, and who otherwise neglect to support local youth talent?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fad461e8347d47e1769f952314ffa551",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football It is good for the development of home-grown players and therefore, the quality of domestic leagues\n\nLimiting the number of overseas players will be good for home-grown sportsmen. At present only a tiny handful of the best native players will get a chance to play for top clubs due to their profit and success motives. This means that talented young players see no reason to work hard and develop their game, because it is so unlikely they will get a chance to play at the top level. And clubs don’t have a reason to seek out local youngsters and train them, as it is easier to buy a fully trained player from abroad. Limiting the number of foreign players would create incentives for both players and clubs to make the most of their talents. As a result, domestic crowds would rise as quality would improve proportionally with the development of local talent.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7f45d1fe6c2d694749c915910e575a63",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football Restrictions are unnecessary\n\nThis plan is unnecessary – Manchester United is one of the most successful club sides and often fields more locally-born players than its rivals. Most big clubs are working hard to build strong football academies to bring talented youngsters through. The logic is simple, home-grown youngsters can be developed much more cheaply and easily than foreigners. In any case, money will still remain vital to success – this plan would mean that the richest clubs will simply pay silly sums of money to buy up all the best local players. Therefore, competition within domestic leagues would not even up, it would simply lead to a re-shuffling of the best home-grown talent. Really the FIFA proposal is just an attack on English football clubs as they have been so successful recently. The issue wasn’t raised previously when Italian and Spanish club sides dominated European competitions.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "df54219a0270d8533f29318f829c4924",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football It is illegal under European Union law.\n\nFIFA’s plan is illegal under European Union rules: ‘The implementation by FIFA of this proposal in the European Union would violate EU law. The Commission is not considering any change to allow FIFA to push forward this idea. FIFA is aware of this fact.’ [1] . The rules say that you can’t discriminate against people from other EU countries on the grounds of their nationality - exactly what the six-plus-five plan would do. And the EU has agreements in place allowing people from non-EU European countries like Switzerland and Norway to work freely in EU states, plus a lot of countries in Africa and the Caribbean as well. This means most of the overseas players currently with European clubs would be able to take FIFA to court if it tried to put its plan into practice. And if six-plus-five won’t work in Europe, there is no point applying it elsewhere.\n\n[1] BBC Sport. (2008, May 30). FIFA backs Blatter on quota plan. Retrieved May 10, 2011, from BBC Sport: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/europe/7421348.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2d4a60a9ad50e8a268802052d9adca13",
"text": "team sports house would introduce restrictions overseas players football It doesn’t solve the problem of protecting countries outside of Europe from losing players\n\nIn practice this plan will do nothing for football in countries outside Europe. Already many overseas players have dual nationality (which is especially easy to obtain for South American players wanting to play in Spain or Portugal). Other players are from countries (e.g. South Africa, Caribbean states) with labour agreements with the EU and can work freely in European countries. Both groups would be able to claim that they didn’t count as overseas players under the FIFA plan, so little would change. One danger is that many good players will completely switch nationality in order to play overseas, and so not be qualified for their original country at all in future. And what FIFA plans to do about the many Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish footballers playing for English teams is very unclear. Would they be banned from playing in their own country?\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
c5e27ce500b8fca26a6713cf7a9baea3
|
Force does more harm than good.
The use of force is incredibly damaging to the people you are trying to protect.
Military intervention inevitably leads to further casualties and loss of civilian life. All warfare has civilian costs due to imperfect strategic information, the use of human shields and the simple fact that more bombs, troops and guns leads to more violence and thus more death of those caught in the crossfire. Adding to this the propensity of forces to hide among civilian populations and, often, the lack of identifiable military uniforms, leads to further human costs and prolonged guerrilla warfare.
Adding to human cost is the infrastructural costs of prolonged warfare, particularly seen in interventions including bombing campaigns, leads to prolonged and sustained damage caused by the use of force both during war and in reconstruction.
For example, the NATO bombing campaign in Kosovo in 1998 led to 1,200-5,000 civilian deaths [1] .
If we are aimed at protecting the human rights of individuals, the massive loss of human life, and sustained damage to basic infrastructure necessary for the functioning of the state means the use of forces furthers human rights abuses, not stops them.
[1] "Kosovo: Civilian Deaths in the NATO Air Campaign." Human Rights Watch. United Nations High Commission for Refugees, n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,HRW,,SRB,,3ae6a86b0,0.html> .
|
[
{
"docid": "14353e47e2b571c8725854e970edd40d",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Although there are some subjective elements of rights, there is generally a consensus amongst most people that fundamental human rights, such as being alive, are universally good. Although we should not impede sovereignty for subjective things, genocide, ethnic cleansing and other systematic abuses of human rights are things that are universal and thus should be protected for all people around the world.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "a21cac7cc9f9423f390cbd2e1350cd97",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society This is unlikely to happen in the majority of cases as not all countries have an anti-Western bias and not all intervening forces have to be Western or identifiably Western. Moreover, the best way to gain the support of a population is to tangibly impact their lives and demonstrate the commitment to their protection and their cause. The best solution for anti-intervention force bias comes with the intervening force itself when real people see troops fighting in a real way to protect them and their rights. There is no more powerful way to build trust than to save a member of someone's family or community in front of their eyes. Thus, this is a self-correcting issue. Although there may be initial issues with backlash from the region, most people will welcome those who are risking their lives to save them and their families.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6b1b8b9fc222e6b55b4838044ae117b5",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Most human rights abuses are motivated by ideological factors that are not rationally calculated through a \"cost-benefit-analysis.\" Much of the world's human rights abuses are committed along ethnic or religious lines and thus are not open to incentives and disincentives but are rather absolutist obligations they think they have from their religion or ethno-cultural beliefs.\n\nMoreover, most interventions are costly, damaging for the intervening forces and are generally unappealing to domestic populations in the states that are intervening. As such, the political will for intervention is usually quite low and not feasible. Most regimes will know this and thus take this \"message\" from the international community with a grain of salt and therefore have no impact on their actions.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3b09bf8499de3b6d4372ae16086e50ab",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Referring back to counterargument one, this again assumes the a priori existence of individual rights. Moreover, following this logic, as all individuals would, behind a \"veil of ignorance\", most certainly choose to live is a developed, prosperous nation, all developed nations would have the moral obligation to literally relocate the entire population of the developing world into their own countries. Simply because something may be seen as \"preferable\" to some people does not a moral imperative create.\n\nFurther, this experiment assumes universality of any conception of rights or \"human rights\". The subjective nature of what it means to be a human being between different faiths and cultures leads to different conceptions of what \"dignity\" means to humanity and thus enforcing the conception of \"dignity\" held by the militarily powerful on other states does not necessarily protect it, but in many ways can erode it.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1fa40533b733fb1096bfb77b828b1f84",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Individual rights are created by the state and do not exist in a vacuum, nor do they exist outside of the realm of the existence of a state. To argue that a “social contract” exists where one gives up their “rights” to the state is to suggest that these rights somehow exist outside of the scope of the state existing, which they do not. States empower individuals to have the capacity to do things and thus allow for practical rights to exist. The rights they allow or disallow, whether “human rights” or otherwise, are simply constructions of the state and its denial of certain rights is therefore in no way a breach of any contract or trust [1] . No state or external organisation has any right to decide what a state should or should not construct as its citizen’s rights and therefore has no basis for intervention.\n\n[1] Burke, Edmund. \"Reflections on the Revolution in France.\" Exploring the French Revolution. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/563/> .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "76db0366fd554654ed705c214ae8be33",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Foreign intervention fragments the conflict.\n\nThe use of force by foreign agents fragments conflicts which perpetuates the war. The countries who are likely to and historically have participated in humanitarian intervention are developed Western nations such as the US, UK, Canada and France either unilaterally or under organisational banners such as NATO. In the vast majority of the world, the West is not well-liked and the education systems, media and local history have created negative perceptions of the West as \"imperialists\" and colonialists. Intervention can often be seen as \"neo-colonialism\" and the West trying to assert power to change regimes inside other countries around the world. This, combined with the inevitable human cost of the use of force, turns local populations against the intervening forces and allows government forces to cast any resistance movements that cooperate with the intervening forces as traitors to their country.\n\nThis is both bad in terms of causing large military opposition from both sides of the conflict against the troops who are intervening, but also fragments the conflict. Resistance movements splinter into those cooperating with the intervening forces and those who aren't. This fractures the resistance movements, reducing their chances of success and reducing the possibility of ceasefires by fragmenting the sides of the conflict making it hard to determine who effectively represents who at the negotiating table.\n\nA good example of this can be seen by the fragmentation of Sunni and Shi'a factions in Iraq post-intervention and the further entrenchment of Sunni opposition to the Shi'a after the Western forces specifically enriched the Shi'a through power and wealth for their cooperation1.\n\n1 \"Iraq in Transition: Vortex or Catalyst?\" Chatham House 04.-2 n. pag. Web. 7 Jun 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6c494e920c280a9cc36eb3a9d0dc2c68",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society This is an illegitimate violation of national sovereignty.\n\nHuman rights are a social construct that are derived from the idea that individuals have created on the subject. States empower individuals to have the capacity to do things and thus allow for practical rights to exist. The rights they allow or disallow, whether “human rights” or otherwise, are simply constructions of the state and its denial of certain rights is therefore legitimate practice of any state [1] .\n\nThe imposition of one state’s conception of what rights should or should not be protected is in no way morally justifiable or universally applicable. Different religions and cultures create different constructs of human dignity and humanity and thus believe in different fundamental tenets and “rights” each person should or should not have.\n\nIt is not legitimate to impede upon another state’s sovereignty due to subjective consideration imposed upon the less powerful by the superpowers of the global system.\n\n[1] Burke, Edmund. \"Reflections on the Revolution in France.\" Exploring the French Revolution. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/563/> .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9251ff8868d72825e33c3df23437f185",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society National sovereignty ends when human rights are systematically violated.\n\nStates violate their right to non-intervention through systematic human rights abuses by violating the contract of their state.\n\nStates derive their rights of control and on the monopoly of violence through what is called the ‘social contract.’ A state gains its right to rule over a population by the people of that state submitting to it their rights to unlimited liberty and the use of force on others in society to the state in return for protection by that state [1] . The individual is sovereign and submits his rights to the state who derives sovereignty from the accumulation of an entire population’s sovereignty. This is where the legitimacy and right to control a population by force comes from. When a state is no longer protecting its people, but rather is systematically removing the security and eroding away the most basic rights and life of those citizens, they no longer are fulfilling the contract and it is void, thus removing their right to sovereignty and immunity from intervention.\n\nThe necessity of intervention in such a case comes from the desperation of the situation. Regimes that use the machinery of the state and their enriched elite against their populations hold all the wealth, power and military might in the country. There is no hope for self-protection for individuals facing a powerful, organized, and well-funded national army. In such a case, the sovereignty of the individuals need to be protected from the state that abuses them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c8ad1ea568f9a3cc780891258dcad22b",
"text": "ional global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Interventions can be small and successful.\n\nIt is the interventions that take a long time to succeed, such as Kosovo, or even fail such as Somalia, or those where many people do not buy into the justification such as Iraq that are remembered. However this forgets that there have also been many small successful interventions and sometimes the threat of intervention is enough. Sierra Leone is the forgotten conflict of Tony Blair’s premiership in the UK. In 2002 Britain sent 800 paratroopers into Sierra Leone, originally just to evacuate foreigners from the country but became an intervention when the British helped government forces drive out rebels which may have saved many lives. However it may also have emboldened Blair to help with intervention in Iraq. [1] This example also shows that it is important to have support on the ground as the British were seen as being legitimate and there was a functioning government who could do the rebuilding. Where this luxury does not exist it is important not to do as happened in Iraq and disband the civil service and prevent those natives who are qualified from running the country even if they may have been implicit in the previous regimes actions.\n\nWhere possible as little force as possible should be used. In Libya NATO only committed airpower and supplied weapons so keeping the conflict as much a domestic affair as possible. Slowly as it becomes accepted that interventions will happen the threat will become enough. Sudan may well in part have accepted the secession of South Sudan due to the US backing of the peace deal in 2005.\n\n[1] Little, Allan, ‘The brigadier who saved Sierra Leone’, BBC Radio 4, 15 May 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/8682505.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "dfd9e6ca69d95298672a91c319f6b8db",
"text": "In general, the USA’s counter terrorism assistance has led to greater regional co-operation. Shared intelligence and resources have become necessary to efficiently combat the global threat of terrorism. The US assisted a joint Mali-Niger venture to regain their desert regions, increasing co-operation between these two states [1] . Intelligence co-operation between North and Sahelian Africans has increased significantly since the beginning of the “War on Terror”, improving international relations between these countries.\n\n[1] Lyman, P. N., ‘The War on Terrorism in Africa’ pg.18\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6bdc349faa9b3aa5de3b5c92463f6d49",
"text": "Gender empowerment\n\nSlum dwellers, particularly women, are affected by violence and crime. COHRE (2008) indicates women living in slums are at risk of violence and illnesses, such as HIV/AIDS, due to insecurities experienced on a daily basis in personal and private spaces. Figures show that in Nairobi slums 1 latrine is shared amongst 500 people (Cities Alliance, 2013). Fearing to go to the toilet at night due to risk of rape, women’s geographical experience of the city is constrained [1] . Therefore investing in houses, including building indoor toilets, provides empowerment, safety, and prevents gender based violence.\n\n[1] See further readings: SDI, 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3704cfbf728f91d2e35889d9865e3862",
"text": "Opinion polls provide useful information to politicians.\n\nThey provide important information about what people think of their performance during the election process. Politicians have the right to change tactics if need be and opinion polls often provide voter feedback about how a candidate is perceived. Informed candidates can better speak to voter concerns, thus increasing dialogue prior to elections. Candidates who speak more specifically to issues develop a better public trust as well as commitment regarding their future performance to which they can be held accountable. Since candidates or platforms which win the election influence future policies, citizens benefit from informed politicians who can speak to the concerns of citizens and issues of the nation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e0caa9aaa76d528b7ca45502bb92cf8a",
"text": "Hold politicians to account\n\nFor the most part in countries with FPTP we don’t like our politicians. In the United States Congress has a job approval rate of 21% and it is often lower [1] while in the UK in 2009 only 1% were ‘very satisfied’ with MPs (total of 29% satisfied 44% dissatisfied). [2] Well elections are your chance to hold them to account by voting for someone else. Elected politicians are there to represent you but if you don’t vote your voice wont be heard and you wont be able to hold your representative to account for what they have done during their time in office. There are increasingly websites which will show you how your MP voted making it simple to find out if they are representing you as you would wish and so making it possible to decide how you will vote on the basis of your representative’s record rather than just their stated intentions at the time of the election.\n\n[1] Jones, Jeffrey M., ‘U.S. Congress’ Approval Rating at 21% Ahead of Elections’, Gallup Politics, 24 October 2012\n\n[2] ‘Satisfaction with Members of Parliament 1991-2009’, Ipsos MORI, 4 March 2010 , (NB satisfaction with own MP is always higher)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f8cddf4cdda24cfbde575e1424de0b8f",
"text": "It is unreasonable to suggest that God must reveal Himself to humanity, or to make His existence manifestly clear because that would undermine the value of faith. [1] Belief is an important component of all religious teachings because it is what allows the soul to transcend the material world and to commune with the divinity. For the religious, a life without faith is meaningless. Furthermore, if God were to make His desires and commands known, then free will would be undermined. It is necessary to the exercise of individual human agency that God not dictate every command to people. That is why God leaves life, at least on the surface, up to humans.\n\n[1] Maitzen, Stephen. 2006. \"Divine Hiddenness and the Demographics of Theism\". Religious Studies 42.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4c87fb5ace1090f384eab09f0c83f3fc",
"text": "The genetic test does not prevent or cure anything. It merely asserts whether someone is a carrier of a genetic disorder. The testing would be paid for by couples to see if they are both carriers of this disorder. The decision then a couple can make based on the screenings is then to:\n\na) not have children together\n\nThe idea of these tests preventing people from marrying is mental. In our liberal society surely it is love that counts in a relationship, not how well your genes fit together to make the perfect child.\n\nb) choose in vitro fertilization\n\nIn order to make them prevent the disease, so that the defected genes (in some cases) can be manipulated.\n\nc) abort the present fetus\n\nWe pressurize and take away choices of the parents, by giving them the knowledge, regarding their children.\n\nA professor of Law at Harvard University, Paul Freund also takes up the position that an unborn child has the right to random genes. Freund states, 'The mystery of individual’s personality, resting on the chance combination of ancestral traits, is the basis of our sense of mutual compassion and at the same time, of accountability.\"\n\nProfessor Freund suggests that the ethical approach to advances in genetic technology allows the random assortment of genes to take effect, thereby protecting the sanctity of the human individual (1).\n\nFurther on with the advances in medicine genetic conditions and disorders no longer present such a burden on the children and enable them to live a good lifestyle and have high survival rates.\n\n1. Renee C. Esfandiary, The Changing World of Genetics and Abortion: Why the Women's Movement Should Advocate for Limitations on the Right to Choose in the Area of Genetic Technology William and Mary Journal of Women and the Law, published 1998, http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1265&context=wmjowl , accessed 05/23/2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fed52aa6bed8a5f8ccff111658d8669a",
"text": "Leaving will cause a shock to the British economy\n\nThe UK leaving the EU would likely be damaging not just to the British economy but globally with the G7 saying it would be “a further serious risk to growth.” [1] The damage to the UK economy would come for several reasons. First there would be uncertainty about what comes next; no one is quite sure what kind of deal the UK will get with the EU, or what will happen to EU migrants in the UK. Additionally businesses that trade with the EU will have uncertainty over that trading relationship and the UK will be a less favourable investment prospect because it is no longer a bridge to 500milion EU consumers. The treasury has estimated that GDP will be lower by 6.2% by 2030 as a result so many people will be considerably worse off. [2]\n\n[1] Asthana, Anushka, ‘Brexit would pose ‘serious risk’ to global growth, say G7 leaders’, theguardian.co.uk, 27 May 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/27/brexit-would-pose-a-serious-risk-to-global-growth-say-g7-leaders\n\n[2] HM Treasury, ‘HM Treasury analysis shows leaving EU would cost British households £4,300 per year’, gov.uk, 18 April 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hm-treasury-analysis-shows-leaving-eu-would-cost-british-households-4300-per-year\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b96c4dabd31d66a554e04f391b3ccff4",
"text": "Security services have managed to watch over and infiltrate the efforts of dissidents all through history. The visibility and tactics is all that has changed. The internet was never going to just be an arena that helps dissidents in authoritarian regimes but as with other technological advances, such as the telephone both increases communication and provides methods of monitoring that communication. If non-democratic states were to lose access to Western technology, they would either procure comparable replacements from other non-democracies, or they would pursue more traditional forms of surveillance, ones that tend to be more invasive and physically threatening.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4c247c11c1d9fb1381b1060da8a96c72",
"text": "To what extent will a competitive industry emerge if direct problems are not resolved? The issue is not simply a need to introduce more airlines. Airline prices cannot be reduced unless fuel prices are lowered. The cost of buying fuel for airlines remains higher in Africa; suggesting that it is not just the airline market but also the market in fuel supplies that requires change. There will be no opportunity for European style budget airlines so long as fuel is expensive.\n\nAdditionally, can a competitive airline industry emerge without transparency and good governance first? The fact good governance remains debatable in many African states raises a question of how the market will work. As new business opportunities arise who will be setting up new airlines? It is likely to be government cronies or those with support from the government rather than those with the most innovative models.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "65c7b629b8c60b27bb65c1ffdfbaa4da",
"text": "Corruption is still present in many states which have joined the US drug war. The war on drugs has done little, and perhaps exacerbated, Columbia’s corruption despite US assistance. In 2011, Columbian ex-government ministers were jailed and prosecuted for corruption and co-operation with paramilitaries.1Judicial reforms have also met with varied success. The Merida Initiative in Mexico, designed at removing the corruption of the cartels, has failed to address corruption in the judicial system which is still rampant. 2\n\n1) Bogota,S. ‘Closer and closer to the top’, The Economist, 29 July 2011\n\n2) Corcoran,P. ‘Mexico Judicial Reforms Go Easy On Corrupt Judges’, In Sight Crime, 16 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
16588f76e8a90ad3940b66bd7586a7d1
|
Paying housewives is financially impractical.
On a very practical level, this policy could never be implemented. As much as housewives are valuable members of society, it is economically impossible to pay them wages. It is only possible to increase somebody’s pay if that person creates increased wealth. There is no direct increase in wealth creation caused by housewives and therefore it would be impossible to gain a direct or accurate valuation or mechanism of exchange for housewife pay.
Even if there was no market mechanism needed, and assuming that there is no interest in getting an accurate valuation of housewife economic contribution, there is no way for a government to finance this. Without the creation of a product or service that has a consumer who would be able to use the money to purchase such services, there is no method of capital accumulation to reimburse the home-keeper with. The baby or child who is receiving the service does not have the ability to pay. Should the government attempt to fill this void, it would be prohibitively expensive to create wages for every single housewife in a country.
|
[
{
"docid": "d5695a94ec39c0c75888eec5186484ef",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their There are many ways to implement this on a practical level. Wages can be created through tax exemptions as opposed to the creation of new streams of wages and wealth.\n\nMoreover, the prohibitive expense can be paid for by an increase in taxation. Home-keeping can be seen as a public good as it create good, strong homes and helps create constructive bases of support that help create productive future members of society, it can qualify as a public good that would therefore be a legitimate expense to tax the public for.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "8ed78e88d16682bc44236c0b98a009e2",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their The job of housewives provides an essential service to society—to raise a healthy family—and so those who perform the job should be paid. Even if a product or service is not economically quantifiable, the person who provides it may have created something that otherwise would not exist through the exertion of their labor. Moreover, simply because they never had an option to opt into a monetized agreement or exchange does not mean that they do not deserve such an option in the future or that their services are not economically valuable, and thus, entitles them to wages.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8ec7e28785d821e0937644c6b088d11b",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Paying housewives a wage would improve not reduce social mobility. Many women would still choose to go to university and the vast majority who do will still want to work. Paying housewives will not prevent any women who wants to work from working. Rather it will simply provide another option for those who wish to devote themselves full time to their family. This will give these women some financial freedom giving them more opportunities to educate themselves and their children so that they can get a better job than they otherwise would when they no longer wish to just be a housewife.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6523896b99b1104d4e049e157e6f9a1f",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Paying housewives would not make much difference to images of women and family life, and could even make things worse rather than better. By paying housewives, monetizing the position of housewife and home-keeper, the state re-affirms the idea that the only true value a person can hold is an economic one and that the only way to assess and quantify the value of an individual or their impact is through financial means. Re-enforcing such a financial-centric version of worth and value is dangerous to housewives, who, by any reasonable expectation, will never make as much as private-sector professionals such as CEOs. It simply re-enforces the inferiority of house-keeping and the role of the family unit in society.\n\nThis pay gap simply re-affirms prejudice and bias of the inferiority of home-keeping as a profession and gives tangible evidence to support this by placing a monetary value on what housewives do and inevitably not including the non-monetary benefits, such as the children having their mother to take them home from school.\n\nKeeping a division between the money-led economic world and the love-driven family world is beneficial to the family dynamic and the perceptions of all those involved.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c2c2eab8d9c8a8f8ba315d1b11762ccb",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their It is highly unlikely that this can be implemented in any country where female empowerment is as restricted as is discussed. If women are as dependent and oppressed as the proposition suggests, the political will to pass such legislation will not exist. Even if a law were passed, the pay would be very low, and so the wife would still rely on the husband’s income.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "67818ad45c363167c2e9adc2c49f8372",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Not all labor is rewarded with wages or pay despite the fact that goods and services are products of said labor. For example, voluntary and charity work are both types of labor that is not paid. The distinction is where the work is done and the obligations owed to people as a result. Home-keeping is a voluntary job that has its own forms of remuneration (family connections etc.) in the same way that volunteering and charity work do (e.g. feeling as though you are part of something larger).\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "83593ea5292bd6acc6aff9961833bc66",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Paying housewives reduces social mobility\n\nBy paying housewives for their work, you create negative stereotypes about families and women by commodifying the role of home-keeper. Paying housewives for their work re-enforces the very framework that is seen as oppressive on home-keepers. It creates a system in which women are even more strongly expected to be housewives than they are now, rather than seeking out career jobs with upward mobility. The result is that women are discouraged from seeking to fulfil their own dreams by creating their own careers as they are more firmly chained to their traditional role. This is damaging to societal views of women and the family.\n\nAs a result the full potential of many more women will not be reached. As is the case in Saudi Arabia women are likely to be very well educated but then have their education and talents wasted by being expected to remain in the home. [1] This would neither be good for the individuals involved or the economy as a whole.\n\n[1] Saner, Emine, “Saudi Arabia opens the world’s largest university for women”, The Guardian, 27 May 2011, < http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/may/27/saudi-arabia-universi...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9a46607b7f41b2cb2c5bce9373f1527d",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Payment and obligation works differently in public and in private.\n\nThe economic sphere and the private (family) sphere have separate obligations and systems of contracts. The way in which the economic system works is that generally people are paid for their labor by those who benefit from it, either directly or indirectly. This is a mutual relationship of monetary-labor exchange. In the family sphere, the contracts are based on personal obligation and the family unit as opposed to individual contraction of services. The family unit is a pre-existing relationship not created on labor-pay agreements. Individuals opt into being a parent in a family unit on a voluntary basis and with no expectation or pretence of return for their services, except perhaps from their children in the future. Remuneration is created in the form of a functioning, rewarding family unit and family life and the products and services produced are of no quantifiable monetary value nor can they be sold or do they create wealth. Because housewives do not labor for anybody outside of their household, they should not be paid by anybody outside of their family. Moreover most of the work that housewives do would have to be done by a member of the family unit regardless of whether everyone was also engaged in monetized work – there would still need to be washing, cleaning, shopping etc done.\n\nHousewives do not exist as workers in the economic sphere as they do not create a monetized product with their labor and opt into the agreement on voluntary non-monetary bases. As such, they are not entitled to pay.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e0c045e819bcfb89dae435337deffe56",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Paying housewives promotes more positive images of women and family life\n\nGender stereotypes dictate that the woman’s place is in the home and that that is an inferior position in the social hierarchy than that of the male’s corporate bread-winner status. The stereotype is particularly damaging to women’s expectations for themselves and the way society treats women.\n\nBy paying housewives for their work, a greater emphasis is placed on the role of the home-keeper and on the women that tend to this job. It elevates the position of women in the household by economically empowering them and giving them the very thing that usually implies the greater importance of the bread-winners in the family (economic power and status). Moreover, it elevates societal views of housewives and home-keepers by valuing their contributions to the household and society in a tangible, monetary way that society cares about.\n\nPaying housewives for their work grants greater social status and power to women and family lives, which improves views of women and the roles they take in the family.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7645f279c328a0f98320f1f23226e91b",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Paying housewives for their work is an important form of economic empowerment.\n\nOne of the most important factors of oppression of women’s rights, particularly in the developing world, is dependence [1] . Women are often confined to the home by force, lack of opportunity or social stigma, on behalf of their husbands. When she is not paid, a housewife must rely on her husband for money, especially if she has children she is expected to take care of. Economic empowerment allows further freedom for women in countries where women are confined to the home [2] . By making women economic actors, you empower them to engage in different social structures and hold a stake and position in the centres of economic power. This is the most empowering tool one can offer women in most countries around the world [3] .\n\nBy paying housewives for their work, you offer one of the most powerful forms of social empowerment for women around the world.\n\n[1] United Nations. Women's Work and Economic Empowerment. Accessed July 1, 2011. http://www.unfpa.org/gender/empowerment1.htm .\n\n[2] United Nations. Women's Work and Economic Empowerment. Accessed July 1, 2011. http://www.unfpa.org/gender/empowerment1.htm .\n\n[3] United Nations. Women's Work and Economic Empowerment. Accessed July 1, 2011. http://www.unfpa.org/gender/empowerment1.htm .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c2d366b956aa5186bbfce0393cc60b9d",
"text": "employment society gender family house believes housewives should be paid their Housewives are entitled to pay\n\nThe philosophical basis of entitlement for pay is derived from the notion that if something comes into being as the product of an individual’s labor, then that individual is entitled to the profit and benefit of such a product because its existence was resultant of that individual’s labor [1] . That in this case the labor is on services does not make any difference, the product of the housewife’s labor is that the children are looked after and domestic matters are all sorted. This is beneficial to society as housewives in addition to helping their own family are likely to have the time to help out others – through volunteering, through looking after other’s children after school etc.\n\nIt is estimated that the value of a housemaker’s services would be equivalent to approximately £30,000 per year [2] . In the same way that any product or service is created, offered or manufactured by individual workers, the services of home-keeping are delivered by the labor of the home-keeper. Just as all workers are entitled to remuneration for the goods and services they create, so is a housewife is so entitled for the house-keeping services they offer.\n\n[1] \"Locke's Political Philosophy.\" Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2010. Web. < http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/#Pro> .\n\n[2] \"'Housewives should be paid £30,000 for doing the cooking, laundry and childcare'.\" Daily Mail 19 Feb 2008, Print.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
393ace8e1cb942579c3fb2e09e3ad628
|
The fence is morally wrong and inhumane
Because it does not create an airtight border, it simply forces crossings at more dangerous locales like the hot, snake-infested deserts. Thousands of Mexicans have died since 2000 attempting the crossing, while less than 300 people died attempting to cross the Berlin Wall in almost three decades.1 The bodies of at least four hundred people were found in 2010.2 Simply put, barriers do not diminish the desire for a better life.3 That sort of catastrophic disregard for the fundamental humanity of these people demeans America as a nation. It is hard to reconcile this disregard with our considerable humanitarian support for starving people in Somalia and all over the world. We should work together to help hard-working individuals provide for their families. Most border-crossers are not drug runners, but people who just want legitimate jobs so they can feed their families.
1 Defense News. "US Drones Track Drug Lords Over Mexico."
2McGreal, Chris. "The battle of the US-Mexico frontier."
3McFadyen, Jennifer. "Immigration Issues: US-Mexico Border Fence Pros and Cons."
|
[
{
"docid": "bba126dbb99267ac155950754e2ade68",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence We have no absolute moral obligation to everyone in the world. Many individuals are now calling for serious reductions in foreign aid and in foreign interventions in order to help Americans who are also suffering. That suffering is no less worthy of support just because it is not as highly publicized or televised on international news. Times may be difficult in Mexico, but they are difficult in America as well, and a country has an obligation to its citizens first, and then everyone else. It is legitimate and justified to build a fence to protect the American economy.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "2839f88ecc05fbe08e5812cc1c46af60",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence While environmental concerns are certainly serious and warrant consideration, we need to balance the competing interests here. It is only a handful of species that would be threatened by this project, and any such endangered species can be moved into specially-designed preservation facilities that mimic the natural habitat. On the other hand, there is no other truly effective way to stop illegal immigrant crossings. In this sense, the local environment is a sacrifice of necessity. A related environmental concern is the pollution border-crossers leave in the desert and surrounding habitats, which would actually be reduced if fewer of them were crossing.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "119c2d919f66a38a3ddb92d162fe084d",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The role of concentrated fencing around urban areas in particular is to prevent immigrants from blending immediately into a town population, and in that sense, it is effective.1Even if you divert some illegal immigrant traffic elsewhere along the border, fencing still reduces overall rates of crossing by forcing those who would cross to go through more dangerous and barren territory; this is a significant deterrent. 2 Additionally, you can step up border patrols in the areas that do not cover the fence to catch drug smugglers and other illegal border crossers.3 This reduces the numbers of border patrol agents necessary to create an effective net to catch would-be illegal immigrants, and consequently reduces the long-term costs of border protection measures. The fence is meant to be merely a tool in the tool box, not a comprehensive solution to the problem of illegal immigration.4\n\n1Associated Press. \"U.S.-Mexico border fence almost complete.\"\n\n2Wood, Daniel. \"Where U.S.-Mexico border fence is tall, border crossings fall.\"\n\n3Hendricks, Tyche. \"Border security or boondoggle?\"\n\n4Archibold, Randal and Preston, Julia. \"Homeland Security Stands by Its Fence.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "39e3693877e58e5d248126579f9928a5",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The United States has consistently demonstrated that it is a true partner in the war on organized crime in Northern Mexico. For instance, it has used unmanned drones like the ones in Pakistan to gather intelligence on Mexican drug lords.1 The relationship is healthy and Mexican officials frequently cooperate; it is certainly possible that there are underlying domestic political motivations for those politicians to be making such strong statements, and we should not necessarily take them at face value as representing the best picture of Mexican-American relations.\n\n1 Defense News. \"US Drones Track Drug Lords Over Mexic\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "953fd9f6f9a6603716c5ee2a18e81415",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence This argument is based on drastically different goals than the one that would support the fence being raised. While some individuals may want to take in illegal immigrants and provide them with generous welfare benefits and call that \"comprehensive immigration reform\", that is not what the majority of Americans want. They want illegal immigrants kept out of the country, and that in and of itself is a solution from their perspective, so to say that a fence distracts from the goal is just a straw-man. In the sense that it helps keep people out, it is working just as intended.\n\nErecting the fence and taking other measures (such as investigating employers who hire illegal immigrants) are by no means mutually exclusive, and we can do both to ensure that American jobs are going to people who are in America legally.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "06d38ad84a31527c2c48b7bd4aa17e9c",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence Just because many people are in favour of a policy does not mean it is normatively justified. Policies that have little to no efficacy and actually even create the opposite outcome than is desired are certainly not justified by this logic. People only want a fence because they think that it will protect American jobs and border security. If a closer examination of the economics of illegal immigration demonstrates that immigration actually grows the economy, it seems nonsensical to continue maintaining the fence. This just perpetuates racist attitudes.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "34b5187caf6c617169becc0efc203ee6",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The border fence is a waste of money. It and the associated measures was given a budget of $1.2billion [i] and it is not likely to be a comprehensive fix. If the fence just covers current high crossing areas then these areas will simply move to more inhospitable areas or migrants will find other ways around – such as travelling through the gulf of Mexico by boat as occurs between in the Mediterranean for migrants travelling from North Africa to Europe.\n\n[i] Weisman, Jonathan. \"With Senate Vote, Congress Passes Border Fence Bill.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6faa8ef08d25d7aeca3a064acce0c73a",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence Just because something is a law does not mean that it is justified or morally correct. There have been many bad and unjustified laws on the books of the legal codes of many countries. Any means of carrying out the ends of a just law that will have terrible impacts are themselves also unjustified. When there are hundreds of people who have died in attempts to cross deserts or dangerous terrain to go around the fence in order to find gainful employment, that is a good indication that a policy is failing.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7be6cf9dbfb62993832dbc1b1b12d516",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence Safety arguments are a red herring; terrorism will not be effectively prevented by the erection of the border fence. We need a proactive strategy that gathers intelligence and works with counterterrorism officials abroad to disrupt recruitment and training centers for terrorist groups.1 If some immigrants can slip through, so can some terrorists. At any rate, the 9/11 hijackers and other Al-Qaeda terrorists traditionally have not come through the Mexican border but rather from abroad and by airplanes or seaports, or they are homegrown radicals. Spending billions of dollars in a vain series of attempts to seal ourselves in an impenetrable fortress simply helps terrorists fulfill their goals of making us live in a culture of perpetual fear. As for drug trafficking, this problem is largely born of the tremendous market for it that still exists in the United States. If the demand dried up, so would the suppliers; on the other hand, if there is still an incredibly lucrative market, no fence will stop them from ferrying large amounts of drugs over the border, and most of the weapons the narcotics traffickers use actually come from the United States as well.2 We need to look to other solutions besides simplistic fences.\n\n1 Bruguire, Jean-Louis. \"The holes in America's anti-terror fence.\"\n\n2McGreal, Chris. \"The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f111c8022d93c8df57675e2c9f3766e8",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence This assumes the fence is efficacious and therefore the cause of the reduction. It is not – there are numerous bypasses, ranging from simple ladders on pickup trucks to complex tunnels for the movement of people and drugs.1 While it may seem to be the case that the fence has caused the reduced numbers of illegal immigrants attempting to cross, in actuality this is because of the economic downturn in the United States.2,3 If there are no jobs, it stands to reason there is not going to be an influx of workers.\n\nEven if it were efficacious, however, the idea that immigrants steal jobs is fundamentally flawed. Immigrants fill gaps in the domestic labour market.4 They are non-competitive for most types of jobs, such as supervisor positions.5 And anyways, most economists say that immigration grows the economy by expanding demand for goods and services that immigrants consume, and consequently this actually creates more jobs. While immigrants certainly may push down wages for some occupations, the net effect is to increase average wages for non-immigrant Americans.\n\nFinally, the economies of many border towns on the United States’ side of the fence will suffer because of decreased demand for their goods and services.\n\n1McGreal, Chris. “The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.”\n\n2Associated Press. “U.S.-Mexico border fence almost complete.”\n\n3Archibold, Randal and Preston, Julia. “Homeland Security Stands by Its Fence.”\n\n4Cowen, Tyler. “How Immigrants Create More Jobs.”\n\n5Novak, Viveca. “Does Immigration Cost Jobs?”\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6dd49712ba693ba81958ceb42c237be7",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence only seems to solve the problem and detracts from dialogue about real solutions.\n\nThe fence serves as a band-aid fix, seemingly solving the problem while not really advancing comprehensive immigration reform. Maintenance of the fence and stringent border patrol contingents drains money that could be used to facilitate better solutions to the supposed problems immigration creates.1Additionally, the perception that something is already being done about illegal immigration saps the political will to find better solutions to the problem. This enables us to ignore the need to investigate shady business practices by employers, for instance.\n\n1 Emmott, Robin. \"A costly U.S.-Mexico border wall, in both dollars and deaths.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5bae4ad5c4877b91d4978c76a8eb6f35",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence is ineffective at carrying out its stated goals.\n\nNot all illegal immigrants who are in the United States arrive by means of crossing the border; some overstay legally-acquired work visas. Attempts to implement \"virtual\" components of the fence have failed on several grounds. Images were too blurry, the systems performed poorly in bad weather, and there were false detections because of the inability to distinguish between animals and people.1 The technology also suffered from software bugs, and ultimately squandered billions of dollars.2 Because not all of the approximately 2000 mile border is covered by actual fencing, and even the physical fencing that exists is not continuous and relied on virtual components to cover the gaps, immigrants can easily go around the fence or through the weak points.3 In the past, immigrants have also used ladders or deception techniques (like cars with hollowed out dashboards) to bypass the fence. Additionally, drug runners have developed extensive and sophisticated tunnels to duck the wall and clear any sort of security checkpoints, rendering this defense mechanism with a price tag in the billions of USD4 (and expensive upkeep costs to boot) virtually useless.5 Finally, many individuals who cross the border looking for employment do so repeatedly, even when they are deported or turned back at the border by agents.6 In jurisdictions where these individuals are held in detention on misdemeanour charges, they contribute to overcrowding in prison facilities and consume valuable prosecutorial resources.7\n\n1Ryan, Jason. \"Homeland Security Axes Bush-Era 'Virtual Fence' Project.\"\n\n2NYT Editors. \"Virtual Failure on the Border.\"\n\n3The Economist. \"Good neighbours make fences.\" 4McFadyen, Jennifer. \"Immigration Issues: US-Mexico Border Fence Pros and Cons.\"\n\n5Global Security. \"US-Mexico Border Fence.\"\n\n6Federation for American Immigration Reform. \"US Mexico Border Fence and Patrol Operations.\"\n\n7Archibold, Randal and Preston, Julia. \"Homeland Security Stands by Its Fence.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "69cd83e6f062bc11354319844814ccfd",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence is a serious environmental threat and endangers wildlife.\n\nBy cutting off components of the habitat, the fence diminishes gene flow and reduces the ability for survival, or creates remnant populations that are too small to sustain the species.1 Counter-intuitively, even certain winged species which fly low to the ground would be at risk. Climate change is forcing more migrations, and this would also prevent animals from carrying those out.2 This has been so lightly regarded by U.S. officials that at one point Mexico actually threatened to file a claim with the International Court of Justice.3\n\n1Goldstein, Rob. \"US-Mexico border fence putting wildlife at risk of extinction.\"\n\n2Marshall, Jessica. \"U.S.-Mexico Border Fence May Snag Wildlife.\"\n\n3Magee, Megan. \"The U.S.-Mexico Border Wall: An Environmental And Human Rights Disaster.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b4383802dc8f973a3c3d74adc0e80eef",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence A fence hurts our political relationship with Mexico.\n\nThe United States needs to demonstrate that it is interested in being a true partner with Mexico in efforts to reduce drug trafficking and the pervasive cartel-driven violence of northern Mexico. Trying to simply keep all the Mexicans out is offensive; the governor of the Mexican state Coahuila has called the fence a \"wall of hate\",1 and in 2005 Mexican President Vincente Fox called the situation \"disgraceful and shameful.\"2 Many individuals in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas have family and friends on the Mexican side and speak fluent Spanish, and don't support the wall. On the other hand, Arizona's demographics reflect population growth as the result of many Midwestern \"snowbirds\" with little experience of Latino culture moving there, and thus Arizona has much harsher prejudices against Mexicans.3 If we do not cooperate with Mexico, they will be less likely to share information valuable to our national security or cooperate with us on foreign policy initiatives.\n\n1Hylton, Hillary. \"Opponents of the Border Fence Look to Obama.\"\n\n2Global Security. \"US-Mexico Border Fence.\"\n\n3The Economist. \"Good neighbours make fences.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f650caa1d2c1ab26e19f80109449295b",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence A state has a fundamental right to set immigration policies and take the necessary steps to make them work.\n\nIronically, even Mexico recognizes this when it attempts to increase border enforcement along its own southern border with Guatemala1,2. If those policies are lawfully set by the people and legislature, then regardless of how efficacious a particular tool is, it is justified. It is clear that the fence is wildly popular – well over half of the United States supports it3 , and many individuals are so adamant about increasing border security that they are willing to make donations for these purposes4. The social contract of the United States means that the government is democratically elected and therefore accountable to its people. If they want to focus on securing the borders instead of providing more extensive welfare programs or reforming education or anything else they could be spending money on, that is their prerogative.\n\n1Thompson, Ginger. “Mexico Worries About Its Own Southern Border.”\n\n2Cutler, Michael. “Hypocrisy: Mexico Building Security Fence Against Guatemala.”\n\n3Rasmussen Reports. “Support for Mexican Border Fence Up to 68%.”\n\n4Crawford, Amanda. “Arizona’s State-Owned Mexico Border Fence Attracts Donors From Across U.S.”\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ddfab4f9bb1938e64a81b6853a58a69e",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence is a practical way to stop immigration and large parts of it have been built.\n\nThe Secure Fence Act of 2006 authorized the construction of at least two layers of reinforced fencing in high-crossing and high-risk sections along the border. This includes around the border town of Tecate, Calif., and a huge expanse stretching from Calexico, Calif., to Douglas, Ariz., which is virtually the entire length of Arizona's border with Mexico. Another section would stretch over most of the southern border of New Mexico. An additional section will wind through Texas, from Del Rio to Eagle Pass, and from Laredo to Brownsville. This would not only be a fence but will include technology to secure \"operational control\" of the border by using unmanned aerial vehicles, ground-based sensors, radar, satellites and cameras.1\n\n1Weisman, Jonathan. \"With Senate Vote, Congress Passes Border Fence Bill.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a1e2d340694194b9f16cd64729e87631",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence A fence would dramatically increase American safety.\n\nMexican violence between drug cartels frequently spills over and threatens the lives and peace-of-mind of Americans as well. The Council on Foreign Relations has said that Mexico's levels of violence and lawlessness over the past few years exceed even those in Iraq or Afghanistan.1 That has forced a costly increased police presence in border areas, and even that often proves insufficient to quell the killings. But even if the violent common criminals were somehow suppressed because of stepped up actions by the Mexican government, an easily penetrated border presents a national security threat. The FBI has warned that it is likely that Al Qaeda operatives and other terrorist groups will use the porous Mexican border as a means of infiltrating the country and launching deadly plots against American citizens in future. To prevent the carrying out of attacks, America needs secure borders.\n\n1 McGreal, Chris. \"The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a2f929c61c666ae496c537cf406c9b17",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence A fence would help defend the economy of the United States.\n\nA fence would help defend the economy of the United States during difficult times by protecting American jobs. It is a popular misconception that immigrants only do the types of jobs that native-born Americans will not take. Many professions encompassing construction, grounds-maintenance, housekeeping, and janitorial services actually have the majority of jobs performed by native-born Americans.1 Furthermore, illegal immigrants constitute a tremendous drain on various public benefits. These include medical treatment (because no one who is seriously injured or sick can be turned away from the emergency room as a result of a law called EMTALA)2 , municipal services like fire and police protection, food stamps, and education in public schools. Every dollar that gets spent on illegal immigrants is a dollar that could have been spent on law-abiding American citizens, who need all the help they can get during these difficult times.\n\n1 Camarota, Steven and Jensenius, Karen. \"Jobs Americans Won't Do?\"\n\n2Jordan, Miriam. \"Illegal Immigration Enters the Health-Care Debate.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6ce94d98f52e52fd2f68a51a4e533d32",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence It is important to maintain and enforce the principle of the rule of law, and a fence does that.\n\nIllegal immigrants are openly flaunting the law, and permitting them to enter the country in this way demeans the hard-working individuals who immigrated legally. If people become angrier about illegal immigrants because more of them are coming in without a fence, this may also lead to the negative outcome of poorer treatment of Latinos who live and work legally in the United States. If there were no or very few illegal immigrants, there would be much less tension in communities since everyone would know that all the inhabitants had come there legally.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
def7c301c9d35c4785590f9145fea5aa
|
A fence hurts our political relationship with Mexico.
The United States needs to demonstrate that it is interested in being a true partner with Mexico in efforts to reduce drug trafficking and the pervasive cartel-driven violence of northern Mexico. Trying to simply keep all the Mexicans out is offensive; the governor of the Mexican state Coahuila has called the fence a "wall of hate",1 and in 2005 Mexican President Vincente Fox called the situation "disgraceful and shameful."2 Many individuals in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas have family and friends on the Mexican side and speak fluent Spanish, and don't support the wall. On the other hand, Arizona's demographics reflect population growth as the result of many Midwestern "snowbirds" with little experience of Latino culture moving there, and thus Arizona has much harsher prejudices against Mexicans.3 If we do not cooperate with Mexico, they will be less likely to share information valuable to our national security or cooperate with us on foreign policy initiatives.
1Hylton, Hillary. "Opponents of the Border Fence Look to Obama."
2Global Security. "US-Mexico Border Fence."
3The Economist. "Good neighbours make fences."
|
[
{
"docid": "39e3693877e58e5d248126579f9928a5",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The United States has consistently demonstrated that it is a true partner in the war on organized crime in Northern Mexico. For instance, it has used unmanned drones like the ones in Pakistan to gather intelligence on Mexican drug lords.1 The relationship is healthy and Mexican officials frequently cooperate; it is certainly possible that there are underlying domestic political motivations for those politicians to be making such strong statements, and we should not necessarily take them at face value as representing the best picture of Mexican-American relations.\n\n1 Defense News. \"US Drones Track Drug Lords Over Mexic\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "2839f88ecc05fbe08e5812cc1c46af60",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence While environmental concerns are certainly serious and warrant consideration, we need to balance the competing interests here. It is only a handful of species that would be threatened by this project, and any such endangered species can be moved into specially-designed preservation facilities that mimic the natural habitat. On the other hand, there is no other truly effective way to stop illegal immigrant crossings. In this sense, the local environment is a sacrifice of necessity. A related environmental concern is the pollution border-crossers leave in the desert and surrounding habitats, which would actually be reduced if fewer of them were crossing.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "119c2d919f66a38a3ddb92d162fe084d",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The role of concentrated fencing around urban areas in particular is to prevent immigrants from blending immediately into a town population, and in that sense, it is effective.1Even if you divert some illegal immigrant traffic elsewhere along the border, fencing still reduces overall rates of crossing by forcing those who would cross to go through more dangerous and barren territory; this is a significant deterrent. 2 Additionally, you can step up border patrols in the areas that do not cover the fence to catch drug smugglers and other illegal border crossers.3 This reduces the numbers of border patrol agents necessary to create an effective net to catch would-be illegal immigrants, and consequently reduces the long-term costs of border protection measures. The fence is meant to be merely a tool in the tool box, not a comprehensive solution to the problem of illegal immigration.4\n\n1Associated Press. \"U.S.-Mexico border fence almost complete.\"\n\n2Wood, Daniel. \"Where U.S.-Mexico border fence is tall, border crossings fall.\"\n\n3Hendricks, Tyche. \"Border security or boondoggle?\"\n\n4Archibold, Randal and Preston, Julia. \"Homeland Security Stands by Its Fence.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bba126dbb99267ac155950754e2ade68",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence We have no absolute moral obligation to everyone in the world. Many individuals are now calling for serious reductions in foreign aid and in foreign interventions in order to help Americans who are also suffering. That suffering is no less worthy of support just because it is not as highly publicized or televised on international news. Times may be difficult in Mexico, but they are difficult in America as well, and a country has an obligation to its citizens first, and then everyone else. It is legitimate and justified to build a fence to protect the American economy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "953fd9f6f9a6603716c5ee2a18e81415",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence This argument is based on drastically different goals than the one that would support the fence being raised. While some individuals may want to take in illegal immigrants and provide them with generous welfare benefits and call that \"comprehensive immigration reform\", that is not what the majority of Americans want. They want illegal immigrants kept out of the country, and that in and of itself is a solution from their perspective, so to say that a fence distracts from the goal is just a straw-man. In the sense that it helps keep people out, it is working just as intended.\n\nErecting the fence and taking other measures (such as investigating employers who hire illegal immigrants) are by no means mutually exclusive, and we can do both to ensure that American jobs are going to people who are in America legally.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "06d38ad84a31527c2c48b7bd4aa17e9c",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence Just because many people are in favour of a policy does not mean it is normatively justified. Policies that have little to no efficacy and actually even create the opposite outcome than is desired are certainly not justified by this logic. People only want a fence because they think that it will protect American jobs and border security. If a closer examination of the economics of illegal immigration demonstrates that immigration actually grows the economy, it seems nonsensical to continue maintaining the fence. This just perpetuates racist attitudes.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "34b5187caf6c617169becc0efc203ee6",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The border fence is a waste of money. It and the associated measures was given a budget of $1.2billion [i] and it is not likely to be a comprehensive fix. If the fence just covers current high crossing areas then these areas will simply move to more inhospitable areas or migrants will find other ways around – such as travelling through the gulf of Mexico by boat as occurs between in the Mediterranean for migrants travelling from North Africa to Europe.\n\n[i] Weisman, Jonathan. \"With Senate Vote, Congress Passes Border Fence Bill.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6faa8ef08d25d7aeca3a064acce0c73a",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence Just because something is a law does not mean that it is justified or morally correct. There have been many bad and unjustified laws on the books of the legal codes of many countries. Any means of carrying out the ends of a just law that will have terrible impacts are themselves also unjustified. When there are hundreds of people who have died in attempts to cross deserts or dangerous terrain to go around the fence in order to find gainful employment, that is a good indication that a policy is failing.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7be6cf9dbfb62993832dbc1b1b12d516",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence Safety arguments are a red herring; terrorism will not be effectively prevented by the erection of the border fence. We need a proactive strategy that gathers intelligence and works with counterterrorism officials abroad to disrupt recruitment and training centers for terrorist groups.1 If some immigrants can slip through, so can some terrorists. At any rate, the 9/11 hijackers and other Al-Qaeda terrorists traditionally have not come through the Mexican border but rather from abroad and by airplanes or seaports, or they are homegrown radicals. Spending billions of dollars in a vain series of attempts to seal ourselves in an impenetrable fortress simply helps terrorists fulfill their goals of making us live in a culture of perpetual fear. As for drug trafficking, this problem is largely born of the tremendous market for it that still exists in the United States. If the demand dried up, so would the suppliers; on the other hand, if there is still an incredibly lucrative market, no fence will stop them from ferrying large amounts of drugs over the border, and most of the weapons the narcotics traffickers use actually come from the United States as well.2 We need to look to other solutions besides simplistic fences.\n\n1 Bruguire, Jean-Louis. \"The holes in America's anti-terror fence.\"\n\n2McGreal, Chris. \"The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f111c8022d93c8df57675e2c9f3766e8",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence This assumes the fence is efficacious and therefore the cause of the reduction. It is not – there are numerous bypasses, ranging from simple ladders on pickup trucks to complex tunnels for the movement of people and drugs.1 While it may seem to be the case that the fence has caused the reduced numbers of illegal immigrants attempting to cross, in actuality this is because of the economic downturn in the United States.2,3 If there are no jobs, it stands to reason there is not going to be an influx of workers.\n\nEven if it were efficacious, however, the idea that immigrants steal jobs is fundamentally flawed. Immigrants fill gaps in the domestic labour market.4 They are non-competitive for most types of jobs, such as supervisor positions.5 And anyways, most economists say that immigration grows the economy by expanding demand for goods and services that immigrants consume, and consequently this actually creates more jobs. While immigrants certainly may push down wages for some occupations, the net effect is to increase average wages for non-immigrant Americans.\n\nFinally, the economies of many border towns on the United States’ side of the fence will suffer because of decreased demand for their goods and services.\n\n1McGreal, Chris. “The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.”\n\n2Associated Press. “U.S.-Mexico border fence almost complete.”\n\n3Archibold, Randal and Preston, Julia. “Homeland Security Stands by Its Fence.”\n\n4Cowen, Tyler. “How Immigrants Create More Jobs.”\n\n5Novak, Viveca. “Does Immigration Cost Jobs?”\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6dd49712ba693ba81958ceb42c237be7",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence only seems to solve the problem and detracts from dialogue about real solutions.\n\nThe fence serves as a band-aid fix, seemingly solving the problem while not really advancing comprehensive immigration reform. Maintenance of the fence and stringent border patrol contingents drains money that could be used to facilitate better solutions to the supposed problems immigration creates.1Additionally, the perception that something is already being done about illegal immigration saps the political will to find better solutions to the problem. This enables us to ignore the need to investigate shady business practices by employers, for instance.\n\n1 Emmott, Robin. \"A costly U.S.-Mexico border wall, in both dollars and deaths.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "77f8343f2a49d4a48787e3e842eedf73",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence is morally wrong and inhumane\n\nBecause it does not create an airtight border, it simply forces crossings at more dangerous locales like the hot, snake-infested deserts. Thousands of Mexicans have died since 2000 attempting the crossing, while less than 300 people died attempting to cross the Berlin Wall in almost three decades.1 The bodies of at least four hundred people were found in 2010.2 Simply put, barriers do not diminish the desire for a better life.3 That sort of catastrophic disregard for the fundamental humanity of these people demeans America as a nation. It is hard to reconcile this disregard with our considerable humanitarian support for starving people in Somalia and all over the world. We should work together to help hard-working individuals provide for their families. Most border-crossers are not drug runners, but people who just want legitimate jobs so they can feed their families.\n\n1 Defense News. \"US Drones Track Drug Lords Over Mexico.\"\n\n2McGreal, Chris. \"The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.\"\n\n3McFadyen, Jennifer. \"Immigration Issues: US-Mexico Border Fence Pros and Cons.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5bae4ad5c4877b91d4978c76a8eb6f35",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence is ineffective at carrying out its stated goals.\n\nNot all illegal immigrants who are in the United States arrive by means of crossing the border; some overstay legally-acquired work visas. Attempts to implement \"virtual\" components of the fence have failed on several grounds. Images were too blurry, the systems performed poorly in bad weather, and there were false detections because of the inability to distinguish between animals and people.1 The technology also suffered from software bugs, and ultimately squandered billions of dollars.2 Because not all of the approximately 2000 mile border is covered by actual fencing, and even the physical fencing that exists is not continuous and relied on virtual components to cover the gaps, immigrants can easily go around the fence or through the weak points.3 In the past, immigrants have also used ladders or deception techniques (like cars with hollowed out dashboards) to bypass the fence. Additionally, drug runners have developed extensive and sophisticated tunnels to duck the wall and clear any sort of security checkpoints, rendering this defense mechanism with a price tag in the billions of USD4 (and expensive upkeep costs to boot) virtually useless.5 Finally, many individuals who cross the border looking for employment do so repeatedly, even when they are deported or turned back at the border by agents.6 In jurisdictions where these individuals are held in detention on misdemeanour charges, they contribute to overcrowding in prison facilities and consume valuable prosecutorial resources.7\n\n1Ryan, Jason. \"Homeland Security Axes Bush-Era 'Virtual Fence' Project.\"\n\n2NYT Editors. \"Virtual Failure on the Border.\"\n\n3The Economist. \"Good neighbours make fences.\" 4McFadyen, Jennifer. \"Immigration Issues: US-Mexico Border Fence Pros and Cons.\"\n\n5Global Security. \"US-Mexico Border Fence.\"\n\n6Federation for American Immigration Reform. \"US Mexico Border Fence and Patrol Operations.\"\n\n7Archibold, Randal and Preston, Julia. \"Homeland Security Stands by Its Fence.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "69cd83e6f062bc11354319844814ccfd",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence is a serious environmental threat and endangers wildlife.\n\nBy cutting off components of the habitat, the fence diminishes gene flow and reduces the ability for survival, or creates remnant populations that are too small to sustain the species.1 Counter-intuitively, even certain winged species which fly low to the ground would be at risk. Climate change is forcing more migrations, and this would also prevent animals from carrying those out.2 This has been so lightly regarded by U.S. officials that at one point Mexico actually threatened to file a claim with the International Court of Justice.3\n\n1Goldstein, Rob. \"US-Mexico border fence putting wildlife at risk of extinction.\"\n\n2Marshall, Jessica. \"U.S.-Mexico Border Fence May Snag Wildlife.\"\n\n3Magee, Megan. \"The U.S.-Mexico Border Wall: An Environmental And Human Rights Disaster.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f650caa1d2c1ab26e19f80109449295b",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence A state has a fundamental right to set immigration policies and take the necessary steps to make them work.\n\nIronically, even Mexico recognizes this when it attempts to increase border enforcement along its own southern border with Guatemala1,2. If those policies are lawfully set by the people and legislature, then regardless of how efficacious a particular tool is, it is justified. It is clear that the fence is wildly popular – well over half of the United States supports it3 , and many individuals are so adamant about increasing border security that they are willing to make donations for these purposes4. The social contract of the United States means that the government is democratically elected and therefore accountable to its people. If they want to focus on securing the borders instead of providing more extensive welfare programs or reforming education or anything else they could be spending money on, that is their prerogative.\n\n1Thompson, Ginger. “Mexico Worries About Its Own Southern Border.”\n\n2Cutler, Michael. “Hypocrisy: Mexico Building Security Fence Against Guatemala.”\n\n3Rasmussen Reports. “Support for Mexican Border Fence Up to 68%.”\n\n4Crawford, Amanda. “Arizona’s State-Owned Mexico Border Fence Attracts Donors From Across U.S.”\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ddfab4f9bb1938e64a81b6853a58a69e",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence The fence is a practical way to stop immigration and large parts of it have been built.\n\nThe Secure Fence Act of 2006 authorized the construction of at least two layers of reinforced fencing in high-crossing and high-risk sections along the border. This includes around the border town of Tecate, Calif., and a huge expanse stretching from Calexico, Calif., to Douglas, Ariz., which is virtually the entire length of Arizona's border with Mexico. Another section would stretch over most of the southern border of New Mexico. An additional section will wind through Texas, from Del Rio to Eagle Pass, and from Laredo to Brownsville. This would not only be a fence but will include technology to secure \"operational control\" of the border by using unmanned aerial vehicles, ground-based sensors, radar, satellites and cameras.1\n\n1Weisman, Jonathan. \"With Senate Vote, Congress Passes Border Fence Bill.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a1e2d340694194b9f16cd64729e87631",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence A fence would dramatically increase American safety.\n\nMexican violence between drug cartels frequently spills over and threatens the lives and peace-of-mind of Americans as well. The Council on Foreign Relations has said that Mexico's levels of violence and lawlessness over the past few years exceed even those in Iraq or Afghanistan.1 That has forced a costly increased police presence in border areas, and even that often proves insufficient to quell the killings. But even if the violent common criminals were somehow suppressed because of stepped up actions by the Mexican government, an easily penetrated border presents a national security threat. The FBI has warned that it is likely that Al Qaeda operatives and other terrorist groups will use the porous Mexican border as a means of infiltrating the country and launching deadly plots against American citizens in future. To prevent the carrying out of attacks, America needs secure borders.\n\n1 McGreal, Chris. \"The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a2f929c61c666ae496c537cf406c9b17",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence A fence would help defend the economy of the United States.\n\nA fence would help defend the economy of the United States during difficult times by protecting American jobs. It is a popular misconception that immigrants only do the types of jobs that native-born Americans will not take. Many professions encompassing construction, grounds-maintenance, housekeeping, and janitorial services actually have the majority of jobs performed by native-born Americans.1 Furthermore, illegal immigrants constitute a tremendous drain on various public benefits. These include medical treatment (because no one who is seriously injured or sick can be turned away from the emergency room as a result of a law called EMTALA)2 , municipal services like fire and police protection, food stamps, and education in public schools. Every dollar that gets spent on illegal immigrants is a dollar that could have been spent on law-abiding American citizens, who need all the help they can get during these difficult times.\n\n1 Camarota, Steven and Jensenius, Karen. \"Jobs Americans Won't Do?\"\n\n2Jordan, Miriam. \"Illegal Immigration Enters the Health-Care Debate.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6ce94d98f52e52fd2f68a51a4e533d32",
"text": "ional americas society immigration house believes mexico us border fence It is important to maintain and enforce the principle of the rule of law, and a fence does that.\n\nIllegal immigrants are openly flaunting the law, and permitting them to enter the country in this way demeans the hard-working individuals who immigrated legally. If people become angrier about illegal immigrants because more of them are coming in without a fence, this may also lead to the negative outcome of poorer treatment of Latinos who live and work legally in the United States. If there were no or very few illegal immigrants, there would be much less tension in communities since everyone would know that all the inhabitants had come there legally.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
d7f8dc36b559d119dc9d73569abc14a7
|
Many developing countries support entrepreneurship and gender equality
In many developing countries, entrepreneurship is supported to create jobs and dynamic work conditions, and women are empowered and politically represented reducing any concerns of feeling as if they don’t belong.
For example in Tunisia, many initiatives are being introduced to promote the entrepreneurship ecosystem including angel investing and attempts to reduce administrative barriers (9). Moreover, regarding gender equality, Tunisia’s Parliament has approved an amendment ensuring that women have greater representation in local politics. This amendment includes a proposal for gender parity in electoral law. (10)
|
[
{
"docid": "21bdbc175a9f66897d1ae923a9b1ec24",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Making a start in encouraging entrepreneurship and gender identity is not likely to be enough to make a county attractive when compared against countries that are much further down the path. According to the Global Gender Gap Report 2016 Tunisia is still in the bottom quartile of the rankings on gender equality.(15)\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "443d6d4ce43416e6aea93888a75f1ad9",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Most job vacancies in African countries ask for a university degree even if a degree is ultimately not the most important attribute for the job. (13) So the opportunities are there for those who would be considered to be intellectuals, it is everyone else for whom opportunities in their native land are lacking.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "daf4815370e09ad2c46523171caee6bd",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities A strong national identity does not necessarily result in a strong sense of belonging. That national identity may have precluded other senses of belonging such as religion, or even close community ties and interactions.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "64aa77aa17441f5f9cd331fd3fbe6f5e",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Education is a crossover point; migrating for education may be about a sense of belonging but it is also an opportunity. A conservative culture that does not educate young women is not providing them with an opportunity that is available elsewhere.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6ac250e58500f536ce6b70eb602eab55",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities It seems hardly likely that feeling undervalued for their skills is a main reason for moving. When moving abroad many will instead encounter racism and concern about increasing numbers of migrants which would at least balance against being undervalued at home. They go instead because the ‘value’ of their skills is monetary – therefore about opportunities – not in terms of reputation and confidence or belonging.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1583fd3ecaad82e7536bb9c0776a47e2",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities If these young intellectuals really are politically conscious then they should desire to stay in their native country and change its system of government. It is the intellectuals who are needed to create, and then grow a democracy so that it represents the whole spectrum of opinion within the country and respects intellectual freedoms.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c346bd8c8417e2de508059e80bb68ceb",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Intellectual migrants do not necessarily discard a traditional value to replace it with a corresponding western value. For example, they seldom renounce their religion in favor of a western one (3).\n\nA weaker sense of nationalism does not have to mean greater internationalism. Instead there may be greater ties to traditional culture, to a region or village. There may be fewer ties to nation, but throughout much of the developing world religion has a far greater adherence than in the west. Thus with a couple of exceptions (Communist states such as China and North Korea) it is more developed countries that are mostly non religious.(12)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0921e01d55dfd6c684d4845b95dd9064",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities If there is really no freedom then these migrants will be asylum seekers and refugees not true intellectual migrants by choice.\n\nEven if there is some alienation from their own native culture these migrants are still travelling to a much more alien culture. This being the case it seems unlikely that alienation is the main cause. Rather they are travelling to a culture that is more alien because they believe there are better opportunities there.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fdc0f223e39a7aecaf5fdc512263aa13",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Many migrants come from countries with strong sense of belonging\n\nMany migrants come from countries with strong sense of belonging, national identities, and political consciousness. For instance, they are European migrants, and in 2016, they were 19.3 million residing in a different EU Member State from the one where they were born (7). With migration an issue even from countries with strong national identities it is clear that that identity is not the major driver of movement.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ffd1df9e1f3b8aa38579a5a392ee2e08",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Developing countries have high unemployment rates and need to invest in job creation\n\nDeveloping countries invest in education and job creation because they have high unemployment rates (6). They need to address the lack of opportunities in order to improve their economy and reduce migration. This is as much the case for those at graduate level as for those who have less of an education. Africa’s 668 universities produce almost 10 million graduates a year, but only half find work.(14) It should therefore be no surprise that many migrate overseas for opportunities.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7db79888d6b1ac0a26c0adac94b74e5f",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Intellectual women migrants outnumber intellectual men migrants\n\nThe need of belonging is greater for women than for men – Bardo and Bardo found that they miss home much more (5). On the other hand, unequal and discriminatory norms can be strong drivers of intellectual female migration (1). More young women than men now migrate for education and, in several European countries today, highly skilled migrant women outnumber highly skilled migrant men (1). Between 2000 and 2011, the number of tertiary-educated migrant women in OECD countries rose by 80%, which exceeded the 60% increase in the number of tertiary-educated migrant men. In Africa for example, the average emigration rates of tertiary-educated women are considerably higher than those of tertiary-educated men (27.7% for women and 17.1% for men).\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4a6227e3793ac6c69352683ef99dcc17",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities The inferiority complex within older generations in the developing countries affects intellectuals’ sense of belonging while in their countries\n\nAn inferiority complex still exists among the older generations in the developing countries as regards the western technical know-how and organisation. A persisting attitude to place more confidence in the experts and specialists belonging to the developed countries than the educated nationals of the country (3) could foster a feeling of underestimation amongst intellectuals while in their countries, and becomes an additional driver of the continuous intellectual migration.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da05cf90f18e2436072174f33d923a83",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Intellectual migrants are more impregnated by ideas of internationalism and universalism\n\nThe concept of nationalism as developed in Europe during the 19th century did not undergo the same evolution in the developing countries. Intellectuals do not identify themselves with their countries the way Europeans do. They are more impregnated by ideas of internationalism and universalism than the western nationalist – for example Mohsin Hamid argues our views of liberal values should be extended beyond nation states with their often unnatural borders. Thus, if they stay abroad after having adhered to the western way of life, they consider themselves part of the great human lot, value free movement as a basic human right, and do not necessarily suffer from complexes of disloyalty towards their home country (3).\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "255a656359afb8c0d7f52fcfbca2bd5c",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Some intellectual migrants already feel a certain degree of alienation towards their national culture before leaving their country\n\nIntellectuals need stimulation, organisation, freedom, and recognition (3) that they usually struggle to find in their countries of origin. Some intellectuals from developing countries already feel a certain degree of alienation towards their national culture before leaving their own country (3). This may be a result of government policy; a lack of intellectual freedom, or because of a generally conservative culture. Thus, they experience a strong lack of intellectual belonging despite the arising economic opportunities resulting from their countries’ investments.\n\nFamily ties also play a strong role in aggravating or mitigating alienation. This is why it is the young, who don’t have dependents themselves, who are often the likeliest to migrate.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9507ac868d83a8515fef53528ffc1227",
"text": "employment international global society immigration minorities Most young intellectuals from developing countries are politically conscious and want to be \"actors\" in policy making\n\nYoung intellectuals from developing countries are to a very large extent politically conscious and active. They want to be \"actors\" and not \"spectators\" in policy making, all the more so when their specialism is impacted by government policy. Those who grow up in an autocratic, or not very democratic state are likely to want to go where they can use their voice. Even in many democracies intellectuals often largely liberal views both for government and teaching are not readily approved by the conservative regimes of their countries where usually the older generation is in power and constitutes a barrier against their progress.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
a8fba51a51d2ed289a4578a4411424e3
|
Remarriage rate shows that even people who go through failed marriages retain faith in the institution of marriage
50% of all divorcees in the UK go on to remarry. (National Office for Statistics 1999) This shows that, although their own marriage failed, they retain faith in the institution of marriage. The fact that, even when marriage has failed to work for them once, many people wish to give it another go shows that it is still meaningful to society. If an institution is so meaningful and relevant to modern society in this way, it cannot possibly be outdated.
|
[
{
"docid": "692b5988e58b59190a5f826654e23dfa",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution The fact that 50% of all divorcees (National Office for Statistics 1999) go on to remarry does not, as the opposition claims, show that marriage is a meaningful and relevant institution but quite the opposite. What this means is that a huge number of people vow to spend the rest of their life with another person, forsaking all others until death do them part, on multiple occasions. This does not show that society still has faith in marriage, it shows that society no longer respects the institution of marriage.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "3888d82475a809ab59a257ccf194a71b",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution The fact that 40% of marriages end in divorce and that this is on the rise (National Office for Statistics 1999) shows that marriage clearly does not offer the stability that the opposition claims it does. In fact, it seems that marriage offers no more stability than a stable relationship, thus making it redundant in terms of raising children.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "79c7e1db9e1b4ebf2c51c8cf0e019421",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution In the last 20 years, the number of people in the UK who identify as religious has declined by 20%. This shows that religion as a whole is becoming less important and, with it, marriage is becoming less important. (British Social Attitudes Survey 2007)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e330fc3db5e5dde4b933139926adbea4",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution If marriage’s main function is to protect against bereavement and divorce then it is essentially protecting against harms that it itself brings. Without marriage, bereavement and divorce would cease to be as serious harms as they currently are.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f273563719ebac89d18ff1c5f3f290b4",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution These statistics do not conclusively prove that married life is a better way to raise a child in every case. It is harmful to promote a message that a marriage is always a better way to raise a child than a single parent family. For instance, in the case of an abusive relationship or an individual who is clearly a completely unsuitable parent, it would be better for the parent who was suitable to raise the child by themselves than to hold up a marriage that was harmful to the raising of that child.\n\nThe choice is not always between a good marriage and single parent life but often between a harmful marriage and single parent life, so marriage does not necessarily promote a better way to raise children. (Cherlin 2009)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b8873c1ed9365c4b717ca20d34f78bbb",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution This argument only works under the assumption that we live in a society where divorce does not exist. If a person enters into a marriage without full awareness of what they have committed to and later need to get out of that marriage, they are free to.\n\nBeing able to leave a marriage, though, does not make marriage a meaningless charade, as the proposition claims. It is still more difficult to leave a marriage than it is to leave a non-marital committed relationship and so it makes a big difference.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d620de9855343e04fe3af18cf96473e2",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution The idea that the existence of marriage undermines other methods of raising children is ridiculous. This is equivalent to saying that making it legal for same-sex couples to adopt undermines raising children as a heterosexual couple or as a single parent.\n\nSome people choosing to raise children in a certain way does not prevent or inhibit other people doing so in a different way.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ba56acb2f6277c0ac3a51af5b686948e",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Firstly, the opposition does not accept that the proposition have proven that marriage has no function outside of religion. However, even if they had proven this, they still have not proven that marriage has no religious function and, therefore, have lost the debate anyway.\n\nThe proposition asserts that because numbers of religious people in the UK are declining, this means marriage is no longer relevant religiously. The fact is that nearly 50% of people in the UK still identify as religious. (British Social Attitudes Survey 2007)The fact that this is less than before is meaningless; it is still the case that marriage has religious significance for nearly half the country.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f9dc27f0bfb2863f191a5bef950f1ad1",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution The purpose of marriage is not an eternal, unrelenting union, whether it is wanted or not. The purpose of marriage is to foster a more stable relationship than would be possible without marital vows. Therefore, the fact that divorce is becoming more common and easier to obtain does not undermine the institution of marriage at all.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b88dba4f5f81f7ec5c90b72b55714079",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Once a couple get married, they have made an official and legal commitment, which makes it more difficult for them to split up. This means that, irrespective of divorce statistics, adding marriage to a relationship will only serve to make it more stable and give the children of that relationship more security. Therefore marriage still gives benefits in modern society and is not outdated. (Waite 2000)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "240ce9d8fa739c66ca618ebb147c879e",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Marriage promotes a better way to raise children\n\nMarriage promotes raising children as part of a monogamous couple. Without marriage, the frequency of single parent families would rise. Statistically, children who come from single parent families are more likely to live under the poverty line, more likely to be convicted of a criminal offence, more likely to become ill, less likely to complete every level of education and more likely to grow up to have low incomes themselves. (O’Neill 2002) Clearly then, marriage provides a lot of goods to children of married families, thus it provides goods in modern society and therefore cannot be outdated.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ae0f396b4f664b56e65f3f5fcbe59220",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Marriage is an important institution to religious people\n\nNearly 50% of people in the UK identify as being part of some religion. (British Social Attitudes Survey 2007) Marriage is an integral part of most major religions, particularly Christianity, where it is one of the sacraments(Lehmkuhl, 1910) which are necessary for salvation (Vatican.va). which encompasses over 40% of the population of the UK. (British Social Attitudes Survey 2007) While there are still such huge numbers of people who practice religions to which marriage is integral, marriage cannot be outdated.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "14e4c6fe8bea0767b6484dfac8b75e57",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Removes the transient and casual aspects of a monogamous relationship, thus giving a child a far more stable environment.\n\nMarriage represents a commitment and a bond that is, although not unbreakable, difficult to break. This may not be appropriate for couples who wish to have a more casual relationship, however, it offers a more stable and official relationship, which is far preferable to a more transient relationship when it comes to raising a child. (Waite 2000)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e1f9000d74cfb685c521b8f16defa85e",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Marriage represents a legal bond which protects both parties in a relationship\n\nMarriage has relevance to modern society in not only an emotional, religious and practical sense but also in a legal sense. According to Sir Mark Potter in English Law marriage is regarded as an \"age-old institution\" that is \"by longstanding definition and acceptance\" a formal relationship between a man and a woman primarily designed for producing and rearing children. It gives many rights in areas like property rights and pension benefits.(Travis, 2011) A marital bond gives important rights to both parties in cases of events such as severe injury, bereavement or even divorce. An institution cannot be outdated if it retains legal importance in modern society.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e7c836302b3dfbfa5784b17503213c72",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Unreasonable commitment to expect of people\n\nThe average age, in the UK, to get married is approximately 30 years old. (Office for National Statistics 1999) Life expectancy in the UK is approximately 80 years. (Office for National Statistics 1999) This means the average marriage expects people to commit to maintain a certain way of life for a period that is longer than they have actually been alive. This goes hand in hand with the rise of social acceptability of people having more than one life partner in their life to show that either marriage is an unreasonable expectation of someone or a meaningless charade that is not actually expected to be maintained.(Cherlin 2009)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "315969d778cbf02d86992788119d9596",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Undermines same-sex couples and single parent families as legitimate ways of raising children\n\nAs explained in the first proposition point, one of the primary functions of marriage is seen to be to raise children. Marriage is therefore seen as the best way to raise children. This undermines same-sex couples and single parent families raising children.\n\nThe existence of marriage is essentially saying that same-sex couples and single parents are less able of raising children than heterosexual couples. Marriage, therefore, can be seen to promote outdated ideals that our society no longer holds and, as such, is itself an outdated institution.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c5273f3f81a4639dc02bae12b51782c2",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Frequency and accessibility of divorce undermines the entire purpose of marriage\n\nWith pre-nuptials, which essentially amount to pre-planning for divorce, heavily on the rise, and divorces becoming ever easier to obtain, it is clear that our society no longer respects marriage as a permanent institution. Serial monogamy is also becoming ever more common, with 50% of all divorcees in the UK going on to remarry. (Office for National Statistics)\n\nSince the purpose of marriage has always been to foster a stable and permanent relationship, it is clearly an entirely outdated institution as it no longer leads to a stable or permanent relationship.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8c2343b5deb8c15c9d0d0ed1525104a5",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Does not provide any more of a stable environment for child rearing than a regular monogamous relationship\n\nThe main objective of marriage is often said to be bringing up children in a stable environment. However in 2010 in the UK there were 119589 divorces; 11.1 per 1000 married population. Furthermore in the same year, the median duration of a marriage remained at a low level of 11.4 years.(Rogers, 2011) This clearly does not fulfill the initial basic aim of marriage as so many marriages end In divorce with the resulting splits affecting the children. In fact, a much more stable environment can be provided by a better relationship, even without matrimonial vows (Cherlin 2009). This relationship should not have to be through marriage; rather it would simply be a partnership in the way that many couples already live today.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "196d17f6bf15a34336392b19bcd758d0",
"text": " marriage society family house believes marriage outdated institution Marriage should be for all by Marriage is a religious institution in a society of declining religion\n\nThe proposition believes that they have proven that marriage no longer has a social or practical function. This leaves its only function as one of religious significance. However, with the percentage of people in the UK who identify as having no religion having risen by nearly 20% in the last 20 years and the percentage of people who identify as religious having dropped by approximately the same amount (British Social Attitudes Surveys 2007). Church attendance is even lower at a mere 6%(whychurch.org.uk). As a result there needs to be a new more inclusive institution that is open to all religions and those of no religion. It is clear that marriage can no longer perform this function for everyone in society.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
754a8776b330af2efd4e3d5f46904577
|
The social security system is unsustainable in the status quo
Social Security is in Crisis. Social Security in the United States, as in most western liberal democracies, is a pay-as-you-go system and has always been so. As such, it is an intergenerational wealth transfer. The solvency of the system therefore relies on favourable demographics; particularly birth rate and longevity. In the United States the birth rate when Social Security was created was 2.3 children per woman but had risen to 3.0 by 1950. Today it is 2.06. The average life expectancy in 1935 was 63 and today it is 75. While this may be representative of an improvement in quality-of-life for many Americans, these demographic changes also indicate the increasing burden that social security systems are being put under. [1]
As a result of changing demographic factors, the number of workers paying Social Security payroll taxes has gone from 16 for every retiree in 1950 to just 3.3 in 1997. This ration will continue to decline to just 2 to 1 by 2025. This has meant the tax has been increased thirty times in sixty-two years to compensate. Originally it was just 2 percent on a maximum taxable income of $300, now it is 12.4 percent of a maximum income of $65,400. This will have to be raised to 18 percent to pay for all promised current benefits, and if Medicare is included the tax will have to go to nearly 28 percent. [2]
Social Security is an unsuitable approach to protecting the welfare of a retiring workforce. The social security system as it stands is unsustainable, and will place an excessive tax burden on the current working population of the USA, who will be expected to pay for the impending retirement of almost 70 million members of the “baby boomer” generation. This crisis is likely to begin in 2016 when- according to experts- more money will be paid out by the federal government in social security benefits than it will receive in payroll taxes. [3]
In many ways Social Security has now just become a giant ponzi scheme. As the Cato Institute has argued: “Just like Ponzi's plan, Social Security does not make any real investments -- it just takes money from later 'investors' or taxpayers, to pay benefits to the scheme’s earlier, now retired, entrants. Like Ponzi, Social Security will not be able to recruit new "investors" fast enough to continue paying promised benefits to previous investors. Because each year there are fewer young workers relative to the number of retirees, Social Security will eventually collapse, just like Ponzi's scheme.” [4]
Faced with this impending crisis, privatizing is at worst the best of the 'bad' options. It provides an opportunity to make the system sustainable and to make it fair to all generations by having everyone pay for their own retirement rather than someone else’s. [5]
[1] Crane, Edward. "The Case for Privatizing America's Social Security System." CATO Institute. 10 December 1997. http://www.cato.org/testimony/art-22.html
[2] Crane, Edward. "The Case for Privatizing America's Social Security System." CATO Institute. 10 December 1997. http://www.cato.org/testimony/art-22.html
[3] San Diego Union Tribune. "Privatizing Social Security Still a Good Idea." San Diego Union Tribune. http://www.creators.com/opinion/daily-editorials/privatizing-social-security-still-a-good-idea.html
[4] Cato Institute. “Why is Social Security often called a Ponzi scheme?”. Cato Institute. 11 May 1999. http://www.socialsecurity.org/daily/05-11-99.html ;
[5] Kotlikoff, Lawrence. "Privatizing social security the right way". Testimony to the Committee on Ways and Means. 3 June 3 1998. http://people.bu.edu/kotlikof/Ways&Means.pdf
|
[
{
"docid": "dd073ce604993483721216eee3fb2aa5",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Social Security is not in crisis and there is no need for privatization. Social Security is completely solvent today, and will be into the future because it has a dedicated income stream that covers its costs and consistently generates a surplus, which today is $2.5 trillion.\n\nProposition’s dire prediction of the collapse of social security’s financial situation is misleading. The Social Security surplus will grow to approximately $4.3 trillion in 2023, and that reserves will be sufficient to pay full benefits through to 2037. Even after this it would still be able to pay 78%. Moreover, there are plenty of ways to reform Social Security to make it more fiscally sound without privatizing it, including simply raising taxes to fund it better. [1]\n\nFurthermore the problem that affects social security of falling numbers of contributors to each retiree will also affect private pensions, at least in the short to medium term, just in a different way. If all younger pensioners went over to just paying for their own future retirement who is to pay for current retirees or those who are shortly to retire. These people will still need to have their pensions paid for. They will not have time to save up a personal pension and so will be relying on current workers – but such workers will not want to pay more when they are explicitly just paying for someone else as they are already paying for themselves separately.\n\n[1] Roosevelt, James.\"Social Security at 75: Crisis Is More Myth Than Fact.\" Huffington Post. 11 August 11 2010. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-roosevelt/social-security-at-75-cri_...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "76d70ad791f3e3d4fe603b681972abdc",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman. Argued in 2004 that: “Social Security is a government program that works, a demonstration that a modest amount of taxing and spending can make people's lives better and more secure. And that's why the right wants to destroy it.\" [1] The problem with Social Security is not that it does not work, nor that it fails the poor. Rather, as Krugman notes, social security uses limited taxation to implement a clear and successful vision of social justice. As a consequence, the social security system has been repeatedly attacked by right wing and libertarian politicians. Such attacks are not motivated by the merits or failure of the social security system itself, but by political ambition and a desire to forcefully implement alternative normative schema within society.\n\nPrivatizing Social Security would require costly new government bureaucracies. From the standpoint of the system as a whole, privatization would add enormous administrative burdens – and costs. The government would need to establish and track many small accounts, perhaps as many accounts as there are taxpaying workers—157 million in 2010. [2] Often these accounts would be too small so that profit making firms would be unwilling to take them on. There would need to be thousands of workers to manage these accounts. In contrast, today’s Social Security has minimal administrative costs amounting to less than 1 per cent of annual revenues. [3]\n\nIt is also unlikely that individuals will be able to invest successfully on their own, although they may believe they can, leading to a great number of retirees actually being worse off after privatization.\n\n[1] Paul Krugman. \"Inventing a crisis.\" New York Times. 7 December 2004. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=2&scp=539&sq...\n\n[2] Wihbey, John, ‘2011 Annual Report by the Social Security Board of Trustees’, Journalist’s Resource, 9 June 2011, http://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/politics/social-security-report-2011/\n\n[3] Anrig, Greg and Wasow, Bernard. \"Twelve reasons why privatizing social security is a bad idea\". The Century Foundation. 14 February 2005. http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "dddb9c67da7f54d1e7a089718b93c701",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Privatizing Social Security would harm economic growth, not help it. Privatization during the current economic crisis would have been disaster, and so doing it now is a risk for any upcoming or future crisis. Privatization in the midst of the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression would have caused households to have lost even more of their assets, had their investments been invested in the U.S. stock market or in funds exposed to complicated and high risk financial instruments.\n\nPrivatizing social security might therefore increase economic growth in the boom times but this would be at the expense of sharper downturns. Proposition’s argument implicitly assumes that the money at the moment does not improve economic growth. On the contrary the government is regularly investing the money in much the same way as private business would – and often on much more long term projects such as infrastructure that fit better with a long term saving than the way that banks invest.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0add56b3247e2cde35ac948db12e56d9",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Most of these arguments can be undercut by noting that the privatization of Social Security accounts would be voluntary, and thus anyone who believed the argument that the government invests better would be free to leave their account as it is, unchanged.\n\nThose who believe they can do a better job of investing and managing their money on their own should be given the freedom to do so. In this respect it is important to remember the origin of the money in these accounts: it has been paid in by the individuals themselves. As James Roosevelt (CEO of the health insurance firm Tufts Health Plan) notes: \" Those ‘baby boomers’ who are going to bust Social Security when they retire? They have been paying into the system for more than 40 years, generating the large surplus the program has accumulated. Much of the money that baby boomers are and will be drawing on from Social Security, is, and will be, their own.” [1] As it is their money which they have paid in in the first place, members of the baby boomer generation should have a right to choose how they invest –it. If that means choosing to go private and pursue riskier investments, so be it. The money paid out by the social security system belongs to those who paid it in, and the government should not deprive taxpayers from exercising free choice over the uses to which their money is put. Moreover, none of the other arguments adduced by side opposition do anything to address the ways in which Social Security currently harms the poor, the redressing of which alone justifies privatizing Social Security.\n\n[1] Roosevelt, James.\"Social Security at 75: Crisis Is More Myth Than Fact.\" Huffington Post. 11 August 11 2010. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-roosevelt/social-security-at-75-cri_b_677058.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c99d7dfeece009eb28480730912d3df3",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes The American people do not oppose privatization -in fact, most support it. A 2010 poll showed overwhelming support for personal accounts. Republican voters support it 65-21, but even Democrat voters like it, 50-36. [1] A poll commissioned by the Cato Institute through the prestigious Public Opinion Strategies polling company showed that 69 percent of Americans favored switching from the pay-as-you-go system to a fully funded, individually capitalized system. Only 11 percent said they opposed the idea. [2] A 1994 Luntz Research poll found that 82 percent of American adults under the age of 35 favored having at least a portion of their payroll taxes invested instead in stocks and bonds. In fact, among the so-called Generation Xers in America, by a margin of two-to-one they think they are more likely to encounter a UFO in their lifetime than they are to ever receive a single Social Security check.\n\nEven more remarkable, perhaps, was a poll taken in 1997 by White House pollster Mark Penn for the Democratic Leadership Council, a group of moderate Democrats with whom President Clinton was affiliated prior to his election. That poll found that 73 percent of Democrats favor being allowed to invest some or all their payroll tax in private accounts. [3] Moreover, the 'alternatives liks raising taxes and reducing benefits are merely kicking the problem further down the road but it will still become a problem at some point. At the same time either raising taxes or reducing benefits would be unfair – raising taxes because it would mean today’s generation of workers paying more than their parents for the same benefit and cutting benefits because it would mean that retirees would be getting less out than they were promised.'\n\nThe alternatives would also be particularly devastating for the poor. Individuals who are hired pay the cost of the so-called employer's share of the payroll tax through reduced wages. Therefore, an increase in the payroll tax would result in less money in workers' going to workers. It is also important to remember that the payroll tax is an extremely regressive tax. Likewise a reduction in benefits would disproportionately hurt the poor since they are more likely than the wealthy to be dependent on Social Security benefits. [4]\n\n[1] Roth, Andrew. \"Privatize Social Security? Hell Yeah!\". Club for Growth.21 September 21 2010. http://www.clubforgrowth.org/perm/?postID=14110\n\n[2] Crane, Edward. \"The Case for Privatizing America's Social Security System.\" CATO Institute. 10 December 1997. http://www.cato.org/testimony/art-22.html\n\n[3] Crane, Edward. \"The Case for Privatizing America's Social Security System.\" CATO Institute. 10 December 1997. http://www.cato.org/testimony/art-22.html\n\n[4] Tanner, Michael. \"Privatizing Social Security: A Big Boost for the Poor.\" CATO. 26 July 1996. http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp4.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c9c92305e7c32e3a69a360a31071ecf0",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Privatization would increase national savings and provide a new pool of capital for investment that would be particularly beneficial to the poor. As it stands, Social Security is a net loss maker for the American taxpayer, and this situation will only continue to get worse unless privatization is enacted: those born after the baby boom will forfeit 10 cents of every dollar they earn in payments towards the up keep of the Social Security system.\n\nBy contrast, under privatization people would actually save resources that businesses can invest. As Alan Greenspan has pointed out, the economic benefits of privatization of Social Security are potentially enormous. In Chile, as Dr. Piñera has noted, there has been real economic growth of 7 percent a year over the past decade, energized by a savings rate in excess of 20 percent. [1]\n\nMartin Feldstein, a Harvard economist, formerly Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Reagan, estimated that the present value to the U.S. economy of investing the future cash flow of payroll taxes in real assets would be on the order of $10 to $20 trillion. That would mean a permanent, significant boost to economic growth. [2]\n\n[1] Crane, Edward. \"The Case for Privatizing America's Social Security System.\" CATO Institute. 10 December 1997. http://www.cato.org/testimony/art-22.html\n\n[2] Crane, Edward. \"The Case for Privatizing America's Social Security System.\" CATO Institute. 10 December 1997. http://www.cato.org/testimony/art-22.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0ad12d4e4ba2c8a5ccabfc7e65ef6811",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Privatising social security will increase the amount of money that reitrees can draw on\n\nPrivate accounts would provide retirees with a higher rate of return on investments. [1] Privatization would give investment decisions to account holders. This does not mean that Social Security money for the under 55’s would go to Wall Street.. This could be left to the individual's discretion. Potentially this could include government funds. But with government’s record of mismanagement, and a $14 trillion deficit, it seems unlikely that many people would join that choice. [2]\n\nAs Andrew Roth argues, \"Democrats will say supporters of personal accounts will allow people's fragile retirement plans to be subjected to the whims of the stock market, but that's just more demagoguery. First, personal accounts would be voluntary. If you like the current system (the one that [can be raided by] politicians), you can stay put and be subjected to decreasingly low returns as Social Security goes bankrupt. But if you want your money protected from politicians and have the opportunity to invest in the same financial assets that politicians invest in their own retirement plans (most are well-diversified long term funds), then you should have that option.\" [3\n\nSocial Security privatization would actually help the economically marginalised in two ways. Firstly, by ending the harm social security currently does; Those at the poverty level need every cent just to survive. Even those in the lower-middle class don’t money to put into a wealth-generating retirement account. They have to rely on social security income to pay the bills when they reach retirement. Unfortunately, current social security pay-outs are at or below the poverty level. The money earned in benefits based on a retiree’s contributions during their working life is less than the return on a passbook savings account. [4]\n\nSecondly, these same groups would be amongst the biggest 'winners' from privatization. By providing a much higher rate of return, privatization would raise the incomes of those elderly retirees who are most in need.\n\nThe current system contains many inequities that leave the poor at a disadvantage. For instance, the low-income elderly are most likely to be dependent on Social Security benefits for most or all of their retirement income. But despite a progressive benefit structure, Social Security benefits are inadequate for the elderly poor's retirement needs. [5]\n\nPrivatizing Social Security would improve individual liberty. Privatization would give all Americans the opportunity to participate in the economy through investments. Everyone would become capitalists and stock owners reducing the division of labour and capital and restoring the ownership that was the initial foundation of the American dream. [6]\n\nMoreover, privatized accounts would be transferable within families, which current Social Security accounts are not. These privatized accounts would be personal assets, much like a house or a 401k account. On death, privatised social security accounts could pass to an individual’s heirs. With the current system, this cannot be done. Workers who have spent their lives paying withholding taxes are, in effect, denied a proprietary claim over money that, by rights, belongs to them. [7]\n\nThis would make privatization a progressive move. Because the wealthy generally live longer than the poor, they receive a higher total of Social Security payments over the course of their lifetimes. This would be evened out if remaining benefits could be passed on. [8] Privatizing Social Security increases personal choice and gives people control over what they paid and thus are entitled to. Overall, therefore, privatizing Social Security would increase the amount of money that marginalised retirees receive and would give all retirees more freedom to invest and distribute social security payments.\n\n[1] Tanner, Michael. \"Privatizing Social Security: A Big Boost for the Poor.\" CATO. 26 July 1996. http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp4.html\n\n[2] Roth, Andrew. \"Privatize Social Security? Hell Yeah!\". Club for Growth.21 September 21 2010. http://www.clubforgrowth.org/perm/?postID=14110\n\n[3] Roth, Andrew. \"Privatize Social Security? Hell Yeah!\". Club for Growth.21 September 21 2010. http://www.clubforgrowth.org/perm/?postID=14110\n\n[4] Tanner, Michael. \"Privatizing Social Security: A Big Boost for the Poor.\" CATO. 26 July 1996. http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp4.html\n\n[5] Tanner, Michael. \"Privatizing Social Security: A Big Boost for the Poor.\" CATO. 26 July 1996. http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp4.html\n\n[6] Tanner, Michael. \"Privatizing Social Security: A Big Boost for the Poor.\" CATO. 26 July 1996. http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp4.html\n\n[7] Roth, Andrew. \"Privatize Social Security? Hell Yeah!\". Club for Growth.21 September 21 2010. http://www.clubforgrowth.org/perm/?postID=14110\n\n[8] Tanner, Michael. \"Privatizing Social Security: A Big Boost for the Poor.\" CATO. 26 July 1996. http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp4.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "20abfc8041b3c327acdf4ec1ac129e8d",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Privatising social security would improve economic growth\n\nPrivatizing social security would enable investment of savings. Commentator Alex Schibuola argues that: \"If Social Security were privatized, people would deposit their income with a bank. People actually save resources that businesses can invest. We, as true savers, get more resources in the future.\" [1] As a result private accounts would also increase investments, jobs and wages. Michael Tanner of the think tank the Cato Institute argues: \"Social Security drains capital from the poorest areas of the country, leaving less money available for new investment and job creation. Privatization would increase national savings and provide a new pool of capital for investment that would be particularly beneficial to the poor.\" [2]\n\nCurrently Social Security represents a net loss for taxpayers and beneficiaries. Social Security, although key to the restructuring the of USA’s social contract following the great depression, represents a bad deal for the post-war American economy. Moreover, this deal has gotten worse over time. 'Baby boomers' are projected to lose roughly 5 cents of every dollar they earn to the OASI program in taxes net of benefits. Young adults who came of age in the early 1990s and today's children are on course to lose over 7 cents of every dollar they earn in net taxes. If OASI taxes were to be raised immediately by the amount needed to pay for OASI benefits on an on-going basis, baby boomers would forfeit 6 cents of every dollar they earn in net OASI taxes. For those born later it would be 10 cents. [3]\n\nChange could be implemented gradually. Andrew Roth argues: “While Americans in retirement or approaching retirement would probably stay in the current system [if Social Security were to be privatized], younger workers should have the option to invest a portion of their money in financial assets other than U.S. Treasuries. These accounts would be the ultimate \"lock box\" - they would prevent politicians in Washington from raiding the Trust Fund. The truth is that taxpayers bail out politicians every year thanks to Social Security. Congress and the White House spend more money than they have, so they steal money from Social Security to help pay for it. That needs to stop and there is no responsible way of doing that except with personal accounts.” [4] This would make social security much more sustainable as there would no longer be the risk of the money being spent elsewhere.\n\nPut simply, privatizing Social Security would actually boost economic growth and lead to better-protected investments by beneficiaries, benefiting not only themselves but the nation at large. Thus Social Security should be privatized.\n\n[1] Schibuola, Alex. \"Time to Privatize? The Economics of Social Security.\" Open Markets. 16 November 2010. http://www.openmarket.org/2010/11/16/time-to-privatize-the-economics-of-...\n\n[2] Tanner, Michael. \"Privatizing Social Security: A Big Boost for the Poor.\" CATO. 26 July 1996. http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/ssps/ssp4.html\n\n[3] Kotlikoff, Lawrence. \"Privatizing social security the right way\". Testimony to the Committee on Ways and Means. 3 June 3 1998. http://people.bu.edu/kotlikof/Ways&Means.pdf\n\n[4] Roth, Andrew. \"Privatize Social Security? Hell Yeah!\". Club for Growth.21 September 21 2010. http://www.clubforgrowth.org/perm/ ?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7ce5fa88bb8fe7aa1c5c22d1a89fb944",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Privatising the social security system would harm economic growth\n\nCreating private accounts could have an impact on economic growth, which in turn would hit social security's future finances. Economic growth could be hit as privatizing Social Security will increase federal deficits and as a result debt significantly, while increasing the likelihood that national savings will decline which will happen as baby boomers retire anyway and draw down their savings.\n\nAn analysis by the Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities shows that the proposed privatization by Obama would add $1 trillion in new federal debt in its first decade of implementation, and a further $3.5 trillion in the following decade. [1] Because households change their saving and spending levels in response to economic conditions privatization is actually more likely to reduce than increase national savings. This is because households that consider the new accounts to constitute meaningful increases in their retirement wealth might well reduce their other saving. Diamond and Orszag argue, 'If anything, our impression is that diverting a portion of the current Social Security surplus into individual accounts could reduce national saving.' That, in turn, would further weaken economic growth and our capacity to pay for the retirement of the baby boomers.\" [2]\n\nThe deficit, and as a result national debt, would increase because trillions of dollars which had previously been paying for current retirees would be taken out of the system to be invested privately. Those who are already retired will however still need to draw a pension so the government would need to borrow the money to be able to pay for these pensions. [3]\n\nContrary to side proposition’s assertions, privatization also would not increase capital available for investment. Proponents of privatization claim that the flow of dollars into private accounts and then into the equity markets will stimulate the economy. However, as the social security system underwent the transition into private ownership, each dollar invested in a financial instrument via the proprietary freedoms afforded to account holders, would result in the government borrowing a dollar to cover pay outs to those currently drawing from the social security system.\n\nThus, the supposed benefit of a privatised social security system is entirely eliminated by increased government borrowing, as the net impact on the capital available for investment is zero. [4]\n\nWhile four fifths of tax dollars for social security is spent immediately the final fifth purchases Treasury securities through trust funds. Privatization would hasten depletion of these funds. President Bush proposed diverting up to 4 percentage points of payroll tax to create the private accounts but with payroll currently 12.4% this would still be significantly more than the one fifth that is currently left over so depleting reserves. Funds now being set aside to build up the Trust Funds to provide for retiring baby boomers would be being used instead to pay for the privatization accounts. The Trust Funds would be exhausted much sooner than the thirty-eight to forty-eight years projected if nothing is done. In such a short time frame, the investments in the personal accounts will not be nearly large enough to provide an adequate cushion. [5]\n\n[1] Anrig, Greg and Wasow, Bernard. \"Twelve reasons why privatizing social security is a bad idea\". The Century Foundation. 14 February 2005. http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf\n\n[2] Anrig, Greg and Wasow, Bernard. \"Twelve reasons why privatizing social security is a bad idea\". The Century Foundation. 14 February 2005. http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf\n\n[3] Spitzer, Elliot. \"Can we finally kill this terrible idea?\" Slate. 4 February 2009. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_best_policy/2009/02/privatize_social_security.html\n\n[4] Spitzer, Elliot. \"Can we finally kill this terrible idea?\" Slate. 4 February 2009. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_best_policy/2009/02/privatize_social_security.html\n\n[5] Anrig, Greg and Wasow, Bernard. \"Twelve reasons why privatizing social security is a bad idea\". The Century Foundation. 14 February 2005. http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cb7308b4b5642271b0783acb8e78eb71",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes Privatising social security will harm retirees\n\nAs Greg Anrig and Bernard Wasow of the non-partisan think tank the Century Foundation argue: \"Privatization advocates like to stress the appeal of 'individual choice' and 'personal control,' while assuming in their forecasts that everyone’s accounts will match the overall performance of the stock market. But… research by Princeton University economist Burton G. Malkiel found that even professional money managers over time significantly underperformed indexes of the entire market.” [1] Most people don’t have the knowledge to manage their own investments. A Securities and Exchange Commission report showed the extent of financial illiteracy for example half of adults don’t know what a stock market is, half don’t understand the purpose of diversifying investments and 45% believe it provides “a guarantee that [their] portfolio won’t suffer if the stock market falls” [2] Including all the management costs it is safe to say that growth from individual accounts will be lower than the market average.\n\nThe private sector is therefore in no better a position to make investment decisions than the state. Privatised accounts would bring their own problems. They are vulnerable to market downturns. Despite crashes the long term return from shares has always been positive. But this does not help those that hit retirement age during a period when the stock market is down. With private pensions people would be relying on luck that they retire at the right time or happened to pick winning stocks. [3]\n\nThe economist Paul Krugman has pointed out, privatizers make incredible assumptions about the likely performance of the market in order to be able to justify their claim that private accounts would outdo the current system. The price-earnings ratio would need to be around 70 to 1 by 2050. This is unrealistic and would be an immense bubble as a P/E ratio of 20 to 1 is considered more normal today. [4]\n\nIf returns are low then there the added worry that privatized social security may not beat inflation. This would mean that retiree’s pensions become worth less and less. At the moment Social Security payouts are indexed to wages, which historically have exceeded inflation so providing protection. Privatizing social security would have a big impact on those who want to remain in the system through falling tax revenues. Implementing private accounts will take 4 per-cent of the 12.4 per-cent taken from each worker’s annual pay out of the collective fund. Thus, almost a 3rd of the revenue generated by social security taxes will be removed. Drastic benefit cuts or increased taxes will have to occur even sooner, which is a recipe for disaster. [5]\n\nIt is for reasons such as these that privatization of similar social security systems has disappointed elsewhere, as Anrig and Wasow argue: \"Advocates of privatization often cite other countries, such as Chile and the United Kingdom, where the governments pushed workers into personal investment accounts to reduce the long-term obligations of their Social Security systems, as models for the United States to emulate. But the sobering experiences in those countries actually provide strong arguments against privatization. A report last year from the World Bank, once an enthusiastic privatization proponent, expressed disappointment that in Chile, and in most other Latin American countries that followed in its footsteps, “more than half of all workers [are excluded] from even a semblance of a safety net during their old age.”” [6] Therefore privatizing Social Security would actually harm retirees and undermine the entire system, and so Social Security should not be privatized.\n\n[1] Anrig, Greg and Wasow, Bernard. \"Twelve reasons why privatizing social security is a bad idea\". The Century Foundation. 14 February 2005. http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf\n\n[2] Office of Investor Education and Assistance Securities and Exchange Commission, ‘The Facts on Saving and Investing’, April 1999, http://www.sec.gov/pdf/report99.pdf pp.16-19\n\n[3] Spitzer, Elliot. \"Can we finally kill this terrible idea?\" Slate. 4 February 2009. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_best_policy/2009/02/privatize_social_security.html\n\n[4] Spitzer, Elliot. \"Can we finally kill this terrible idea?\" Slate. 4 February 2009. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_best_policy/2009/02/privatize_social_security.html\n\n[5] Anrig, Greg and Wasow, Bernard. \"Twelve reasons why privatizing social security is a bad idea\". The Century Foundation. 14 February 2005. http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf\n\n[6] Anrig, Greg and Wasow, Bernard. \"Twelve reasons why privatizing social security is a bad idea\". The Century Foundation. 14 February 2005. http://tcf.org/media-center/pdfs/pr46/12badideas.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d5902944c6af806efa2c5a456a40b26d",
"text": "economic policy society family house would privatize usas social security schemes The problems with the social security are systemic, not inherent\n\nSocial security is currently solvent and will be into the future due to its dedicated income stream that consistently generates a surplus, which today is $2.5 trillion. This surplus will even grow to approximately $4.3 trillion in 2023, It is only after 2037 when there will begin to be a deficit.(11)\n\nSide opposition will concede that there is a long-run financing problem, but it is a problem of modest size. There would only need to be revenues equal to 0.54% of GDP to extend the life of the social security trust fund into the 22nd century, with no change in benefits. This is only about one-quarter of the revenue lost each year because of President Bush's tax cuts. [1]\n\nBudget shortfalls- of the sort that side proposition’s case is based on- Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman argues: \" has much more to do with tax cuts - cuts that Mr. Bush nonetheless insists on making permanent - than it does with Social Security. But since the politics of privatization depend on convincing the public that there is a Social Security crisis, the privatizers have done their best to invent one.\" [2]\n\nKrugman goes on to argue against the twisted logic of privatization: “My favorite example of their three-card-monte logic goes like this: first, they insist that the Social Security system's current surplus and the trust fund it has been accumulating with that surplus are meaningless. Social Security, they say, isn't really an independent entity - it's just part of the federal government… the same people who claim that Social Security isn't an independent entity when it runs surpluses also insist that late next decade, when the benefit payments start to exceed the payroll tax receipts, this will represent a crisis - you see, Social Security has its own dedicated financing, and therefore must stand on its own. There's no honest way anyone can hold both these positions, but very little about the privatizers' position is honest. They come to bury Social Security, not to save it. They aren't sincerely concerned about the possibility that the system will someday fail; they're disturbed by the system's historic success.” [3]\n\nThere are many other ways to improve and reform Social Security without privatizing it. Robert L. Clark, an economist at North Carolina State University who specializes in aging issues, formerly served as a chairman of a national panel on Social Security's financial status; he has said that future options for Social Security are clear: \"You either raise taxes or you cut benefits. There are lots of ways to do both.\" These alternatives are also backed by the American people. The American people, despite voting for Republicans, have said over and over in polls that they would pay more in taxes to save entitlements such as Social Security. [4] Therefore Social Security is not fundamentally unsound, and alternative reforms should be made without privatizations.\n\n[1] Paul Krugman. \"Inventing a crisis.\" New York Times. 7 December 2004. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=2&scp=539&sq...\n\n[2] Paul Krugman. \"Inventing a crisis.\" New York Times. 7 December 2004. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=2&scp=539&sq...\n\n[3] Paul Krugman. \"Inventing a crisis.\" New York Times. 7 December 2004. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=2&scp=539&sq...\n\n[4] Dick, Stephen. \"Op-Ed: Yes, leave Social Security alone.\" CNHI News Service. 19 November 2010. http://record-eagle.com/opinion/x877132458/Op-Ed-Yes-leave-Social-Securi...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
844b0cfba060100747cfdc4ef2ff2a7c
|
This is a gateway privilege that allows these people to integrate into American society.
Drivers licenses are used a major form of identification in America and so granting illegal immigrants these forms of identification can help enfranchise one of the most exploited minorities in America.
Despite American feelings on illegal immigrants, they are there in their society, contribute to their communities and are a group of people that are routinely and unjustly exploited because of their lack of access to state protection. Despite popular opinion of this being a punishment for breaking their laws, these people operate like any other citizen in American society and are human beings who deserve to be treated as such and to be offered at least some level of protection for the fact that they are human and for what they contribute to America communities and society.
Providing these people with a proper form of identification, especially a driver’s license, which is almost universally accepted as an adequate form of identification to access services from the state and to interact with the rest of society. Specifically, this allows immigrant communities to not feel as though they are confined to an isolated area as they now can travel further distances to gain better employment without fear of being caught and thrown into jail [1] . Moreover, this allows them access to all services offered by the state that require identification such as voter registration.
Therefore, this helps enfranchise a group that is normally exploited in America society.
[1] "Driver's Licenses for Undocumented Aliens." Institute of Governmental Studies. UC Berkeley, n. d. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/research/quickhelp/policy/social/immigra...
|
[
{
"docid": "cd3fc53af9fe2c62e6d83617aafd509a",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses These people do not deserve to use the services of the USA. They are not citizens, they are law-breakers and society has no obligation to make life easier or more comfortable for those who break the law. Regardless of their contributions to society or the economy, illegal immigrants have broken the law. The consequences of their breaches of the law should be remedied. If necessary, illegal immigrants should be punished in proportion to the harm that their act has caused. Under no circumstances should illegal acts allow these individuals to gain access to the status and legal privileges that citizenship confers.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "e082c742e104c78de213420834320064",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This is a marginal impact at best. The vast majority of illegal immigrants will try to flee the scene of a crash because they would be worried that the police might be called in to investigate the crash and find out they are illegal and therefore deport them. Although this isn’t always a realistic expectation, it is an expectation that most people in the illegal immigrant community have because of their paranoia over the state pursuing them and wanting to deport them. This fear is only exacerbated by the anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric that permeates American society at present and makes them feel that the state will try to seek them out however they can to get rid of them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a5f500c8d1fca26947c30c019c11b975",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses It is very unlikely that illegal immigrants will even opt into this scheme. Illegal immigrants are notoriously paranoid about going to the state for any form of assistance as they are afraid of deportation. The vast majority of them would rather risk getting caught driving without a license then they would risk going to the state as an illegal to receive a license in the first place.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "39d15832f944892ed57213b8e7602fff",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses There is a very big difference between rewarding people for breaking the law and taking positive action to prevent them being exploited and financially marginalised. The United States’ legal system supposedly exists to protect everyone resident within its borders – not just individuals possessing citizenship. Giving illegal immigrants basic access to very rudimentary things such as the driver’s education does not reward law-breaking or undermine the rule of law. Even if side opposition disagree with granting illegal immigrants any rights, this argument is still defeated by the beneficial consequences of ensuring that a much larger number of drivers have received training on the rules of the road. Under the resolution, America’s highways and cities will generally safer for both pedestrians and other drivers.\n\nOn the point of deterrence, there are already very large deterrents to trying to immigrate illegally. The trek is long, dangerous and controlled by violent groups on either side of the border. Bandits and people smugglers engage in robberies and people trafficking on the Mexican side; extremist groups such as the minutemen attempt to assault or shoot immigrants in transit from the American side. Not being able to get a driver’s license once here is not in any way a deterrent that holds any weight when put in context.\n\nBeing able to drive is a necessary skill in the US, where under-investment in public transport infrastructure has led to workers developing a dependence on private transport. The weak bargaining position of an immigrant seeking work would be completely undermined if she were unwilling to drive for or to her job. Even the most risk averse migrant labourer accepts that the possibility of being caught driving without a licence is a risk that they have no choice but to take.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a517155c80097c47766f496c2f5328aa",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses The first problem with this argument is that it assumes that illegal immigrants are easily identifiable without a driver’s license. It is not like illegal immigrants walk around with a giant red sign that says “Potential Security Threat” at present, and that when we give them licenses they will finally get to put down their signs.\n\nOn this basis, the security risk presented by this policy is minimal. Moreover, for what security risk might exist, it is very easily mitigated or gotten rid of all together. For example, if identification is needed for access to something that is vulnerable to security threat, it is very easy for the government or relevant officials to say that the only sufficient form of ID is a passport instead of a license, due to the risk people may pose.\n\nThe additional harms identified by side opposition are the result of service providers’ discriminatory practices. Federal and state race equality laws prevent businesses and government employees from refusing service to individuals based on their physical characteristics or ethnicity. Therefore, official discrimination cannot exist. At best, this will simply be soft discrimination.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da5bfa99befb79407b342c9825fda73e",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses The state should never allow mob mentality to govern its policies and specifically should never let prejudice of its people allow the state to let exploitation and abuse of human beings go unaddressed. This resentment and assumption that all Hispanics are illegal immigrants leeching from the state is something that is already a perception that permeates US thought. This policy will at worst marginally increase that sentiment, and even if it does, the state has a duty to ignore blind hate and not let it drive state policy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2597f61f43a71f727b31fa9133e8544d",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This allows illegal immigrants to get drivers insurance, which makes safer and fairer roads.\n\nInsurance is a key component in making the streets safe for all drivers on the road. Allowing illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses allows them to gain driver’s insurance.\n\nDriving absent insurance means that there is an incentive to drive off if you cause an accident to avoid having to pay for the damages you have caused and being criminally punished for driving without insurance. This leaves the other driver having to foot their own bill for the repairs to their vehicles [1] . Moreover, even if the uninsured driver stays at the scene, illegal immigrants are characteristically very poor as they must engage in exploitative work to make a wage because they must hide from the state and do not get the same protections from the state, so would still be unable to pay for the damages they have caused. Moreover, having uninsured drivers on the road increases insurance premiums for all insured drivers on the road, as they have to de-facto pay for the risk and damage these uninsured drivers cause [2] .\n\nTherefore, offering illegal immigrants driver’s licenses allows for more fair and accountable systems of insurance and driving conditions on the road.\n\n[1] Confessore, Nicholas, and Danny Hakim. \"Licenses for Immigrants Find Suppot.\" New York Times 09 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/nyregion/09license.html?ref=todayspaper\n\n[2] Confessore, Nicholas, and Danny Hakim. \"Licenses for Immigrants Find Suppot.\" New York Times 09 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/nyregion/09license.html?ref=todayspaper\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c99b91528cb591154a40bd83ca6f947d",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses The provision of driver’s licenses makes the streets safer.\n\nOffering drivers licenses to illegal immigrants makes the streets safer by giving drivers training to people who would otherwise be driving on the streets without adequate education. Unlicensed drivers are five times more likely to get into a fatal crash than licensed drivers [1] .\n\nA fact that needs to be acknowledged is that illegal immigrants have a necessity to drive and the vast majority will do so regardless of if they are given licenses or not. This is very dangerous both for them and for those who they share the road with as they are operating motor vehicles with a proper education on the rules of the road or any form of driving instruction or test to ensure that they can competently and safely drive on the streets [2] .\n\nIllegal immigrants are very likely to opt into this system of driver’s education and licensing because it is in their own interest to avoid breaking the law to avoid detection, but also because it is very much in their interest to get instruction on how to drive as they are as much a danger to themselves as they are to the rest of society when they drive without instruction [3] .\n\nTherefore, offering illegal immigrants driver’s licenses will help make the streets safer by giving drivers access to the education and instruction they need to be safe and competent drivers.\n\n[1] \"Immigration: Let them drive.\" Economist 25 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.economist.com/node/10024818?story_id=10024818\n\n[2] \"Immigration: Let them drive.\" Economist 25 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.economist.com/node/10024818?story_id=10024818\n\n[3] \"Driver's Licenses for Undocumented Aliens.\" Institute of Governmental Studies. UC Berkeley, n. d. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/research/quickhelp/policy/social/immigra...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7e07f89397672d8ac861a30e7dd6b518",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This will foster further resentment of the Hispanic community in America.\n\nThis policy will only further the resentment that exists for illegal immigrants in America, and will make life harder for the entire Hispanic community as a result.\n\nIt is no secret that the idea of granting illegal immigrants driver’s licenses is a very unpopular idea. In New York, for example, 70% of the electorate is against this policy [1] . Looking to California, not only are drivers licenses out of the question, but in 1994 the state passed a bill denying illegals access to welfare, healthcare and education by a 59% margin [2] . Resentment for the community is high and it is undeniable that this policy will be wildly unpopular with the vast majority of Americans.\n\nThe issue with Americans being unhappy with this policy is that they will channel their unhappiness toward all immigrant communities and the Hispanic community more generally. The concept of driver’s licenses especially fuels this hatred because Americans believe that this will allow them to “masquerade” as normal Americans and therefore will assume all Hispanics are these illegals that are masquerading as legal immigrants in their communities. This will only engender more hate and discrimination against these communities.\n\nTherefore, this will seriously harm the Hispanic-American community by fuelling hatred against them in the American majority.\n\n[1] \"Immigration: Let them drive.\" Economist 25 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.economist.com/node/10024818?story_id=10024818\n\n[2] \"Driver's Licenses for Undocumented Aliens.\" Institute of Governmental Studies. UC Berkeley, n. d. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/research/quickhelp/policy/social/immigra...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "10f4a0e9623fc6a9ba401a0642eb4902",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This rewards law-breaking.\n\nThis policy rewards those who break the law and therefore is unjustified.\n\nThere are immigration policies for a reason, and to skirt them because you do not want to wait in line like everyone else does not entitle you to be treated on the same level as those who adhere to American laws and immigration procedures. Allowing illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses simply because they made it here is just rewarding them for being good at breaking our laws.\n\nWe have a moral obligation to continue to deny illegal immigrants the perks of citizenship because they have undermined the very laws and processes that citizenship relies on in America. Moreover, if we simply treat them the same as legal immigrants in our country, there is no deterrent left to stop people from just ignoring our immigrant processes and trying to immigrate illegally to avoid the queue.\n\nTherefore, we shouldn’t give illegal immigrants drivers licenses because that simply rewards law-breaking and undermines the legal system and immigration policy we rely on.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c0b906c423d41e203003e32feba59708",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This allows illegals to masquerade as normal immigrants.\n\nAllowing illegal immigrants to get drivers licenses is a security issue for America.\n\nIllegal immigrants are a threat to the US because they have not gone through the necessary background checks that all immigrants are supposed to go through before being allowed into the US to ensure that they are not going to harm American citizens.\n\nGiving illegal immigrants documents that- as proposition argument three says- could grant them access to state services and to a wider range of private services is dangerous [1] . There is no way for frontline state and business staff to determine whether drivers licence holders are migrants who have undergone appropriate police screening, or criminals with a history of dishonest or exploitative behaviour. The resolution may, therefore, allow disreputable individuals to falsely claim to be normalised American citizens.\n\nAlternatively, and more likely, the resolution will undermine the value and utility of state drivers licences – for Latin-American US citizens at the very least. As it becomes known that immigrants from the south bearing licences might be more likely to be dishonest, banks, stores and hospitals will become less willing to accept drivers licences as conclusive proof of a Latin-American individual’s identity.\n\nIf the degree to which service providers will trust a driving licence is reduced, the improvements to illegal immigrants’ quality of life that the resolution brings about will be short lived. Moreover, legally resident Latin-Americans will find that their lives become much more difficult. Service providers will adopt a stance of suspicion toward Latin-American individuals, assuming that a Latino-American’s driving licence offers no useful indication as to his immigration status and background. Therefore, this policy constitutes a large security threat to America and its citizens, and a significant danger to the integration and lifestyles of thousands of Latino-American individuals.\n\n[1] \"Position Paper: No Drivers Licenses for Illegal Aliens.\" News Blaze. Realtime News, 23 Sep 2001. Web. 30 Nov. 2011. http://newsblaze.com/story/20070923120657tsop.nb/topstory.html\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
2457d86eb558ce458eb928b39b79c360
|
This will foster further resentment of the Hispanic community in America.
This policy will only further the resentment that exists for illegal immigrants in America, and will make life harder for the entire Hispanic community as a result.
It is no secret that the idea of granting illegal immigrants driver’s licenses is a very unpopular idea. In New York, for example, 70% of the electorate is against this policy [1] . Looking to California, not only are drivers licenses out of the question, but in 1994 the state passed a bill denying illegals access to welfare, healthcare and education by a 59% margin [2] . Resentment for the community is high and it is undeniable that this policy will be wildly unpopular with the vast majority of Americans.
The issue with Americans being unhappy with this policy is that they will channel their unhappiness toward all immigrant communities and the Hispanic community more generally. The concept of driver’s licenses especially fuels this hatred because Americans believe that this will allow them to “masquerade” as normal Americans and therefore will assume all Hispanics are these illegals that are masquerading as legal immigrants in their communities. This will only engender more hate and discrimination against these communities.
Therefore, this will seriously harm the Hispanic-American community by fuelling hatred against them in the American majority.
[1] "Immigration: Let them drive." Economist 25 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.economist.com/node/10024818?story_id=10024818
[2] "Driver's Licenses for Undocumented Aliens." Institute of Governmental Studies. UC Berkeley, n. d. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/research/quickhelp/policy/social/immigra...
|
[
{
"docid": "da5bfa99befb79407b342c9825fda73e",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses The state should never allow mob mentality to govern its policies and specifically should never let prejudice of its people allow the state to let exploitation and abuse of human beings go unaddressed. This resentment and assumption that all Hispanics are illegal immigrants leeching from the state is something that is already a perception that permeates US thought. This policy will at worst marginally increase that sentiment, and even if it does, the state has a duty to ignore blind hate and not let it drive state policy.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "39d15832f944892ed57213b8e7602fff",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses There is a very big difference between rewarding people for breaking the law and taking positive action to prevent them being exploited and financially marginalised. The United States’ legal system supposedly exists to protect everyone resident within its borders – not just individuals possessing citizenship. Giving illegal immigrants basic access to very rudimentary things such as the driver’s education does not reward law-breaking or undermine the rule of law. Even if side opposition disagree with granting illegal immigrants any rights, this argument is still defeated by the beneficial consequences of ensuring that a much larger number of drivers have received training on the rules of the road. Under the resolution, America’s highways and cities will generally safer for both pedestrians and other drivers.\n\nOn the point of deterrence, there are already very large deterrents to trying to immigrate illegally. The trek is long, dangerous and controlled by violent groups on either side of the border. Bandits and people smugglers engage in robberies and people trafficking on the Mexican side; extremist groups such as the minutemen attempt to assault or shoot immigrants in transit from the American side. Not being able to get a driver’s license once here is not in any way a deterrent that holds any weight when put in context.\n\nBeing able to drive is a necessary skill in the US, where under-investment in public transport infrastructure has led to workers developing a dependence on private transport. The weak bargaining position of an immigrant seeking work would be completely undermined if she were unwilling to drive for or to her job. Even the most risk averse migrant labourer accepts that the possibility of being caught driving without a licence is a risk that they have no choice but to take.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a517155c80097c47766f496c2f5328aa",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses The first problem with this argument is that it assumes that illegal immigrants are easily identifiable without a driver’s license. It is not like illegal immigrants walk around with a giant red sign that says “Potential Security Threat” at present, and that when we give them licenses they will finally get to put down their signs.\n\nOn this basis, the security risk presented by this policy is minimal. Moreover, for what security risk might exist, it is very easily mitigated or gotten rid of all together. For example, if identification is needed for access to something that is vulnerable to security threat, it is very easy for the government or relevant officials to say that the only sufficient form of ID is a passport instead of a license, due to the risk people may pose.\n\nThe additional harms identified by side opposition are the result of service providers’ discriminatory practices. Federal and state race equality laws prevent businesses and government employees from refusing service to individuals based on their physical characteristics or ethnicity. Therefore, official discrimination cannot exist. At best, this will simply be soft discrimination.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e082c742e104c78de213420834320064",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This is a marginal impact at best. The vast majority of illegal immigrants will try to flee the scene of a crash because they would be worried that the police might be called in to investigate the crash and find out they are illegal and therefore deport them. Although this isn’t always a realistic expectation, it is an expectation that most people in the illegal immigrant community have because of their paranoia over the state pursuing them and wanting to deport them. This fear is only exacerbated by the anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric that permeates American society at present and makes them feel that the state will try to seek them out however they can to get rid of them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cd3fc53af9fe2c62e6d83617aafd509a",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses These people do not deserve to use the services of the USA. They are not citizens, they are law-breakers and society has no obligation to make life easier or more comfortable for those who break the law. Regardless of their contributions to society or the economy, illegal immigrants have broken the law. The consequences of their breaches of the law should be remedied. If necessary, illegal immigrants should be punished in proportion to the harm that their act has caused. Under no circumstances should illegal acts allow these individuals to gain access to the status and legal privileges that citizenship confers.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a5f500c8d1fca26947c30c019c11b975",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses It is very unlikely that illegal immigrants will even opt into this scheme. Illegal immigrants are notoriously paranoid about going to the state for any form of assistance as they are afraid of deportation. The vast majority of them would rather risk getting caught driving without a license then they would risk going to the state as an illegal to receive a license in the first place.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "10f4a0e9623fc6a9ba401a0642eb4902",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This rewards law-breaking.\n\nThis policy rewards those who break the law and therefore is unjustified.\n\nThere are immigration policies for a reason, and to skirt them because you do not want to wait in line like everyone else does not entitle you to be treated on the same level as those who adhere to American laws and immigration procedures. Allowing illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses simply because they made it here is just rewarding them for being good at breaking our laws.\n\nWe have a moral obligation to continue to deny illegal immigrants the perks of citizenship because they have undermined the very laws and processes that citizenship relies on in America. Moreover, if we simply treat them the same as legal immigrants in our country, there is no deterrent left to stop people from just ignoring our immigrant processes and trying to immigrate illegally to avoid the queue.\n\nTherefore, we shouldn’t give illegal immigrants drivers licenses because that simply rewards law-breaking and undermines the legal system and immigration policy we rely on.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c0b906c423d41e203003e32feba59708",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This allows illegals to masquerade as normal immigrants.\n\nAllowing illegal immigrants to get drivers licenses is a security issue for America.\n\nIllegal immigrants are a threat to the US because they have not gone through the necessary background checks that all immigrants are supposed to go through before being allowed into the US to ensure that they are not going to harm American citizens.\n\nGiving illegal immigrants documents that- as proposition argument three says- could grant them access to state services and to a wider range of private services is dangerous [1] . There is no way for frontline state and business staff to determine whether drivers licence holders are migrants who have undergone appropriate police screening, or criminals with a history of dishonest or exploitative behaviour. The resolution may, therefore, allow disreputable individuals to falsely claim to be normalised American citizens.\n\nAlternatively, and more likely, the resolution will undermine the value and utility of state drivers licences – for Latin-American US citizens at the very least. As it becomes known that immigrants from the south bearing licences might be more likely to be dishonest, banks, stores and hospitals will become less willing to accept drivers licences as conclusive proof of a Latin-American individual’s identity.\n\nIf the degree to which service providers will trust a driving licence is reduced, the improvements to illegal immigrants’ quality of life that the resolution brings about will be short lived. Moreover, legally resident Latin-Americans will find that their lives become much more difficult. Service providers will adopt a stance of suspicion toward Latin-American individuals, assuming that a Latino-American’s driving licence offers no useful indication as to his immigration status and background. Therefore, this policy constitutes a large security threat to America and its citizens, and a significant danger to the integration and lifestyles of thousands of Latino-American individuals.\n\n[1] \"Position Paper: No Drivers Licenses for Illegal Aliens.\" News Blaze. Realtime News, 23 Sep 2001. Web. 30 Nov. 2011. http://newsblaze.com/story/20070923120657tsop.nb/topstory.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2597f61f43a71f727b31fa9133e8544d",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This allows illegal immigrants to get drivers insurance, which makes safer and fairer roads.\n\nInsurance is a key component in making the streets safe for all drivers on the road. Allowing illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses allows them to gain driver’s insurance.\n\nDriving absent insurance means that there is an incentive to drive off if you cause an accident to avoid having to pay for the damages you have caused and being criminally punished for driving without insurance. This leaves the other driver having to foot their own bill for the repairs to their vehicles [1] . Moreover, even if the uninsured driver stays at the scene, illegal immigrants are characteristically very poor as they must engage in exploitative work to make a wage because they must hide from the state and do not get the same protections from the state, so would still be unable to pay for the damages they have caused. Moreover, having uninsured drivers on the road increases insurance premiums for all insured drivers on the road, as they have to de-facto pay for the risk and damage these uninsured drivers cause [2] .\n\nTherefore, offering illegal immigrants driver’s licenses allows for more fair and accountable systems of insurance and driving conditions on the road.\n\n[1] Confessore, Nicholas, and Danny Hakim. \"Licenses for Immigrants Find Suppot.\" New York Times 09 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/nyregion/09license.html?ref=todayspaper\n\n[2] Confessore, Nicholas, and Danny Hakim. \"Licenses for Immigrants Find Suppot.\" New York Times 09 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/nyregion/09license.html?ref=todayspaper\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5427854acf5918aee14f6fd4ad7c2101",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses This is a gateway privilege that allows these people to integrate into American society.\n\nDrivers licenses are used a major form of identification in America and so granting illegal immigrants these forms of identification can help enfranchise one of the most exploited minorities in America.\n\nDespite American feelings on illegal immigrants, they are there in their society, contribute to their communities and are a group of people that are routinely and unjustly exploited because of their lack of access to state protection. Despite popular opinion of this being a punishment for breaking their laws, these people operate like any other citizen in American society and are human beings who deserve to be treated as such and to be offered at least some level of protection for the fact that they are human and for what they contribute to America communities and society.\n\nProviding these people with a proper form of identification, especially a driver’s license, which is almost universally accepted as an adequate form of identification to access services from the state and to interact with the rest of society. Specifically, this allows immigrant communities to not feel as though they are confined to an isolated area as they now can travel further distances to gain better employment without fear of being caught and thrown into jail [1] . Moreover, this allows them access to all services offered by the state that require identification such as voter registration.\n\nTherefore, this helps enfranchise a group that is normally exploited in America society.\n\n[1] \"Driver's Licenses for Undocumented Aliens.\" Institute of Governmental Studies. UC Berkeley, n. d. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/research/quickhelp/policy/social/immigra...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c99b91528cb591154a40bd83ca6f947d",
"text": "immigration minorities house would give illegal immigrants drivers licenses The provision of driver’s licenses makes the streets safer.\n\nOffering drivers licenses to illegal immigrants makes the streets safer by giving drivers training to people who would otherwise be driving on the streets without adequate education. Unlicensed drivers are five times more likely to get into a fatal crash than licensed drivers [1] .\n\nA fact that needs to be acknowledged is that illegal immigrants have a necessity to drive and the vast majority will do so regardless of if they are given licenses or not. This is very dangerous both for them and for those who they share the road with as they are operating motor vehicles with a proper education on the rules of the road or any form of driving instruction or test to ensure that they can competently and safely drive on the streets [2] .\n\nIllegal immigrants are very likely to opt into this system of driver’s education and licensing because it is in their own interest to avoid breaking the law to avoid detection, but also because it is very much in their interest to get instruction on how to drive as they are as much a danger to themselves as they are to the rest of society when they drive without instruction [3] .\n\nTherefore, offering illegal immigrants driver’s licenses will help make the streets safer by giving drivers access to the education and instruction they need to be safe and competent drivers.\n\n[1] \"Immigration: Let them drive.\" Economist 25 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.economist.com/node/10024818?story_id=10024818\n\n[2] \"Immigration: Let them drive.\" Economist 25 Oct 2007, n. pag. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://www.economist.com/node/10024818?story_id=10024818\n\n[3] \"Driver's Licenses for Undocumented Aliens.\" Institute of Governmental Studies. UC Berkeley, n. d. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. http://igs.berkeley.edu/library/research/quickhelp/policy/social/immigra...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
035af3faa8bb34c4c37db120d4d09c87
|
Having children guarantees support for parents
From parents’ point of view it is also beneficial to have children as they are the only guarantee of help and support when parents get old. It has been one of the most prevailing practices around the globe for children to return their parents care and dedication. When they become elderly, parents that have lost their spouse often come and live with their children. Additionally, kids tend to look after their parents when they get chronically ill towards the end of their days. It is also the child that visits its parent in hospital. Moreover, many kids support their parent financially, which may become crucial in an era of population ageing, which will bring about drastic reductions in pensions. In China a traditional saying is “Raise children in preparation for one’s old age’ as families often have to care for senior citizens but with a declining population each person may soon be caring for two parents. There is very little in the way of social care there are old-age beds for only 1.8% of the population in China, compared with 5% to 7% in most developed and 2% to 3% in developing countries.* The best way to secure a safe future is to have children to care for you rather than assuming an overburdened state will provide.
*Worldcrunch, 2011, http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2091308,00.html?iid=pf-mai...
|
[
{
"docid": "70be5701827d057de79f2651b6adb06d",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children There is no causal link between having children and being supported later in life. After children leave home they become fully independent individuals. They haven’t chosen to be born and so they shouldn’t be burdened by the parents. If kids do look after their parents it should be out of choice as it is not their duty to do so. It is government’s responsibility to take care of its citizens, so that the elderly can spend their last years in fair conditions with the possibility to live in decent old people’s homes if necessary.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "e7ea2554b4ec1a70f1efa556ee4acb12",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children People are free to choose whether or not to have children. Human beings are granted freedom of choice. The decision to have offspring is, like many others, only a matter of personal choice and there is no duty here that we can talk about. The only real responsibilities towards society that people have are those imposed on them by law. (Paying taxes or protecting a country being prime examples of these). Because society has not chosen to create a law forcing everybody to have children, we see that choosing not to bear offspring is accepted by society.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d41c7dfab2eb7cec907020eb4e104f8f",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children can be counterproductive in achieving a desirable society. First of all, having children is by no means necessary for possessing all those valuable traits. All of them can be developed though other experiences as well. Secondly, having kids may actually lead to society being less desirable. For instance, parents being exhausted by constant absorption with their children become less productive. They can also become disillusioned or frustrated by their offspring, which will result in their general bitterness.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "abf365bba4cb2fa0ba0732559da0a613",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children There is a lot more in humans’ lives than having children. There are numerous differences between humans and other animals. While it may be true that the purpose of animals’ lives is to produce offspring, it is not the case when we talk about humans. People, being much more complex creatures, can contribute to society in many other ways than by having kids (for instance by artistic or scientific activities). So, although our physiology and behaviour may point to reproduction as the main purpose of our lives, these indicators are simply misleading.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "aa1cedffeb2709732bf13eaf746844b4",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children enriches parents emotionally. The experience of parenting triggers deep and genuine emotions, which parents would not experience otherwise. Attachment, caring, compassion, understanding, moral outrage, joy, and wonder are all inevitably a part of parenting. Many parents claim that they have never loved anybody as much as their children. Thus, having children actually enlarges both the spectrum and the intensity of emotional experiences for parents. Worrying for kids is a natural consequence of praising them so much. The more valuable something is, the more attention we pay to it. The fact that parents worry about their children that much is only a further evidence of how much children’s contribution means to parents.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5e5fce5bfcf67f99076bbb8367c467f0",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Not having children is not a good way to combat environmental problems. The real answer to environmental issues is developing clean technology and promoting ecological awareness. If we start to produce energy from renewable resources, switch to electrical transportation, recycle waste etc. we won’t need to reduce population in order to sustain the environment. Furthermore, a higher population living in a more eco-friendly manner would be less harmful than the current level of population with its lifestyles.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "20548e106d2b26c2ba236e1fc92f1642",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children There is no better present for somebody than to give him a life. Our lives are not just about money. There are so many valuable emotions, situations, experiences that have nothing to do with wealth level, for example falling in love or simply being enchanted by the world’s beauty. Even if the child is born to an impoverished family that doesn’t mean he won’t be able to rise out of the poverty. There are numerous sponsored programmes that encourage social mobility in both developing and developed countries. However, we need to accept this simple truth that life is not a sequence of only joyful events, and sometimes we have to experience a difficult situation to be able to appreciate all the good out there. Additionally, positive experiences in lives usually outweigh those negative, that’s why a vast majority of us would never change our lives for not being born. Therefore, giving a child a life is more than morally right.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a7a4c8ec72684177736b66faf240e168",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Any money spent on children is well used. Is there a better way to invest money than to use them to support future generations? The more we spend on children’s health care, the more productive our society will be; the more we spend on their education, the wiser our society will be; the more we spend on their cultural awareness, the more conscious of art our society will be. There is no better use of money than spending them on our kids.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2e1185f141069b66d2b1562f573ffcef",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children is one of the most fulfilling and rewarding experiences in life. When people become parents obviously they experience a major change in their lives. However, change doesn’t mean a change for worse. Raising children is not easy, but it brings about a feeling of fulfillment. For many people, having children is the main purpose in their lives. Kids enable parents to rediscover the world around them. Additionally, parents feel empowered as they can shape another human being to a previously inexperienced extent. Relationships with kids seem to be the deepest, most enduring ones. These are the very reasons why people become so upset when they cannot have children. The development of treatments such as in vitro fertilization proves how much we want to have babies. There is also substantial evidence supporting the claim that having children has a constructive rather than destructive influence on parents. Dr. Luis Angeles from the University of Glasgow in the UK has just published in the Journal of Happiness Studies, claiming that the research he has conducted suggests that having children improves married peoples' life satisfaction, making them happier.* A recent Newsweek Poll also found that children add to general levels of parents’ happiness. Fifty percent of surveyed Americans said that adding new children to the family tends to increase their happiness levels. Only one in six (16 percent) said that adding new children had a negative effect on the parents' happiness.** The evidence that having children has a devastating effect is mixed at best and in many cases outright wrong.\n\n*Bayaz, 2009, http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/169018.php\n\n**Newsweek, 2008, http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/06/28/having-kids-makes-you-happy.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "48c5b8e2e8136ff82b2e88752c63541a",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children There are better ways of eliminating gender inequality. First of all, inequality between sexes is far more complex of an issue than the proposition would like us to believe. There are many reasons why gender inequalities prevail in the society. They are grounded in different physical, psychological and social features of males and females. Moreover, they date back to prehistoric times when men and women occupied themselves with different tasks and had different responsibilities. It is too simplistic to say that by not having children gender inequalities will be eradicated. Furthermore, there are other more effective and less damaging ways of heading towards equality between sexes, such as education, affirmative action and social policy encouraging men to participate in childcare on equal basis with women.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "80fbe3385e8fc1cb296476b8ce436190",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children is the essence of existence for every creature\n\nThe most basic purpose of every human being, like of any other animal, is to reproduce, thus ensuring the continuity of ones species. Reproduction is even included in our very definition of life “the state or quality that distinguishes living beings or organisms from dead ones and from inorganic matter, characterized chiefly by metabolism, growth, and the ability to reproduce and respond to stimuli”.* Our bodies (physiological features), behaviour (flirting, dressing up) and sexual drives all point to that fundamental aim of our lives. It is only by having children that we can fulfil the most natural goal of our existence. Until very recently the family and ensuring its continuance has been the goal of almost every human. This is shown by how hereditary has been one of the defining features of almost every society in history, whether it is in government; through monarchy or an aristocracy, in the economy; through passing wealth down from one generation to the next.\n\n* Collins English Dictionary, 2003, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/life\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3058ec8cdae86db6ccbbc450f8b64a79",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children The act of having children makes people more desirable citizens.\n\nNot only does parenting teach responsibility, but it also triggers such feelings as love, compassion and helps develop such features as patience, devotion, tenderness, understanding. For instance, if parents learn the benefits of being patient towards their children, they are more likely to react patiently in other life situations, which in turn will lead to less aggressive society. Therefore, the more people have children, the more desirable our society becomes.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e2033fa1def3a1446174edc019cfa5f8",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children is our duty and responsibility\n\nWe cannot live without the society; it is that very society that provides us with basic goods and services such as education, health care, transportation, work. We can only interact with other people and fulfil our most basic needs if we live within the society. Therefore, we owe it to the society to ensure its continuation. It is only by having children that we can do this. Falling rates of population growth in developed countries highlight how dire the need for reproduction is. If people don’t have children today, the society will run into an enormous economic crisis tomorrow, as there will not be enough citizens to work for the growing numbers of the elderly. In the long run, not having children will lead to human beings’ extinction. If present trends continued it would only be 25 generations before Hong Kong’s female population shrank from today’s 3.75 million to just one. Similarly on current trends Japan, Germany, Russia, Italy and Spain will not reach the year 3000.* It is therefore clear that by not having children people fail to fulfil their most fundamental duty.\n\n*The Economist Online, 2011, http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/populations\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "853eecd8ccdc129f1a6112bfb0c195d0",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children is emotionally draining for parents\n\nThe level of emotional involvement in bringing the child up is immense. Parents pour all their souls into children, who, in turn, often leave them disenchanted and exhausted. Parents also have to share their child’s problems, fears and traumas, so that the amount of grief that parents take on themselves doubles (or even triples, depending on how troublesome the child is). Not only that, but those who have offspring also become more vulnerable. They worry about their kids from the moment they are born until the day they themselves die. Parents’ to-worry-about list is endless: from child’s nutrition to summer camps, from accidents to social acceptance, from choosing a school to moving out. Having raised children, parents become emotional wrecks. All parents agree that it is emotionally draining and stressful, in 1975, advice columnist Ann Landers asked her readers, “If you had it to do over again, would you have children?” seventy percent of respondents said “no.”*\n\n*Goldberg, 2003, http://dir.salon.com/mwt/feature/2003/05/06/breeding/index2.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "73d0cd45b4e9ebf08257cc3ce50285a3",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Not having children is environmentally friendly\n\nThe more people consume in the world, the greater the environmental damage. An average American produces 52 tons of garbage by the age of 75.* However, producing extra litter and pollution is not the only hazard that every child poses to the planet. Increasing world’s population also places incredible stress on Earth’s resources. It is estimated, for instance, that by 2025 three billion people will live in water-scarce countries. By reducing the number of human beings we will manage to avoid numerous overpopulation crises and reverse the damage done to the environment.\n\n* Tufts Climate Initiative., 2006, http://sustainability.tufts.edu/?pid=106\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "42df23bd9571f4596fb84556ce846477",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children is extraordinarily expensive\n\nFor majority of people children are the biggest expenditure they ever undertake. The United States Department of Agriculture reported in 2008 that the average annual expenses associated with raising a child can be as high as $22,960.* If we assume that a child will live with their parents until the age of 18 and add average cost of sending a child for 4 years to college, we arrive at the conclusion that bringing up a child in a developed country costs around $500,000. This money can be far better spent, for instance, on enhancing the standard of education or health care, subsidising economic initiative in developing countries, investing in green technologies, etc.\n\n*Boy Scouts of America, 2011, http://www.scouting.org/filestore/media/ES_Finances.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a02c89ba37d2997d2bbf9978aee62303",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Not having children promotes gender equality\n\nSocial and economic inequalities between men and women stem primarily from the fact that women are the child bearers, and mothers overwhelmingly spend more time on childrearing tasks than do their male spouses. Not surprisingly then, many employers still discriminate against women when recruiting to work. They view females as those responsible for parenting and thus not reliable, devoted or loyal as employees. Even when there is little or no discrimination in recruitment women often hit a ‘glass ceiling’ due to breaking their careers in order to have children, in the UK a recent report by the Chartered Management Institute found it would take until 2109 to close the pay gap.* On a social level, not having children will mean more gender equality as there will be no ground for justifying an unequal labour division.\n\n*Goodley, 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/aug/31/cmi-equal-pay-report\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "977f349fa198d238654aad2a3ea13656",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children Having children has a devastating effect on lives of parents\n\nParenting effectively prevents people from pursuing their own interests and fulfilling their own goals. The child becomes the center and the only valid part of parents’ lives. By having kids, people turn from free individuals into servants. They often have to abandon their careers in order to take care of the offspring. Women’s careers are most heavily affected, as women usually end up being the major childcare provider. Furthermore, people with children have much less time for socializing resulting in losing friends. Couples’ relationships are also bound to deteriorate as mother and father become more interested in a baby than in themselves. It has also been proven that couples with kids engage in sexual activities far less often than those who are childless. All of these reasons contribute to general dissatisfaction of parents who feel they have lost their own lives. As the evidence for that we can quote Daniel Gilbert, who holds a chair in psychology at Harvard. Based on his research findings, he reports that childless marriages are far happier.* Such a view is supported also by Madelyn Cain, a teacher at the University of Southern California, who says \"Statistics show childless couples are happier. Their lives are self-directed, they have a better chance of intimacy, and they do not have the stresses, financial and emotional, of parenthood.\"**\n\n*Kingston, 2009, http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/24/no-kids-no-grief/3/\n\n**Goldberg, 2003, http://dir.salon.com/mwt/feature/2003/05/06/breeding/index2.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ca91234c18cba07c1b371a070fffc603",
"text": "hy life society family house would never have children It is morally wrong to bring children to this cruel and miserable world.\n\nFour out of every five children will be born to families whose members survive on less than $10 a day. Around one third of children in developing countries is estimated to be underweight or stunted.* Research suggests that even in the USA, 20% of children live in poverty. And such an extreme plight of the child is only the beginning. Even if a child is born into a relatively well-off family, there are endless devastating situations he has to face during his life: war, death of family members, chronic illness, divorce, crime, and social exclusion. The list can go on and on forever. Having children is the equivalent of forcing innocent people, against their will, to experience the misery of life. Thus, it is inhumane.\n\n*Shah 2010, http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
27961f31f78b24ce6e3b4ab83522a6d6
|
Other parental controls are more practical and reasonable to administer.
Monitoring would be extremely tedious and time-consuming. Many teens send over 100 texts a day, it would clearly be very time consuming to read them all along with all other digital communication.[1] By contrast content filtering, contact management, and privacy protection parental controls, which can be used to block all incoming and outgoing information, require only minimal supervision. Parents who meanwhile deem their children immature when it comes to social networking and gaming can instead impose user restrictions on the relevant websites and devices. [2] Administering these alternative parental controls leave for more quality time with children. In this case, only when children acquire sufficient digital maturity and responsibility can these controls be lifted. As they have learnt to be mature in the digital environment the children would most likely continue to surf safely even when the parental controls are lifted.
[1] Goldberg, Stephanie, “Many teens send 100-plus texts a day, survey says”, CNN, 21 April 2010
[2] Burt, David. “Parental Controls Product Guide.” 2010 Edition. n.d. PDF File. Web. May 2013.
|
[
{
"docid": "378541bb09666564c50ed738c79cca80",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents While it is practical to use these parental controls, it is not always realistic to set such limited parameters to the digital freedom of children. Children need to understand that they have the capacity to breach their parents’ trust. [1] This not only allows a child to understand how to interact sensibly with the internet, but to experience taking an initiative to actually obey parents in surfing only safe sites. Selectively restricting a child’s digital freedom does not help in this case. Thus, monitoring is the only way for children to experience digital freedom in such a way that they too are both closely guided and free to do as they wish. Moreover, this is also self-contradictory because opposition claimed that children are capable of circumvention which children would be much more likely to do when blocked from accessing websites than simply monitored.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "505289ab0a1fb5846060341c0d64c5f7",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents The individual right to privacy must certainly encompass the digital realm as proposition says. It is also undeniable that individual privacy enhances individuality and independence. However, this privacy can and should be regulated lest parents leave children ‘abandoned’ to their rights. [1] “One cannot compare reading a child’s journal to accessing his or her conversations online or through text messages,” says Betsy Landers, the president of the National Parent-Teacher Association of the US and explains, “It’s simply modern involvement.” [2] Thus, Hillary Clinton argues, “children should be granted rights, but in a stage-by-stage manner that accords with and pays attention to their physical and mental development and capacities.” [1] Applying this principle, children should be given digital privacy to an equitable extent and regulated whereby both conditions depend upon the maturity of the child.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] Landers, Betty. “It’s Modern Parental Involvement.” New York Times. 28 June 2012: 1. New York Times. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b63ac9fe5ffddfb4cd26a0d557e7edfa",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents It is true that trust is a cornerstone of relationships. Admittedly, the act of monitoring may initially stimulate feelings of distrust which are particularly destructive in relationships. But nonetheless, trust is earned, not granted. The only proactive way to gauge how much trust and responsibility to give a child in the digital world is monitoring. By monitoring a child, parents come to assess the initial capability of the child in digital responsibility and ultimately the level of trust and the level of responsibility he or she deserves and to be assigned subsequently. Ideally, the initial level of monitoring and follow-through should be maximum in order to make clear to the child that he is being guided. Only when a child proves himself and grows in digital maturity can monitoring and follow-through be gradually minimized and finally lifted. [1]\n\n[1] Bodenhamer, Gregory. Parents in Control. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995 Inc. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1bab4c60134a73f6ecef787bfcc4b144",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Opposition claims that monitoring is ‘laziness’. Admittedly, monitoring makes digital parenting more efficient and comprehensive. But, such technology makes parenting practical, not ‘lazy’. As it is, many people blame technology for their own shortcomings. [1] Thus, parents need to know that monitoring will not do all the work for them. It is not lazy to monitor your children, it is clearly essential that children are monitored when involved in activities such as sports. The internet is a dangerous environment just as the sports field is and should have similar adult supervision.\n\n[1] Bradley, Tony. “Blaming Technology for Human Error: Trying To Fix Social Problems With Technical Tools.” About. About. 30 Mar 2005.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "52abd307c7909702b022017e99e5b20f",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Certainly parents should help their children to make most of their time with the computer and their phone. However, monitoring children in order to do so is lazy, or more precisely a form of ‘remote-control parenting’. Parents abuse of their children’s inherent right to privacy and feel that they have satisfactorily fulfilled their parental role when instead they are just lazy and unwilling to talk to their child personally about being a responsible netizen. [1] How are children to develop a healthy relationship to sharing information and privacy protection if they are constantly being surveilled by their own parents? More effective parents would instead choose to personally and positively teach their children about time management.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "728dbdcfa9a17de170c56bb9157ed3e5",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents While it is certainly beneficial for parents to immerse themselves in the digital world, it may not be good for them to be partially and informally educated by simple monitoring. Especially for parents who are not already familiar with the internet, monitoring may simply condition them to a culture of cyberstalking and being excessively in control of the digital behavior of their children. As it is, a number of children have abandoned Facebook because they feel that their parents are cyberstalking them. [1] Besides, there are other ways of educating oneself regarding ICT which include comprehensive online and video tutorials and library books that may cater to an unfamiliar parent’s questions about the digital world.\n\n[1] “Kids Are Abandoning Facebook To Flee Their Cyber-Stalking Parents.” 2 Oceans Vibe News. 2 Oceans Vibe Media. 11 Mar 2013. Web. May 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6df45c46107d8d065ff310cdfddbbb90",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Indeed it is important to consider that children do not receive or send sexually disturbing media. However, as proposition has already stated parents are much less likely to be digitally savvy than their children. Should they wish to learn children are likely to be able to penetrate any elaborate digital monitoring set by a parent. As it is, Defcon, one of the world’s largest hacker conventions, is already training 8- to 16-year olds to hack in a controlled environment. [1] That pornography is so widely available and so desirable is the product of a culture the glorifies sexuality and erotic human interaction. The effects on childrens well-being are by no means clear, indeed it can be argued that much of what parents are no able to communicate to their children in the way of sexual education is communicated to them through Internet pornography. While this brings with it all manner of problems, aside from the outrage of their parents there is little scientific data to suggest that mere exposure to pornography is causing wide-scale harm to children. Instead, it may be that many of the ‘objects’ of these debates on the rights of children are themselves quite a bit more mature than the debates would suggest..\n\n[1] Finkle, Jim. “Exclusive: Forget Spy Kids, try kiddie hacker conference.” Reuters. Thomas Reuters. 23 Jun 2011. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "83722c81a40910c39fc1bd944c4ccde2",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents While cyberbullying is indeed a danger to children, it is not an excuse to invade their personal life-worlds. The UNCRC clearly states that “(1) No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation,” and that, “(2) The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attack.” These ‘interferences’ or ‘attacks’ not only apply to third parties but to parents as well. [1] Moreover in less traditional ‘offline’ spaces children have far greater ability to choose which information they share with their parents and what they do not. As online spaces are not inherently more dangerous than those offline, it seems reasonable to suggest that similar limitations and restrictions on invasions of privacy that apply online should also apply offline. What a parent can do is to be there for their children and talk to them and support them. They should also spend time surfing the Internet together with them to discuss their issues and problems. But the child should always also have the opportunity to have his or her own protected and private space that is outside the every watchful surveilant eye of the parent..\n\n[1] United Nations Children’s Fund. Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Fully revised 3rd edition. Geneva. United Nations Publications. Google Search. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a07e36802e1558f022d0d24253755c64",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring is lazy parenting.\n\nThe proposition substitutes the good, old-fashioned way of teaching children how to be responsible, with invasions of their privacy, so violating an inherent rights [1]. Such parenting is called remote-control parenting. Parents who monitor their children’s digital behavior feel that they satisfactorily fulfil their parental role when in fact they are being lazy and uninvolved in the growth of their child. Children, especially the youngest, are “dependent upon their parents and require an intense and intimate relationship with their parents to satisfy their physical and emotional needs.” This is called a psychological attachment theory. Responsible parents would instead spend more time with their children teaching them about information management, when to and when not to disclose information, and interaction management, when to and when not to interact with others. [2] That parents have the ability to track their children is true, but doing so is not necessarily likely to make them better adults [3]. The key is for parents and children to talk regularly about the experiences of the child online. This is a process that cannot be substituted by parental monitoring.\n\n[1] United Nations Children’s Fund. Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Fully revised 3rd edition. Geneva. United Nations Publications. Google Search. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n\n[3] “You Can Track Your Kids. But Should You?” New York Times. 27 June 2012: 1. New York Times. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8b4340f948f82ffa1b972228316533f2",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring is a hindrance to forming relationships both outside and inside the family.\n\nIf children are being monitored, or if it seems to children that they are being monitored, they would immediately lose trust in their parents. As trust is reciprocal, children will also learn not to trust others. This will result in their difficulty in forging human connections, thereby straining their psychosocial growth. For them to learn how to trust therefore, children must know that they can break their parents’ trust (as said by the proposition before). This will allow them to understand, obey, and respect their parents on their own initiative, allowing them to respect others in the same manner as well. [1] This growth would only be possible if parents refuse this proposition and instead choose to educate their children how to be responsible beforehand.\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c6050f20c978e302187a7bcafe35e1a9",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents This proposal is simply an invasion of privacy.\n\nChildren have as much right to privacy as any adult. Unfortunately there is yet to be a provision on the protection of privacy in either the United States Constitution or the Bill of Rights, though the Supreme Court states that the concept of privacy rooted within the framework of the Constitution. [1] This ambiguity causes confusion among parents regarding the concept of child privacy. Many maintain that privacy should be administered to a child as a privilege, not a right. [2] Fortunately, the UNCRC clearly states that “No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation,” [3] making child privacy an automatic right. Just as children should receive privacy in the real world, so too should they in the digital world. Individual rights, including right to privacy, shape intrafamilial relationships because they initiate individuality and independence. [1]\n\n[1] Shmueli, Benjamin, and Ayelet Blecher-Prigat. “Privacy for Children.” Columbia Human Rights Review. Rev. 759 (2010-2011): 760-795. Columbia Law School. Web. May 2013. P.764\n\n[2] Brenner, Susan. “The Privacy Privilege.” CYB3RCRIM3. Blogspot. 3 April 2009. May 2013.\n\n[3] United Nations Children’s Fund. Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Fully revised 3rd edition. Geneva. United Nations Publications. Google Search. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ca9cf033eb5ff4b9da00e7d171b71474",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring allows parents to correct children who are wasting their time.\n\nParents also need to monitor their children to ensure that they are properly using the time they have with the computer and the mobile phone. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation 40% of 8- to 18-year olds spend 54 minutes a day on social media sites.[1] and that “when alerted to a new social networking site activity, like a new tweet or Facebook message, users take 20 to 25 minutes on average to return to the original task” resulting to 20% lower grades. [2] Thus, parents must constantly monitor the digital activities of their children and see whether they have been maximizing the technology at their disposal in terms of researching for their homework, connecting with good friends and relatives, and many more.\n\n[1] Foehr, Ulla G., Rideout, Victoria J., and Roberts, Donald F., “Generation M2 Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds”, The Kaiser Family Foundation, January 2010, p.21\n\n[2] Gasser, Urs, and Palfrey, John, “Mastering Multitasking”, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, March 2009, p.17\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "681e634ca2ed17b22ecc06e4ace09ed2",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring decreases children’s involvement with pornography.\n\nA 2005 study by the London School of Economics found that “while 57 per cent of the over-nines had seen porn online, only 16 per cent of parents knew.” [1] That number is almost certain to have increased. In addition sexting has also become prevalent as research from the UK suggests “over a third (38%) [of] under 18’s have received an offensive or distressing sexual image via text or email.” [2] This is dangerous because this digital reality extends to the real world. [3] W.L. Marshall says that early exposure to pornography may incite children to act out sexually against other children and may shape their sexual attitudes negatively, manifesting as insensitivity towards women and undervaluing monogamy. Only with monitoring can parents have absolute certainy of what their children are doing on the Internet. It may not allow them to prevent children from viewing pornography completely, but regulating the digital use of their children in such a way does not have to limit their digital freedoms or human rights.\n\n[1] Carey, Tanith. “Is YOUR child watching porn? The devastating effects of graphic images of sex on young minds”. Daily Mail. Daily Mail and General Trust. 25 April 2011. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] “Truth of Sexting Amongst UK Teens.” BeatBullying. Beatbullying. 4 Aug 2009. Web. May 2013.\n\n[3] Hughes, Donna Rice. Kids Online: Protecting Your Children in Cyberspace. Michigan: Fleming H. Revell, 1998. ProtectKids. Web. May 2013.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d64e9c6ee55de3dbae091fc6d12f8dfa",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring prevents cyberbullying.\n\nSocial approval is especially craved by teens because they are beginning to shift focus from family to peers. [1] Unfortunately, some teens may resort to cyberbullying others in order to gain erroneous respect from others and eliminate competitors in order to establish superficial friendships. Over the last few years a number of cyberbullying cases have caused the tragic suicides of Tyler Clementi (2010), Megan Meier who was bullied online by a non-existent Josh Evans whom she had feelings for (2006), and Ryan Halligan (2003) among others. [2] Responsible parents need to be one step ahead because at these relevant stages, cognitive abilities are advancing, but morals are lagging behind, meaning children are morally unequipped in making informed decisions in cyberspace. [1] One important way to make this guidance more effective would be if parents chose to monitor their children’s digital behavior by acquiring their passwords and paying close attention to their social network activity such as Facebook and chat rooms, even if it means skimming through their private messages. Applying the categorical imperative, if monitoring becomes universal, then cyberbullying will no longer be a problem in the cyberspace as the perpetrators would be quickly caught and disciplined.\n\n[1] Bauman, Sheri. Cyberbullying: a Virtual Menace. University of Arizona, 2007. Web. May 2013.\n\n[2] Littler, Chris. “8 Infamous Cases of Cyber-Bullying.” The Sixth Wall. Koldcast Entertainment Media. 7 Feb 2011. Web. May 2013 .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a372698e89a244e34f72254b93e7679d",
"text": "internet society family youth digital freedoms privacy house would allow parents Monitoring raises digital awareness among parents.\n\nParents who are willing to monitor their children’s digital communications also benefit themselves. By setting up the necessary software and apps to secure their children’s online growth, parents familiarize themselves with basic digital skills and keep up with the latest in social media. As it stands there is a need to raise digital awareness among most parents. Sonia Livingston and Magdalena Bober in their extensive survey of the cyber experience of UK children and their parents report that “among parents only 1 in 3 know how to set up an email account, and only a fifth or fewer are able to set up a filter, remove a virus, download music or fix a problem.” [1] Parents becoming more digitally involved as a result of their children provides the added benefit of increasing the number of mature netizens so encouraging norms of good behavior online.\n\n[1] Livingstone, Sonia, and Magdalena Bober. “UK Children Go Online: Surveying the experiences of young people and their parents.” UK Children Go Online. Second Report (2004): 1-61.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
caf12e3e750c8cb0e4f8b90e8674aedb
|
Gender roles.
Children raised by gay couples will find it more difficult to learn appropriate gender roles in the absence of male and female role-models. Although not an exact match single parents provide a similar case where there has not been someone of the other gender as a role model. Although the evidence is not nearly as conclusive as is often claimed1 there have been many studies that have shown that two parents from different genders is beneficial to the child in its development2. Similarly it is often claimed that boys develop negative attitudes to study because there are very few male teachers in primary schools3.
1 Flood, Michael, Fatherhood and fatherlessness, The Australia institute, Discussion Paper Number 59, (November 2003), p.xi ,(accessed 2nd August 2011)
2 Sarkadi, Anna et al., 'Father's involvemen and children's developmental outcomes: a systematic review of longitudinal studies, ActaPaediatrica, 97 (2008) pp.153-158, p.155 (accessed 2nd August 2011)
3 Gerver, Richard, 'Lack of male role models a primary concern', The Telegraph, 22nd March 2009, (accessed 2nd August 2011)
|
[
{
"docid": "cd079a53ef8f84b622cb63191784b8d2",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt These kids won't be completely deprived of models from the opposite sex to their parents'. They will still have contact with grandparents, teachers, friends, etc. But even if they didn't, why would the opposition just assume that gender roles are a valuable thing to learn? Why would we want to teach children to act and think differently based on being a boy or a girl? Parents should help them develop as individuals, based on their own interests and propensities.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "012392cdbaa0fec15687ffe1fa7d46ff",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt Even if it were true, that the ideal environment for a child is a mother and father, which studies show it isn't, that still wouldn't justify a flat-out ban. Most governments still allow single people to apply for adoption, and even single gay people1. That is because there won't be an 'ideal' family available for every child who needs a home. So other options should be considered. After all, a child is better off with 'non-ideal' parents than with no parents at all. With adoptions, there is generally great demand for babies and toddlers, but older children are generally unwanted2 and end up in foster care until they're 18.\n\nProposition fails to tell us what studies they are referring to which does leave the question open whether these studies have taken into account other factors such as whether or not the biological parents were drug users. The heritage left by the biological parents needs to be remembered.\n\n1 United Nations General Assembly, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights , (accessed 2nd August 2011)\n\n2 James Madison et al., Constitution of the United States ,(accessed 2nd August 2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a2904e17cd6c4931572b1b83986d5c2d",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt These studies often confuse correlation and causation. The reason why children do best in these unions is not because there is some type of magical component to traditional marriage. It is the quality of the relationship not the form of it that benefits children. The government should encourage people to be stable, committed, loving parents, regardless of their marital status or gender. The stability of a relationship is what causes children to thrive, and it is merely usually correlated to heterosexual marriage, not produced by it. Also, there are more children up for adoption than there are opposite-sex couples willing to adopt, in this sort of a world it is clearly better for children to get out of the foster care system and into a loving home. Gay parents have also faced more discrimination and exclusion than most straight parents, which makes them especially able to help children who feel unwanted or out of place in the world.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f790813660a4af2ad4510e5e9029aeb0",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt The scientific debate is not as settled as proponents of gay rights claim. The studies, while positive in their conclusions, have generally been based on very small samples, not more than a dozen families. Some experts claim that there is also a volunteer bias, with the subjects of these studies usually supportive of the gay rights agenda and therefore keen on reporting positive results. Lastly, the researchers themselves can be biased and willing to find evidence to back a political agenda1.\n\n1 Parke, Mary. \"Are Married Parents Really Better for Children?\".Center for Law And Social Policy. May 2003. (accessed 2 August 2011).\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8060473852549e0caf8a628e1d011c2e",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt Just because the government will protect people's right to have a family from outside interference, and will publicly fund the treatment of a medical condition, such as infertility, it doesn't mean the government has to give children to those who don't or are unable to have any in order to protect their right to a family life.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5f99dffc8e371704ea2289ef695f9897",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt States place many restrictions on adoptions. China, for example, does not permit adoptions by couples who are too old, have disabilities or are obese1. It doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with being overweight, old, or disabled. But the Chinese authorities are trying to decrease the likelihood of the adopted child losing a parent before the age of 18, which for these kids can be especially traumatic. If the parents being gay can be shown to be inherently harmful or less desirable for a child than straight parents, then such a ban would not constitute discrimination. It would be a decision based on a relevant and valid criterion.\n\n1 Belkin, Lisa. \"An End to Gay-Adoption Bans?\". New York Times. 28 July 2010 .(accessed 2 August 2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8a103bf46e008edc6ca2d251acaa2547",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt Because no democratic government should ever attempt to regulate people's reproductive rights and dictate who is or isn't allowed to have children. And unless a massive harm can be shown to the child, the government usually doesn't take children away from their parents, as that might be more harmful. But the government is allowed to define what a family is or should be, under the law.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "04c6ffaab607b98ac0d9f1b1156d8ef3",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt The government's interest in protecting traditional families.\n\nNumerous studies have shown that children do best when they are raised by two married, biological parents1. In the case of adopted children that is impossible, but a man and a woman is the best approximation of that family. Since that is the best environment to raise children, the government has to encourage and promote these traditional unions, not undermine them. Allowing gay couples to legally become parents, would legally and socially redefine what a family is and society as a whole may suffer. Children who are adopted already face bullying and exclusion in school because of their difference, placing them in same-sex households will double their exclusion and make their lives much harder than if placed in an opposite-sex household.\n\n1 Council of Europe, The European Convention on Human Rights, 4th November 1950 ,( accessed 2nd August 2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b1767116a7a8ed65dd8b9fd076bbeb7f",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt The welfare of the adopted child as the primary concern of the state.\n\nThe focus of this debate should not be on gay rights, but on what is in the best interest of the adopted child. The adoption process' goal is to find the most suitable parents for that child, not to resolve other social inequalities and injustices. Being raised in a traditional family, by a mother and father, is the best environment for a child. Studies have shown that children who are raised by homosexual couples can have problems with substance abuse, violence and 'at risk' behaviour. Therefore the state has the obligation to try to provide the child with that environment.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "f6bd7c91c4be89e99d151a021c665caa",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt There is no fact-based evidence for this exclusion.\n\nThe overwhelming majority of scientific studies on this issue have convincingly shown that children raised by gay couples are certainly not worse off than those raised by straight parents1. Some studies have gone as far as to demand that in the face of this evidence, gay bans be ended2. Based on the robust nature of the evidence available, the courts in Florida were satisfied in 2010 that the issue is beyond dispute and they struck down the ban3. When there isn't any scientific evidence to support the differential treatment of one group, it is only based on prejudice and bigotry, which should have no place in a democratic society.\n\n1 Carey, Benedict. \"Experts Dispute Bush on Gay-Adoption Issue\". New York Times. 29 January 2005. (accessed 2 August 2011).\n\n2 Wikipeida. \"LGBT adoption status around the world\" .(accessed 2 August 2011).\n\n3 Foster Care 1999 Statistics. Adoption.com .(accessed 2 August 2011).\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e4d7a099188a79ad7555e31856313ac9",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt Gay adoption bans amount to state sponsored discrimination against gay people.\n\nDiscrimination is the practice of treating people differently based not on individual merit but on their membership to a certain group. The adoption bans are a clear example. Rather than assessing gay couples individually, it is simply assumed that they would all make bad parents because they are gay, while straight couples are assessed based on their individual merit. This breaches the fundamental right of all people to be treated equally under the law and it should be stopped. This principle is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; article 1 \"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.\"1 And also many other national and regional legal texts (e.g. The US Constitution,2 The European Convention on Human Rights).\n\n1 United Nations General Assembly, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights , (accessed 2nd August 2011)\n\n2 James Madison et al., Constitution of the United States ,(accessed 2nd August 2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "aa536a7a5024f1389d4fef3b61e3baea",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt Where same-sex households exist, they should have equal rights as opposite-sex households.\n\nThere are still many ways for gay people to become parents. Some of them are able to pay for a surrogate; some may have a natural child from a previous (heterosexual) relationship and then raise the child with a gay partner. In effect, what this law does is make it impossible for two gay people to have legal rights over a child they may already be raising together. These kids deserve the security of two legally recognized parents. If being raised by gay parents is really that harmful, why would the law allow two gay people to raise a child together as parents but refuse to legally recognize them as such?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cf86da1e29e5e16d2b2a8f3ed69b59dc",
"text": "gender family house believes homosexuals should be able adopt Gay people have the right to a family life.\n\nGetting married and raising a family is considered in most societies one of the most important and fulfilling experiences one can aspire to. It is so important it is considered a human right (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights states \"Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.\"1) It is considered so important for people to be able to become parents that some governments (the UK, for example) fund fertility treatments for couples who are reproductively challenged, and a majority of the population supports that policy2. But members of the LGBT community are stopped from pursuing this human right by repressive and discriminatory laws.\n\n1 Council of Europe, The European Convention on Human Rights, 4th November 1950 ,( accessed 2nd August 2011)\n\n2 Schwartz, John. \"Florida Court Calls Ban on Gay Adoption Unlawful\". New York Times. 22 September 2010 .(accessed 2 August 2011).\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
53dbcbe2225a66bab51a1a3ee918cb93
|
Obesity is a public health issue .
All around the world, obesity has become a serious threat to public health. And the problem starts early on. In the US, for example, 17% of youth are obese4. Obesity itself has many consequences; most obviously on health such as increasing the risk of numerous diseases like heart disease, there are however economic costs both for treatment of these diseases, lost working days and due to less obvious costs such safety on transport and its resulting fuel cost. [1] Tackling obesity is therefore well within the purview of government policy. A failure to act might seriously affect the economic productivity of the nation, and even bankrupt healthcare systems [2] . A measure like the toy ban would be a first step to tackling the problem at the root, preventing children from growing up into obese adults.
[1] Zahn, Theron, “Obesity epidemic forcing ferries to lighten their loads”, seattlepi, 20 December 2011, http://www.seattlepi.com/local/komo/article/Obesity-epidemic-forcing-fer...
[2] “Obesity ‘could bankrupt the NHS’”. BBC. 15 December 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6180991.stm
|
[
{
"docid": "64a8af8e1a1c0ae42115de0151da0c8e",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Even if we were to accept that the government has a role in combatting the so-called ‘obesity epidemic’, that does not justify it taking any measures it deems appropriate. The government should at the very least be able to prove that there is some link between the toys sold with the fast food meals and the rise in obesity. After all, the toys have been around since the late 70s. The ‘obesity epidemic’ is a far more recent phenomenon.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "828999fb9c4f3d36f323c34404018b05",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast If a parent gives into pressure from a young child so easily, even when she knows it’s the wrong thing to do, then she has bigger parenting problems to worry about than the presence of toys in fast food meals. The government cannot possibly step in to eliminate all temptations and negative influences on children’s choices. Parents need to be firm and provide their kids with the guidance necessary to choose what is best.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6aa19fdba3f2adb3cf742f42fafa1172",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast It is important to instil good habits in children at an early age. But the manner in which it is done is equally important. Kids should be taught to make choices based on what is best for them, through information and appropriate explanations, rather than just being shielded from potential dangers. That kind of behaviour, predicated on reason and understanding, will have a far more lasting impact on the way they make choices, than just protecting them from temptation, with which they will inevitably have to cope later in life.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "dd6fb302f2b3f0b6650d353fe8f06df9",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Children may have a strong preference for a certain type of meal over another, but young kids don’t buy their own food. Parents do. And if kids might not understand that fast food is bad for them, their parents should. If a child is eating too much fast food, that is not a marketing success, it’s a parenting failure.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fe9e416bd3747a492956449b5e624f98",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast This is not exactly a ban on the sale of fast food to children. This ban does not affect the options of bad foods that parents can continue to feed to their young children if they choose to do so. They will even be able to continue buying happy meals – simply without the toy. It merely alters the incentives slightly toward promoting better, healthier choices by making fast food less appealing.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "419da13a3348c670550ff761edd3edd2",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast While McDonald’s may have found a way to circumvent the ban, the significant pressure that was applied to them in the process led the company to improve the quality of the Happy Meal, by providing clients with fresh fruit and healthier drink options. Therefore, the ban could be considered a success.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "badc284aca3c7b4144ceefadd5d99ede",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Of course there is no such thing as a silver bullet solution to a problem as complex as childhood obesity. This ban would need to be part of a bigger push to regulate the fast food industry’s marketing to children and to provide kids and parents with better choices and information. That doesn’t mean the ban has no merit or that it would not play a beneficial role in the fight against obesity.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ddb5f9acdc67728171b06f77ef8b3508",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Making it easier for parents to raise their children well.\n\nAs well meaning as parents may be in trying to guide their kids toward better nutritional choices, they face a formidable opponent: the fast food marketing machine that spends over 4 billion dollars on advertising a year, much of it targeted directly at kids [1] . This can create enough ‘pester power’ [2] from the kids themselves, seduced by the toy that comes with the meal, that it can persuade parents to make bad choices they wouldn’t otherwise make. By eliminating at least one layer of negative pressure, this law would help parents make those healthy choices that they already know are best.\n\n[1] Philpott, Tom. “The fast-food industry’s 4.2 billion marketing blitz.” Grist. November 10. 2010. http://www.grist.org/article/food-2010-11-09-the-fast-food-industrys-4.2...\n\n[2] “San Francisco Happy meal Toy Ban Takes Effect, Sidestepped by McDonald’s.” Huffington Post. November 2011. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/san-francisco-happy-meal-ban_n_...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c9a0237194dc9d23e3c8f4692a6cd89f",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Bad nutrition habits start during childhood.\n\nGiving away toys with meals that are calorie laden and of poor nutritional quality creates an emotional attachment between the child and fast food [1] . This bond will then follow that child into adulthood, making it harder for her to make better nutritional choices in order to become a healthy individual. This ban would break that bond and make it easier for children to grow up to be healthier adults.\n\n[1] Storm, Stephanie. “McDonald’s Trims Its Happy Meal.” The New York Times. July 26, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/27/business/mcdonalds-happy-meal-to-get-h...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cb8d51365f0ade342a91da99a3fe8de6",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Marketing aimed at children should be subject to strict regulations.\n\nUnlike adults, children are not able to make healthy decisions for themselves. They don’t understand what calories, sodium content, or saturated fats are. They are unable to comprehend the long-term effects that fast food might have on their health and development. On the other hand, a toy is instantly appealing to them and offers a straightforward incentive to opt for such a meal. As long as the negative consequences cannot be explained to kids in a clear and compelling manner, we should not make unhealthy food even more desirable for them. We should not allow children to make bad choices based on information they don’t understand [1] .\n\n[1] Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. “Fast Food FACTS: Evaluating Fast Food Nutrition and Marketing to Youth.” Yale University. November 2010. http://www.fastfoodmarketing.org/media/FastFoodFACTS_Report.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c564dc51672321bd42f34672c2075721",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast The ban is ineffective in addressing the problem of obesity.\n\nStudies have shown that only a very small amount of the calories consumed by children come from foods like the Happy Meal. And while kids are eating at fast food restaurants at an alarming rate, it is their parents who make the decision to take them there 93% of the time. Of the kids who do want to go to McDonald’s, only 8% cite the toy as the primary reason. Therefore, this piece of legislation seems to tackle a perceived problem rather than a real one. Legislators would be better off focusing their attention where it matters: providing information to parents about making better choices for their kids, and improving the quality of school lunches, which are actually provided by the government and are eaten by kids every single day, often as their main meal [1] .\n\n[1] Eskenazi, Joe, and Wachs, Benjamin. “How the Happy Meal ban explains San Francisco.” San Francisco Weekly. January 19, 2011. http://www.sfweekly.com/content/printVersion/2330057/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "82a9702c0a351ee89d7cee4e6242309d",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast This ban constitutes serious governmental intrusion into parental responsibilities and private choices.\n\nParents, not politicians, should be responsible for guiding the choices their children make and the food they eat, especially when they pay for it with their own money. Parents may have other reasons for wanting their children to have the meal with a toy, for example the toy is a useful distraction for the child. Governments should not try to impose their own idea of what constitutes appropriate food choices for children on parents and on businesses. Governments may aim to promote and educate, but imposing bans on private businesses goes too far [1] .\n\n[1] Martinez, Michael. “Mayor vetoes San Francisco ban on Happy Meals with toys.” CNN. November 13 2010. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/11/12/california.fast.food.ban/index.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c62464078699f228e4cc2fd49d653056",
"text": "ealth general weight society youth tthw prohibit sale childrens toys part fast Such bans are easy to side step.\n\nThe San Francisco ban has already been circumvented by McDonalds who has started selling their Happy Meals without the toys and then selling the toys separately for a nominal price [1] . Banning the sale of any toys in fast food restaurants would be difficult without prompting legal action from the companies. The steep legal costs of defending such a law would waste public resources that could easily be put to better use.\n\n[1] Eskenazi, Joe. “Happy Meal Ban. McDonlad’s Outsmarts San Francisco.” San Francisco Weekly. November 29, 2011. http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2011/11/happy_meal_ban_mcdonalds_out...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
bdb1d993109c76ca970d7619f2fe5ab3
|
Age of consent laws prevent the most vulnerable receiving contraceptives.
Age of consent laws are in fact dangerous because they drive underground the very people who should be, and are in most need of, receiving contraceptives, advice on safe sex, and access to health and other educational services. This is true both of the ‘statutory rapist’ as well as the under-16 consenting ‘victim’, who may worry about having assisted in the commission of a crime. Both parties then become real victims as they are put at greater risk of contracting STDs or unwanted pregnancies.
|
[
{
"docid": "cd39f3273ded34d7116bac89573e40b1",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered It seems important to note that the age of consent could be maintained – or raised- while allowing people who need advice on or access to contraceptives, or other services to access them. The idea would be that school students are still taught about sex, contraceptives and consequences, and doctors are to give free, impartial and –most importantly- confidential advice, and contraception to be readily available to all\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "00f6c8b87b6e3be48ec25b12fd825177",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered The principle reason some countries have higher ages of consent for males compared to females [1] is simply because of the medical evidence that males reach sexual maturity at a later age than females. [2] This has nothing to do with discriminating against homosexual sex. However it is true that when it comes to children, some countries do view underage homosexual as slightly more dangerous than underage heterosexual sex. Largely because there is the higher risk of HIV infection in the case of the former. [3]\n\n[1] Canadian Department of Justice, ‘Age of Consent to Sexual Activity’, justice.gc.ca, http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/clp/faq.html\n\n[2] Neinstein, Lawrence S., ‘Puberty: Normal Growth and Development’, Adolescent Health Curriculum: University of Southern California, http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/Health_Center/adolhealth/index.php\n\n[3] HIV, AIDS and Young Gay Men, AVERT: Averting HIV & AIDS, http://www.avert.org/young-gay-men.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e5fb12a5d2931cd6fd73389873f0dc9d",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered Liberals tend to assume that many young boys and girls would want to have sex if not for age of consent laws. In reality many boys and girls themselves actually do not want to have sex or sexual contact, but lack the social and emotional confidence to say ‘no’. Age of consent laws protect such children, by preventing others from putting them in such a difficult position and help them against peer pressure.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "653f324d756cf32feb65d25cc566de10",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered Those who are underage are not 'expressing' themselves through sex. They are unlikely to fully know what they are doing so this is not an area where they are going to be expressing themselves. Children have freedom of expression in many other areas and through technology gaining more and more options. This is therefore a step that is unnecessary if all it is about is 'freedom of expression'.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9bafd012c33583575727da9515e8494c",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered Even if we can accept that children need protection from sex, is it right to use the full force of the criminal law – which includes the threat of criminal prosecution and the prospect of a criminal sentence – to do it? It is contrary to both justice and common sense for people who have merely had consensual sex with a teen who happens to be under-16 to be arrested, tried, branded with a criminal label (‘statutory rapist’, ‘sex offender’), thrown in prison, and thereby treated on the same footing as real (sometimes violent) rapists, arsonists and kidnappers.\n\nThe debate surrounding the age of consent raises the broader point of the role of the criminal law. The function of the criminal law is to preserve public order and decency, not to intervene in the lives of citizens, especially those who have mutually consented to taking part in a harmless activity in private. To accept otherwise would be to disregard the crucial notion of human autonomy and the free will of the individual, which are expressed, regardless of one’s age, each time a person presents his or her consent. This is why it is so important that the law recognises the sanctity of consent.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1d033cce92fddaacae31d94b2bfaa8c5",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered Liberalising age of consent laws will not encourage paedophilia or make sexual exploitation any easier. That is simply a false nightmare scenario propagated by scaremongers. Many countries have lowered the basic age of consent while strengthening their ‘plus elements’. For example, by making ‘sexual grooming’ an offence (to stop rings of internet paedophiles); by making it an offence to have sex with a young child if you are above a certain age or if the age differential between the partners is above a certain limit (to target adult paedophiles while allowing teens their sexual freedom); and by making it an offence to have sex with someone who is in a relationship of trust of dependency with you (to stop sexual exploitation).\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4535e57c4f035f2b6341ee3a7b5b21c0",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered Age of consent laws are also arbitrary as children become sexually and emotionally mature at very different rates, so any artificially imposed limit will be too high for many and too low for others.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6daefc65a0dfa8074c09cb8306ec2da6",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered Consent Laws are discriminatory.\n\nSome countries have one age of consent for young females (say 16) and a different, higher age of consent for young males or for having anal sex (say 18). This means that a heterosexual adult male who wants to have sex with a 17-year-old female is free to do so, but a homosexual adult male cannot have intercourse with a young man who is 17. [1] Not only are such laws clearly discriminatory, they entrench and perpetuate the myths, stereotypes, and prejudices against homosexuals and homosexual sex. Age of consent laws, if we are to have them at all, should be equalised across the genders.\n\n[1] HIV, AIDS and Young Gay Men, AVERT: Averting HIV & AIDS, http://www.avert.org/young-gay-men.htm , ‘Worldwide ages of Consent’, AVERT: averting HIV & AIDS, http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm , HIV, AIDS and Young Gay Men, AVERT: Averting HIV & AIDS, http://www.avert.org/young-gay-men.htm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b4cd790eb2af6164b7871d0b9b45f23d",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered The censorship laws are a relic from the past.\n\nThe idea that young people should not be having sex is a leftover relic from the past: its justifications are anachronistic and have little place in modern times. Age of consent laws were the product of a ‘purity campaign’ in Britain in the 1800s, when it was believed that sex was a ‘male privilege’, that it led to the sexual ruin of young women, that it meant the loss of their virtue, which was a fate worse than death, and that it contributed to women’s second class citizenship. [1] In the UK the age of 16 was chosen and set in 1885, more than 100 years ago, and has remained ever since. [2] Today these ideas would offend both men and women.\n\n[1] Harman, Lillian, ‘Understanding the Age of Consent in the Context of the 1800’s’, Liberty No. 235, pp.3-4 from Age Of Consent, http://www.ageofconsent.com/comments/numberten.htm\n\n[2] Bullough, Vern L, ‘The Age of Consent’, Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality Volume 16, Issue 2-3, 2005\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b49aef37d3137cc65c9f0fff06c4f75a",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered We should defend children’s freedom of expression.\n\nThe freedom of sexual expression (and exploration) is not only a matter of choice which is fundamental to the individual – it is also particularly important to young people as they proceed through the stage of adolescence into young adulthood. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is entirely natural and should be celebrated in the context of loving relationships, not criminalised and put under the prying eye of an authoritarian state. Violence, coercion and exploitation in sexual relationships should still be punished, but not consensual activity. Such restrictions go against the human rights to privacy and of freedom of expression.\n\nThe concept that young people do not know what they are doing is flawed, because every person who has gone through sexual development has learnt by doing. There is no process of suddenly coming into full knowledge without acting and exploration. Such exploration would be more safely done in an environment that doesn't criminalize it. Such criminalization can actaully lead to the very harm that the law ostensibly seeks to avoid, coercion and exploitation, for it is people who are naturally more inclined to coercion and exploitation that will disregard the law anyway. This feeds the lambs to the wolves.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9d0ca0c002c04567e7edcc9b6b01d154",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered We must protect the vulnerable from themselves.\n\nIt is undeniable that young children form a special and vulnerable group in society. Nowhere is this truer than in the context of sex – so much so that we often need to protect them by placing limitations on what they do sexually. Below a certain minimum age, children are at risk of not having the physiological, biological and, most importantly, emotional development to cope with sex, and with the many possible consequences of having sex, which include teen pregnancy, illegal or legal abortion, childbirth, parental and societal disapproval, unsupported parenthood, legal consequences and increased risk of cervical cancer. [1]\n\nUnfortunately everyone matures a different age. That does not mean that choosing an average, approximate age for consensual sex, such as 16, is arbitrary or wrong. There is no great harm in asking “early developers” to wait for a year or two before they begin to have sex. Especially young people are not always as mature as they believe they are.\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Cervical cancer link to early sex’, 21 December 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8420690.stm ,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b80ce4d828f5a9cd4d926b8ed1158e35",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered We must protect the vulnerable in society.\n\nEven without resorting to a moralistic view of the criminal law (i.e. that its function is to stem moral disintegration and to uphold the ‘shared morality’ of society), there is adequate justification for age of consent laws. Society has a vital interest in ensuring that its naturally weaker members are protected from harm, and doing so is precisely the function of the persuasive and coercive powers of the criminal law. It is therefore legitimate for the law to aim to prevent sexual harm to children by criminalising sex with them. Indeed, age of consent sex laws are not the only laws dependent on age. In many countries it is also an offence, for example, to sell tobacco to children, or to employ children below a certain age in the entertainment industry, whether or not the child ‘consents’. Society must recognise the reality that the apparent expression of ‘consent’ by a child is often different from consent expressed an adult. In the case of the former, therefore, it is not always true that saying ‘yes’ is a true expression of human autonomy.\n\nThe argument that these laws may cause injustice to someone who truly thought his partner was above the legal age is also a poor one – many countries already provide a defence for such situations\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2e3b74df785c47194dd2f8460c6055a4",
"text": "gender youth house believes age consent laws should be made more liberal lowered Lowering the age of consent will cause criminal dangers.\n\nLowering the age of consent (or worse, getting rid of it entirely) legalises, legitimises and brings above ground the many problems that we are fighting underground. It will provide an opportunity for paedophile networks to expand, by allowing them to target even younger children – now lawfully. The problem of paedophilia is already a rapidly growing one, made worse by its expansion into ‘related’ avenues such as child pornography. In addition to the obvious problem of paedophilia, the problem of the sexual predation of young children also encompasses the problem of youth prostitution (since prostitution is itself already legal in many countries), and the international traffic in boys and girls.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
e92662039a89c1e771826d50e8a88d2c
|
The link between constituencies and Members of Parliament is important.
Most PR systems would result in a break between the constituency and parliament. It is important that there is a single MP that represents a particular area. Having constituencies means that every citizen feels that they have a personal representative in parliament. Much of the work of an MP is constituency business, resolving problems encountered by constituents and raising the particular concerns of their geographical area with the government. The importance of this link can be shown in the difference in feeling towards individual’s own representative and the parliament as a whole. In 2010 there was a dissatisfaction in parliament as a whole of 38% whereas only 16% were dissatisfied with the job of their own MP.(Hansard Society, Audit of Political Engagement 7, p.29, p.88)
|
[
{
"docid": "386e1a5c2a0e156b267991a877e93baa",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt A proportional electoral system is more likely to return seats for smaller parties. Amongst these smaller parties, it is likely that we will find parties on either extreme of the left-right spectrum. The British National Party campaigned for PR for this reason (Channel 4 Fact Check, ‘Would AV help or hinder the BNP?’). Potentially even more extreme parties, such as the English Defence League, could get members of parliament under some proportional systems. It is not beneficial to the country to have extremist groups like this in parliament.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "2b34c19f9cec1981def757fb75bdf74c",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt A lot of successful countries use PR, so clearly it doesn’t lead to instability. In particular coalitions don’t always mean weak government. For example, Germany uses PR and has coalitions, yet is one of the strongest economies in the world and a significant power within Europe. Furthermore, Canada, India and the UK use FPTP and all have had coalitions. The UK coalition has so far proven to be both strong and radical. Michael Portillo, a former Conservative Minister of Defence has argued \"They have been more radical on deficit reduction than say Margaret Thatcher was, but on top of doing that very difficult fiscal adjustment, they are also reformed schools, health, welfare, and pensions - areas where Margaret Thatcher didn't care to tackle.\"(Today, 2011)\n\nThe assumption that Proportional Representation leads to coalition also needs to be examined. Australia has for decades had strong single party government under the Alternative Vote.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "23fe3987ef0d3fb0cf0245b2d76fbf92",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt On the contrary having several manifestos used by a coalition actually means that there are many more people who get some of the policies they voted for passed. Under FPTP only a minority has ever voted for the manifesto that wins and gets implemented. If there is a coalition created by PR then more than 50% of the electorate will be getting a large amount of the policies they voted for implemented.\n\nThe whole issue of manifesto promises also makes the assumption that parties always stick to them when they get into power. This is not the case even under single party government. Election promises are often not implemented as politicians are simply using them to win an election, they may realise that the policy will not form the basis of a sensible government policy, or be too politically difficult to implement. Creation of a democratically elected House of Lords was in every New Labour manifesto, yet after three terms in power was at best half complete.(Summers, Labour’s attempts to reform the House of Lords)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2274886da1680e0b3c89ab1dd1706713",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt Junior partners are by definition junior. It is the biggist party in the coalition that gets the top job; President or Prime Minister while the minor party has to make do with much more junior roles – the Foreign Ministry has been popular in Germany. In the UK Conservative-Liberal democrat coalition the senior partner the conservatives hold all the big offices: Prime Minister, Chancellor, Foreign Office and Home Office. Even if they have to compromise on some issues it is the senior partner that is setting the government agenda.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "949014faf098fd1c1e367494e30411ed",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt Cooperation and compromise often does not happen and acknowledging a wide range of public opinion is the main reason why they cant compromise. Firstly, they frequently won’t agree, which will lead to tortuously slow progress or even to having no government for the country. This happened after the general election in Belgium in 2010, when the record was broken for the time taken to form a new democratic government after an election (The Telegraph, ‘Belgium wins Guinness World Record for political impasse’). This occurred because none of the parties are willing to compromise over election promises and yet do not want to have to fight another election. However if a government is to be formed the parties involved will have to make compromises and resulting in tearing up some of their promises, betraying those who voted for them. The alternative is the expense of going to the country again, with no guarantee of a different result.(DW-world.de, 2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6d8aace72b837332afa1968d4dc31847",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt If seats are safe, that is because people are continuing to vote for a party that they are satisfied with. Furthermore, it is perfectly possible for politicians to lose safe seats if the electorate is no longer happy with them; for example, in 2008, the Scottish National Party (SNP) won Glasgow East, one of Labour’s safest seats (BBC News, ‘SNP stuns Labour in Glasgow East’).\n\nIn almost every constituency the number of people who do not vote outnumbers the vote of the winning party. This means if those who don’t vote all got out and voted the election could go any way, they could elect in a fringe party if voting together. So look at Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, one of the safest seats in the country, former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s seat. In 2010 Labour won with 65.2% of the vote,(Electoral Calculus, 2010) with 29559 labour votes compared to 6550 SNP a majority of 23009.(Wells, 2010) However in this seat turnout was only 62.2% that means that 27863 people did not vote, considerably more than voted for Labour. If they voted together for someone else those who do not vote could always throw out the party in power. No seat is therefore really a safe seat, they are safe because who believe their vote is not worthwhile do not bother to vote when in reality if they did they could make a difference. Indeed in the Scottish elections of 2011 the SNP managed to take a large part of this same seat.(Vote 2011, 2011)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4f66fe9576651e79fff5b63a02756d11",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt There is no reason to assume that there will be an increase in political engagement. Votes will simply not count in different ways. If there are more coalitions, people could feel their vote doesn’t count even more strongly, as they will see that the parties they vote for change their policies once in government. What is the point in voting for a platform if the party that is pledging to fulfil these promises is simply going to drop them as soon as the election is over and the negotiations begin?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e1195b35b617808eba14430d8be5ca1f",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt As there are many different forms of proportional representation some of them will be fairer than others. Implementing AV for example may help sort out the problem of MPs not receiving a majority in their constituency as they will now need to receive 50% of the vote in order to be elected. Yet it will do nothing for the other two problems identified. Minority parties are still unlikely to get any seats and parties with their vote uniformly spread across the country will still be punished. AV in both cases still favours geographically centered parties and still favors the top two parties over any smaller one as the small parties will drop out as the ballots are counted.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d615278227af83cd8ab6582a726a5bcb",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt PR creates an unfair balance of power.\n\nCoalition government is actually unfair, as small parties with only a few percent of support nationally can hold the balance of power. This can result in them being able to force through unpopular or sectarian policies with no national mandate as a price for their support in parliament; for example, the Dutch coalition lost its majority in 2011, meaning it may have to rely on the support of the SGP, a very small conservative Christian party that does not even allow women to be members (Financial Times, ‘Dutch Coalition loses Senate majority).\n\nParticularly when there is only one potential small party that could be a coalition partner for the biggest party(s) that small party potentially holds a lot more power than their number of seats in parliament would imply. When either of the main parties could form a government the small party can negotiate with both to get the best deal possible. And once in government they can threaten to walk out if they do not get their way on the issues that matter to them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c6cf3b1370d6e3b0115ef3e43f1b758a",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt PR leads to weaker government.\n\nTypically under PR, no one party gains a majority of the popular vote, so coalition governments have to be formed often between four or more parties. This tends to produce unstable governments, changing as parties leave or join the governing coalition, and frequent elections. Governments are unable to put a clear, positive legislative agenda in place over several years or act decisively in time of crisis. Compare this to the strong governing majorities produced by FPTP, such as the Conservatives in the 1980s in the UK, which allowed them to push through unpopular but necessary policies, such as tackling trade unions and reducing inflation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c0ef063a1c1912decdd6a442a02e6862",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt PR decreases political engagement.\n\nPR results in less engagement in politics as voters do not get what they voted for – instead post-election deals between the parties create coalitions which do not feel bound by manifesto promises. In order to create coalitions there is a need for parties to be flexible on their manifestos especially where they contradict each other. As elections seldom result in all the parties in a governing coalition leaving power, in practice accountability is blurred and voters feel alienated from the political process. In addition, many PR systems are very complex and off-putting for voters.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0a90a0ab6d97ee5f24ac78e07322aa6a",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt Coalition government is a good thing.\n\nAdversarial democratic systems such as the United States, Britain and Australia have been becoming increasingly dysfunctional with politics simply being a shouting match. Coalition governments lead to cooperation and compromise between parties.(Woldring, 2011) Governments which are forced to acknowledge a wide range of public opinion are less likely to introduce policies which victimise minorities or ride roughshod over public opinion for ideological reasons; for example, the poll tax in the UK, 1988-92. Empirically, countries with PR systems, such as Germany, show that great prosperity can result from the policies of such governments.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0441e9fd0577eb67e5b243cc3ab540bb",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt PR increases political engagement which benefits society.\n\nPR results in more engagement in politics as every vote counts (CPA/Wilton Park conference, ‘How can Parliamentarians best re-engage the public?’). Political participation is good and we should care about the low voter turnout in elections that has been caused by first past the post. Surveys show that that those who vote are more engaged in the community in other ways and have better personal wellbeing. Research in Switzerland has shown that voting does make people happier as well as being better informed citizens. The higher the stake the person has, and the more likely their vote is to count the more effort they will make to find out the facts so as to make informed choices.(Marks et al., 2005, p5-6)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "372f970b3567b1612e06ca3ecf9dbeb9",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt PR produces fairer results\n\nFirst past the post (FPTP) often results in a party without majority support being able to dominate parliament. Minority parties, such as the Green party and UKIP (in the UK), which can win 5-10% or so of the vote all over the country, can fail to win a single seat. In the UK 2010 general election, UKIP received 919,546 votes across the country, but not a single seat (BBC News, UK 2010 general election results). Parties with a uniform vote across the country are punished unfairly. Thus in Singapore’s general election of 2011 the National Solidarity Party contested 24 seats and won 39.25% of the valid votes across the wards it contested yet still failed to win any seats.(Wikipedia, Singaporean general election, 2011) Theoretically parties could win huge numbers of votes, potentially up to 49% in every constituency, without ever getting any representation in parliament. As such FPTP favours parties that appeal to local issues or to particular segments of the population these parties that are losing out are likely to be those parties that either appeal to a broad segment of the population or whose support is based upon an issue that affects everyone. Furthermore, in the UK 2010 general election, two thirds of MPs were elected without receiving a majority of the votes in their constituency (Lodge, 2011). This suggests that most people are being represented by people they didn’t vote for.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "24ce3ad3cf9cf52cc3bf8f227431daec",
"text": "politics general government leadership local government voting house would adopt Safe seats will be reduced.\n\nAll political parties have seats that they consider safe and unlikely to lose. If a person in an inner city constituency that has a strong Labour history, wishes to vote for someone other than Labour, then their vote is effectively null and void. Labour will win a majority however they vote. The fact that the seat is so safe means that there is effectively very little effect people can have, resulting in thousands of people's vote being wasted and having no effect when it comes to forming a government. In the 2010 UK general election the result was decided by less than 460,000 voters in only 111 constituencies. This gives an unfair amount of political influence to a tiny minority of the electorate while making the majority’s votes close to worthless.(Miliband, 2011)\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
68cdd56887e1d90c0e19f3039213dd1e
|
Randomly checking passengers’ identities is much safer than allowing terrorists to know in advance who the authorities are seeking.
Making statements in advance as to who is likely to be stopped at airports is the most dangerous action any government could take. There are innumerable ways in which it would be possible to perform a terrorist act, and random checks mean that all possible routes are equally likely to be apprehended.
By contrast, actively and visibly subjecting members of particular ethnic groups to stricter security checks will enable terrorists to determine where surveillance in airports is at its most lax. The most dangerous terrorist groups operate on an international level, recruiting attackers from a wide range of backgrounds and ethnic groups. It would therefore be comparatively easy for an organisation such as al Qaeda to mount an attack using only individuals who do not conform to the authorities’ profile of a potential terrorist.
More importantly random checks mean that all people, regardless of the background, age or appearance are equally deterred from considering criminal or terrorist acts.
On the basis that it would be impossible to search everyone at a major international airport, the deterrence factor offered by random stops is far more effective than searching a tiny proportion of a designated group.
|
[
{
"docid": "5b484745fc94ed80753d50fb5ecb8e01",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part In other areas of enforcement it is routine to use simple common sense when identifying security risks. A group of students coming off a cheap flight from Amsterdam are simply more likely to have illegal drugs in their possession than a group of pensioners returning from a tour of museums in St Petersburg.\n\nOf course it is important that airport authorities should be vigilant and avoid making damaging assumptions, but that is no reason for them to be reckless.\n\nThere are a limited number of people that can be stopped and searched or questioned at an airport; wasting that time on passengers who are extremely unlikely to pose any threat presents a substantial risk of peoples’ lives and safety.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "f9905d9a058f23c2f8b0eaa419772409",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part The use of the term “racism” suggests that assumptions made by screeners are based on prejudice, not fact. Profiling, which takes far more than race into account, has a solid basis in fact. It is entirely sensible to attempt to prevent criminal acts by being particularly cautious in the investigation of those groups and individuals that are most likely to pose a risk to other passengers.\n\nRisking the lives of innocent passengers in the name of political correctness is simply absurd. These are measures that protect the security of thousands of passengers at the cost of minor inconvenience to a few.\n\nAny reasonable traveller- Arab or not- would accept that there is a reason for these actions in the same way that passengers realise that delays caused by security controls and passport checks are an unavoidable nuisance in an era of routine international travel.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "194f930fd70d04daf73347aaef687e34",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part This opposition argument is potentially contradictory. It argues that the majority of Muslims are reasonable people and then, on the other hand, that the moment reasonable security measures are put into place there will be a massive increase in radicalised young people willing to act as suicide bombers.\n\nEverybody accepts that security checks are necessary at airports and for the most part they are applied universally. However, if opposition is correct, it would seem absurd to suggest that millions of reasonable people would suddenly take affront at the simple fact that they happen to be part of a social group that has an unusually high number of rogue elements. Indeed, suggesting such a thing could be construed as a racist act; implying that the people concerned are in some way incapable of reaching this regrettable, if logical, conclusion.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0a85b81bd0ace88ee92d175333412bfa",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part It is incredibly unlikely that any randomly selected member of a particular group would be attempting to commit a crime. Racial, ethnic and identity groups are extremely large. Terrorist organisations, even al Qaeda, rarely contain more than a few hundred members. The relative proportion of individuals belonging to any particular identity group who also belongs to a terrorist organisation is likely to be impossibly small.\n\nThe impact of the perceptions of the communities involved, however, would be significant, allowing for accusations of racism and persecution.\n\nStatistically, profiling would have very little impact: in 2005, US Airlines carried 745.7 million passengers. [i] Faced with figures like that random stoppages make far more sense.\n\nAlthough exact figures are not available even if just two or three million fell within the profile group, it would be impossible to search all of them. The use of profiling, however, as a result of the PATRIOT Act, led to, among others, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy being stopped; it does not and cannot work. [ii]\n\n[i] ‘2005 Total Airline System Passenger Traffic Up 4.6 Percent From 2004’, Research and Innovative Transport Administration, 2006, http://www.bts.gov/press_releases/2006/bts020_06/html/bts020_06.html\n\n[ii] ‘Senetor? Terrorist? A Watch List Stops Kennedy at Airport’, Swarns, Rachel L., The New York Times, 20 August 2004, http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/20/national/20flight.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b1f69391273bd3667ae254180b6aba90",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part The scale of flights in Israel- both domestic and international- is tiny. Compared with the North American and European aviation markets, screening passengers entering and leaving Israeli territory requires an entirely different approach. Equally the racial diversity of Tel Aviv is quite different to New York and London.\n\nThe Pew Research Centre estimates that there are 2.6 million Muslims living in the US [i] , a number equal to twice the population of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv combined. The pressures on airports between a small state in the Middle East and the transportation hubs of the US and Europe are totally different. The very account cited by Proposition talks about some passengers being interviewed for up to half an hour, that is a rather different prospect when dealing with JFK or Heathrow. It is just not a practical solution.\n\n[i] “The future of the global muslim population”. Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, January 2011. http://features.pewforum.org/muslim-population-graphic/#/United%20States\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8daff97c7d8db79433e69edd0c9f001a",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part The presumption of innocence is a principle worth defending and an important part of this is rejecting policing strategies that assume certain groups are more likely to be engage in criminal activity than others. In the last ten years, a few dozen people, at most, have been involved in terrorist acts at airports. Meanwhile, millions upon millions of young, Muslim men have flown across continents and oceans without the slightest disruption.\n\nIt is both unfair and foolish to target a single group as being more likely to contain terrorists. It builds resentment among the group concerned and is unlikely to reveal any practical results because of the numbers concerned.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8862a93cccd894431c251ca678b0011a",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part Profiling is simply institutionalizing racism an reduces minorities to the status of second class citizens\n\nProfiling is, in the end, simply wrong. Britain suffered for decades from the ‘innocent until proven Irish’ attitude of their security forces, which did nothing but engender resentment among Irish individuals who were trying to live and work in the United Kingdom. For western nations to make the same mistake in their approach to Muslims would be the gravest folly.\n\nAviation authorities are, ultimately, under the control of the state, and if a government announces that they consider all members of a group to be potential criminals, it sends out a very provocative message.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "51478718bb155fd6d81cb67f33d255ad",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part Profiling exacerbates terrorism as it reinforces the perception that Muslims and marginalised ethnic groups face prejudice.\n\nThe reality is that if a plane can be held up with a box-cutter, a broken glass bottle from duty free or flammable alcohol from the same source could be just as threatening.\n\nHowever, increased use of air marshals- armed plainclothes police officers who travel secretly on certain flights- means that even these desperate tactics are likely to be ineffectual.\n\nInstitutionalising prejudice and assumption will add legitimacy and grativas to terrorist propaganda that seeks to radicalise curious or confused young people.\n\nNot only is profiling ineffectual, it is likely to exacerbate the situation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "dd8cf907a09dad56781d0ffc98cc5b7b",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part Profiling would have caught many of the perpetrators of terrorism in recent years.\n\nProfiling takes account of many more characteristics than an individual’s ethnicity. Targeted checks would have caught, for example, the so called Christmas Day Bomber. Individuals who pay in cash for a one way flight while carrying no luggage, as Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab [i] did, are a fairly small group and it makes sense to target them.\n\nProfiling is a great deal more subtle than a decision to target a single ethnic group. It is entirely possible to identify patterns in the behaviour of terrorists, drug mules and smugglers, and to respond to that accordingly.\n\nObviously, the more refined the profile can be, the better. It is incredibly unlikely that an affluent, Caucasian businessman with a return ticket for the following day is either a suicide bomber or a drug smuggler. Both common sense and statistics show this to be the case.\n\n[i] “Obama vows to repair intelligence gaps behind Detroit airplane incident”. The Washington post, 30 December 2009. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/29/AR2009122901433.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7d823b6201f095703e0793b267ff4b3a",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part The experience of Israel proves that profiling works\n\nIsrael has been using profiling for decades to identify those individuals at airports that should be stopped, questioned and have their luggage thoroughly checked [i] .\n\nDespite the massive threats that Israel faces, the Israeli state does not feel the need to invade the privacy of most passengers because they simply know what and who they are looking for. This approach has meant that, despite high odds, hijackings and bombings are not the routine affairs on El Al flights that one might expect it to be.\n\nAs the focus for terrorist atrocities has now become the US and the UK, it simply makes sense to follow the example of a nation that has been such a target since its creation.\n\n[i] “Exposing hostile intent”. SecuritySolutions.com. http://securitysolutions.com/news/security_exposing_hostile_intent/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "26d2dddae4d2a5812df20136713f4696",
"text": "terrorism society minorities inequality house would use racial profiling part When you know terrorists are likely to be members of particular national and ethnic groups, it is simply more practical to focus searches on those groups.\n\nThe reality is that all of the major terrorist attacks against Western targets in recent years have been perpetrated by young, Muslim men. It doesn’t require any prejudice at all to realise that they are the most sensible group to check and recheck.\n\nAlthough it is important to respect people’s rights and liberties regardless of ethnicity or religious belief, a sensible security policy must force police officers and security officials to make decisions based on factual information. Everybody- including most members of the groups identified by profiling- has an interest in not being blown up on an aeroplane. They will, therefore, accept that this is a regrettable necessity. Airport staff can only stop so many people and it makes sense to target groups that terrorists are likely to be part of.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
01b19f3338d84b3d822b7a141dac7a1c
|
Humanitarian mercenaries
Mercenaries are finding a more ethical role in the form of humanitarian missions. The idea of humanitarian mercenaries is a concept of hired guns employed by governments and the United Nations to prevent genocide in the place of nation state militaries. The major benefit of using mercenaries would be the absence of a political cost should there be mercenary causalities as seen in Iraq15. There will not be waning political support from the military’s home country. Early examples include the use of mercenaries in Sierra Leone. When the Revolutionary Unified Front (RUF) was advancing on the capital Executive Outcomes and other mercenaries held back the RUF, preventing a massacre. They would later seek out and destroy elements of the rebel group. The lack of political cost makes them ideal for operations where other countries have no domestic political will to intervene.
15) Raffin,R. ‘Humanitarian Mercenaries’ 2008
|
[
{
"docid": "03e2136a4295a2d8c5c7738e24caf8e7",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Firstly, the emergence of the African Union (AU) as a peacekeeping force on the continent negates the need for mercenaries. The AU’s has become increasingly involved in peacekeeping since 200316. They are more willing to involve themselves in African affairs than the West, and have deployed the lion’s share of soldiers in peacekeeping operations as in the Central African Republic17.\n\nSecondly, the UN has condemned mercenary use in general and it would seem hypocritical to begin hiring them. The UN’s weaker states have been reluctant to agree to UN mercenaries for fear they could be used against them18. The UN has actively criticised humanitarian mercenaries in the past for their lack of appreciation of conflict dynamics19, making them unlikely to employ dogs of war.\n\n16) Pan,E. ‘African Peacekeeping Operations’ December 2005\n\n17) Felix,B. ‘Militia attack Muslim neighbourhoods in Central African Republic’s Capital’ 2013\n\n18) Avant,D. ‘Mercenaries’ pg.26\n\n19) Chrisafis,A. ‘UN and aid groups criticise “Humanitarian Mercenaries’ 2007\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "ee57edd0828fd94d679eeca597fb1d0f",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Hired hackers don’t count as real mercenaries. While it is true that they are not a citizen of either state’s military structure and that they seek to gain profit from their venture, they do not qualify under the UN mercenary convention. To be a mercenary, one must qualify under all the conditions listed in the convention. Cyber mercenaries are not directly involved in acts of violence, which disqualifies them under Article 1, sub-section 2.A of the UN mercenary convention30. Definitions will have to be updated in the future if cyber-mercenaries are going to be considered anything other than criminals.\n\n30) United Nations ‘United Nations Mercenary Convention’ 1989\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8f7f17eeceab615fac269bcfce9f016d",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african NGOs are actively discouraged from hiring mercenaries. In 2003, UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw strongly advised against the use of mercenaries by British companies on the Ivory Coast. In addition to government deterrence, many charities are more likely to depend on the United Nations to secure conflict zones before they operate. In Darfur, aid agencies relied upon the United Nations to set up refugee camps in the region rather than seek protection from mercenaries27.\n\n27) Pham,J. ‘Send in the Mercenaries’ 2006\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8839c4589e2c6da25f08b6d2f944af3e",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Coups are becoming less frequent and less successful. The number of coups, which some mercenaries headed personally, has decreased from an average twenty per decade between 1960 and 1990 to ten a decade23. Success has also been less forthcoming; Simon Mann’s attempted coup in Equatorial Guinea was met with failure when he was arrested in Zimbabwe, and Bob Denard was eventually arrested by French forces for disgracing France’s reputation abroad with his frequent coups24.\n\n23) August,O. ‘Africa Rising: A Hopeful Continent’ 2013\n\n24) Mwagiru,C. ‘They Kill Africans, paid by Africans’ 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1db14b0870bcd14e2c46460676b20e88",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african The majority of these laws have done little to prevent citizens from seeking a career as a mercenary. While they are commendable on principle, mercenary specific legislation has not translated in to a high number of prosecutions for mercenarism in Africa7. Examples such as Angola and Zimbabwe are rare exceptions. Mercenaries generally operate in conflict zones, where government control is weak. This makes it difficult for the state to enforce such laws, especially as the mercenaries may be working for opposition factions.\n\n7) Fallah,K. ‘Corporate actors: the legal status of mercenaries in armed conflict’, 2006 pg. 610\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2850e1e3d28b08e0af5353d9d8214658",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african More than half of African countries are ruled by dictatorships. Authoritarian regimes remain numerous enough, and the opposition still prominent enough, for there to be adequate instability for mercenaries to gain employment. During the Libyan revolution, caused by the poor governance of Gaddafi’s regime, South African mercenaries attempted to extract Gaddafi from Libya with supposed Tuaregs joining his force as guns for hire14.\n\n14) Hicks,C. ‘Tuareg rebels make troubled return from Libya to Mali’ 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a73f8ea73f4063e1e3b042efb358f562",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african There are still enough wars and rebel movements to provide opportunity for employment. By 2013 there were 23 conflicts in Africa, with many other small militia groups actively fighting low-intensity wars. This stream of conflicts has ensured revenue for mercenaries. Reports have surfaced that ex-commander for the anti-terror unit in Liberia, Benjamin Yeaten, raised a mercenary force to fight against the army of the Ivory Coast between 2012 and 201311 With the prediction of ‘forever wars’ by Gettlemen12, where rebels have no object except banditry, mercenaries could maintain their prevalence in Africa for a long time.\n\n11) Heritage ‘Liberia: UN reports- Yeaten remains a threat to peace and security in Liberia’ 2013\n\n12) Gettlement,J. ‘Africa’s Forever Wars’ Foreign Policy 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "402313ad97b475fb2cc2abb59e2c45dd",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african PMCs are just mercenaries under a different name, demonstrating a continued prevalence of the dogs of war in Africa. To escape the name, and the illegal status, of mercenary a PMC must only avoid one of the several clauses laid out by the United Nations Mercenary Convention4 While they are rarely hired for fighting roles, companies such as Military Professional Resources Inc. have demonstrated a willingness to engage in military operations; making them guns for hire5. Executive Outcomes’ operations in Sierra Leone equated to mercenary work, as they undertook offensive military operations with a force of foreign soldiers for profitable gain. In this sense, mercenaries still maintain their position on the continent.\n\n4) Sheimer,M. ‘Separating Private Military Companies From Illegal Mercenaries in International Law’, 2009 Pg. 624\n\n5) Milliard,S. ‘Overcoming Post-Colonial Myopia: A Call to Recognise and Regulate Private Military Companies’, 2003 Pg.16\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "44dcc8fb8be6a654504c6d17ed9de79d",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Mercenaries still have a presence in coups\n\nAfrican Mercenaries have been crucial to the success of many coups in the 21st Century, and are a ‘ubiquitous factor in the continent’s conflicts over the years, often determining the duration or outcomes of such conflicts’20. The 2013 coup in the Central African Republic saw President Francois Bozizi ousted from power and was accomplished with support of mercenaries from Chad and the Sudan21. An attempted coup by Simon Mann against Equatorial Guinea failed in 2004 and Bob Dernard’s five coups against the Comoros22 demonstrate that mercenaries still have a role in the changing of political leaders within Africa.\n\n20) Mwagiru,C. ‘Mercenaries: Are the ‘dogs of war’ still prevalent in Africa?’ 2012\n\n21) Melly,P. ‘Central African Republic: France and the CAR- Now Comes the Hard Part’ 2013\n\n22) Mwagiru,C. ‘They Kill Africans, paid by Africans’ 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6e2f09a11c46e758f7967ff776a046e5",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Cyber Mercenaries\n\nThere is a new form of mercenary appearing on the continent which is hired to use technology, rather than a gun, to fight. Cyber mercenaries are a relatively recent phenomenon. In 2013, British intelligence service GCHQ stated that nations were beginning to employ hackers to ‘attack their enemies’28. Kenya experienced attacks by cyber mercenaries in 2013, with 91% of its organisations coming under attack from these hired hackers29. There is potential for this to become a substantial form of mercenary work in the future.\n\n28) The Age ‘Hackers turn into cyber-mercenaries as nations battle a virtual war’ 2013\n\n29) Murule,R. ‘Kenya: Firms Battle Cyber Crime’ 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "067a2c4b77071cb2e243d0887ca64ab2",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Mercenaries are still hired by NGOs\n\nNon-Governmental organisations struggle to operate in conflict zones, and still hire mercenaries to protect them. Extractive industries also require security for their installations and operations in unstable regions25. The massacre of 74 civilians at a Chinese oil field in Ethiopia in 2007 and the 2013 Amenas siege demonstrate the continued need for security, which mercenaries can provide. Charities have employed mercenaries in the past to ensure better security. In 2002, mercenaries were hired by the African Rainforest and Rivers Conservation Organisation to seek out elephant poachers who they could not pursue themselves26.\n\n25) Avant,D. ‘Mercenaries’2004, pg.26\n\n26) Astill,J. ‘Charities hire gunmen to stop elephant poachers’ 2002\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "31f03d73a268fce36b9b21a3a164c6f1",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Legislation against mercenaries\n\nNation states and the United Nations have passed laws making mercenary activity illegal. Legislation against mercenaries prevent either seeking employment as a mercenary or hiring one. Western states such as Austria and Germany have made it illegal for citizens to become mercenaries, revoking their citizenship if they choose to do so anyway6. South Africa, a major source of hired guns, passed the ‘foreign military assistance act’ in 1998 which prohibited citizens from joining foreign wars with the exception of humanitarian intervention. In international law, the United Nations has outlawed mercenaries through the UN Mercenary Convention of 1989 which bans the use of foreign soldiers from fighting for profit. Finally, many African states have passed further legislation which restricts mercenaries operating in their countries. The trial of thirteen mercenaries in Angola and the arrests of Simon Mann’s unit Zimbabwe in 2004 were both due to their mercenary status. The increased legal pressure is a symptom of changing attitudes towards the use of mercenaries in Africa.\n\n6) Mian,Q. ‘Legal status of mercenaries’\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b1c98da9ea40d166161160335db43612",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Decreased Conflict and the end of the mercenary age\n\nThe decline of conflicts and mercenary freedom on the African continent has meant less work for mercenaries. The Congo conflict of the 1960s, is seen as the first mercenary age8. Hired guns fought on all sides of the conflict and enjoyed the freedom to act at their discretion. The 1976 execution of mercenaries in Angola was seen as a symbolic ending of this age. That said, mercenaries were still prevalent into the 1990s and early 2000s.\n\nSince the peak of the 1990s, however, there has been a noticeable decrease in the number of conflicts in Africa from 27 civil wars and 9 interstate wars to 5 major civil wars and no interstate wars9,10 . As wars and civil unrest are an obvious source of employment for mercenaries; this decrease in conflict leaves them with fewer opportunities. The African Union’s promise to end war on the continent by 2020 also puts the future prospects of mercenaries in to question.\n\n8) Keane,F. ‘There will be work for mercenaries in Africa until democracy replaces dictatorships’ 2004\n\n9) The World Bank ‘World Development Report 2011’ pg.52\n\n10) Wikipedia ‘List of ongoing armed conflicts’\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e6e406a8a925eef33577c58b5b862c1d",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african Private corporations have replaced mercenaries\n\nPrivate Military Companies (PMCs) are independent, registered, corporate actors who have risen in prominence and replaced mercenaries in their security function. PMCs are different to mercenaries in the sense that mercenaries will fight for the highest bidder. PMCs on the other hand will only work for legitimate governments and intergovernmental organisations such as the UN1. Their main roles include; support services, logical support, humanitarian support and the upholding of law and order and defensive military action2. PMC activity has seen corporations operating on behalf of the Somalian government training coast guards to deal with the threat of piracy which peaked in 20093. The legal status of PMCs, compared with mercenaries, makes them a preferable choice for the aforementioned tasks reducing the prominence of illegal hired guns.\n\n1) Jefferies,I. ‘Private Military Companies- A Positive Role to Play in Today’s International System’, 2002 Pg.106\n\n2) Jefferies,I. ‘Private Military Companies- A Positive Role to Play in Today’s International System’, 2002 Pg.107\n\n3) Stupart,J. ‘Somalia’s PMCs: What’s the Big Deal?’, 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "72febde79a3f57d1afa0f240354f4058",
"text": "onal africa politics defence warpeace house believes prevalence african The expansion of democracy\n\nThe increased presence of democracies on the African continent has led to greater security. Mercenary activity is usually associated with the presence of bad governance, which is most commonly featured in dictatorships. Dictatorships generally lead to corruption, unrest and economic collapse. The dispossessed in society then begin to resist, with the ensuing conflict providing employment opportunities for mercenaries. A prime example of this being Equatorial Guinea, where mercenary Simon Mann planned to use popular support to remove the infamous Teodoro Nguema13. Since the first mercenary age, however, the number of democracies has increased from 3 to 25 which has reduced instability on the continent in some regions, reducing opportunities for mercenaries.\n\n13) Keane,F. ‘There will be work for mercenaries in Africa until democracy replaces dictatorships’ 2004\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
5f33e4cc094622dc6a515d862622d602
|
Presents a bold new path
Since the start of the 1990s Labour has moved to the right to contest the ‘centre ground’ of politics. This worked in 1997 when the Conservatives were a spent force after 17 Years in power. Tony Blair successfully stole the conservatives moderate policies. However this has resulted in the centre ground moving to the right with policies such as austerity and welfare cuts becoming a consensus. Labour needs to move left to fight on their own ground forcing other parties to match their more populist policies such as renationalising the railways.
|
[
{
"docid": "c16e6ae0f1238e716dd11180bf50810c",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Labour can be bold without turning to the left. It could endorse bolder action on climate change, much greater local democracy, and increasing the use of new technologies. The concern should not be about a policy being left or right wing but about its beneficial (or otherwise) consequences. When labour has won in the past it has been by taking centerist trends and making them their own – for example Wilson’s ‘white fires of industry’. [1]\n\n[1] Skelton, David, ‘What does the Labour party do now?’, Demos Quarterly, 31 July 2015, http://quarterly.demos.co.uk/article/issue-6/what-does-the-labour-party-do-now/\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "69e9d740044d19b8f9a14ca95947a354",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour “I'm fed up with the Punch and Judy politics of Westminster, the name calling, backbiting, point scoring, finger pointing.” Not Jeremy Corbyn, David Cameron in 2005 when he became opposition leader. [1] Every new opposition party leader starts out saying they want to change Westminster’s style of politics; Miliband was the same. Yet they get sucked in all the same. The robust Punch and Judy style is part and parcel of British politics having happened during periods where the parties were ideologically far apart in the past; there were comnplaints about jeering and interuptions in the 1970s. [2]\n\n[1] Cameron, David, ‘Leadership acceptance speech, BritishPoliticalSpeech.org, 2005, http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=315\n\n[2] Parkinson, Justin, ‘Is Prime Minister’s Questions really getting worse?’, BBC News, 18 February 2014, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26239991\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "40e6e8e796ebcbd2ac3b76d85e95a16f",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour It is false that there is a lack of choice now. There are plenty of other parties that voters could vote for if they believe the main two parties do not provide them with the choice they want. On the right there is UKIP and on the left the Greens and also other much smaller more extreme parties standing pain a few constituencies. If there were sufficient numbers who want to vote for a more left wing agenda then the Greens would be doing much better than they are – they currently only have one seat.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7f453e0e90f5d06a69feadf6e3be7a41",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Old values are just out of date values. There is little point in Labour appealing to the working class as the party they are supposed to represent when those same people have been abandoning it for decades; in 1966 69% of manual workers voted labour, this was only 45% by 1987 [1] – long before Labour dropped its left wing ideology. Going back to core values if those core values are the values that the electorate wants.\n\n[1] O’Neill, Brendan, ‘Labour lost the working-class vote a long time ago’, The Spectator, 12 May 2015, http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/05/labour-lost-the-working-class-vote-a-long-time-ago/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b46e4e9c8e724383042e9ca7a273f305",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour The biggest news of the last few years in politics has been the fragmentation of the electorate; the increase in voting for the Scottish National Party, Greens, and UK Independence Party. It can no longer be certain that Labour will pick up most votes by staying close to the centre ground. In all but the very safest seats there are more non-voters than there are people who vote for the winning party. It was notable that many of the safest seats in the country, held by Labour in 2010, were toppled by the SNP in 2015 including Glasgow North East that had an almost 16,000 majority in 2010 fell to the SNP with a majority of over 7,000. [1]\n\n[1] Glasgow North East (UK Parliament constituency), Wikipedia, last checked 16 September 2015\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a99d8b7d6529acc04a1b0a9e89a46387",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Corbyn is not tied to the past and his agenda is not going to simply be a rehash of Michael Foot’s manifesto in 1983. The policies Corbyn is advocating now would not have been considered particularly left wing in 1983 and most are not particularly radical even now. Policies like rent controls, peoples’ QE, and renationalising the railways may be statist but are potentially popular solutions to issues that concern voters; the cost of housing, that QE benefited the banks and no one else, and that commuting is cramped and costly.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5b6bf3382b2c75a6180578953ce09f36",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Far from depriving the Labour Party of talent he has been drawing new talent into the party. Labour gained 15,000 members in the three days since Jeremy Corbyn’s victory on top of those who signed up during the leadership campaign. [1] Ultimately it is the membership and its size and diversity that provides the talent of the future, not an elite clique of individuals at the top.\n\n[1] Withnall, Adam, ‘More than 15,000 join Labour party as full members in wake of Jeremy Corbyn victory’, The Independent, 13 September 2015, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-more-than-15000-join-labour-party-as-full-members-in-wake-of-islington-mps-victory-10498813.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4d79dd28c4819a98dfe45d328e3d85f4",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Provides greater choice\n\nCorbyn in his last campaign rally argued “fundamentally many people are turned off by a political process when the major parties are not saying anything different enough about how we run the economy”. [1] This lack of choice has been a complaint by voters for years – ever since Tony Blair made New Labour electable by moving to the centre. Jeremy Corbyn now gives the electorate a real choice compared to the Conservative party; tackling the deficit through tax rises (rather than cutting spending, nationalising the railways, peoples Quantitaive Easing, don’t replace trident, and rent controls. [2]\n\n[1] Wintor, Patrick, ‘Corbyn: it’s time for a new kind of politics’, The Guardian, 12 September 2015\n\n[2] Magazine, ’24 things that Jeremy Corbyn believes’, BBC News, 13 September 2015, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34209478\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "280b526e92ad0e5a368a226f093bf781",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Brings labour back to its core values\n\nThe original values of the Labour party were “the common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange” and even today the Labour party aims to “serve the public interest” as well as to create “a just society, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong”, “an open democracy, in which government is held to account by the people”, and “a healthy environment”. [1] In the last parliament Labour supported there being a cap on welfare spending. [2] More recently Labour abstained on a Conservative welfare bill that many felt was too harsh in its cuts. [3] Corbyn, and a move to the left, will bring Labour back to its core values rather than supporting Conservative policies and austerity that harms individuals.\n\n[1] Clause IV, Labourcounts, http://www.labourcounts.com/oldclausefour.htm , accessed 15 September 2015\n\n[2] Wintour, Patrick, ‘Miliband: Labour not abandoning its values with cap on welfare spending’, The Guardian, 6 June 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/06/miliband-labour-cap-welfare-spending\n\n[3] Eaton, George, ‘Welfare bill passed as 48 Labour MPs defy leadership and vote against’, The Spectator, 20 July 2015, http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/07/welfare-bill-passed-48-labour-mps-defy-leadership-and-vote-against\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "10ad665c8f76e3e3e345f30f26fb8984",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Lack of difference encourages Punch and Judy politics\n\nThe public “are totally turned off by a style of politics which seems to rely on the levels of club house theatrical abuse that you can throw across at each other in parliament and across the airwaves.” [1] This style is necessary to extentuate the small areas where there are differences between the parties. Introduce real differences on the big issues of government, particularly the economy and society, then such minor point scoring fades into insignificance.\n\n[1] Wintor, Patrick, ‘Corbyn: it’s time for a new kind of politics’, The Guardian, 12 September 2015\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "96918850bd4b6a57800d6b766b075842",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour The Labour party is deprived of talent on the front bench\n\nNumerous former front benchers and government ministers under the last Labour government will not serve in a Corbyn shadow cabinet. Most obviously two of the four leadership contenders; Liz Kendall and Yvette Cooper. [1] This deprives the party of experienced parliamentarians who know government and what it takes to win elections.\n\n[1] Wintour, Patrick, and Watt, Nicholas, ‘Labour frontbenchers rule out serving in Corbyn’s shadow cabinet’, The Guardian, 12 September 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/12/labour-frontbenchers-rule-out-serving-in-jeremy-corbyn-shadow-cabinet\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "79783034f77aaaa2654cff334e0749c5",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour A shift to the left means labour is no longer a party of government\n\nA shift to the left means that Labour is no longer a real contender for government. This is not only bad for Labour but bad for the country as a whole. Voters need to have a choice between parties that stand a realistic chance of getting into power to have a real choice. By moving away from the centre where most of the votes are labour is no longer a serious contender. In the UK it is already the case that the average voter for a party holds more centrist, or moderate, policy positions than the party they vote for. [1]\n\n[1] Voters’ Policy Preferences Much More Centrist than those of Political Parties, Compass, June 2015, http://home.kieskompas.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/UK-Landscape-proximity.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "41c5f266bf7a4389f0e4a8bbd6ebc6b6",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Going left is step back not a step forward\n\nLabour has tried left wing politics in the past – in the 1980s – in what was described by Gerald Kaufman, himself in the shadow cabinet at the time, as “the longest suicide note in history”. [1] Going leftwards means moving back to these policies rather than carving out new progressive policies that can energise and excite. Why should Labour be backing coal rather than renewables? Should Labour not be looking to give more power to the people rather than brining it back to the state through nationalisation?\n\n[1] Clarck, Neil, ‘Not so suicidal after all’, The Guardian, 10 June 2008, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jun/10/labour.margaretthatcher\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
11866d30c32ad1ccabbf80e806b3ac77
|
Going left is step back not a step forward
Labour has tried left wing politics in the past – in the 1980s – in what was described by Gerald Kaufman, himself in the shadow cabinet at the time, as “the longest suicide note in history”. [1] Going leftwards means moving back to these policies rather than carving out new progressive policies that can energise and excite. Why should Labour be backing coal rather than renewables? Should Labour not be looking to give more power to the people rather than brining it back to the state through nationalisation?
[1] Clarck, Neil, ‘Not so suicidal after all’, The Guardian, 10 June 2008, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/jun/10/labour.margaretthatcher
|
[
{
"docid": "a99d8b7d6529acc04a1b0a9e89a46387",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Corbyn is not tied to the past and his agenda is not going to simply be a rehash of Michael Foot’s manifesto in 1983. The policies Corbyn is advocating now would not have been considered particularly left wing in 1983 and most are not particularly radical even now. Policies like rent controls, peoples’ QE, and renationalising the railways may be statist but are potentially popular solutions to issues that concern voters; the cost of housing, that QE benefited the banks and no one else, and that commuting is cramped and costly.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "b46e4e9c8e724383042e9ca7a273f305",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour The biggest news of the last few years in politics has been the fragmentation of the electorate; the increase in voting for the Scottish National Party, Greens, and UK Independence Party. It can no longer be certain that Labour will pick up most votes by staying close to the centre ground. In all but the very safest seats there are more non-voters than there are people who vote for the winning party. It was notable that many of the safest seats in the country, held by Labour in 2010, were toppled by the SNP in 2015 including Glasgow North East that had an almost 16,000 majority in 2010 fell to the SNP with a majority of over 7,000. [1]\n\n[1] Glasgow North East (UK Parliament constituency), Wikipedia, last checked 16 September 2015\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5b6bf3382b2c75a6180578953ce09f36",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Far from depriving the Labour Party of talent he has been drawing new talent into the party. Labour gained 15,000 members in the three days since Jeremy Corbyn’s victory on top of those who signed up during the leadership campaign. [1] Ultimately it is the membership and its size and diversity that provides the talent of the future, not an elite clique of individuals at the top.\n\n[1] Withnall, Adam, ‘More than 15,000 join Labour party as full members in wake of Jeremy Corbyn victory’, The Independent, 13 September 2015, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-more-than-15000-join-labour-party-as-full-members-in-wake-of-islington-mps-victory-10498813.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c16e6ae0f1238e716dd11180bf50810c",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Labour can be bold without turning to the left. It could endorse bolder action on climate change, much greater local democracy, and increasing the use of new technologies. The concern should not be about a policy being left or right wing but about its beneficial (or otherwise) consequences. When labour has won in the past it has been by taking centerist trends and making them their own – for example Wilson’s ‘white fires of industry’. [1]\n\n[1] Skelton, David, ‘What does the Labour party do now?’, Demos Quarterly, 31 July 2015, http://quarterly.demos.co.uk/article/issue-6/what-does-the-labour-party-do-now/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "69e9d740044d19b8f9a14ca95947a354",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour “I'm fed up with the Punch and Judy politics of Westminster, the name calling, backbiting, point scoring, finger pointing.” Not Jeremy Corbyn, David Cameron in 2005 when he became opposition leader. [1] Every new opposition party leader starts out saying they want to change Westminster’s style of politics; Miliband was the same. Yet they get sucked in all the same. The robust Punch and Judy style is part and parcel of British politics having happened during periods where the parties were ideologically far apart in the past; there were comnplaints about jeering and interuptions in the 1970s. [2]\n\n[1] Cameron, David, ‘Leadership acceptance speech, BritishPoliticalSpeech.org, 2005, http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=315\n\n[2] Parkinson, Justin, ‘Is Prime Minister’s Questions really getting worse?’, BBC News, 18 February 2014, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26239991\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "40e6e8e796ebcbd2ac3b76d85e95a16f",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour It is false that there is a lack of choice now. There are plenty of other parties that voters could vote for if they believe the main two parties do not provide them with the choice they want. On the right there is UKIP and on the left the Greens and also other much smaller more extreme parties standing pain a few constituencies. If there were sufficient numbers who want to vote for a more left wing agenda then the Greens would be doing much better than they are – they currently only have one seat.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7f453e0e90f5d06a69feadf6e3be7a41",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Old values are just out of date values. There is little point in Labour appealing to the working class as the party they are supposed to represent when those same people have been abandoning it for decades; in 1966 69% of manual workers voted labour, this was only 45% by 1987 [1] – long before Labour dropped its left wing ideology. Going back to core values if those core values are the values that the electorate wants.\n\n[1] O’Neill, Brendan, ‘Labour lost the working-class vote a long time ago’, The Spectator, 12 May 2015, http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/05/labour-lost-the-working-class-vote-a-long-time-ago/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "96918850bd4b6a57800d6b766b075842",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour The Labour party is deprived of talent on the front bench\n\nNumerous former front benchers and government ministers under the last Labour government will not serve in a Corbyn shadow cabinet. Most obviously two of the four leadership contenders; Liz Kendall and Yvette Cooper. [1] This deprives the party of experienced parliamentarians who know government and what it takes to win elections.\n\n[1] Wintour, Patrick, and Watt, Nicholas, ‘Labour frontbenchers rule out serving in Corbyn’s shadow cabinet’, The Guardian, 12 September 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/12/labour-frontbenchers-rule-out-serving-in-jeremy-corbyn-shadow-cabinet\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "79783034f77aaaa2654cff334e0749c5",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour A shift to the left means labour is no longer a party of government\n\nA shift to the left means that Labour is no longer a real contender for government. This is not only bad for Labour but bad for the country as a whole. Voters need to have a choice between parties that stand a realistic chance of getting into power to have a real choice. By moving away from the centre where most of the votes are labour is no longer a serious contender. In the UK it is already the case that the average voter for a party holds more centrist, or moderate, policy positions than the party they vote for. [1]\n\n[1] Voters’ Policy Preferences Much More Centrist than those of Political Parties, Compass, June 2015, http://home.kieskompas.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/UK-Landscape-proximity.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2a83c8ac197b3711cf70ad31979d2d4a",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Presents a bold new path\n\nSince the start of the 1990s Labour has moved to the right to contest the ‘centre ground’ of politics. This worked in 1997 when the Conservatives were a spent force after 17 Years in power. Tony Blair successfully stole the conservatives moderate policies. However this has resulted in the centre ground moving to the right with policies such as austerity and welfare cuts becoming a consensus. Labour needs to move left to fight on their own ground forcing other parties to match their more populist policies such as renationalising the railways.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4d79dd28c4819a98dfe45d328e3d85f4",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Provides greater choice\n\nCorbyn in his last campaign rally argued “fundamentally many people are turned off by a political process when the major parties are not saying anything different enough about how we run the economy”. [1] This lack of choice has been a complaint by voters for years – ever since Tony Blair made New Labour electable by moving to the centre. Jeremy Corbyn now gives the electorate a real choice compared to the Conservative party; tackling the deficit through tax rises (rather than cutting spending, nationalising the railways, peoples Quantitaive Easing, don’t replace trident, and rent controls. [2]\n\n[1] Wintor, Patrick, ‘Corbyn: it’s time for a new kind of politics’, The Guardian, 12 September 2015\n\n[2] Magazine, ’24 things that Jeremy Corbyn believes’, BBC News, 13 September 2015, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34209478\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "280b526e92ad0e5a368a226f093bf781",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Brings labour back to its core values\n\nThe original values of the Labour party were “the common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange” and even today the Labour party aims to “serve the public interest” as well as to create “a just society, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong”, “an open democracy, in which government is held to account by the people”, and “a healthy environment”. [1] In the last parliament Labour supported there being a cap on welfare spending. [2] More recently Labour abstained on a Conservative welfare bill that many felt was too harsh in its cuts. [3] Corbyn, and a move to the left, will bring Labour back to its core values rather than supporting Conservative policies and austerity that harms individuals.\n\n[1] Clause IV, Labourcounts, http://www.labourcounts.com/oldclausefour.htm , accessed 15 September 2015\n\n[2] Wintour, Patrick, ‘Miliband: Labour not abandoning its values with cap on welfare spending’, The Guardian, 6 June 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jun/06/miliband-labour-cap-welfare-spending\n\n[3] Eaton, George, ‘Welfare bill passed as 48 Labour MPs defy leadership and vote against’, The Spectator, 20 July 2015, http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/07/welfare-bill-passed-48-labour-mps-defy-leadership-and-vote-against\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "10ad665c8f76e3e3e345f30f26fb8984",
"text": "y political philosophy politics leadership house believes move left good labour Lack of difference encourages Punch and Judy politics\n\nThe public “are totally turned off by a style of politics which seems to rely on the levels of club house theatrical abuse that you can throw across at each other in parliament and across the airwaves.” [1] This style is necessary to extentuate the small areas where there are differences between the parties. Introduce real differences on the big issues of government, particularly the economy and society, then such minor point scoring fades into insignificance.\n\n[1] Wintor, Patrick, ‘Corbyn: it’s time for a new kind of politics’, The Guardian, 12 September 2015\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
936dcec3f676f27c592c4596a7ff0226
|
Term limits restore a concept of rotation in public office, and reestablish the concept of the citizen legislature:
It is gravely unfortunate that politics has become an accepted career path for citizens of democratic states. It is far better that participation in government be brief. To end politics as a lifetime sinecure, thereby making legislative service a leave of absence, rather than a means of permanently absconding from a productive career in the private sector, requires that there be term limits 1. Without term limits, the temptation to remain in office for life will keep people seeking reelection long after they have accomplished all the legislative good of which they are capable. It does not take long for legislators to become more occupied with their relationships with each other and with lobbyists, than with their constituents. Representative assemblies work best when they function as citizen legislatures, in which people who pursue careers other than politics enter the legislative forum for a brief time to do their country service, and then leave again to reenter society as private citizens2. Such citizen legislators who enter politics to make their mark and then leave are far more desirable than the career politicians of today who focus only on building their own power influence, rather than considering the people they were elected to represent. US states with 'citizen legislatures', where the state legislature is part time with short sessions so allowing its members to hold other jobs, were at the top of freedom indexes. New Hampshire was both the most minimal parliament and the state with most fiscal freedom according to the Ruger-Sorens Index.3 1 Will, George. 1993. Restoration: Congress, Term Limits, and the Restoration of Deliberative Democracy. New York: Free Press. 2 Bandow, Doug. 1995. "Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever". Cato Institute Policy Analysis. 3 Rugar, William and Sorens, Jason. 2011. "The Citizen Legislature: How Reasonable Limits on State Legislative Salaries, Staff and Session Lengths Keep Liberty Alive" Policy Brief, Goldwater Institute,
|
[
{
"docid": "5b2202869706a40ec8d3af59805e15a8",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce If people wish to pursue a career in politics, then it is their right to do so. There is nothing wrong with career politicians so long as they obey the will of their people and accurately represent the desires of their constituents. While there should be no bar to people seeking to enter politics on a temporary basis, placing that form of political participation over a more lasting one makes no sense. Furthermore, career politicians have valuable experience that can be extremely useful in the forming of legislation and the conducting of public business. Term limits destroy this valuable resource by casting people out of the halls of government at a fixed point, regardless of the worth they might still impart to the legislative process.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "d645d00abb9dc32cd922137ca8cfa1ce",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term-limiting legislators insults the intelligence of the electorate. Individuals can make prudent decisions about who to vote for, and it so happens that that decision is often to keep incumbents in power. If the reason for such high reelection rates is due to an uneducated or disaffected electorate, then the problem is not be solved by simply instituting term limits. Rather, such results mean an effort must be made to educate voters and to fight voter apathy. Neither of those things is accomplished by limiting the choice of the voters.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0810f74853940a6486aca1b022592731",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce A term-limited legislator suffers from the effects of being a lame duck. A final term legislator will not be able to command the same degree of leverage as one who can potentially serve another term. Building the necessary support for worthy legislation might thus prove far more difficult than it would have had the legislator not been a lame duck. Furthermore, with regard to lobby-group support, a politician on the way out who cannot seek another term has an incentive to favor groups and firms that will place him on their boards, a potentially highly lucrative retirement package for outgoing legislators, paid for often at the expense of the public.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "00b4e2c434f89dd66d3297c392ddf777",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce People are intelligent enough to recognize whether a representative is benefiting them or not. They will not vote for someone who is using his privileged position in the legislature to enrich himself or build a fiefdom of influence. Rather, legislators will only be able to stay in office so long as they do what their constituents want. If legislators are maintaining their power by other means, such as institutionalized corruption and force, it is not because there are no term limits on them, but rather because of other fundamental problems of government in those states.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e9ae5832dc351613bf08cdec2cc66ddf",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits promote greater choice in candidates and protect democracy1. While people may not be able to vote for a legislator again who has reached his limit of service, they can still vote for a continuation of his policies by voting for his chosen successor or for his political party's candidate. Limiting individual politicians to specified terms, however, prevents them from becoming too powerful and damaging the democratic system through efforts at self-enrichment and influence-peddling.\n\n1 Bandow, Doug. 1995. \"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever\". Cato Institute Policy Analysis.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5e3c201f7b2e12d52de95ba7eee54751",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The dynamics of party primaries are not the same in all jurisdictions, and efforts at promoting moderate and capable candidates can still be made after the institution of term limits. Furthermore, new politicians may in fact be more willing to work on bipartisan projects, as they are not inculcated in the culture of confrontation that predominates between political parties in many legislatures. For this reason politicians of longer standing might actually be a hindrance to bipartisan compromise. It is far better to allow for a preponderance of political views by making the legislature more open. The best way to accomplish this is clearly to impose term limits.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6f1f3f113cc74c6e31b6cbc67f03f0e0",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Legislators may gain skill in maneuvering in the legislative arena with time, but they also gain a propensity for power grabbing and self-advancement. Politicians of long standing use their knowledge of the working of the legislature as much for the lobbyists and interest groups, who they prefer to work with rather than young, inexperienced legislators. The power of lobbyists is magnified by the solidity of the channels of political influence created by high rates of incumbency. Term limits actually serve to restrict the power of interest groups, and instead places emphasis on the production of progressive legislation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e776144044ad5974868eed3c9de2b52e",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce A politician who has to constantly concern himself with reelection has a much greater likelihood of being beholden to special interest groups and lobbyists than one who is term-limited so will actually engage in more corruption. While a term-limited legislator may suffer to a degree from lame duck status, the need to continuously seek electoral support is far more damaging to his ability to do what is right for the nation. Politicians who are not term-limited will spend more time doing what is popular than what is necessary. It is far better to have a representative who has only a limited time to enact the policies he envisions, so that he actively seeks to implement his vision, rather focusing on the short-term goal of reelection.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4871dcd4932c37e8f2f53eb850a40ac5",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits create more competitive elections for public office that empower new leaders and ideas:\n\nIncumbency provides a huge election advantage. Politicians almost always win reelection. The frequency with which they win varies over time and between states, but incumbency is always a powerful advantage. This is seen most visibly in the United States Congress of the past 30 years, in which it has become virtually impossible to unseat an incumbent legislator. Legislators are reelected because they have better name recognition both with the electorate and with lobby groups. People have a tendency to vote for whom they recognize, and firms tend to support past winners who will likely continue to benefit their interests. Term limits actually increase voter choice by making elections more competitive and encouraging more candidates to run. In areas where term limits have been instituted there is far higher turnover amongst legislators, giving voters far more choice in who should represent them. In California, the institution of term limits on state legislators caused a rush of retirements, which led to 50 percent more candidates than would otherwise have been expected, as well as a marked increase in the diversity of the backgrounds of those elected [1] . Ultimately, old legislators using election machines to retain power do their country and constituents a disservice. Power is best used when it changes hands over time in order to allow for dynamic new solutions to be mooted in a changing world.\n\n[1] Bandow, Doug. 1995. \"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever\". Cato Institute Policy Analysis.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "adc486a8ae20a6bf72037b39af2ef6e4",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The longer a politician remains in office, the more entrenched his grip becomes, and the more likely he is to use his office to his personal advantage:\n\nPower is highly intoxicating; it can corrupt even the most scrupled individual given enough exposure over time. For this reason, power should not be left in the hands of specific individuals for too long. When a politician is firmly entrenched, he may seek to enrich himself at the expense of the public. He may seek to shower benefices on family and allies in order to maintain and strengthen his powerful position. Without term limits legislators often become self-serving individuals, more interested in craving out personal power bases than with serving the people who elected them. Because legislators are so likely to be reelected, lobbyists and special interest groups find the lines of power in states' capitals largely predictable, and are thus able to buy the influence of the permanent power nexuses in the legislature with relative ease1. Term limits serve to limit the ability of individuals to put forward self-serving legislation and to retain power indefinitely 2. Instead, by maintaining term limits, legislators have only a limited time in power, which tends to shift their focus toward genuinely benefiting the public.\n\n1 Bandow, Doug. 1995. \"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever\". Cato Institute Policy Analysis. 2 Green, Eric. 2007. \"Term Limits Help Prevent Dictatorships\". America.gov.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b7cdb32b0e926b6e6c8346972feda03d",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The need to constantly fight elections compromises a politician's ability to make the difficult and unpopular decisions that may be needed at a given time:\n\nA major focus of a legislator hoping to serve another term is on the next election and on vote getting. It is often the case that hard decisions need to be made by legislators, but it is difficult for them to do so when they are fixated on being reelected. Legislators have an incentive to put tough decisions off if they can retain power by doing so. An example of such seemingly perpetual procrastination is observable in the United States Congress's attitude toward social security. The fund is set to become insolvent, by some estimates, in less than two decades, yet congressmen and senators have chosen time and again to put off enacting painful, but necessary reform to the system. They find it easier to delay a decision until the next Congress, preferring their own reelection to the good of the nation. When constrained by term limits, legislators must make the most of their limited time in office, resulting in greater prioritization of difficult decisions and reform1. Furthermore, the need to constantly fight elections places politicians in the pocket of lobby-groups and election supporters to a greater degree, as they will always need to go back to them for support, and thus cannot make decisions that are in the national interest alone. While there will always be some of this behavior, it is curtailed by term limits, as legislators will, in their final term at the very least, not be beholden to as many special interests as they cannot run again. Bolder legislative action is observed from retiring legislators in the United States Congress, for example. When a congressman or senator does not intend to seek reelection, his tendency to vote along strict party lines diminishes substantially. Term limits, just like voluntary retirement, leads legislators to vote more on the basis of principle than on party stance2. The result of this is a more independent legislature, with a greater interest in actually serving the people.\n\n1 Chan, Sewell. 2008. \"Debating the Pros and Cons of Term Limits\". New York Times. 2 Scherer, Michael. 2010. \"Washington's Time for Bipartisanship: Retirement\". Time.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6b13d0fe58ee0906cec3e903e2cdbbf4",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The incentive for corruption and self-enrichment in office is increased by term limits:\n\nWith term limits, a legislator will, after he enters his final permitted term of office, not have to face the electorate again, meaning he can do whatever wants, to an extent. This encourages corruption and self-enrichment on the part of legislators in their final term of office when they do not need to face the people to answer for poor management. There is likewise less incentive to follow through on election promises to supporters, since their withdrawing support can have little tangible impact on a lame duck. A study into term limits in Brazil found that \"mayors with re-election incentives are signi?cantly less corrupt than mayors without re-election incentives. In municipalities where mayors are in their ?rst term, the share of stolen resources is, on average, 27 percent lower than in municipalities with second-term mayors.\"(Ferraz, 2010) Furthermore, lame duck politicians can devote time to buddying up to businesses and organizations in order to get appointments to lucrative board seats after they leave office. This has often been the case in Western democracies, where former parliamentarians, cabinet ministers, senators, etc. find themselves being offered highly profitable positions upon their retirement (Wynne, 2004). Imposing term limits necessarily increases this sort of behavior, as politicians look more toward their retirement during their final years of office, rather than to the interests of the people. 1 Ferraz, Claudio and Finan, Frederico, (2010). \"Electoral Accountability and Corruption: Evidence from the Audits of Local Governments\" Berkeley, 2 Wynne, Michael. 2004. \"Politics, Markets, Health and Democracy\". University of Wolongong.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ba226c45f2b725aceb524669a4a40bb7",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits tend to increase partisanship between political parties and factions:\n\nTerm limits on legislators serve to exacerbate partisan tensions between political parties1. This is due to several causes. First, the increased iteration of primary elections, caused by politicians being forced out of office by term limits, in which there tends to be low voter turnout, and higher voter apathy when they happen to regularly. This leads to the selection of more conservative candidates from the right, and more radical candidates from the left. These more opposed groups forming large portions of political parties' representation will lead to more tension in the legislature. Second, newly elected politicians are often more likely to readily take the party whip when they enter the legislature. These results in more disciplined voting, which restricts the ability of moderates on either side to build consensuses on legislation. Third, the ability to build consensus and support from other parties relies on experience and deft political acumen, which are usually garnered through lengthy participation in the legislative process.2 Term limits exclude many skilled politicians from being able to use their expertise in the building of such consensus efforts. Fourth, concerns for their post-legislative career can lead to greater partisanship from retiring legislators. This is due to their need to court appointments to positions at party-affiliated, or party-leaning, think tanks, and on corporate boards favorable to their party. All of these factors lead to a less cooperative legislature when term limits are instituted. 1 Marcus, Andrew. 2010. \"Dodd and Other 'Retiring' Democrats Show Why Term Limitsare a Bad Idea\". Big Government. 2 Kouser, Thad. 2004. Term Limits and the Dismantling of State Legislative Professionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "54f61e22f8f05ba581c7c6e24e370078",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits are undemocratic and suggest, falsely, that voters cannot make intelligent decisions about their representatives without guidance:\n\nTerm limits are flagrantly undemocratic. If a legislator is popular and desired by the people to continue to represent them, then it should be their choice to reelect him. The instituting of term limits assumes voters cannot act intelligently without proper guidance. This is a serious insult to voters' intelligence. The electorate can discern for itself whether a legislator is doing a good job and will vote accordingly. Preventing a potentially popular candidate from standing for reelection simply removes the right from people to make important political decisions. It is not the duty of the state to encourage more candidates to run in elections to replace politicians who are already popular and doing a suitable job1. Should the US people have not been allowed to elect Franklyn D. Roosevelt for his third term? FDR was a very popular and successful president who brought the United States out of depression and won the Second World War and it was those very successes that lead the American people to reelect him. The people, if they have the freedom to choose who should represent them, should have the freedom to choose incumbents, and to do so indefinitely if that is what the popular will demands. 1 Marcus, Andrew. 2010. \"Dodd and Other 'Retiring' Democrats Show Why Term Limitsare a Bad Idea\". Big Government.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da7f21b5ce41aac087c3f7588f874bde",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Experienced legislators who understand the workings of the legislative system are needed for their expertise and wisdom:\n\nThe process of drafting legislation and shepherding it through the legislature often requires a delicate and practiced hand, especially when the issue under discussion is of a controversial nature. By forcing politicians out of the legislature on the basis of term limits, the depth of knowledge and experience available to the assembly is reduced, often to its serious detriment [1] . Seasoned politicians are also needed to help newcomers acclimate to the environment of the legislature; something first-time elected individuals are completely unused to. Naiveté on the part of new policymakers who are unused to the system will leave them vulnerable and exploitable. Lobbyists and special interest groups will seek to influence politicians while they develop their first impressions of life in the legislature, and will immediately capitalize upon any perceived vulnerability. Luann Ridgeway a Republican senator in the Missouri senate argues that term limits mean “we rely more on the trustworthiness of those established -- government relations individuals and staff persons -- because we have to”, [2] this would include more taking advice from the long standing lobbyists. Furthermore, legislation often requires lengthy periods of negotiation, that require not only the experienced hand of long-standing legislators, but also the continuity they offer. If legislators are constrained by term limits their time horizons are narrowed causing them to put too much emphasis on near-term, rather than long-term legislation. Clearly, term limits undermine the effective operation of government and deny the legislature an invaluable source of experience and ability.\n\n[1] Kouser, Thad. 2004. Term Limits and the Dismantling of State LegislativeProfessionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\n\n[2] Coleman, Emily and Bushnel, Michael, (2009). “Legislators attribute heightened partisanship to term limits”, Missourian, 16th May 2009\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
ee5572c32ec69105291c5954de411684
|
Term limits tend to increase partisanship between political parties and factions:
Term limits on legislators serve to exacerbate partisan tensions between political parties1. This is due to several causes. First, the increased iteration of primary elections, caused by politicians being forced out of office by term limits, in which there tends to be low voter turnout, and higher voter apathy when they happen to regularly. This leads to the selection of more conservative candidates from the right, and more radical candidates from the left. These more opposed groups forming large portions of political parties' representation will lead to more tension in the legislature. Second, newly elected politicians are often more likely to readily take the party whip when they enter the legislature. These results in more disciplined voting, which restricts the ability of moderates on either side to build consensuses on legislation. Third, the ability to build consensus and support from other parties relies on experience and deft political acumen, which are usually garnered through lengthy participation in the legislative process.2 Term limits exclude many skilled politicians from being able to use their expertise in the building of such consensus efforts. Fourth, concerns for their post-legislative career can lead to greater partisanship from retiring legislators. This is due to their need to court appointments to positions at party-affiliated, or party-leaning, think tanks, and on corporate boards favorable to their party. All of these factors lead to a less cooperative legislature when term limits are instituted. 1 Marcus, Andrew. 2010. "Dodd and Other 'Retiring' Democrats Show Why Term Limitsare a Bad Idea". Big Government. 2 Kouser, Thad. 2004. Term Limits and the Dismantling of State Legislative Professionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
[
{
"docid": "5e3c201f7b2e12d52de95ba7eee54751",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The dynamics of party primaries are not the same in all jurisdictions, and efforts at promoting moderate and capable candidates can still be made after the institution of term limits. Furthermore, new politicians may in fact be more willing to work on bipartisan projects, as they are not inculcated in the culture of confrontation that predominates between political parties in many legislatures. For this reason politicians of longer standing might actually be a hindrance to bipartisan compromise. It is far better to allow for a preponderance of political views by making the legislature more open. The best way to accomplish this is clearly to impose term limits.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "e9ae5832dc351613bf08cdec2cc66ddf",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits promote greater choice in candidates and protect democracy1. While people may not be able to vote for a legislator again who has reached his limit of service, they can still vote for a continuation of his policies by voting for his chosen successor or for his political party's candidate. Limiting individual politicians to specified terms, however, prevents them from becoming too powerful and damaging the democratic system through efforts at self-enrichment and influence-peddling.\n\n1 Bandow, Doug. 1995. \"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever\". Cato Institute Policy Analysis.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6f1f3f113cc74c6e31b6cbc67f03f0e0",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Legislators may gain skill in maneuvering in the legislative arena with time, but they also gain a propensity for power grabbing and self-advancement. Politicians of long standing use their knowledge of the working of the legislature as much for the lobbyists and interest groups, who they prefer to work with rather than young, inexperienced legislators. The power of lobbyists is magnified by the solidity of the channels of political influence created by high rates of incumbency. Term limits actually serve to restrict the power of interest groups, and instead places emphasis on the production of progressive legislation.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e776144044ad5974868eed3c9de2b52e",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce A politician who has to constantly concern himself with reelection has a much greater likelihood of being beholden to special interest groups and lobbyists than one who is term-limited so will actually engage in more corruption. While a term-limited legislator may suffer to a degree from lame duck status, the need to continuously seek electoral support is far more damaging to his ability to do what is right for the nation. Politicians who are not term-limited will spend more time doing what is popular than what is necessary. It is far better to have a representative who has only a limited time to enact the policies he envisions, so that he actively seeks to implement his vision, rather focusing on the short-term goal of reelection.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d645d00abb9dc32cd922137ca8cfa1ce",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term-limiting legislators insults the intelligence of the electorate. Individuals can make prudent decisions about who to vote for, and it so happens that that decision is often to keep incumbents in power. If the reason for such high reelection rates is due to an uneducated or disaffected electorate, then the problem is not be solved by simply instituting term limits. Rather, such results mean an effort must be made to educate voters and to fight voter apathy. Neither of those things is accomplished by limiting the choice of the voters.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0810f74853940a6486aca1b022592731",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce A term-limited legislator suffers from the effects of being a lame duck. A final term legislator will not be able to command the same degree of leverage as one who can potentially serve another term. Building the necessary support for worthy legislation might thus prove far more difficult than it would have had the legislator not been a lame duck. Furthermore, with regard to lobby-group support, a politician on the way out who cannot seek another term has an incentive to favor groups and firms that will place him on their boards, a potentially highly lucrative retirement package for outgoing legislators, paid for often at the expense of the public.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "00b4e2c434f89dd66d3297c392ddf777",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce People are intelligent enough to recognize whether a representative is benefiting them or not. They will not vote for someone who is using his privileged position in the legislature to enrich himself or build a fiefdom of influence. Rather, legislators will only be able to stay in office so long as they do what their constituents want. If legislators are maintaining their power by other means, such as institutionalized corruption and force, it is not because there are no term limits on them, but rather because of other fundamental problems of government in those states.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5b2202869706a40ec8d3af59805e15a8",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce If people wish to pursue a career in politics, then it is their right to do so. There is nothing wrong with career politicians so long as they obey the will of their people and accurately represent the desires of their constituents. While there should be no bar to people seeking to enter politics on a temporary basis, placing that form of political participation over a more lasting one makes no sense. Furthermore, career politicians have valuable experience that can be extremely useful in the forming of legislation and the conducting of public business. Term limits destroy this valuable resource by casting people out of the halls of government at a fixed point, regardless of the worth they might still impart to the legislative process.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6b13d0fe58ee0906cec3e903e2cdbbf4",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The incentive for corruption and self-enrichment in office is increased by term limits:\n\nWith term limits, a legislator will, after he enters his final permitted term of office, not have to face the electorate again, meaning he can do whatever wants, to an extent. This encourages corruption and self-enrichment on the part of legislators in their final term of office when they do not need to face the people to answer for poor management. There is likewise less incentive to follow through on election promises to supporters, since their withdrawing support can have little tangible impact on a lame duck. A study into term limits in Brazil found that \"mayors with re-election incentives are signi?cantly less corrupt than mayors without re-election incentives. In municipalities where mayors are in their ?rst term, the share of stolen resources is, on average, 27 percent lower than in municipalities with second-term mayors.\"(Ferraz, 2010) Furthermore, lame duck politicians can devote time to buddying up to businesses and organizations in order to get appointments to lucrative board seats after they leave office. This has often been the case in Western democracies, where former parliamentarians, cabinet ministers, senators, etc. find themselves being offered highly profitable positions upon their retirement (Wynne, 2004). Imposing term limits necessarily increases this sort of behavior, as politicians look more toward their retirement during their final years of office, rather than to the interests of the people. 1 Ferraz, Claudio and Finan, Frederico, (2010). \"Electoral Accountability and Corruption: Evidence from the Audits of Local Governments\" Berkeley, 2 Wynne, Michael. 2004. \"Politics, Markets, Health and Democracy\". University of Wolongong.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "54f61e22f8f05ba581c7c6e24e370078",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits are undemocratic and suggest, falsely, that voters cannot make intelligent decisions about their representatives without guidance:\n\nTerm limits are flagrantly undemocratic. If a legislator is popular and desired by the people to continue to represent them, then it should be their choice to reelect him. The instituting of term limits assumes voters cannot act intelligently without proper guidance. This is a serious insult to voters' intelligence. The electorate can discern for itself whether a legislator is doing a good job and will vote accordingly. Preventing a potentially popular candidate from standing for reelection simply removes the right from people to make important political decisions. It is not the duty of the state to encourage more candidates to run in elections to replace politicians who are already popular and doing a suitable job1. Should the US people have not been allowed to elect Franklyn D. Roosevelt for his third term? FDR was a very popular and successful president who brought the United States out of depression and won the Second World War and it was those very successes that lead the American people to reelect him. The people, if they have the freedom to choose who should represent them, should have the freedom to choose incumbents, and to do so indefinitely if that is what the popular will demands. 1 Marcus, Andrew. 2010. \"Dodd and Other 'Retiring' Democrats Show Why Term Limitsare a Bad Idea\". Big Government.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "da7f21b5ce41aac087c3f7588f874bde",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Experienced legislators who understand the workings of the legislative system are needed for their expertise and wisdom:\n\nThe process of drafting legislation and shepherding it through the legislature often requires a delicate and practiced hand, especially when the issue under discussion is of a controversial nature. By forcing politicians out of the legislature on the basis of term limits, the depth of knowledge and experience available to the assembly is reduced, often to its serious detriment [1] . Seasoned politicians are also needed to help newcomers acclimate to the environment of the legislature; something first-time elected individuals are completely unused to. Naiveté on the part of new policymakers who are unused to the system will leave them vulnerable and exploitable. Lobbyists and special interest groups will seek to influence politicians while they develop their first impressions of life in the legislature, and will immediately capitalize upon any perceived vulnerability. Luann Ridgeway a Republican senator in the Missouri senate argues that term limits mean “we rely more on the trustworthiness of those established -- government relations individuals and staff persons -- because we have to”, [2] this would include more taking advice from the long standing lobbyists. Furthermore, legislation often requires lengthy periods of negotiation, that require not only the experienced hand of long-standing legislators, but also the continuity they offer. If legislators are constrained by term limits their time horizons are narrowed causing them to put too much emphasis on near-term, rather than long-term legislation. Clearly, term limits undermine the effective operation of government and deny the legislature an invaluable source of experience and ability.\n\n[1] Kouser, Thad. 2004. Term Limits and the Dismantling of State LegislativeProfessionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\n\n[2] Coleman, Emily and Bushnel, Michael, (2009). “Legislators attribute heightened partisanship to term limits”, Missourian, 16th May 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4871dcd4932c37e8f2f53eb850a40ac5",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits create more competitive elections for public office that empower new leaders and ideas:\n\nIncumbency provides a huge election advantage. Politicians almost always win reelection. The frequency with which they win varies over time and between states, but incumbency is always a powerful advantage. This is seen most visibly in the United States Congress of the past 30 years, in which it has become virtually impossible to unseat an incumbent legislator. Legislators are reelected because they have better name recognition both with the electorate and with lobby groups. People have a tendency to vote for whom they recognize, and firms tend to support past winners who will likely continue to benefit their interests. Term limits actually increase voter choice by making elections more competitive and encouraging more candidates to run. In areas where term limits have been instituted there is far higher turnover amongst legislators, giving voters far more choice in who should represent them. In California, the institution of term limits on state legislators caused a rush of retirements, which led to 50 percent more candidates than would otherwise have been expected, as well as a marked increase in the diversity of the backgrounds of those elected [1] . Ultimately, old legislators using election machines to retain power do their country and constituents a disservice. Power is best used when it changes hands over time in order to allow for dynamic new solutions to be mooted in a changing world.\n\n[1] Bandow, Doug. 1995. \"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever\". Cato Institute Policy Analysis.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "adc486a8ae20a6bf72037b39af2ef6e4",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The longer a politician remains in office, the more entrenched his grip becomes, and the more likely he is to use his office to his personal advantage:\n\nPower is highly intoxicating; it can corrupt even the most scrupled individual given enough exposure over time. For this reason, power should not be left in the hands of specific individuals for too long. When a politician is firmly entrenched, he may seek to enrich himself at the expense of the public. He may seek to shower benefices on family and allies in order to maintain and strengthen his powerful position. Without term limits legislators often become self-serving individuals, more interested in craving out personal power bases than with serving the people who elected them. Because legislators are so likely to be reelected, lobbyists and special interest groups find the lines of power in states' capitals largely predictable, and are thus able to buy the influence of the permanent power nexuses in the legislature with relative ease1. Term limits serve to limit the ability of individuals to put forward self-serving legislation and to retain power indefinitely 2. Instead, by maintaining term limits, legislators have only a limited time in power, which tends to shift their focus toward genuinely benefiting the public.\n\n1 Bandow, Doug. 1995. \"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever\". Cato Institute Policy Analysis. 2 Green, Eric. 2007. \"Term Limits Help Prevent Dictatorships\". America.gov.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bdbcff5fb65e9d12021f770faad0d993",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce Term limits restore a concept of rotation in public office, and reestablish the concept of the citizen legislature:\n\nIt is gravely unfortunate that politics has become an accepted career path for citizens of democratic states. It is far better that participation in government be brief. To end politics as a lifetime sinecure, thereby making legislative service a leave of absence, rather than a means of permanently absconding from a productive career in the private sector, requires that there be term limits 1. Without term limits, the temptation to remain in office for life will keep people seeking reelection long after they have accomplished all the legislative good of which they are capable. It does not take long for legislators to become more occupied with their relationships with each other and with lobbyists, than with their constituents. Representative assemblies work best when they function as citizen legislatures, in which people who pursue careers other than politics enter the legislative forum for a brief time to do their country service, and then leave again to reenter society as private citizens2. Such citizen legislators who enter politics to make their mark and then leave are far more desirable than the career politicians of today who focus only on building their own power influence, rather than considering the people they were elected to represent. US states with 'citizen legislatures', where the state legislature is part time with short sessions so allowing its members to hold other jobs, were at the top of freedom indexes. New Hampshire was both the most minimal parliament and the state with most fiscal freedom according to the Ruger-Sorens Index.3 1 Will, George. 1993. Restoration: Congress, Term Limits, and the Restoration of Deliberative Democracy. New York: Free Press. 2 Bandow, Doug. 1995. \"Real Term Limits: Now More Than Ever\". Cato Institute Policy Analysis. 3 Rugar, William and Sorens, Jason. 2011. \"The Citizen Legislature: How Reasonable Limits on State Legislative Salaries, Staff and Session Lengths Keep Liberty Alive\" Policy Brief, Goldwater Institute,\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b7cdb32b0e926b6e6c8346972feda03d",
"text": "eneral philosophy political philosophy politics government house would enforce The need to constantly fight elections compromises a politician's ability to make the difficult and unpopular decisions that may be needed at a given time:\n\nA major focus of a legislator hoping to serve another term is on the next election and on vote getting. It is often the case that hard decisions need to be made by legislators, but it is difficult for them to do so when they are fixated on being reelected. Legislators have an incentive to put tough decisions off if they can retain power by doing so. An example of such seemingly perpetual procrastination is observable in the United States Congress's attitude toward social security. The fund is set to become insolvent, by some estimates, in less than two decades, yet congressmen and senators have chosen time and again to put off enacting painful, but necessary reform to the system. They find it easier to delay a decision until the next Congress, preferring their own reelection to the good of the nation. When constrained by term limits, legislators must make the most of their limited time in office, resulting in greater prioritization of difficult decisions and reform1. Furthermore, the need to constantly fight elections places politicians in the pocket of lobby-groups and election supporters to a greater degree, as they will always need to go back to them for support, and thus cannot make decisions that are in the national interest alone. While there will always be some of this behavior, it is curtailed by term limits, as legislators will, in their final term at the very least, not be beholden to as many special interests as they cannot run again. Bolder legislative action is observed from retiring legislators in the United States Congress, for example. When a congressman or senator does not intend to seek reelection, his tendency to vote along strict party lines diminishes substantially. Term limits, just like voluntary retirement, leads legislators to vote more on the basis of principle than on party stance2. The result of this is a more independent legislature, with a greater interest in actually serving the people.\n\n1 Chan, Sewell. 2008. \"Debating the Pros and Cons of Term Limits\". New York Times. 2 Scherer, Michael. 2010. \"Washington's Time for Bipartisanship: Retirement\". Time.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
b40148ec1c683edd2ac010f37b54c872
|
Globalisation has made socialism impractical to implement
Global economic forces have rendered socialism powerless. Financial speculation, and investment flows can make or break economies, and the agents who channel these monies want to see countries liberalise, privatise and de-regulate more. This is being shown by the speculative attacks on Eurozone countries where the markets are showing they can force governments to implement tough austerity or even force changes in government without an election as has happened in Greece and Italy where technocrats have taken over as Heads of Government. [1]
These more flexible markets generate higher levels of growth and prosperity, and provide higher returns on investment, encouraging more. Countries which try to resist globalisation and liberal economic markets, as in ‘old Europe’, suffer stagnant growth and higher unemployment as a result. Old socialist-style economic models of tight economic regulation and central planning are unsustainable.
[1] Frankel, Jeffrey, ‘Let European technocrats weave their magic’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 29 November 2011, http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/let-european-technocrats-weave-their-magic-20111128-1o37s.html
|
[
{
"docid": "dcccaa5ba0a731779dad27c71b3afff4",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead What investors want more than anything is a stable economy and skilled workforce. Ironically it is the European nations where socialist thought remains strongest (the Nordic Countries) that are consistently ranked as the most competitive economies in the world. [1] Careful state management of the economy, provision of infrastructure and investment in exceptional health and education systems through high taxation have created a dynamic and highly qualified workforce, and attracted huge investment from technologically advanced industries.\n\n[1] World Economic Forum, ‘The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012’, http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GCR_CompetitivenessIndexRanking_2011-12.pdf\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "186cd84c806eb2cf95390590050f3af9",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Trying to pretend that absolutely anyone who disagrees in some way with the architects of the banking bubble can be described as a Socialist is simply taking things too far.\n\nMany people are suffering as a result of austerity measures and it is interesting that in countries with left wing governments the protests support the right and vice versa. This has nothing to do with the emergence of Socialism for the 21st century – however desperately the Socialists of the 20th century may wish it.\n\nThe closest even the most ardent supporters of the current protests can get is that ‘things should be different’ other than that it tends to be a round of decidedly nineteenth century solutions to nineteenth century problems\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "308c12f934d1a0ceac5fa4663c009ffc",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead As has so often been the case in the history of Socialism, the moment one form is comprehensively beaten, its adherents announce, “Oh that wasn’t really Socialism”. The reality is that Socialism fell with the Berlin Wall it just took a few years for the impact of that to ripple all the way across Europe.\n\nThe last stage of that process is now taking place as the economies that continued to believe that social systems would pay for themselves realize that not only is that fantasy not the case, it never was.\n\nIt may have taken a crisis in Capitalism to demonstrate that Socialism is a luxury Europe cannot afford but the result is the same anyway.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "77f519c8bf73e0d77ab9924076abcb01",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Setting the crises of the last few years against decades of prolonged growth under market capitalism really shows the lie of this idea. There is no doubt that certain sectors over-reached themselves in the latter part of the last decade but to suggest that this is a collapse of the Capitalist model makes about as much sense as the idea that a handful of idealists camped outside St Pauls are the emergence of a new political movement.\n\nBoth ideas are preposterous and only give credence to some of the madder parts of the Right whom would like nothing more than to be able to demonise the protesters and their demands.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e16241fc686e044c67ae1d538a1d666a",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead While there are a vast number of potential combinations of resources, the ones that are useless are mostly obvious and do not need a market to tell us so. Nobody would attempt to generate power by burning bicycles, for example.\n\nAn economy that is organised by prices will be organised by those with enough capital to out-bid all others, not those willing to pay the best price because they can make the most use of the resource\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fc36e57f58c95d6b3a0aac819ac6d329",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead It seems odd to quote the wife of an investment banker commenting about the abuse of other people’s money. What is becoming increasingly clear in critiques both from the left and the right is that we can actually afford a welfare state just fine but not at the same time as allowing a bunch of Wall Street wideboys to play fast and loose with the nation’s money.\n\nIn terms of twentieth century ideologies, certainly there have been changes on both sides of the political fence – the rise of moralising neo-cons and a growing far right is nothing for Conservatives to write home about – but the idea that Capitalism now reigns supreme rather than having the guts of it corpulent excesses scattered across the capitals of Europe is simply laughable.\n\nAs the high priests of Capital write themselves yet another cheque, an increasing number of people are objecting to the idea that public services should be closed so that the very rich can have their taxes reduced simply won’t wash.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d0acc6209b1df408c08bc3dd1921a41f",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Remembering that those states that dashed after the illusory prize of low taxes and deregulated banking are currently only being propped up by the ratings agencies should give politicians around the world- both radical and conventional- something to think about. However, even the most casual wander around the blogosphere makes clear that the principles of market economics are a long way from being universally agreed.\n\nThe intellectual recovery from the assault posed by Thatcherism and Reaganomics has taken time but is certainly taking place and it is increasingly the Right that appears intellectually bankrupt.\n\nOrganisations like the New Economics Foundation are approaching old problems in new ways alongside a whole range of popular movements – environmental, youth led, immigrant led and others. The fact that modern socialism has as much to do with the industrial struggles of the seventies as it does with the Spanish Civil War in the thirties should really come as no surprise.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "eb5fa194db83482c46fc3abe8ae3612f",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Socialism has frequently been defined by its opponents and as Capitalism has changed so have the political responses made to it. The fact that this iteration of socialism is different should come as no surprise to anyone who has studied the history of Socialism. That earlier generations of Socialists would not have recognised a blog or a Twitter account doesn’t change the fact that they recognise the flaws of Capitalism and reject the widely accepted views of the last twenty years or so that if everything is left to the market then everything will come out just fine.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4374190ac4ea10df4c348111a1a5ccbd",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead It is impossible to acquire the information necessary to create a coherent economy\n\nA planned economy requires that the planners have the information necessary to allocate resources in the right way. This is a virtually impossible task.\n\nThe world contains trillions of different resources: my labour, iron ore, Hong Kong harbour, pine trees, satellites, car factories – etc. The number of different ways to use, combine and recombine these resources is unimaginably vast.\n\nAnd almost all of them are useless. For example, it would be a mistake to combine Arnold Schwarzenegger with medical equipment and have him perform brain surgery.\n\nCentralised planning cannot possibly sort through the myriad of way of arranging resources to arrive at the most efficient usage. Only a decentralised price system can achieve this via the institution of private property and associated duties and rights. [1]\n\n[1] Boudreaux, Donald J, ‘Information and Prices’. http://econlib.org/library/Enc/InformationandPrices.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ffc89bd876b93fa6fa7fcf80123e306b",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead The idea that wealth should be more fairly and evenly distributed has never had so many supporters and the failure to do so has rarely been more keenly felt\n\nIn the model of Blair and Clinton, it didn’t matter if the rich got a lot richer, as long as the poor got a bit richer. That model has now been shown not to work and the rather timid new leaders of the left are starting to return to concepts of fairness and equality rather than the rather bland concepts of ‘opportunity’ and ‘choice’.\n\nEurope is increasingly governed by unelected technocrats who seem to think that the opinions of a handful of international bankers are somehow more important than the jobs and livelihoods of millions. This may always have been the case but it tends not to show during times of plenty. Now these latent inequalities are becoming apparent and people are angry.\n\nIt is perhaps one of the great ironies of history that one of the aspirations of early nineteenth century Socialists- nationalising the banks- required Capitalists to actually achieve it.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ef2ee958761ee1f9554309e62fd15c8b",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Socialism has changed historically to meet the challenges of the moment and is addressing those of the 21st century in new ways\n\nIt should perhaps come as no surprise that the days of standing outside shopping centres and train stations handing out soggy newspapers have passed into the annals of political history – although some still do it.\n\nEqually, trades union are no longer seen as being as central to European Socialism as they once were. However, the militancy seen over the last few years suggest, if anything, that what was a diversified ‘anti-capitalist’ movement is now coalescing around a rather clearer set of goals of which the basics of the anti-capitalism movement are merely a part. In the light of the globalisation of Capitalism, the left is increasingly rediscovering its internationalist roots which were lost to a great extent in the seventies and eighties in national struggles to save industries and jobs.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "cd63e30bd7311e92088191efdefe4176",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Class consciousness is an important aspect of Socialism, it would be hard to find a period in recent history when the majority have been so aware that their interests are not the same as the uber-rich\n\nIt has rarely been so clear that the interests of the few are not the same as those of the vast bulk of either European societies or the world outside it. At a time of rising unemployment, a handful of people who are already fantastically rich continue to pay themselves obscene salaries and bonuses. Of course there is nothing in this that is unusual, it’s just not usually done in so cavalier a fashion.\n\nAlthough there is nothing mechanical in the process, most Socialist thinkers have been clear that the popular realisation that there really is a class distinction between what the Occupy protesters refer to as the 1% and the rest of us is an important first step towards establishing Socialism.\n\nWhatever the media and political classes may pretend, Socialism is not – and never was – a single party or policy. It is a process. And that process is being seen on the streets across Europe\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8cb89b2360be639827bcd8abf37b7a34",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Socialism was a twentieth century ideology which ran its course and ran out of steam when it became clear that Capitalism worked better\n\nThe world has moved on; it is inconceivable that the protests of the seventies and eighties could be refought again. This issue was settled at the end of the eighties. It wasn’t just the collapse of the Soviet Union, although that no doubt played a major role in shaping the future of socialism in Europe.\n\nIn a globalised world the traditional ideas about class and the nature of the labour market have moved on and politics moved on with it.\n\nSocialists may have won many of the arguments over social issues, but arguments on the advantages of free trade, deregulation, the role of the state, the relationship between government and industry all line up firmly in the Capitalist column.\n\nThere were some remnants of dogmatic, “classical” socialism left in continental Europe, especially amongst its union movements, which are now collapsing. As Margaret Thatcher put it, “The problem with Socialism is that you will eventually run out of other people’s money.” [i]\n\n[i] Quoted in: James Turk. “Will Sovereign Debt Defaults Bring The End Of Socialism?” Free Gold Money Report. 19 December 2009.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "573f37c6e67a69050c48f69922a8ca50",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Even the leaders of the Left have given up on Socialism as a creed and have now accepted the vast majority of modern Capitalist principles\n\nEven the leaders of those European political parties that still call themselves socialist tend to avoid the word. Broadly speaking even the leaders of the left- outside Cuba and Colombia- accept the basic principles of Market economics and recognise that high-tax, high-spend economics simply does not work.\n\nLike it or not borders are now open and the idea that the state can control the flow of capital is a thing of the past. As a result people generally are richer and the idea that there a solid class block is simply no longer relevant to their lives.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6a3a8dd8d6ab5b139912cb9a61ad187d",
"text": "y political philosophy politics government society house believes socialism dead Although there are protests as a result of the banking crisis and the resulting financial meltdown, they have no cohesive ideology\n\nThere is clearly a difference between the general malaise of those protesting the result of the financial crisis and any form of coherent ideology or manifesto for government. The only people pretending that protesters in Athens or Rome – or the Occupy movement worldwide – are in some meaningful way Socialists are aging class warriors from the seventies.\n\nThe Occupy movement may well count many social liberals [i] among its members, and these individuals are almost certainly unhappy about many aspects of modern Capitalism but that doesn’t make Occupy, or the Athens street protestors Socialist.\n\n[i] Occupy Wall Street Website. “Forum Post Liberalism is Not Socialism”. 12 November 2011.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
10f040370a03ed93ab8275d5e50c00d3
|
The bombing was immoral and illegal
The use of the Atomic bomb raised immediate moral questions as to its use.
Albert Einstein argued “The American decision [to use the bomb] may have been a fatal error, for men accustom themselves to thinking a weapon which has been used once can be used again... [on the other hand] Our renunciation of this weapon as too terrible to use would have carried great weight” [1] So far Einstein has been proved wrong and the precedent thus set has not been followed. That the bombs are ‘to terrible to use’ does seem to have sunk in.
The use of the bombs was also illegal as it would have breached the Hague conventions of 1899 and 1907, signed by the US. Of Hague IV The Laws and Customs of War on Land it probably breached articles 23, forbidding the use of weapons that cause ‘unnecessary suffering’, and article 25 forbidding the attack of undefended towns. It would certainly by its indiscriminate nature have breached article 27 “In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes” [2] as well as the attendant declaration forbidding attack from aircraft!
Clearly such sections forbidding attack from aircraft, or balloons in the 1899 version make the Hague convention seem antiquated but the laws of war in general remain even now as they were codified in 1907. [3] The International Court of Justice has referred back to these precedents “In the view of the vast majority of states as well as the writers there can be no doubt as to the applicability of humanitarian law to nuclear weapons. The Court shares that view.” [4] That humanitarian law included the Hague conventions. The court reconfirmed the view that “States must never make civilians the object of attack and must consequently never use weapons that are incapable of distinguishing between civilian and military targets” [5] It is noteworthy that dissensions from a position of banning the use of nuclear weapons entirely focus on the possible use with minimal civilian casualties. [6] Since the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings did not attempt to minimize civilian casualties the implication is that their use was illegal based upon the Hague conventions that were already in force.
[1] Albert Einstein, quoted by Rudolph A. Winnacker, ‘The Debate About Hiroshima’, Military Affairs, vol.11, no.1, Spring 1947, p.25.
[2] Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hague04.asp
[3] Malcom H. Shaw, International Law (Cambridge, 1997), p.807.
[4] International Court of Justice advisory opinion of 8 July 1996 Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, paragraphs 85-6. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/95/7495.pdf?PHPSESSID=61c346606e8c49...
[5] ibid. para. 78.
[6] ibid. para. 91.
|
[
{
"docid": "4c75ff97267cbda9488f0ac3d3670efd",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and Before Hiroshima and Nagasaki the use of the Atomic Bomb did not raise profound moral questions with allied policymakers. Civilians had been intentionally targeted from the air since the start of the war and both Japanese and German cities had been already subjected to relentless bombardment. There was no compelling reason for politicians to view the Atomic bomb any differently from the London blitz or the Dresden raid. [1]\n\nThe Hague conventions had been systemically honoured only in the breach for the previous six years and so would not have given Truman or his advisors any particular heartache. The radiation effects were as yet unknown and so there was no reason to treat atomic bombs as anything more sinister than a mighty conventional bomb would be. Had the radiation been known about then it might have moved them into a category akin to chemical or biological weapons, which were already frowned upon. Chemical weapons were banned by the Hague convention in 1899. [2] This did not of course prevent their widespread use in WWI but the horrified reaction to the use of mustard gas and other agents lead to the Geneva Protocol [3] which came into force in 1928 although the US was not a signatory. In practice Atomic weapons have not been since treated as equivalent to poison gas or other ‘analogous devices’ and thus the International Court of Justice has said that they do not breach the Hague conventions or the Geneva Protocol. [4] Therefore as these were the only international laws in force at the time of the action the dropping the bombs were not illegal acts.\n\n[1] Barton J. Bernstein, ‘The Atomic Bombings Reconsidered’, Foreign Affairs, vol.74, no.1, Jan.- Feb., 1995. p.135.\n\n[2] Declaration on the Use of Projectiles the Object of Which is the Diffusion of Asphyxiating or Deleterious Gases; July 29, 1899; http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/dec99-02.asp\n\n[3] Geneva Protocol to Hague Convention http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Geneva_Protocol_to_Hague_Convention\n\n[4] International Court of Justice advisory opinion of 8 July 1996 Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, paragraphs 54-6. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/95/7495.pdf?PHPSESSID=61c346606e8c49...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "29787c3dd1578282676477f9e0e6a32c",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and The justification for the second bomb relies principally upon the argument that Japan would presume there was only one A-bomb if another was not dropped, so the destruction of Nagasaki was a necessary evil to force surrender just as much as that at Hiroshima. Indeed senior Japanese figures did argue that there was only one bomb, and even in one case that the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was not atomic at all, simply a very big conventional bomb. The Chief of the Naval General Staff Toyoda Soemu thought “it is questionable whether the United States will be able to use more bombs in rapid succession.” [1] This was a view that Anami Korechika, the army minister, shared until it was shattered by the second bomb although even then he said “The appearance of the atomic bomb does not spell the end of war” [2]\n\n[1] Admiral Toyoda quoted by Sadao Asada, ‘The Shock of the Atomic Bomb and Japan’s Decision to Surrender - A Reconsideration’ in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, p.37.\n\n[2] Army Minister Anami quoted by Sadao Asada, ‘The Shock of the Atomic Bomb and Japan’s Decision to Surrender - A Reconsideration’ in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, p.40.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "21505edbc8f11949bc9bc5a491ab4c48",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and Offering the preservation of the Monarchy was unlikely to have altered the outcome of the conflict by bringing peace before August 6th. This was the only concession to the Japanese that was even considered by the US government. It was thought that even this would be very hard for the American public to swallow. Truman’s personal feeling was also that nothing short of an unconditional surrender would do to avenge Pearl Harbour. [1]\n\n[1] Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Racing the enemy: Stalin, Truman and the surrender of Japan, (Cambridge, 2005) p.291.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "93538c037ecde8be75b55c0f06102150",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and The alternatives to either invasion or atomic bombing are covered in the previous counterpoint. It can only be said that none of them are without a high human cost, though invasion spearheaded by an atomic barrage is surely the worst. The principle of advantage of the conventional bombing option being that it would be easily justifiable as only quantitively different to what the Japanese had already meted out themselves. The blockade similarly has easy justification in not being a deviation from any accepted standards as well as only indirectly attacking the home islands while putting the onus on the Japanese government to avoid starvation. Really in order to find a less costly alternative then diplomacy has to be raised for which refer to the second response argument.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "26be805bc1f3fffa6bb93d26948b966c",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and Having a weapon is hardly a good argument for using one, society would fall apart if ‘I have a gun thus I must shoot someone’ became an accepted maxim. Since war is policy by other means the ultimate weapon is one that achieves its policy objectives without the need to be actually be used. As to the cost, the $2.2bn translates to a little below $7,000 for each Japanese life taken.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a1dc1fc2bb3e16568753ed019dcb0396",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and It can be argued that conventional bombing could have brought about a Japanese surrender without the recourse to the use of the atomic bombs. Compared to conventional bombings the atomic bombs caused disproportionate amounts of civilian casualties. The Strategic Bombing survey estimated that in the 9 months prior to the surrender there were 806,000 Japanese civilian casualties inclusive of A-bombs, of which 330,000 were deaths. Therefore nearly a third of civilian deaths were as a result of the atomic bombings (and that is only counting those who died immediately). In Hiroshima 72% of buildings were destroyed, in Nagasaki 37.5% of buildings were destroyed. However in a conventional raid Yokohama was 47% destroyed in an hours bombing, for the comparatively light cost of 5,000 civilian fatalities. [1] Of course some conventional raids, particularly fireraids caused very heavy casualties, in particular the Tokyo firebombing of March 9th 1945 killed 100,000 and destroyed 15.8 square miles. However that is still three times the area destroyed of Hiroshima. Since the only possible justification for attack on cities is the destruction of infrastructure conventional bombing was similarly effective while being the cause of many fewer civilian deaths.\n\nAccording to the United States Strategic Bombing Survey “Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” [2] The accuracy of this prediction has since been called into question, [3] after all the allies dropped far more bombs on Nazi Germany without securing surrender. However the fact remains that the conventional bombing campaign was only just starting to get going and might have achieved decisive results.\n\nPossibly even more important for the prospects of a conventional victory, and one not clouded by the stigma of massive bombing campaigns against civilians, was the maritime blockade. By the end of the war Japan had only 700,000 tons of shipping remaining, she had started the war with 6,337,000 tons. Of 122,000 sailors in the merchant marine 27,000 were killed 89,000 wounded. For an island nation reliant on imports not just to run its industry but also to keep its people fed this was devastating. The result was starvation in the Japanese home islands. After the war it was reported that up to 10 million would die of starvation without American food aid, as a post war report to the Diet (Japanese Parliament) put it ‘the greatest cause of defeat was the loss of shipping’. [4]\n\n[1] United States Strategic Bombing Survey: Summary Report (Pacific War), http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm pp.20, 23-24.\n\n[2] United States Strategic Bombing Survey: Summary Report (Pacific War), http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm p.26.\n\n[3] Gian Peri Gentile, ‘Advocacy or Assessment? The United States Strategic Bombing Survey of Germany and Japan’, in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, (Columbia, 2007) pp.123-4.\n\n[4] Joel Ira Holwitt, “Execute against Japan”: The US decision to conduct unrestricted submarine warfare, (College Station TX, 2008) pp.166-9\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "70579bb0e13982874812b3170776e845",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and A negotiated peace would have been preferable to the dropping of the atomic bombs\n\nIt is conventional to argue that Japan was defeated already and so the bombings were unnecessary as Sadao Asada points out this confuses defeat with surrender. However such a position seems equally to confuse surrender with peace. That there had to be an unconditional surrender seems almost unquestioned. Most wars do not end in an unconditional surrender of one side or the other, Japanese defeat was plain so a negotiated peace would normally have been set in motion when the US saw the terrible casualties it might be forced to take in its push for total victory. The Americans learnt of Japanese willingness to negotiate in July, on the 13th Secretary of the Navy Forrestal wrote in his diary “The first real evidence of a Japanese desire to get out of the war came today... Togo said further that the unconditional surrender term of the Allies was about the only thing in the way of termination of the war” [1] Stimson, Grew and Forrestal aimed at persuading president Truman to offer the Japanese promise of the preservation of the monarchy as an alternative to unconditional surrender. [2] Ultimately the Potsdam declaration set the unconditional surrender policy in stone. [3] Offering such a condition would certainly have strengthened the peace party within the Japanese cabinet and allowed them to present further resistance by the generals and admirals as endangering the monarchy. [4] However, on its own this would probably not have lead to peace, the cabinet would still have been split 3-3 with the Army and Navy ministers both opposed and with vetoes on policy. Even the most belligerent of the Japanese Cabinet, Army Minister Anami’s conditions were preservation of the Imperial institution, no military occupation of the home islands, Japanese forces were to demobilize and disarm themselves and war criminals were to be prosecuted by the Japanese themselves. [5] While these conditions are obviously ripe for exploitation, would they really disarm and try war criminals? they are not unreasonable. Just because there was no hope that the US would accept these conditions, they fly in the face of the Potsdam Declaration from which the allies would not deviate, does not mean that another alternative to unconditional surrender should not be considered as an alternative to the dropping of the Nuclear bombs.\n\n[1] Secretary Forrestal quoted by Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Racing the enemy: Stalin, Truman and the surrender of Japan, (Cambridge MA, 2005) p134.\n\n[2] Campbell Craig and Sergay Radchenko, The Atomic Bomb and the Origins of the Cold War, (New Haven, 2008) p.69\n\n[3] Potsdam Declaration, http://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/etc/c06.html\n\n[4] Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, Racing the enemy: Stalin, Truman and the surrender of Japan, (Cambridge, 2005) pp.290-1.\n\n[5] Sadao Asada, ‘The Shock of the Atomic Bomb and Japan’s Decision to Surrender - A Reconsideration’ in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, p. 39.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7d50904f3b97201a460a74b9f2a2edd9",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and It was not necessary to use atomic weapons on a population centre\n\nThe first bomb, on Hiroshima was sufficient to achieve the objective of surrender without the use of the second bomb after only a very short period of time. There was only three days between the two bombings, an unpardonably short period. Communications between Hiroshima and Tokyo had unsurprisingly been severed, so the full effect had yet to sink in on some policy makers by the time ‘Fat Man’ was dropped. It had however already convinced Foreign Minister Togo, Prime Minister Suzuki and crucially the Emperor himself. He said upon hearing the news of Hiroshima: “Now that things have come to this impasse, we must bow to the inevitable. ... We should lose no time in ending the war so as not to have another tragedy like this.” [1] The rest of the cabinet was as yet unmoved, but even if they had been it is unlikely they would have been able to actually surrender before the second bomb was dropped.\n\nThere were significant other factors in play as well. Before the second bomb was dropped the Japanese had learnt of the Soviet attack which dashed their last hopes of mediation for a favourable settlement and they were not optimistic of their chances in that conflict, even the army’s planners expected Manchukuo’s capital Changchun would fall in two weeks. [2] Although the Cabinet was deadlocked 3 to 3 this was the case both before and after the news of Nagasaki came in, the point of fact that the US had more than one bomb although a shock to those opposed to surrender did not alter their position. Ultimately the Emperor was forced to intervene on the side of the proponents of peace, his mind had been made up even before the first bomb. It is arguable that Hiroshima was necessary to push him into acting, which was unprecedented but the Nagasaki bombing was entirely superfluous. Historian Sadao Asada’s opinion is that the second bomb was unnecessary. [3]\n\n[1] Emperor Hirohito quoted by Sadao Asada, ‘The Shock of the Atomic Bomb and Japan’s Decision to Surrender - A Reconsideration’ in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism p.33.\n\n[2] Sadao Asada, ‘The Shock of the Atomic Bomb and Japan’s Decision to Surrender - A Reconsideration’ in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, p.36.\n\n[3] Sadao Asada, ‘The Shock of the Atomic Bomb and Japan’s Decision to Surrender - A Reconsideration’ in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, pp.38, 41-2.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "edaf2e3ad9da8d1974f35d34d0c9da84",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and The continuation of a conventional war would have been much costlier than an atomic attack\n\nThe US was planning for a massive invasion of the Japanese Home Islands (Operation Olympic). Nine divisions were to land on the southern Japanese island of Kyushu. However the Japanese had ten divisions in southern Kyushu by August, and 600,000 troops on the whole island. [1]\n\nThe US army widely disseminated a figure of half a million casualties for the conquest of Japan. This was however only the figure for public consumption and some calculations went much higher. [2] On top of the US losses the same amount and probably considerably more Japanese deaths would have to be added. The estimates of US losses were so bad that atomic bombs were actually considered for use in clearing the landing beaches.\n\nChief of Staff George C. Marshall argued “We had to visualize very heavy casualties unless we had enough atomic bombs at the time to supplement the troop action.” [3] Invasion was therefore not really an alternative to the A-bomb use at all. Although the use of the bomb in a battlefield situation might be more justifiable that it was considered shows the ignorance of the radiation effects that might well have been a disaster for US forces as well as Japanese.\n\n[1] Edward J. Drea, ‘Intelligence Forecasting for the Invasion of Japan: previews of Hell, Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, (Columbia, 2007) p.59,71\n\n[2] D. M. Giangreco, \"A score of bloody Okinawas and Iwo Jimas\": President Truman and casualty estimates for the invasion of Japan’, Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, (Columbia, 2007), p.88\n\n[3] Edward J. Drea, ‘Intelligence Forecasting for the Invasion of Japan: previews of Hell’, pp.74-5.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2b66643812999ac1ea8a94e89f4f4ec3",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and The United States need to maximise the effectiveness of its atomic weaponry program before it could be compromised\n\nThere was no possibility of keeping nuclear weapons under wraps; scientists from several countries had been working on them. They were ripe for discovery. Robert Oppenheimer pointed out “it is a profound and necessary truth, that deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them” [1] If Atomic bombs were going to be developed anyway there was a compelling reason to be the first to own these weapons, even to be the first to use them. Deterrence, would not work if suspected to be a bluff or a dud, having used the bomb twice it could not be doubted that the US was willing to use it again in extremis.\n\nThe cost of building the bomb was enormous. At 2.2 billion dollars the Manhattan project cost about the same as the drive to get to the moon in the sixties, but the comparison is not adjusted for inflation. [2] The vast majority of the cost, and of the 130,000 employed in the project, was not in the development but in the building of the factories to produce the fissile material. The opportunity cost of that 2.2 billion is surely huge, how many more bombers and tanks or how many more medicines and bandages could it have bought? Not using the bomb and squandering that investment would bring that opportunity cost to life; the question is not just how many would die in months more war but how many might not have to build something unused.\n\n[ 1 Robert Oppenheimer quoted by Richard Rhodes, ‘The Atomic Bomb in the Second World War’ in C. C. Kelley (ed.), Remembering the Manhattan Project : Perspectives on the Making of the Atomic Bomb and Its Legacy, (River Edge NJ, 2005), p.18\n\n[2] ibid p.22\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e382a2b36147cd3e8125c9b831273594",
"text": "y ethics politics warpeace house believes use atomic bombs against hiroshima and The use of atomic bombs was the only was to persuade Japan's rulers to surrender\n\nFrom late 1944 Japan’s defeat was certain. The Japanese leadership knew this, but this knowledge did not equate acceptance nor did it translate into action. The Americans felt that some sort of game changer was needed to push the Japanese into surrender.\n\nAccording to Henry L. Stimson “We, [the administration] felt that to extract a genuine surrender from the Emperor and his military advisors, they must be administered a tremendous shock which would carry convincing proof of our power to destroy the Empire.” [1]\n\nThe United States Strategic Bombing Survey reckoned that to cause equivalent damage done by the Atomic Bombs using conventional weapons would require 345 B29’s. [2] However it is not the fact that the Atomic bombs saved hundreds of B29 missions that is the crucial element. That is the sheer terror that the destructive power of the atomic bombs. This made the Atomic bombs of a different order to any number of conventional B29 missions and was a crucial factor in bringing about the Japanese surrender. If the fact that a city could be levelled in a single night could make the Japanese surrender they would have done so many months previously, and many times over. Important members of the Japanese government agreed with Stimson’s assessment of the importance of shock. Prime Minister Suzuki said “The atomic bomb provided an additional reason for surrender as well as an extremely favorable opportunity to commence peace talks. I believed such an opportunity could not be afforded by B-29 bombings alone.” [3]\n\n[1] Secretary of War, Henry Stimson quoted by Rudolph A. Winnacker, ‘The Debate About Hiroshima’, Military Affairs, vol.11, no.1, Spring 1947, p.27.\n\n[2] United States Strategic Bombing Survey: Summary Report (Pacific War), http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm p.24.\n\n[3] Suzuki Kantaro quoted by Sadao Asada, ‘The Shock of the Atomic Bomb and Japan’s Decision to Surrender - A Reconsideration’ in Hiroshima in History: The Myths of Revisionism, (Columbia, 2007) p. 35\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
e283560510ab8c7e663d5675648c93b8
|
Western donors should support fair government
The west should support democratically elected, just, uncorrupted government no matter who provides it. Hamas could make a much better government than Fatah, it is a religious movement dedicated to political and social action. For many years it has run the most effective welfare programmes in the Palestinian territories, especially Gaza, including orphanages, schools, clinics and help for the needy. [1] The honesty and discipline of its leaders and followers provide a stark contrast with the corruption and chaos of the Fatah-run administration of Yasser Arafat and Mahmood Abbas. They paid lip service to the peace process but either could not, or would not control their followers so as to make a clear commitment to peace. At least with Hamas in power, the Palestinians would be better and more honestly governed, and billions of dollars in aid money will no longer be stolen by a corrupt elite. Hamas in Gaza by comparison has established an efficient public administration and has an ambitious infrastructure program. [2] In addition, militias and security forces are likely to be under much more effective control, making genuine negotiations about a long-term ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinians much more plausible. After all, a deal which excludes Hamas has no chance at all of holding.
[1] Putz, Ulrike. “Uncle Hamas Cares for Palestinians.” Spiegel. 12/20/2006. http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,455632,00.html
[2] Shaikh, Salman, ‘Don’t Forget Gaza’, ForeignPolicy.com, 24 January 2011, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/01/24/don_t_forget_gaza
|
[
{
"docid": "b670b565c4fe1160fd82dbe23ee7eb5a",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other This assumes that it is Hamas that is elected or another group that has been involved in running welfare programmes. It should however be noted that while Hamas has effectively provided welfare programmes it has at the same time used those same civilians as human shields. During its time in power in Gaza Hamas has had little impact except for starting a conflict with Israel, as a result Gaza is in a worse position than the West Bank with 80% of the population dependent on international aid, 61% are food insecure and 90% of water supplied is not suitable for drinking. [1]\n\n[1] Hasan, Mehdi, ‘No end to the strangulation of Gaza’, New Statesman, 6 January 2011, http://www.newstatesman.com/middle-east/2011/01/gaza-israeli-documents-s...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "f42fbc89ebb9b507df5bb663943518dc",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other Arab and Muslim states won’t necessarily make up any budget shortfall if the EU and USA stop funding the PNA. Many Arab governments would be deeply unhappy at seeing Islamists in government and even though they do not like Israel, they have no wish to inflame the situation further. More moderate countries in the region recognise Israel and want the peace process to move forward so would be just as likely to demand that a terrorist group gives up terror and disarms as the west. Iran may be more sympathetic, but almost all Palestinians are Sunni rather than Shia Muslims, and Iran has its own international problems such as sanctions that are making an economic impact so it may not be in a position to subsidize other governments.\n\nThere is also no evidence that the Palestinians would turn to such states. In December 2007, 87 countries and international organisations, including Serbia and Nicaragua, pledged to donate $7.4 billion to the PNA over three years. [1] This amount is far more than previous US and EU funding and there is no evidence that its acceptance has led to Palestine depending on anti-Israel regimes.\n\n[1] Stotsky, Steven. “Does Foreign Aid Fuel Palestinian Violence?” Middle East Quarterly. Summer 2008. http://www.meforum.org/1926/does-foreign-aid-fuel-palestinian-violence\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c74a6663ab571ee0cdb0b51d297d9178",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other The history of the IRA does not provide a useful precedent for dealing with Hamas. Leaving aside questions of how genuine the IRA’s conversion to peace and democracy really is, parallels with Hamas and the Palestinian conflict are misleading. Compared to the religious fundamentalism of Hamas, Irish republicans were pretty secular and focused on gaining and using power in this world. They wanted to force Britain out of Northern Ireland, but not to wipe Britain itself off the map. There has never been an IRA suicide bomber and, faced with a failing armed struggle, the movement’s leaders chose to compromise. Hamas is entirely different in its beliefs and attitudes, and there is no reason to suppose that funding it in power will encourage it to change its strategy or aims.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5d51cf1cf70cabd6186d8b86783e1982",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other Cutting off aid to the PNA need not result in mass suffering among the Palestinian people. Humanitarian aid would certainly continue, although this could no longer be channelled through the PNA but rather to individual schemes run by non-governmental organisations. In any case, the greatest suffering is caused by a lack of a peace process with Israel. A commitment to peace talks shown by a terrorist group pledging to end terrorism would help allow the economic development needed to create jobs and relieve poverty in the Palestinian territories.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "afce57641fe2bc36e2028f679098bd18",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other If the terrorist organisation was elected as Hamas was it is likely that as in 2006/7 when much of the power in the PA remained with the Fatah President, Mahmood Abbas, one or other of the presidency or the parliament would remain in non-terrorist hands so funding should be continued in order to strengthen that party. In any case, any party that is willing to stand and contest relatively free and fair elections, is in the long term likely to want to bring peace. Working with such a government would encourage the moderates within that organisation, and allow them to understand that helping the Palestinian people to a better future requires compromise and negotiation. This move from terrorism to a political process will take time in order for attitudes to change and trust to build. It can only be achieved by western commitment to work with the new government rather than to cut it off entirely.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "34d5f6d1ced18e951949a592dbaf5768",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other It would be anti-democratic to punish the Palestinian people for exercising their right to vote. Their vote may not be a vote for terrorism or against the peace process, but rather a response to the corruption and anarchy of the ruling party, currently Fatah, and its mismanagement of the Palestinian National Authority. Withdrawing funding is not just a signal of disapproval for the party which is elected, but a clear attempt to bring down the PNA government and overturn the election result. After all the years of western criticism of corrupt dictatorial regimes, what message does it send to Arab governments and people if the west refuses to respect the result of an election and imposes a collective punishment?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7e7d70aade2df4e2a43267fb61c5dc6d",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other It is these western governments themselves who define what groups are terrorist groups. They both make the definitions of terrorism and decide what groups fall into these definitions. For example the United Kingdom regarded the IRA (Irish Republican Army) as being a terrorist group while the United States did not consider them a terrorist organisation. [1] Therefore if these countries wished to deal with and provide financial aid to a new Palestinian government, even if it was the political arm of a terrorist organisation they could simply redefine it, as would almost certainly be the case if the terrorist organisation was perceived as doing something that is in the interests of these western nations.\n\n[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_organizations\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d195402cd87a0f8c58ee1348cdec6431",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other The loss of funding would destabilise and radicalise Palestine.\n\nPalestine is very dependent on foreign aid, the PNA is dependent on aid for 50% of its budget and per head the Palestinians are the biggest recipients of aid in the world. [1] The loss of funding would therefore destabilise both the Palestinian National Authority and Palestinian society as a whole. 140,000 PNA jobs are dependent upon the income from western funding, and these workers in turn help support more than a third of the Palestinian population. [2] Cutting funding could lead to the collapse of any government system and cause great suffering among the people who would lose their chief source of income has gone. Both these things are likely to radicalise the Palestinian people further and make peace less likely.\n\n[1] Levy, Judith, ‘Palestinian economy dangerously dependent on foreign aid’, The Washington Times Communities, 27 May 2011, http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/israel-online/2011/m...\n\n[2] “Palestinians ‘face financial crisis’.” BBC News. 21/02/2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4732090.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8904de4288a1adc33877fc9916a24e4c",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other Withholding funds will cause Palestine to rely on anti-Israeli regimes.\n\nCutting off aid to the Palestinian National Authority would be counter-productive no matter who is elected in. The PNA would have to replace funding from somewhere, this would inevitably mean turning for aid to Muslim and Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran as Hamas did. [1] The west may therefore simply force the Palestinians in to the arms of countries that are much more hostile to Israel resulting in the Palestinians simply being more hard-line to please their new paymasters. Allowing the Palestinians to become dependent upon such anti-Israel regimes will end any influence the west has had with the PNA and push it in a more extremist direction. Potentially, such alliances could make a regional conflict more likely.\n\n[1] Watt, Nicholas. “US urges Arab states to fund Palestinians after Hamas victory.” The Guardian. 31/01/2006. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/31/israel/print\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4d2f8ea9c8d296c71fe7d311b0d15e5f",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other Engaging with Hamas is the best way to secure a peace deal between Israel and Palestine.\n\nThere is a clear precedent for engaging with terrorist groups moving towards a political track. Like Hamas in recent years, at the end of the 1970s, the IRA was a terrorist organisation which rejected the political process. In the early 1980s, Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA, decided to stand for elections. As elected representatives grappled with local issues and had to work with others on councils and committees, the movement changed and, in 1994, the IRA declared a ceasefire. [1] More recently, Sinn Fein leaders have held ministerial positions in Northern Ireland and the IRA has ended the armed struggle. This was a long process but it shows clearly how, if we respect any elected terrorist group’s popular mandate and are prepared to engage with them, they may be encouraged to give up terrorism and make concessions for peace. Indeed some hard liners in Hamas controlled Gaza worry that exactly such a scenario may happen. [2]\n\n[1] Schmidt, William E. “Cease-Fire in Northern Ireland.” New York Times. 01/09/1994. http://www.nytimes.com/1994/09/01/world/cease-fire-northern-ireland-overview-ira-declares-cease-fire-seeing-new.html?pagewanted=all\n\n[2] Shaikh, Salman, ‘Don’t Forget Gaza’, ForeignPolicy.com, 24 January 2011, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/01/24/don_t_forget_gaza?page=0,1\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e716c7f8a99677c7478b5e8abb316d00",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other Withholding funds will prevent PNA terrorism and anti-Semitism.\n\nIt is clear what Hamas, or any other terrorist organisation, has to do in order to convince western governments to continue funding the Palestinian National Authority with it in charge. It must formally give up terror, accept the existence of the state of Israel and drop any anti-Semitic ideology. Yasser Arafat’s PLO and Fatah Party made these commitments in the early 1990s, and this allowed them to become negotiating partners in the Oslo Peace process. [1] Hamas has to take the same steps if it wants to enjoy the same level of support from western donors which the previous Fatah government had. Until it makes these public changes, there would not be any funding.\n\n[1] Schlaim, Avi. “The Rise and Fall of the Oslo Peace Process.” International Relations of the Middle East. 2005. http://users.ox.ac.uk/~ssfc0005/The%20Rise%20and%20Fall%20of%20the%20Oslo%20Peace%20Process.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "853b11cc9cb4a3a1b7526512c937acf9",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other The outcome of the Palestinian elections should not be rewarded with aid.\n\nA terrorist organisation such as Hamas may be democratically elected, but that does not mean we have to fund its government. Respecting the decision of the Palestinian people is not the same thing as liking their choice or rewarding it with aid. The Palestinian people should realise that a vote for Hamas or any other terrorist organisation is a vote for international isolation. Showing our clear disapproval of terrorists in government sends a clear message for future elections both in Palestine and in other countries.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5c942d9ba54bbe9b68e45c7f49103004",
"text": "onal global middle east politics terrorism house believes eu usa and other The law prevents US and EU governments from funding terrorist groups.\n\nHamas is a terrorist organisation, responsible for killing hundreds of civilians, often by sending suicide bombers into Israel. Both the European Union and the US State Department have recognised this by listing Hamas as a terrorist organisation. Their governments are barred by law from providing any funding to such groups. [1] It is extremely worrying that such a violent organisation managed to win power in the most recent Palestinian election, and that committed terrorists are in government in Gaza and in control of the Palestinian budget and security forces. In 2007 both Western law, and the moral disgust at the thought that aid funding could be used to fund terror attacks, required the EU and US to stop funding the Palestinian Authority while under a Hamas government, the same would almost certainly be the case again if Hamas were to regain power.\n\n[1] Schulenburg, John. “Fatah Reconciles With Hamas.” Gateway Pundit. 27/04/2011. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/04/fatah-reconciles-with-hamas-us-now-officially-funding-islamic-terrorism-how-will-obama-proceed/\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
c249b9f5bb30404d9b027d1f03bf8c59
|
Islamic parties have led governments before
The economic, social, and political history of the region show there are many obstacles to establishing stable democracies in the Middle East. Many in the West fear that Islam is among these barriers, with claims that Islamist parties like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Ennahda in Tunisia will turn their countries into theocracies like Iran. However, there are majority-Muslim states with Islamist parties that have succeeded in creating stable democracies, including Turkey and Indonesia. Both countries are good case studies that disprove the widespread notion that Islam is incompatible with democracy.
Turkey is most often cited as a good example for the Arab spring to follow. The election of the AKP has shown that an Islamic party can also uphold democracy, so providing a good example for the powerful Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab world. Elections are free and fair and the press is relatively free. The Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has faced down coup threats from the military, again something that may well be necessary given the large role the military has had in the previous regimes. Turkey’s economy is growing briskly and Turkey is following a foreign policy of reaching out to everybody and is touting itself as a model for Arab countries to follow. [1]
In Indonesia in 1998 there was a revolution that ousted President Suharto who had like Mubarak been in power for thirty years. This revolution progressed in a very similar way to the ongoing revolution in Egypt – in both countries the protesters were middle class and young, the president went relatively peacefully and the military helped during the transition. [2] Indonesia is now the largest Muslim democracy in the world and while there are islamist parties in parliament their support is now below 30%. [3] Indonesia can therefore provide a road map for moving from an interim government with the military in control to a fully functioning and successful democracy.
[1] A Muslim Democracy in Action, The Economist, 17th February 2011, http://www.economist.com/node/18185813 accessed 20/05/11
[2] Banyan, Remember 1998 The Indonesian Example, The Economist, 7th February 2011, http://www.economist.com/blogs/asiaview/2011/02/indonesian_example accessed 20/05/11
[3] Thomas Carothers, Egypt and Indonesia, The New Republic, 2nd February 2011, http://www.tnr.com/article/world/82650/egypt-and-indonesia accessed 20/05/11
|
[
{
"docid": "123e1a09ea3333e8eae45699ec557da8",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house While these examples prove that in some iterations Islam can work with democracy, it is likely that other factors made democracy viable in Inodnesia and Turkey. Indonesia is free of the hostile relationship with the West that often undermines the stability of the Middle East, and has benefitted from a strong trade relationship. While the AKP in Turkey is Islamist, it operates within the Turkish constitution which requires the military to dissolve any government that threatens the secular nature of the state. Without a constitutionally defined commitment to strict secularism, like in Turkey, the Islamist parties in Egypt and Tunisia will resort to undemocratic practices.\n\nWhile Indonesia’s revolution superficially looks similar it should be remembered that no two revolutions are really the same. They are different in almost every respect, culturally, geographically, economically. Indonesian Minister Natalegawa argues “I think the lesson form us is that it is possible for the democratization process to return to the military to it must be its original function.” [2] However this really shows a difference. In Indonesia the military never stepped in to take over the government as they have done in Egypt. If the key is reducing the role of the military Egypt has barely begun.\n\n[1] Wolfango Piccoli, Full steam ahead on Turkish Constitutional reform, ForeignPolicy.com, 29th May 2011, http://eurasia.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/05/19/turkey_full_steam_ahead_on_constitutional_reform accessed 20/05/11\n\n[2] Julia Simon, Reformasis and Revolutions, Asia Calling, 17th April 2011, http://www.asiacalling.org/ur/news/others/1966-reformasis-and-revolutions accessed 20/05/11\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "e6981d52375c2b1ac225e00df05474a1",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house The referendum is not an example of progress. It is not hard to see why many of those who demonstrated in Tahrir square were in the no camp for this referendum. “The president remains extraordinarily powerful. The amendments do nothing about due process and neglect other authoritarian aspects of the state” [1] The referendum was attacked for not dealing with large scale structural issues. Leading opposition figures such as Mohamed El Baradei argue “The referendum deals only with minutiae. It doesn't talk about the imperial power of the president, it doesn't talk about the distortion of the parliament, it doesn't talk about the need to have an independent constituent assembly that represents everybody. So we are going to say no.” [2] This means that the institutional problems that helped create an over-mighty presidency and autocracy have remained in place.\n\nThese countries have also not become much more stable. There have been clashes between Christian Copts and Muslims following the burning of two churches on the 7th of May, which have left 180 injured and raises the specter of sectarian violence. [3] Meanwhile in Tunisia the government has re-imposed night time curfews after four days of demonstrations were ended by police firing tear gas. [4] It is difficult to consider such unrest progress.\n\n[1] Steven A. Cook, ‘Interview, Egypt’s Referendum: Nervous Steps Forward’, Council on Foreign Relations, 21st March 2011, http://www.cfr.org/egypt/egypts-referendum-nervous-steps-forward/p24452 accessed 19/05/11\n\n[2] ‘Large turnout for Egypt's constitutional referendum’ BBC News, Mar. 19, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12793484\n\n[3] Egypt Christians protest in Cairo after church attack, BBC News, May 9., 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13331628\n\n[4] Post-revolution Egypt and Tunisia gripped by unrest May 8, 2011, http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/casbah/post-revolution-egypt-and-tunisia-gripped-unrest\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b8d643033fd242f9480db81e023e9830",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house While the presence of pre-existing institutions is an advantage in transitioning to a democracy, that advantage may be compromised when these institutions are largely seen as illegitimate and have not fostered a democratic political culture. Key to the development of a democratic political culture is confidence in institutions and a willingness to accept the popular will as carried out by those institutions.\n\nThe predominance of the Executive over the Legislature is rather reminiscent of the Imperial Russian State Duma (1905-1917) as with Tunisia and Bahrain the lower house was directly elected, although the system was heavily weighted to produce pliant Dumas from 1907 on, and the upper house appointed. There was quite a plurality of parties and the Duma had control over a wide area of legislation but not over areas such as military policy and the Tsar had veto powers. [1] It certainly cannot be said that the Duma’s existence proved to be conducive to the creation of a stable democracy after the fall of the Tsar, or even a stable state of any sort.\n\nThe existence of the necessary institutions therefore does not mean anything if those very institutions are not seen as legitimate.\n\n[1] E. A. Goldenweiser, ‘The Russian Duma’,Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Sep., 1914), pp. 408-422\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e724a67a7dc39f7ee12d27cfe1349566",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house The question is as much whether once a democracy has been established it can sustain itself as a system through multiple changes in government without reverting to dictatorship by coup. Notionally at least Lebanon has been a democracy continually since 1932, if the interruption of the brutal civil war is ignored. While that event shows that it can hardly be called stable in the general sense, it has been in the way that democracy survived even that cataclysm. Such ethnic tensions are hardly conducive to stable government even in Western Europe. [2] When Belgium’s current political quagmire is looked at next to Lebanon the differences between Flemish and Walloon seem insignificant compared those which a Lebanese government must bridge, so even if its effectiveness may be questioned Lebanon’s democracy surely holds out hope for all, particularly for countries that are much less divided.\n\nThere are excessively high hopes for Arab democracy this early, given that democracy has only been the prominent governing system in the West for the past century or so, and only without widespread violence since the end of World War II. It may take more than a few months for the Middle East to establish durable democratic systems, but the first steps are certainly established.\n\n[2] Belgium: Still No Government, Mar., 1. 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/02/world/europe/02briefs-Belgium.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "65aa79d1bb25625af0818efcaf5da922",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house For these states perpetuating the resources that give their regime its legitimacy, as a provider, is absolutely vital, the regime needs to be able to fulfill its side of the bargain with the people. [1] This is exactly what Egypt and other Middle Eastern states have been failing to do for the last couple of decades. Increasing food prices sparking riots shows that this is the case. Instead they have to rely more and more on force.\n\nOnce a rentier system has begun to break down there may well be an opportunity for a more democratic system to take hold and better redistribute the economic resources of the state that have previously been so concentrated in a few hands.\n\n[1] Gerd Nonneman, ‘Rentiers and Autocrats, Monarchs and Democrats, State and Society: The Middle East between Globalisation, Human “Agency”, and Europe’, International Affairs, Vol.77, No.1 (Jan., 2001), pp.141-162, pp.146-147.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9e0b4d0f0e1b19f9885f6b254fc62ad3",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house In the Libyan case the dictator remains (as of 20th April 2011) but cannot sell oil even if he retakes the refineries. The rebels cannot sell oil either (legally) even though they control most of the infrastructure. The sanctions imposed against Gaddafi apply to the whole of the country. [1] Therefore the desire for oil pushes for further support of the rebels in this case as the sanction regime is only likely to be deconstructed following a rebel victory. Should Gaddafi remain in power the west may have to cut itself off from Libyan oil for years to come.\n\nObviously the above case represents a regime in flux. Once a regime is toppled then anything can happen. There is then no reason why outside actors should want to encourage another dictatorship rather than a democracy. A dictatorship may bring stability faster but a democracy is much more stable in the long run. Countries ideas of their strategic interests can be very divergent. An example is the Suez crisis. Prime Minister Eden considered it “an obvious truth that safety of transit through the canal…[is] a matter of survival [however] world opinion seemed to be that Nasser was within his rights in nationalising the Canal Company.” [2] As Nasser promised “freedom of navigation would not be affected by nationalisation” reducing the matter in the view of the US Secretary of Defence to “a ripple”. [3] So while Britain was still willing to fight for control over the Suez canal the US condemned that very action forcing a withdrawal.\n\n[1] Libya oil stuck in legal limbo as UN panel shunned, Reuters Africa, 20th April 2011, http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE73J04Q20110420 accessed 19/5/11\n\n[2] Sir Anthony Eden, Full Circle: The Memoirs (Cambridge, 1960), p.533.\n\n[3] Dwight D. Eisenhower, Waging Peace 1956-1961 (New York, N.Y., 1965), pp.39, 41-3.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "70eafa55bcd06f5c411da76a21f83d77",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house The western reaction to victories by Hamas or Hizbollah while on one level hypocritical do not show that the west would be unsupportive of Arab democracy. Both parties are opposed because they are perceived to be both anti-democratic in nature and, through their opposition to Israel, agents of instability. Opposition to Hamas was always qualified, according to Tony Blair former British PM “Of course, we recognize the mandate for Hamas because the people have spoken in a particular way in the Palestinian Authority. But I think it is also important for Hamas to understand that there comes a point, and that point is now following that strong showing, where they have to decide between a path of democracy or a path of violence.” [1] Certainly when it comes to more moderate parties like Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP)’s victory in 2002 was cautiously welcomed by the United States despite the party’s islamist roots. With State Department spokesman Richard Boucher saying immediately after its electoral victory “Let's not speculate on the future of the Turkish government, but let us at this point congratulate the Justice and Development Party on its electoral success. [2] Although the press tended to present the party’s islamist leanings as a problem this was balanced by some in the western media welcoming the opportunity to marry Islam with liberal democracy, and the example that Turkey could show. [3] It has to be remembered that there is a great deal of religion in US politics, to dismiss any parties that had Islamic roots would be seriously hypocritical. It has to be assumed that democrats in Muslim nations would express piety in order to connect with the general population, if politicians did not reflect the views of their constituents they would not be very good democrats.\n\n[1] Bush: no change in US policy on Hamas, The Independent, Jan., 26, 2006, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/bush-no-change-in-us-po...\n\n[2] Michael Rubin ‘Green Money, Islamist Politics in Turkey’, Middle East Quarterly Winter 2005, http://www.michaelrubin.org/933/green-money-islamist-politics-in-turkey\n\n[3] Christian Christensen, ‘Pocketbooks or Prayer Beads? : U.S./U.K. Newspaper Coverage of the 2002 Turkish Elections’, The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 2005 10: 109, pp.120-1\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "723e027350f37ba2316f8cef6e4f8b95",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house Progress has been made.\n\nEgypt as the biggest Arab state and one of only two so far that have had largely peaceful revolutions is perhaps the best example of the progress that has been made. There was a referendum in Egypt in March on amending the constitution that passed with a yes vote of 77.2%. That there was a referendum at all surely counts as progress. It limits the number of presidential terms to two, promises to strengthen the judiciary and abolish some of the emergency laws. A turnout of 41% is not as good as it could have been but it was a great advance compared to other polls in recent Egyptian history. Mohamed Ahmed Attia, the chairman of the supreme judicial committee that supervised the elections, explained its significance as being “the first real referendum in Egypt's history, we had an unprecedented turnout because after Jan. 25 people started to feel that their vote would matter.” [1] Because Egypt has historically been at the center of the Arab world success in Egypt will be vital to show that a stable Arab democracy can be created.\n\n[1] Egyptian Voters Approve Constitutional Changes, New York Times, Mar. 20, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/world/middleeast/21egypt.html?_r=1&par...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e67d20adb6c0e4525851cc65f79669c0",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house There are preexisting institutions in Arab countries.\n\nMany middle eastern states already have institutions that are similar to the representative institutions that a stable democracy needs so can easily become the real thing. Arab dictators have grown adept at holding elections, setting up parliaments; constitutional courts etc. as window dressing to show either to their people or to the outside world that they are reforming and are ‘democratic’. No matter how undemocratic these regimes have been the simple existence of these institutions is useful when there is a revolution as they allow some continuity and the possibility of a transition to democracy.\n\nTo take Egypt where protests toppled the Mubarak regime as an example. It has a parliament with the Majilis Al-Sha’ab (People’s Assembly) as its lower house and Majilis Al-Shura (Shura Council) as its upper house. In both houses a majority of the members are directly elected. [1] Egypt held elections for its parliament as recently as November 2010, these elections had very poor turnout and blatant ballot rigging while the main opposition the Muslim Brotherhood have to stand as independents. [2] Egypt also has previously had local elections for 52,000 municipal council seats in some 4,500 towns and cities. These elections are just as fraudulent as those for the national parliament. According to Muslim Brotherhood MP Jamdi Hassan “The ruling party used to allow opposition candidates to run and then simply rig the elections. Now, it has adopted a new strategy to ensure its continued domination: preventing the opposition from fielding any candidates at all.” [3] This may not be the best democratic tradition but at least it is a start. Similarly Egypt has a Supreme Constitutional Court that is supposed to be independent. [4]\n\nWhile these institutions may have ceased working in a democratic way they could quite easily be changed in to being fully democratic. This would create the necessary checks and balances to sustain democracy over the long term. The people are used to elections and will know what to do when they have the option to vote freely, they would vote in a broad range of candidates. Many of them may be islamist but it would be democratic.\n\n[1] Wikipedia, ‘Parliament of Egypt’, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Egypt accessed 19/05/2011\n\n[2] Egypt hold parliamentary poll, 28/11/2010, BBC News, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11855691\n\n[3] Adam Morrow and Khaled Moussa al-Omrani Opposition Squeezed in Local Elections, IPS News, 17/3/08, http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41618\n\n[4] The Supreme Constitutional Court, ‘Historical Overview’, http://hccourt.gov.eg/About/history.asp\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "92863b994f3375a7eff1b76d17a9f968",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house The west only supports democracies that fit with its world view.\n\nFincial and diplomatic engagement with the international community is essential for democracy to take hold. Tensions turn to conflict when governments are unable to provide basic services to the people, as was the case in Gaza when Hamas was elected in 2006 and the US and EU immediatey froze nearly all the funds and resources that were reaching the occupied territory. Furthermore, support from the West is necessary to provide the financial resources to rebuild after the revolutions damaged business and scared tourists away.\n\nHowever the West’s does not support democracy unless the ruling party is guaranteed to act in the interests of the West. Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, the United States has either directly aided or executed the overthrow of over thirty foreign governments, many of which were popularly elected.a The US has in the past warned that aid to Lebanon could be jeopardized if Hezbollah was dominant in the government. [1] The US has a history of confrontation with the party that is the main political representation for the Shia element of Lebanese society which has eroded rather than supported Lebanese stability. [2] The victory of Hamas in the 2006 Palestinian elections, winning 76 of 132 seats, did not result in any rapprochement with the Bush administration despite their professed desire to see democracy in the Middle East. [3] The result was that aid from Europe and the US was reduced to humanitarian aid only, rather than as before being a major element of Palestinian government income and expenditure. [4] The result being that in 2007 the ‘country’ was rent in two as Hamas seized control of Gaza. Of course another Middle Eastern state that holds democratic elections, Iran, is the very model of a pariah state from the western point of view. It seems that the west is less concerned about democracy in the middle east and more about stability.\n\na. Wikipedia, 'Covert United States foreign regime change actions;, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_United_States_foreign_regime_change_...\n\n[1] ‘U.S. warns on ties with Hezbollah-backed Lebanon gov’t’, Reuters, 25 January 2011, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/25/us-lebanon-government-usa-idUS...\n\n[2] Nicholas Noe, Lebanese government collapse: a history of missed opportunities, guardian.co.uk, 14th January 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jan/14/lebanese-... accessed 19/05/11\n\n[3] Scott Wilson, Hamas Sweeps Palestinian Elections, Complicating Peace Efforts in Mideast, Washington Post Foreign Service, 27th January 2006, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012600372.html accessed 19/5/11\n\n[4] Palestinian Parliamentary Elections 2006, GlobalSecurity.org, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/palestine/pa-elections2006.htm accessed 19/5/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "de9d264739d4d198221d07119246fdd2",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house Rentier economies lead to dictatorships.\n\nMost economies in the middle east are oligarchic with the wealth in the hands of a few. Oil has created rentier economies. These economies rely upon systems of patronage relying upon kinship groups, merchant communities and patron-client relationships, economic considerations become subservient to political considerations. [1] This occurred because of the small size of Middle Eastern private sectors forced the creation of state centred development programs. [2] While it remains the case there is a very small group of people in each Arab country that need to keep political power in order to perpetuate their economic power. As they already have the economic power and are often the best educated they are the most capable of forming any new government. In such an oligarchic society it would be very risky for these people to allow the creation of a democracy that may well wish to redistribute resources more equally.\n\n[1] Michel Chatelus and Yves Scehmeil, ‘Towards a New Political Economy of State Industrialisation in the Arab Middle East’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 16, No. 2 (May, 1984), pp.251-265, pp.261-262\n\n[2] Timur Kuran, ‘Why the Middle East is Economically Underdeveloped: Historical Mechanisms of Institutional Stagnation’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.18, No.3 (Summer, 2004), pp.71-90, p.87.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8fac5d6974e01a5505e5ae3e3ea5729a",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house Factionalism is too strong\n\nSince the 1970s, Arab state governments have become especially corrupt and oppressive, and have failed to provide essential social services on a consistent basis. Over the past forty years, people in the region have had to become increasingly reliant on informal networks and institutions in order to ensure personal and familial security and livlihood. This has degraded hopes of a relationship of trust between the state and people, causing people to committ themselves to differing factions, gangs, tribes, and parties in order to sustain themselves. It is apparent that the resulting factionalism may stand as a barrier to democracy, as parties hold fast to ideological committments and interest groups instead of political compromise and power-sharing.\n\nThis is especially rampant in post-conflict states, as is the case in Iraq. The current Iraqi government took 249 days to form. [1] The conditions for creating a stable government in Iraq seem to be based more on appeasing all the relevant groups than creating a working government. Lebanon, perhaps the most democratic Arab country also has its problems, the national unity government collapsed this month after 11 ministers from Hezbollah and its allies resigned. [2] , [3] The third example of an emerging democracy is of course Palestine. President Mahmoud Abbas, elected in 2005, continues in office despite his term having expired in January 2009. He extended his term, which opponents say breached the Palestinian Basic Law. [4] In 2007 clashes broke out between Fatah and Hamas, the two most prominent political parties, as a result of over a year of attempted political sabotage after Hamas won the election and Fatah refused to form a coalition in order to govern. These examples show that in environments where there are high levels of violence and conflict, factionalism takes hold over democratic governance. When law and order become difficult to establish under normal means, these regimes tend to seek security through autocracy and de-facto martial law, as has been happening under Maliki in Iraq or under Hamas and Fatah in the Occupied Territories.\n\nLibya may face this same challenge after its July 2012 election, as tensions remain high after the country was divided between Qaddafi loyalists and the patchwork rebel network. Egypt also faces the risk of the military seizing power from the civilian government, as SCAF has already given itself additional powers and intends to create a shadow council that would allow it to veto parliamentary decisions.\n\n[1] Ranj Alaaldin, The Iraqi government’s patchwork alliance may struggle to survive, guardian.co.uk, 24th December 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/24/iraq-government-maliki?INTCMP=SRCH accessed 19/05/11\n\n[2] Hezbollah and allies topple Lebanese unity government, BBC News 12th January 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12170608 accessed 19/05/11\n\n[3] Lebanon is the most democratic Arab country, ranks 86th Globally, iloubnan.info, 25th December 2010, http://www.iloubnan.info/business/actualite/id/53574/titre/Lebanon-is-the-most-democratic-Arab-country,-ranks-86th-Globally accessed 19/05/11\n\n[4] Khaled Abu Toameh, Hamas challenges Abbas term extension, The Jerusalem Post, 29th September 2008, http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=115988 Accessed 19/05/11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "677c0f37058355cff95dfcc6b80b5a2d",
"text": "onal africa middle east politics defence government terrorism warpeace house Outside powers want oil so support dictatorial regimes who can deliver it.\n\nOil creates interdependence between the producing states in the Middle East and the consumers in Asia and the West. Although rising prices are good for producers they can also threaten the world economy and create inflation that in turn will damage the producers by reducing demand. [1] The consumers have to listen to Saudi Arabia and the other Arab regimes who provide their oil whereas they often don’t for poor countries in Africa who would otherwise be no different. Oil is the main reason for external interest in Arab regimes some of the strongest alliances in the Middle East are built with oil as their foundations. [2] Saudi Arabia is a US ally due to it being a major supplier while Egypt is an ally due to its vital position controlling a major trade route – the Suez canal. In neither case would any external powers such as the EU nor the U.S. really want a long an unstable transition to a democracy making a strong man a much easier option. This is shown by how the Obama administration has always been behind events, being unwilling to call for democracy in Egypt and President Mubarak to go. Instead the administration made statements such as that by Secretary of State Hilary Clinton “Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people”. [3] Many previous administrations would probably have been even more supportive of Mubarak.\n\n[1] Daniel Yergin, The Prize The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power (New York, N.Y., 1993), p.703.\n\n[2] Eric Watkins, ‘The Unfolding US Policy in the Middle East’, International Affairs, Vol.73, No.1 (Jan., 1997), pp.1-14, p.1\n\n[3] John Barry, Inside the White House’s Egypt scramble, Newsweek, 30/1/2011, http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/30/inside-the-white-house-s-egypt-scramb...\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
058c633abd75209dd226301e6dc6123c
|
Democracy has been brought to Afghanistan
Some of the biggest benefits of the NATO occupation have been through the increase in democracy and human rights. While these were not specific aims of the NATO mission they were among the goals set out by the United Nations. [1] There have been two Presidential elections, one in 2004 the other in 2009, and two parliamentary elections, 2005 and 2010 none have been perfect but it is a clear advance from no elections at all. The most notable human rights increase has been in women’s rights. Under the Taliban Afghanistan strictly limited the activities of women but today 27.3% of the representatives in the Parliament are women (better than in the UK or US) and the first female governor is in office. The literacy rate is still low but they now make up 36.6% of those in primary school up from almost nothing. [2] There have been similar gains in other human rights such as a reduction in the use of corporal punishments such as amputating hands for theft.
[1] Annex III Request to the United Nations by the participants at the UN talks on Afghanistan, S/2001/1154, UNDemocracy.com
[2] Haidari, M. Ashraf, ‘Afghan women as a measure of progress’, The AfPak Channel Foreign Policy, 18 March 2013
|
[
{
"docid": "38f84ffbcaf5c52f38a12186303f05b6",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan Some elections may be better than no elections but where the west has control there really should have been exemplary elections. The 2009 Presidential elections in particular have been accused of having been riddled with fraud. The election observers from the National Democratic Institute said “polling was marred by widespread fraud” and the opposition candidate Abdullah Abdullah pulled out of the run off pointing to there being no measures taken to prevent the fraud recurring. [1] If Afghan elections are so marred by fraud when the US and NATO still have a lot of control over the country how bad will it be when there is no outside check? And if democracy may not survive the transition from NATO control what hope is there for human rights and particularly women’s rights? [2]\n\n[1] National Democratic Institute, ‘The 2009 Presidential and Provincial Council Elections in Afghanistan’, 2010\n\n[2] UN News Centre, ‘Georgette Gagnon: Raising the bar on respect for human rights in Afghanistan’, un.org, 28 May 2013\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "a9cb4ff80bb1ef56a30767b363440095",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan Peace talks starting just 18 months before all NATO forces have left is clearly leaving it too late to ensure success. There will be little to persuade the Taliban to compromise as they believe their situation is only going to get better when there is no fear of military defeats. The Taliban has walked away from talks before and could easily do so again. It is notable that a Taliban spokesman says “There is no ceasefire now. They are attacking us and we are attacking them” which makes the chances of breakdown in the talks high. [1] To make matters worse the Afghan government has only been lukewarm about the talks complaining that allowing the Taliban an office in Doha “gave the Taliban an official identity, something we didn't want” and responded by suspending negotiations with the United States on a security agreement that would determine how many US soldiers stay in the country after the NATO mission has ended. [2]\n\n[1] ‘US to hold direct peace talks with Taliban’, Al Jazeera, 19 June 2013\n\n[2] Shalizi, Hamid, ‘Afghan government irked over U.S. talks with Taliban’, Reuters, 19 June 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2a4a252e49f61c7eaaf9950f78aa0e3c",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan There are still immense problems with infrastructure in Afghanistan, more roads and railways are needed if large scale investment by China and others is to be made a success. There is little point in huge investment in mines if the product of those mines then can’t be transported out of the country to the markets as a result of either poor infrastructure or security concerns. There are also cases where infrastructure built by the US military has been allowed to deteriorate when handed over to Afghan control; there have been problems maintaining almost half the infrastructure projects built by the US in Laghman province. [1]\n\n[1] Boak, Josh, ‘U.S.-funded infrastructure deteriorates once under Afghan control, report says’, Washington Post, 4 January 2011\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1a4ddd4c6b28814364149443ab8ab5a0",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan The conflict clearly is ongoing in Afghanistan; in 2012 there were 245 drone strikes in Afghanistan compared to only 44 in Pakistan and 28 in Yemen. [1] Even if those drones are not being used to attack al Qaeda but instead the Taliban in Afghanistan it is impossible to say that peace and security has been brought to the country.\n\nIt is also impossible to say that the handover to Afghan forces shows that the NATO mission has been a success; a handover could occur no matter how peaceful or otherwise the country is. In Vietnam the United States declared victory by signing the Paris Peace Accords and handing over to South Vietnam only for the country to be overrun two years later in the spring of 1975. [2]\n\n[1] Woods, Chris, and Ross, Alice, K., ‘Revealed: US and Britain launched 1,200 drone strikes in recent wars’, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 4 December 2012\n\n[2] The Learning Network, ‘April 30, 1975 | Saigon Falls’, The New York Times, 30 April 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3b6d2a53c8a22ec5bf11b91ed7c9366d",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan In a country where the insurgents are more opposed to the foreign occupiers than their nominal opponents in the Afghan government the complete withdrawal of troops will actually be good for peace and security. Yes Afghanistan is still dangerous but the aim is not necessarily to provide security through NATO forces but to train Afghan forces to do it.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "36ffdc464b31094006d5e6f1b290dd5e",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan In a country as rugged as Afghanistan there is always going to have to be a lot of decentralisation and at the moment this means warlords having a lot of power in individual areas. However this is better than the alternative of a centralising Taliban which would still have many factions and elements but these would be much more extreme than today’s warlords. It is also difficult to see how this impacts on the success of NATO in Afghanistan. They can be bad but can also bring benefits as they have an incentive to deliver stability and reconstruction to their local areas. [1]\n\n[1] Milhopadhyay, Dipali, ‘Warlords as Bureaucrats: The Afghan Experience’, Carnegie Papers, Number 101, August 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bdcbbef5c1a36831b5738f82098428ff",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan There will still be aid after NATO leaves and Afghanistan is not simply going to be abandoned as the troops go home. Economic growth since the fall of the Taliban has been spectacular with average growth of 9.1% of GDP since 2009 while it is true that this has been in part fueled by aid there are more sustainable sources of growth in the form of the mineral wealth of Afghanistan which can go to the giant and growing economies of India and China. [1]\n\n[1] Al Jazeera and agencies, ‘Afghanistan’s economy at a glance’, Al Jazeera, 19 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "acc7f7259385e6dcaa17c1bc72100850",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan There is little reason to believe that the Taliban will succeed in rapidly forcing the Karzai government out of power. The Taliban has been failing to retake the ground they have lost after offensives by NATO forces so even if the Afghan National Army fails to take more ground it seems unlikely the Taliban will quickly succeed in driving on Kabul. [1] In the unlikely event that the Taliban does begin winning the US and other NATO states are not going to sit back and let the Afghan government fall. David Cameron, the British Prime Minister has said “The clear message is to the Taliban that you can't just wait this out until foreign forces leave in 2014. We will be firm friends and supporters to Afghanistan long beyond that.” [2]\n\n[1] American Enterprise Institute, ‘Why we must win in Afghanistan’, 17 October 2012\n\nBiddle, Stephen, ‘Salvaging Governance Reform in Afghanistan’, Council on Foreign Relations, April 2012\n\n[2] Mason, Rowena, ‘David Cameron: Taliban could be waiting for British troops to leave before trying to take Afghanistan’, The Telegraph, 19 July 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a41251472ed5a00adbfa5db98ddafc88",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan Negotiations to ensure lasting peace\n\nNATO is also ensuring that peace and security remain in Afghanistan as they draw down by opening up negotiations with the Taliban. Peace can only be assured by bringing together the sides so that almost everyone accepts the status quo and does not want to destroy that status quo through force. United States officials say “We have long said this conflict won't be won on the battlefield” with the deputy national security advisor, Ben Rhodes, adding “The United States will be supporting a process that is fundamentally Afghan-led” meaning that NATO is no longer key to the process. [1] NATO handing over control to the Afghans and eventually withdrawing entirely will make peace more likely to succeed as the Taliban “considerers it its religious and national duty to gain independence from the occupation” with this goal it wants “to support a political and peaceful solution”. [2] Lasting peace is then only possible when NATO leaves.\n\n[1] Roberts, Dan, ‘Taliban peace talks: ‘Peace and reconciliation’ negotiations to take place in Qatar’, The Guardian, 19 June 2013\n\n[2] Taliban, ‘Taliban agree to peace talks with US over Afghanistan – full statement’, guardian.co.uk, 18 June 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "04a005dfcf1a75284e9eac3cc805aea5",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan NATO has brought peace and security\n\n“NATO’s primary objective in Afghanistan is to enable the Afghan authorities to provide effective security across the country and ensure that the country can never again be a safe haven for terrorists.” [1] The invasion of Afghanistan was initially about destroying al-Qaeda and with the killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011 in Pakistan this objective has been met. There are still efforts to destroy al Qaeda but these have mostly moved out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan and other countries such as Yemen.\n\nNATO has also brought Afghanistan to the point where the Afghani’s can look after themselves and exercise their own security. On 18th June Afghanistan took over the lead from NATO on security nationwide having previously been taking control district by district. Handing over security also itself improves security with Afghanis in Kandahar saying “Now that the foreigners are gone, the security situation in the city and in the districts is much better”. [2]\n\n[1] ‘NATO and Afghanistan’, nato.int\n\n[2] Loyn, David, ‘Afghans take nationwide security lead from NATO’, BBC News, 18 June 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8acc5b499fd850be0912cc596aeffeb7",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan Investment in Afghanistan; rebuilding the economy\n\nThe ‘rehabilitation’ of Afghanistan’s infrastructure has not been an immense success due to the continuing bombing campaign which inevitably damages infrastructure but there have been big economic benefits from the NATO presence. There have been more than 4,000 schools built and 175,000 teachers trained, although more is needed this is an immense boost to education in Afghanistan. [1] Another benefit of increased stability is a renewal of outside investment, from China in particular. China has been investing billions, Several mining firms have made a $4.4 billion investment in one project; an immense undeveloped copper reserve in Aynak. [2] In total there is more than $20 billion being invested in infrastructure by Afghanistan’s Asian neighbours, as these investments are looking for profit they are clearly believed to be sustainable, by comparison the United States has only funded $1.6billion since 2006. [3]\n\n[1] ‘Afghanistan’, USAID, February 2013\n\n[2] Downs, Erica S., ‘China Buys into Afghanistan’, Brookings, 21 February 2013\n\n[3] Barfield, Thomas, ‘Two Diverging Roads in Afghanistan’, YaleGlobal, 11 January 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "96c9e17a286c2e0a6e35cf5f4aeed632",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan The Taliban will likely take over when the NATO forces leave\n\nEven if they are willing to negotiate a peaceful US exit this does not mean the Taliban will not wish to use force when the United States has left. In their statement on peace talks they highlighted “the establishment of an independent Islamic system and true security which is the want and aspiration of the nation.” [1] They also style themselves as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan clearly showing their political goal is regaining power in Afghanistan which would mean overthrowing the democratically elected government. Some Afghan experts such as Gilles Dorronsoro believe that this is what will happen “After 2014, the level of US support for the Afghan regime will be limited and, after a new phase in the civil war, a Taliban victory will likely follow” though this would have the advantage of bringing stability as the Taliban did before the US invasion it would represent a complete failure for the US. [2]\n\n[1] Taliban, ‘Taliban agree to peace talks with US over Afghanistan – full statement’, guardian.co.uk, 18 June 2013\n\n[2] AFP, ‘Afghan govt will collapse and Taliban will rule again, Afghan expert says’, news.com.au, 27 September 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6e70ba0b110771d17efb231c5748e44e",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan An Afghanistan dominated by warlords.\n\nUnder the Taliban up to the US invasion Afghanistan was at least united. Today however there is little central control beyond the NATO forces; the Taliban clearly controls some areas but there are also powerful warlords. Appointments are based on nepotism and tribal affiliations not on merit or education and those who were part of the northern alliance that fought on the US side (Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazaras) are taking advantage of the opportunity of the overthrow of Pashtun dominance in the country to grab power and resources. [1] Already the conflict has an ethnic dimension as almost all of the Taliban is made up of Pashtuns. The Taliban meanwhile believes that the other ethnicities want a partition of the country through a very decentralised federal state. In almost any peace scenario with NATO gone there is a large chance that one faction will walk out setting off a civil war and fragmentation of the country. [2]\n\n[1] Noor, Ahmad, ‘Power Politics of ethnic groups and the future of Afghanistan’, World Security Network, 8 July 2011\n\n[2] Rafiq Arif, ‘The Coming Civil War in Afghanistan’, Foreign Policy, 3 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1bb396c7ca6d26f5bbd1062bf8a6163f",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan Afghanistan is still a dangerous place\n\nPeace talks or no peace talks, NATO military leadership of Afghan would all appear to make no difference. Only hours after the Taliban said it would hold peace talks and the United States handed over control of military operations to the Afghan National Army four US soldiers were killed in a mortar attack at Bagram Airbase one of the centres of NATO operations. [1] Clearly then NATO has not brought peace and security to Afghanistan. The effect of handovers to the Afghans have already been seen; August to October of last year saw a 28% spike in killings from the same period the year before at a time when NATO was handing over control implying that the Afghan army is not yet ready to protect civilians. [2]\n\n[1] Roberts, Dan, ‘Taliban peace talks: ‘Peace and reconciliation’ negotiations to take place in Qatar’, The Guardian, 19 June 2013\n\n[2] Borger, Julian, ‘Can Afghan troops hold off the Taliban after Nato withdraws?’, The Guardian, 1 January 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "117a7d4a765caefb0e397726f6e5448a",
"text": "defence terrorism warpeace house believes nato has succeeded afghanistan NATO has failed to solve Afghanistan’s economic problems\n\nWhile some progress has been made on the economic and development front in Afghanistan it is difficult to consider it a success. There are still 20% of households who are chronically food insecure and another 18% in need of assistance in some of the year with the result that nearly 40% of children under three are malnourished. [1] Afghanistan is immensely dependent on aid for its economic progress with foreign aid to the country representing 100% of GDP in 2011 which makes the country vulnerable to a change in priorities. Clearly the withdrawal will represent such a change; when NATO goes aid, and spending as a result of the military occupation, will drop at the very least constraining growth and likely taking the Afghan economy with it. [2] Already the International Labour Organisation has been warning that this will mean increasing child labour in the country as lower profit margins force families to use their children to boost incomes. [3]\n\n[1] UNDP Afghanistan, ‘Eradicated Extreme Poverty and Hunger’, United Nations Development Programme, 21 July 2011\n\n[2] ‘The hand that feeds’, The Economist, 14 July 2012\n\n[3] Ferris-Rotman, Amie, ‘Afghan child labor fears grow as aid dries up’, Reuters, 7 February 2012\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
3dd682f1c7858d31c1b75d39d23cf1e7
|
Open primaries will lead to an intensification of lobbying activities
Elections, particularly in the United States, can be prone to excessive lobbying by various interest groups who fund candidates who are more likely to support their point of view whilst also pouring efforts into ensuring the defeat of those who are opposed to their interests (See the fate of Rep. Richard Pombo, who was defeated after a campaign by the Sierra Club [1] ).
Primary elections exacerbates this, with 527 groups affiliated to certain interest groups being able to lobby and fund numerous candidates in the primary to ensure that regardless of the result, their interests are best preserved. This can be harmful as it further allows for corporate capture of the election cycle, with candidates positioning themselves in relation to the aims of those who helped them gain the candidacy rather than the voters who put them there. This undermines the ability of legislators to arbitrate between competing claims when making law, creating less effective government.
[1] Carlton, Jim, ‘Pombo Embarks on Fresh Path’, The Wall Street Journal, 22 February 2010, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703455804575058372413222414.html
|
[
{
"docid": "7430ee2ca1e1af3d964fa306179b93e7",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most There is a large problem with lobbying in the United States but the influence they exert would be worse if there was no system. The efforts of interest groups would be exerted upon one candidate from each party, whereas Primaries make it harder for interest groups and 527’s to gain access to power as there are multiple hurdles for their candidate to overcome to win power and gain influence over policy. Primaries can also prevent capture of entire parties by interest groups as can happen in countries where funding of candidates comes directly from the central party such as the United Kingdom (where the role Trade Unions for example have 50% of the vote in the labour party conference [1] ). Candidate discretion is more likely in Primary systems, giving more choice over what the general election candidate will support as opposed to just following the lead of the party leadership, which causes more disillusionment to politics in the long run.\n\n[1] ‘Ed Miliband ‘plans to water down trade unions’ influence over labour’’, The Telegraph, 3 August 2011, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/8678413/Ed-Miliband-plans-to-water-down-trade-unions-influence-over-Labour.html\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "9f947e91a2165e9713c6646928dc1cb4",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open Primaries have proven themselves to be a means of engagement in the political process, providing scrutiny of individual candidates before approving the program that they stand for. Open Primaries maintain scrutiny over individual action as opposed to merely scrutinising the actions of the party as a whole, giving voters a chance to provide a nuanced results in elections. Politicians can still focus on their job of representing the people under an Open Primary system, as it is their actions in conducting that particular role that will decide their success in reselection by the electorate they represent.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8d214d1003100e67b72ee12f71f98e4a",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most This Argument does not stack up. The large numbers of people voting in Primary elections will mean many ‘apoliticals’ will counter the worst partisan tactics (if any) being used in the election. If there has been any impact of opposition party involvement upon the internal politics of a party, it has been to elect more centrist candidates that the greatest number of voters can find palatable. That in itself is no bad thing, as politics can become extremely partisan at times, it does help to have candidates who can be moderate and be more prepared to compromise in order to the best possible outcome for all they represent.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "572b626367f709bc313c0d4b31defb53",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most While centrist candidates maybe preferred in Primary elections, but it is a choice that has been made by the people when presented with a full ideological spectrum by the range of candidates standing for elections.\n\nAppeal to Swing voters is what matters in elections anyway so what Open Primaries do is make that abundantly clear, with the candidate most likely to carry swing voters in the general election most likely to win the candidacy. This makes party leaderships think hard about what voters want and how to incorporate that into policy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b97ae20a5f979f7a2dbb192d28edb467",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Only in exceptional circumstances are major splits caused by Primary election. What tends to happen is that Primaries act as a stimulus to healthy debate over what the party stands for, with candidates from all parts of the political spectrum engaging in a contest to define the party in line with the wishes of the electorate.\n\nCandidates focus on themselves, while the party leaderships can still play the role of holistically overseeing proceedings to make sure that the focus still remains the general election and what happens after the ballots in the primary election have been counted. It is possible to have rigorous primary campaigns without there being major splits that harm the party’s performance in the general election (The performance of The Democratic Party in 1992 bears this out).\n\nWhile there maybe an emphasis on candidacy and personality, it helps to form a clear of what the party stands for in the general elections, marking out a clear choice between the parties at election time.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "071a7b880f8104815811d48c5713900c",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most This happens in theory but in practise does not work this way. Precedent in the United States has shown that political discourse is still fractious despite the presence of Open Primaries as it is still the ideologically focussed base that that vote and decide such elections on a low turnout.\n\nEven if Propositions contentions were true, it can be argued that it is the lack of clear dividing lines between parties that can cause major disillusionment in politics, with many parties now subscribing to a broadly neoliberal world view as has happened in the UK where parties regularly cross-dress, appeal to the same groups and steal each other’s policies. [1] The lack of clear ideology engendered by Open Primaries would make such disillusionment worse. Two parties that agree on everything would seriously damage turnout as no clear choice is presented to the electorate.\n\n[1] Ash, Timothy Garton, ‘If our political parties did not exist would we ever need to invent them?’, The Guardian, 25 October 2007, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/oct/25/comment.eu\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4a918a907a744b296fde48705c59b0bd",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Contests between those of the same party are in their nature divisive and distract from the aim of winning the general election. Debates about Ideological nuance are not major reasons for non-political voters to go to the polls. Debates about those issues have largely been the preserve of those who are party members and as a result should stay within that sphere.\n\nGreater competition can be engendered through other means, such as Proportional Representation that leads to real competition between all parties in all areas of a country as opposed to a contest between candidates who have no real differences of opinion.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8a18ab42624aeb4992249a311d75cc90",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Party power is exercised heavily in countries where Open Primaries exist. In the United States, it is common for a political party to openly back a candidate in Primary Elections for Congressional seats. This can give said candidate a major head start, with the massive financial backing and exposure in the public eye that follows resulting in predictable results. [1] Only special circumstances see incumbents defeated (See the rise of the Tea Party and its effect on the US Republican Party), with Primaries being largely predictable affairs. These results in a lack of interest in many Primary contests, making them little more than sideshows that distract from the process of government.\n\n[1] ‘“Open” Primaries and the Illusion of Choice’, open salon, 9 June 2010, http://open.salon.com/blog/front_porch_republic/2010/06/09/open_primaries_and_the_illusion_of_choice\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0da37d7058c7fd54d76f5e73b6a69263",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most The whole point of Democracy is that there are losers as well as winners. It is not up to political parties to accommodate those who disagree with them by accommodating their policies. Parties and the candidates who stand on their behalf must be able to justify their own views and polices to the electorate, without them being diluted by the outside influence of those who may actually fundamentally disagree with what the party believes in. Those on the fringe are better off advocating their policies better instead of voting for candidates of the party they do not support.\n\nVery occasionally an open primary may allow an independent to seriously run, but this will be so rare that it will not compensate for having their independent platforms at elections.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "32572489e29097f8f5d535cbe84a09a8",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most People feel disengaged with politics in general not because they don’t have a say over candidacies, but because of the constant merry-go-round that is electoral politics. The voter fatigue that comes from the constant chase for votes from parties will not decrease. If anything, it will increase as candidates and media coverage is dominated by speculation over who will be a candidate for office rather than who will gain the office actually up for election, causing further disillusionment with the political process.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9fe040c89460ab58f5fcb72630fea0b8",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries will lead to an increase in disputes internal to political parties\n\nPrimary elections can be extremely damaging to parties as it engenders cleaves and splits which damage chances of election. Election campaigns between candidates from the same party can become feverish, particularly if the contest is close (See the Democratic Presidential Primary in 2008).\n\nThis can be damaging as parties are made to spend their time focussing their energies on themselves instead of the opposition only to create an image of a divided party that alienates voters who prefer parties who can convey a coherent message about what they can provide for the future.\n\nPrimaries obscure what a party is about, changing the focus from being about policy and the message of the party to the candidate with personal attributes such as image being of importance. This makes politics much more superficial than it already is.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "00e47b09b83b14901b8fcd7bab1cfce0",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries obscure the distinctions between political parties\n\nPrimaries tend to favour candidates that are more centrist in nature, as non-committed voters are more likely to vote for such a candidate than grass roots members of the party hosting the primary, who are much more likely to prefer a candidate who is more ideological.\n\nThe dominance of centrist candidates in primaries may lead to convergence between the major parties to the extent that there is little difference between them for voters to choose from in the general election. [1] This creates the harm of not presenting a clear democratic choice to voters, which can help feed the discontent with politics that discontent hopes will be countered by Open Primaries.\n\n[1] White, Stuart, ‘Why open primaries are a really bad idea’, NextLeft, 26 May 2009, http://www.nextleft.org/2009/05/why-open-primaries-are-really-bad-idea.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "93af40c29db7872d460fd72ec3beaddf",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries will distract and confuse the majority of the electorate\n\nPrimary Elections do little more than provide a distraction to the political process. Instead of focusing on the political process for the maximum time possible between elections, politicians are constantly distracted by electioneering, not just to be re-elected but also to seek selection as their party’s candidate.\n\nThis may create a dangerous precedent of politics being little more than one constant election cycle, with decision being made to please constituents in order to win two elections. We see this the most in the US House of Representatives, where decisions influencing ‘pork-barrel’ spending are made with the main aim of keeping constituents happy in order to avoid primary defeat, to the detriment of government being more disposed to dysfunction. [1]\n\nThe constant election cycle can cause disillusionment with voters who fail to see tangible effects of what the politicians the elect do yet face constant electioneering. By only hosting general elections, a clear focus is provided for candidates and electorate alike, allowing for scrutiny to be based upon the actions of politicians and the party they represent against the opposition who seek to replace them.\n\n[1] Rauch, Jonathan, ‘Earmarks Are A Model, Not A Menace’, NationalJournal, 14 March 2009, http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/st_20090314_4955.php\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "25ac5445d430b8fdbf7485aecb2dabc9",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries are open to manipulation\n\nBecause political persuasion is no bar to voting in a Primary election, it can make the internal elections within parties be open to manipulation from those hostile to the aims of the party and the candidates running for election.\n\nWe have seen instances where ‘unelectable’ candidates have been elected by Open Primary as means of discrediting a party and helping their opponents win the general election. A famous instance of this was in the Democratic Primary for the US Senate seat in South Carolina, where the winner, Alvin Greene became the candidate with little advertising or successful fundraising, leading to accusations of a Republican campaign to make re-election of their incumbent, Jim DeMint, much easier. [1]\n\nIn other instances, it is also possible that the opposition party can use the election as a means of electing a candidate that most reflects their views, neutering the effect of losing the general election. Either way, Open Primaries can be manipulated to create unrealistic outcomes that neither the party nor the electorate truly want, damaging the political process.\n\n[1] ‘Alvin Greene’s implausible S.C. victory: 6 theories’, the week, 10 June 2010, http://theweek.com/article/index/203864/alvin-greenes-implausible-sc-victory-6-theories\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9dfbf0c4f9f9e0aaf6149870d042d42e",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries promote moderate, non-partisan politics\n\nBy creating a situation whereby all voters have a potential say in selecting candidates, it can prevent overweening control by party grass roots who may vote for overtly ideological candidates who turn off the moderate voters needed to win elections.\n\nAn Open Primary is more likely to choose more centrist candidates for the general election, providing a degree of moderation to the process of election and politics in general. This in turn can help foster a consensual atmosphere in political discourse with general agreed points, focusing the debate on more core issues between the main parties. [1]\n\nThis then means that much more is likely to get done. At the moment American politics is plagued by gridlock both in the states and in Congress. Individuals elected under open primaries are much more likely to be willing to compromise across the aisle. [2] As a result government will begin moving again.\n\n[1] ‘Editorial: California should switch to open primary elections’, The Stanford Daily, 12 May 2010, http://www.stanforddaily.com/2010/05/12/editorial-california-should-switch-to-open-primary-elections/\n\n[2] Michael Alvarez, R., and Sinclair, Betsy, ‘Electoral Institutions and Legislative Behavior: The Effects of Primary Processes’, P.2 http://home.uchicago.edu/betsy/papers/Sinclair_BlanketPrimary.pdf\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6315beb786700d1d37281067ad62767d",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries allow the electorate to express nuanced polling choices\n\nOpen Primaries allows for the electorate to make a considered choice between candidate and party, with other considerations beyond the partisan being up for consideration.\n\nIn safe districts, voters are given a choice between members of the same party, allowing for voters to effectively choose the next member based upon past record and views on big issues, allowing for the ideological cleavages within parties to brought under closer examination, with voters in the safe seat choosing the type of Conservatism/Liberalism/Socialism they prefer. [1]\n\nThis can help to provide choice even when one party is already assured of winning the seat, thus providing a degree of competition in the district, engaging voters in the electoral process.\n\n[1] Skelton, George, ‘California open primaries? Give them a chance’, Los Angeles Times, 11 February 2010, http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/11/local/la-me-cap11-2010feb11\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "db36d89d68f6e60e538602774aa34001",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries promote engagement with political minorities\n\nA major problem with general elections, specifically in countries such as the United States, United Kingdom and Canada which use Majoritarian Simple Plurality electoral systems, is that only two major parties (e.g. Democrats and Republicans) are in contention for power or in some cases representation, leaving those that have loyalties elsewhere feeling disenfranchised from a political system that does not take into account of their point of view.\n\nOpen Primaries counters this by allowing these voters a chance to vote for candidates of a major party that are closer to their own political persuasion, thus giving as many people as possible the opportunity to register their opinion on who will be their representative for the next term, ending disillusionment with predictable election results. This means that third party candidates may become serious candidates in elections when they pass the primary test. [1]\n\n[1] Nielson, Susan, ‘Open Oregon’s primaries’, The Oregonian, 13 October 2008, http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2008/10/open_oregons_primaries.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8a2551157f59aca0780b027887a3b06a",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Increasing voter engagement\n\nA major problem with politics in Western Liberal Democracies is that electorates feel disengaged from the political process as they are generally presented with a choice between parties at irregular intervals without much oversight over the calibre of candidate presented to them by each party.\n\nThis issue would be countered by introducing Open Primaries for candidates to elections. By making candidates from the same party compete for a party candidacy by appealing to the same group that will choose between all parties in General Elections, voters will have a chance to greater examine each prospective candidate at greater detail, allowing for a more considered choice of candidate than the binary choice made at elections. [1]\n\nBy giving more time to voters, this will increase interest in what candidates have to say, and allow those of all political persuasions to contribute to the debate, turning contests away from ideology and towards representation.\n\n[1] Hannan, Daniel, ‘Conservative Democrats prove the case for open primaries’, The Telegraph, 18th July 2009, http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100003880/conservative-democrats-prove-the-case-for-open-primaries/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "605f335c057550242797ad8675277bec",
"text": "politics general government voting house believes open primaries are most Open primaries prevent the centralisation of party power\n\nPolitical Parties are able to wield considerable power, controlling their party members and representatives, particularly in Parliamentary political systems. Through use of patronage and the threat of sanctions such as deselection, party leaders are able to manipulate representatives to fulfil their own aims rather than those of constituents. [1]\n\nBy instituting Open Primaries, the focus of representatives shifts from the party leadership to the constituents whom prospective candidates hope to represent. Scrutiny over the representative’s conduct would be in the hands of the voters, with reselection in an Open Primary being contingent upon the member looking after the interests of their constituents, rather than the interest of the party as is the case in many countries that do not have Open Primary systems. [2] By using Open Primaries, elections once again becomes about representing the people as opposed to being a means to power as is the case under the status quo in countries that do not use it.\n\n[1] Stone, Daniel, ‘Prop 14’s Winners and Losers’, Newsweek, 8 June 2010, http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/06/09/prop-14-s-winners-and-losers.html\n\n[2] Triggs, Matthew, ‘Open primaries’, Adam Smith Institute, 16 September 2010, http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/politics-and-government/open-primaries\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
e0d1ce463ae9c91467f0483efc5c2cae
|
A technocratic government is needed to prevent corruption
Democracy does not mean that a country is not corrupt, or that the political leadership is not corrupt. There are many countries where democratic elections stand side by side with a large amount of corruption; Afghanistan, Libya and Iraq countries that have recently had elections following western intervention are ranked 175, 172, and 171 out of 177 on the corruption perceptions index. Even countries with long established democracies can be perceived as being corrupt, India is 94th. 1 If the political class is incapable of reforming itself it may be necessary for another actor to do it for them.
There have been several coups in which the military has taken power in order to reform the political system before handing over to a civilian government at elections; Turkey in 1960, Portugal in 1974, and the relatively recent coup in Bangladesh in 2007. 2
1 Transparency International, 'Corruptions Perceptions Index 2013', http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/
2 Marinov, Nikolay, and Goemans, Hein, 'Coups and Democracy', British Journal of Political Science, 2013, http://www.nikolaymarinov.com/wp-content/files/GoemansMarinovCoup.pdf , p.5
|
[
{
"docid": "78cfb1551a9bb2174f401a955ff5f5d9",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup In a corrupt system the military is likely to be corrupt too. It will have its own sectional interest; getting as much funds for itself, or hyping possible threats. The military interest can often lead to far worse things than corruption – such as wars. 1 In countries where the military is powerful it is likely to have large private interests too; in Egypt the military's holdings in the economy is estimated at anywhere from 5 to 60% of GDP though the military itself says its revenue from its private businesses is only 1% this is still a large interest. 2\n\n1 Snyder, Jack, Myths of Empire, Cornell University Press, 1991\n\n2 Hauslohner, Abigail, 'Egypt's 'Military Inc' expands its control of the economy', Guardian Weekly, 18 March 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/18/egypt-military-economy-power-elections\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "e92963451f9536e1e6238bcb82268a5c",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup The argument that the military is restoring democracy from a democracy makes no sense. Only once a democracy has been turned into an autocracy can it be said to be restoring democracy. So long as the system is still democratic then there should be constitutional ways to replace an increasingly authoritarian government; elections, vote of no confidence, or the judiciary.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "be6c47cef8251f2241a631cb96c96829",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup A military government may well be as riven by factionalism and division as the system which it replaces. The main interests of the military is often simply to maintain or increase the position of the military, this makes it likely there will be disagreement on other issues including over how quickly to return to democratic government. The military will often opt to return to barracks rather than have such splits become too deep “Military regimes thus contain the seeds of their own destruction” as there is almost bound to be a split into factions at some point when governing a country. 1\n\n1 Geddes, Barbara, 'What do we know about democratization after twenty years?', Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.2, 1999, pp.115-144, http://ussc.edu.au/s/media/docs/other/Geddes1.pdf , p.131\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d35a4eec3a132347b57b91ca6aefde1f",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup In a country that is so polarised that there is violence at elections the chances are the military is not neutral. In Thailand the royalists had been calling for military intervention because they know it is unlikely they will win an election. A coup cannot therefore be considered to be likely to end violence; Egypt is a case in point as there have been more than 3,200 deaths in the 7 months after the coup against President Morsi. 1\n\n1 'More than 3,200 Egyptians killed since coup', Middle East Monitor, 9 April 2014, https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/africa/10798-more-than-3200-egyptians-killed-since-coup\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "92f4cb82ee7471d469bb53c020f5f5c8",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Elections do not always return a government that has true popular support; the system may be gerrymandered so it is much easier for one party to win seats. Additionally in many democracies there is a large number of people who don't vote so even a party that is elected may not have a true mandate. If the abstaining majority want a different government should the military not respect their democratic wish?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d742464aaebe6a8b3f6848aa2708f000",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Whether or not the head of the army is the right man to run the country is immaterial as he will be passing on to another administration quickly. This will either be a temporary civilian administration in which top technocrats are brought in or it will be as a result of new elections. If a military man is still in power after an election, as with Sisi in Egypt, then they have come through the same test as a politician would have done.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "c90c9d455327af4234ea3a5dbed37c88",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Military intervention is most likely to happen only when trust in democracy has already been damaged. In Thailand democracy was already distrusted due to corruption and vote buying, the military acted because of that distrust. When intervention is to clean up corruption and create greater separation of powers the coup may actually improve trust in democracy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9d6df2e741bdc0dd57b0f6a2408ba4d0",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup A neutral party\n\nDemocracies can turn into an intractable conflict between two political parties with neither side ruling in their national interest but simply using power in an attempt to defeat the other side. Bangladesh is a good example of this as there are two main parties; the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. Neither are willing to talk to the other, the competition has at times been violent and attempts to create neutral caretaker governments are scotched by one side or the other as occurred at the start of 2014. 1 The 2007 coup resulted in the arrests of the leaders of both parties along with a major anti corruption drive. 2 Unfortunately this did not prevent Bangladesh quickly falling into the same two party system with the same parties and leaders once civilian rule was restored.\n\n1 Budhwar, Kailash 'Bangladesh elections: The 'battling begums'', Al Jazeera, 4 January 2014, http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2014/01/bangladesh-elections-battling-begums-20141492730547677.html\n\n2 Voice of America, 'Former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Arrested', voanews.com, 27 October 2009, http://www.voanews.com/content/a-13-2007-07-16-voa21-66720297/560572.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "45d72d0c55a7b642b346d469bb856cb5",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Necessary to restore peace to the country\n\nThe clearest, and most common, reason for the military stepping in is to restore peace to the country. When the stakes are so high, power through control of government, the ability to distribute resources, it is something well worth fighting for. The result can be that democracies become unstable and violent with election campaigns particular flashpoints. The runup to the Thai elections in 2014 shortly before the coup left 10 dead and 600 injured 1 with no sign of stability returning after the flawed elections General Prayuth Chan-ocha the head of the army said the coup was necessary “in order for the country to return to normality quickly, and for society to love and be at peace again.” 2 When there violence creating violence it is the military's role to step in the prevent such instability.\n\n1 Wilkinson, Laura, 'Thailand elections: Violent clashes in Bangkok over disputed poll', The Independent, 2 February 2014, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/thailand-elections-violent-clashes-in-bangkok-over-disputed-poll-9101656.html\n\n2 Hodal, Kate, 'Coup needed for Thailand 'to love and be at peace again' – army chief', The Guardian, 23 May 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/22/military-coup-thailand-peace-general-prayuth-chan-ocha\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87bce6f6ac39f5fe980871c5df6ceb6e",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Restoring democracy\n\nA coup that is against an elected government that is however becoming increasingly anti democratic is justified. When an elected government is increasingly concentrating power in its own hands, and particularly if elections are postponed then it is necessary for the military to step in to ensure democracy continues to function. From 1991-2006 31 of 43 coups resulted in an election within five years so far from damaging democracy were often restoring it. 1\n\n1 Marinov, Nikolay, and Goemans, Hein, 'Coups and Democracy', British Journal of Political Science, 2013, http://www.nikolaymarinov.com/wp-content/files/GoemansMarinovCoup.pdf , p.2\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3ce465bfd445d732fb9cb757bea23ddd",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup A coup makes it more difficult to trust in democracy\n\nMilitary intervention damages trust in democracy even if the intent of the coup is to return to democratic rule as quickly as possible. There are two ways in which democracy is damaged. The first is that it undermines the point of majority rule if the military may just step in and take over if they don't like the result. Secondly if a democratic government is making a mess of ruling and the military steps in to clean things up then this may create an impression that they will do so again, so absolving politicians to clean up their own act.\n\nThis may well be what happens in Thailand. Since the end of military rule in 1973 Thailand has now had seven coups; 1976, 77, 81, 86, 91, 2007 and 2014. 1 In the 2007 and 2014 coups the government being overthrown was very popular; in 2005 Shinawatra's Thai Rak Thai party won 60.7% of the vote while in 2011 his sister won 48.41% if the military simply steps in after a few years of rule by a clearly elected majority then what is the point in voting? Already the middle class supporters of a coup argue that elections do not mean democracy to justify military intervention thus undermining the concept of democracy. 2\n\n1 Winichakul, Thongchai, 'Toppling Democracy', Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol.38, No.1, February 2008, pp.11-37, http://www.polsci.chula.ac.th/viengrat/thpolgovt/Thongchai%20-%20Toppling%20Democracy.pdf , p.15\n\n2 Ibid, p.27\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2a40c8474e154a507c18f03967829adb",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup The response must be democratic\n\nIt is never appropriate to overthrow a democratically elected government which the people have chosen. The government is legitimised by being the choice of the people, a coup is by definition not legitimate in such a way. The response to a government that has lost the trust of the electorate, unable to prevent violence, or is corrupt, is to hold an election. In the worst case and an elected government is using its power as a government to manipulate any election then the responsibility is with the judiciary to convict a government which is responsible for such a\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e1f79a6e3e249df15f578a2369be0bdb",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup The army is not the best institution to run a country\n\nIf the country is in trouble is the army the best placed to take over and manage the country better than it has been in the past? This may plausibly be true if the reason democracy is failing is a large scale insurgency or near civil war but in almost every other case it is not the best institution. The army is trained to fight not to govern. The generals who take over top positions are used to running a bureaucracy that has to respond to politicians, not one that has to respond to the people.\n\nPoliticians may be corrupt, venal, or unpopular but at the least they are open about what they stand for. They have a manifesto and a clear ideology which if the people don't agree with they wont be voted for. This is not the case with generals; the chances are they have a bureaucratic desire to maintain the power and funding for the military but otherwise there is likely to be little known about their politics.\n\nFinally for those who are being overthrown the electorate has had a chance to investigate their policies, their past, to question their views and catch the candidate out when they are not consistent. The candidate came through an electoral test and media grilling. When there is a coup there is no such chance to determine if the coup leader is the right man for the job.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
f28f444d0c40dadf69a4845f324a48ae
|
A coup makes it more difficult to trust in democracy
Military intervention damages trust in democracy even if the intent of the coup is to return to democratic rule as quickly as possible. There are two ways in which democracy is damaged. The first is that it undermines the point of majority rule if the military may just step in and take over if they don't like the result. Secondly if a democratic government is making a mess of ruling and the military steps in to clean things up then this may create an impression that they will do so again, so absolving politicians to clean up their own act.
This may well be what happens in Thailand. Since the end of military rule in 1973 Thailand has now had seven coups; 1976, 77, 81, 86, 91, 2007 and 2014. 1 In the 2007 and 2014 coups the government being overthrown was very popular; in 2005 Shinawatra's Thai Rak Thai party won 60.7% of the vote while in 2011 his sister won 48.41% if the military simply steps in after a few years of rule by a clearly elected majority then what is the point in voting? Already the middle class supporters of a coup argue that elections do not mean democracy to justify military intervention thus undermining the concept of democracy. 2
1 Winichakul, Thongchai, 'Toppling Democracy', Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol.38, No.1, February 2008, pp.11-37, http://www.polsci.chula.ac.th/viengrat/thpolgovt/Thongchai%20-%20Toppling%20Democracy.pdf , p.15
2 Ibid, p.27
|
[
{
"docid": "c90c9d455327af4234ea3a5dbed37c88",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Military intervention is most likely to happen only when trust in democracy has already been damaged. In Thailand democracy was already distrusted due to corruption and vote buying, the military acted because of that distrust. When intervention is to clean up corruption and create greater separation of powers the coup may actually improve trust in democracy.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "92f4cb82ee7471d469bb53c020f5f5c8",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Elections do not always return a government that has true popular support; the system may be gerrymandered so it is much easier for one party to win seats. Additionally in many democracies there is a large number of people who don't vote so even a party that is elected may not have a true mandate. If the abstaining majority want a different government should the military not respect their democratic wish?\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d742464aaebe6a8b3f6848aa2708f000",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Whether or not the head of the army is the right man to run the country is immaterial as he will be passing on to another administration quickly. This will either be a temporary civilian administration in which top technocrats are brought in or it will be as a result of new elections. If a military man is still in power after an election, as with Sisi in Egypt, then they have come through the same test as a politician would have done.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "78cfb1551a9bb2174f401a955ff5f5d9",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup In a corrupt system the military is likely to be corrupt too. It will have its own sectional interest; getting as much funds for itself, or hyping possible threats. The military interest can often lead to far worse things than corruption – such as wars. 1 In countries where the military is powerful it is likely to have large private interests too; in Egypt the military's holdings in the economy is estimated at anywhere from 5 to 60% of GDP though the military itself says its revenue from its private businesses is only 1% this is still a large interest. 2\n\n1 Snyder, Jack, Myths of Empire, Cornell University Press, 1991\n\n2 Hauslohner, Abigail, 'Egypt's 'Military Inc' expands its control of the economy', Guardian Weekly, 18 March 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/18/egypt-military-economy-power-elections\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e92963451f9536e1e6238bcb82268a5c",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup The argument that the military is restoring democracy from a democracy makes no sense. Only once a democracy has been turned into an autocracy can it be said to be restoring democracy. So long as the system is still democratic then there should be constitutional ways to replace an increasingly authoritarian government; elections, vote of no confidence, or the judiciary.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "be6c47cef8251f2241a631cb96c96829",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup A military government may well be as riven by factionalism and division as the system which it replaces. The main interests of the military is often simply to maintain or increase the position of the military, this makes it likely there will be disagreement on other issues including over how quickly to return to democratic government. The military will often opt to return to barracks rather than have such splits become too deep “Military regimes thus contain the seeds of their own destruction” as there is almost bound to be a split into factions at some point when governing a country. 1\n\n1 Geddes, Barbara, 'What do we know about democratization after twenty years?', Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.2, 1999, pp.115-144, http://ussc.edu.au/s/media/docs/other/Geddes1.pdf , p.131\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d35a4eec3a132347b57b91ca6aefde1f",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup In a country that is so polarised that there is violence at elections the chances are the military is not neutral. In Thailand the royalists had been calling for military intervention because they know it is unlikely they will win an election. A coup cannot therefore be considered to be likely to end violence; Egypt is a case in point as there have been more than 3,200 deaths in the 7 months after the coup against President Morsi. 1\n\n1 'More than 3,200 Egyptians killed since coup', Middle East Monitor, 9 April 2014, https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/africa/10798-more-than-3200-egyptians-killed-since-coup\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2a40c8474e154a507c18f03967829adb",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup The response must be democratic\n\nIt is never appropriate to overthrow a democratically elected government which the people have chosen. The government is legitimised by being the choice of the people, a coup is by definition not legitimate in such a way. The response to a government that has lost the trust of the electorate, unable to prevent violence, or is corrupt, is to hold an election. In the worst case and an elected government is using its power as a government to manipulate any election then the responsibility is with the judiciary to convict a government which is responsible for such a\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e1f79a6e3e249df15f578a2369be0bdb",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup The army is not the best institution to run a country\n\nIf the country is in trouble is the army the best placed to take over and manage the country better than it has been in the past? This may plausibly be true if the reason democracy is failing is a large scale insurgency or near civil war but in almost every other case it is not the best institution. The army is trained to fight not to govern. The generals who take over top positions are used to running a bureaucracy that has to respond to politicians, not one that has to respond to the people.\n\nPoliticians may be corrupt, venal, or unpopular but at the least they are open about what they stand for. They have a manifesto and a clear ideology which if the people don't agree with they wont be voted for. This is not the case with generals; the chances are they have a bureaucratic desire to maintain the power and funding for the military but otherwise there is likely to be little known about their politics.\n\nFinally for those who are being overthrown the electorate has had a chance to investigate their policies, their past, to question their views and catch the candidate out when they are not consistent. The candidate came through an electoral test and media grilling. When there is a coup there is no such chance to determine if the coup leader is the right man for the job.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ac78e02f4d3e6dd171850944d4c4ea3a",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup A technocratic government is needed to prevent corruption\n\nDemocracy does not mean that a country is not corrupt, or that the political leadership is not corrupt. There are many countries where democratic elections stand side by side with a large amount of corruption; Afghanistan, Libya and Iraq countries that have recently had elections following western intervention are ranked 175, 172, and 171 out of 177 on the corruption perceptions index. Even countries with long established democracies can be perceived as being corrupt, India is 94th. 1 If the political class is incapable of reforming itself it may be necessary for another actor to do it for them.\n\nThere have been several coups in which the military has taken power in order to reform the political system before handing over to a civilian government at elections; Turkey in 1960, Portugal in 1974, and the relatively recent coup in Bangladesh in 2007. 2\n\n1 Transparency International, 'Corruptions Perceptions Index 2013', http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/\n\n2 Marinov, Nikolay, and Goemans, Hein, 'Coups and Democracy', British Journal of Political Science, 2013, http://www.nikolaymarinov.com/wp-content/files/GoemansMarinovCoup.pdf , p.5\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9d6df2e741bdc0dd57b0f6a2408ba4d0",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup A neutral party\n\nDemocracies can turn into an intractable conflict between two political parties with neither side ruling in their national interest but simply using power in an attempt to defeat the other side. Bangladesh is a good example of this as there are two main parties; the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party. Neither are willing to talk to the other, the competition has at times been violent and attempts to create neutral caretaker governments are scotched by one side or the other as occurred at the start of 2014. 1 The 2007 coup resulted in the arrests of the leaders of both parties along with a major anti corruption drive. 2 Unfortunately this did not prevent Bangladesh quickly falling into the same two party system with the same parties and leaders once civilian rule was restored.\n\n1 Budhwar, Kailash 'Bangladesh elections: The 'battling begums'', Al Jazeera, 4 January 2014, http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2014/01/bangladesh-elections-battling-begums-20141492730547677.html\n\n2 Voice of America, 'Former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Arrested', voanews.com, 27 October 2009, http://www.voanews.com/content/a-13-2007-07-16-voa21-66720297/560572.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "45d72d0c55a7b642b346d469bb856cb5",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Necessary to restore peace to the country\n\nThe clearest, and most common, reason for the military stepping in is to restore peace to the country. When the stakes are so high, power through control of government, the ability to distribute resources, it is something well worth fighting for. The result can be that democracies become unstable and violent with election campaigns particular flashpoints. The runup to the Thai elections in 2014 shortly before the coup left 10 dead and 600 injured 1 with no sign of stability returning after the flawed elections General Prayuth Chan-ocha the head of the army said the coup was necessary “in order for the country to return to normality quickly, and for society to love and be at peace again.” 2 When there violence creating violence it is the military's role to step in the prevent such instability.\n\n1 Wilkinson, Laura, 'Thailand elections: Violent clashes in Bangkok over disputed poll', The Independent, 2 February 2014, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/thailand-elections-violent-clashes-in-bangkok-over-disputed-poll-9101656.html\n\n2 Hodal, Kate, 'Coup needed for Thailand 'to love and be at peace again' – army chief', The Guardian, 23 May 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/22/military-coup-thailand-peace-general-prayuth-chan-ocha\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "87bce6f6ac39f5fe980871c5df6ceb6e",
"text": "defence government leadership voting house believes launching military coup Restoring democracy\n\nA coup that is against an elected government that is however becoming increasingly anti democratic is justified. When an elected government is increasingly concentrating power in its own hands, and particularly if elections are postponed then it is necessary for the military to step in to ensure democracy continues to function. From 1991-2006 31 of 43 coups resulted in an election within five years so far from damaging democracy were often restoring it. 1\n\n1 Marinov, Nikolay, and Goemans, Hein, 'Coups and Democracy', British Journal of Political Science, 2013, http://www.nikolaymarinov.com/wp-content/files/GoemansMarinovCoup.pdf , p.2\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
2042eee6e848cf1d134bc364f73f8377
|
[Iran specific] Others, particularly Israel, would act if the United States did not
A failure of the United States to act would motivate Israel to do so. [1] Israel is under much more pressure to act as it would be the most affected by Iran going nuclear. The result would be catastrophic, as Iran would be able to portray itself as a victim of Israeli aggression, leading to a massive outpouring of pro-Iranian and anti-American sentiment in the middle east and central asia. It could easily spark a regional war across the middle east as Iranian proxies strike back against Israel and U.S. forces around the region. [2]
The US would get all the harms of direct intervention with none of the benefits, and efforts to fight Hezbollah and Hamas, both within Palestine and elsewhere, would be undermined by their newfound sympathy in the region and the need of Arab governments to pander to it.
[1] Ravid, Barak, ‘Report: U.S. preparing for an Israeli strike on Iran’, Haaretz.com, 14 January 2012, http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/report-u-s-preparing-for-a...
[2] Benhorin, Yitzhak, ‘Attack on Iran would ignite regional conflict’, ynetnews.com, 3 November 2011, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4143358,00.html
|
[
{
"docid": "61531c395ebbfb5a6dbf43009e6f2316",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Forcing Israel to act would remove the United States from direct responsibility for the consequences, and allow the US to strategically “condemn” Israel’s actions.\n\nIran and Israel already have a terrible relationship, so a lot of the harms here are already sunk costs.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "8bb6697bfeef57fb7c6339d8f3174a33",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent This would be an argument in favour of preventing countries from developing any deterrent at any time, because it would make them easier to invade. It presumes, firstly, that it would be a good thing for the United States to be able to invade countries that do things it does not like at will, and secondly that it assumes that deterrence will not deter the initial invasion in the first place.\n\nThe main reason why great powers involve themselves in wars, is because many smaller countries are not able to fight off larger ones using their own resources and so the great power expects an easy victory assuming it can avoid intervention by other great powers. Jammu and Kashmir could not stand up to the Indian army in 1947 and Kuwait could not stand up to Iraq; Georgian was unable to mount armed resistance against a Russian incursion and neither was Chechnya.\n\nNuclear Weapons are a great equalizer, and if one consequence of Iran developing Nuclear weapons is that all of her neighbours do so as well, then war will become far less likely, and US intervention will become unnecessary. As a consequence, in the long-run, Nuclear proliferation is a self-correcting problem.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5cf6f8d8539cd7330180ea3db392f914",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Ahmadinejad’s words were mistranslated, [1] and Iran’s position has been clarified by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who has repeated Khomeini’s exhortation that Islam prohibits the use of nuclear weapons. [2]\n\nOn the Presidential side, Esfandiar Mashaei, formerly Vice President in Ahmadinejad’s first term and now Presidential Chief of staff, suggested in 2008 that Iran is a friend of all peoples including Israelis. [3]\n\nFurthermore, Iran needs Israel to provide a bogeyman they can use to divide their anti-Iranian governments from their anti-Israeli people. Anti-Israel sentiment has allowed Iran to push anti-Persian sentiment in the Arab world to the backburner, something that would disappear along with Israel if Iran were to act on these ideas.\n\n[1] Bronner, Ethan, ‘Just How Far Did They Go, Those Words Against Israel?’, The New York Times, 11 June 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/weekinreview/11bronner.html?adxnnl=1&a...\n\n[2] BBC News, ‘Iran leader Khamenei brands US ‘nuclear criminal’, 17 April 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8627143.stm\n\n[3] Cohen, Dudi, ‘Iranian VP: We are friends of the nation in Israel’, ynetnews.com, 19 July 2008, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3570266,00.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "90eff8e49aaaf3099b3da76e66ec5d2a",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent This is in fact a good thing. Nuclear weapons are a great equalizer between large and small countries. [1] One of the great problems of history for tiny nations like Georgia or the Baltic states is that they have consistently been at the mercy of Russia. Nuclear weapons will allow them to fight the Russians on an equal level, and therefore deter the Russians from intervening as actively as they have in the past.\n\nIn the case of Iran and its neighbours, Iran’s position would actually be weakened if everyone in the region acquired nuclear weapons as the United Arab Emirates or Bahrain cannot compete with Iran conventionally, but could compete in a nuclear arms race. Wider uptake of nuclear arms would reduce Iran’s power and influence.\n\nMoreover there is little evidence that this domino effect will happen. North Korea detonated its first nuclear weapon in 2006 but there has been no response from other countries in the region even though South Korea and Japan could have rapidly gone for nuclear breakout. [2]\n\n[1] Buchanan, Patrick J., ‘The Great Equalizer’, The American Conservative, http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2003/feb/10/00007/\n\n[2] Berganas, John, ‘The Nuclear Domino Myth’, Foreign Affairs, 31 August 2010, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66738/johan-bergenas/the-nuclear-...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "58cfe632e92f849ab9abf407e18aa363",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Preventing nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists is a serious concern, but terrorists tend to be stronger in weak states than strong ones. That is one reason why Pakistan has figured so prominently in weapons sales in the past.\n\nInvading a country like Iran would be more likely to destabilize things than stabilize them. This argument is underlined by analysis of the second Iraq war. Al Qaeda and Shi’a insurgent groups became a far stronger presence in Iraq following the coalition invasion than before the arrival of American and British troops. [1] As a consequence, it is unclear if invading these countries is a better way of preventing transfers of nuclear technology than sanctions and other methods of coercing their governments.\n\n[1] Mazzetti, Mark, ‘Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terroism Threat’, The New York Times, 24 September 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?pagewan...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8ca1fd117c07e862d33d522d7efb8f70",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The reality is that it makes far more sense for the United States to legitimatise actions it might take to prevent a state like Iran from developing nuclear by making reference to the uses that might find for a nuclear device, rather than the fact that they are have breached the terms of highly tenuous body of law.\n\nWhile it may be true that the development of nuclear weapons is banned by international treaty, and that this treaty is recognised as a valid international legal instrument, it is far from clear whether it is in the United State’s interests to embrace either this specific version of International Law, or whether it should be the enforcer even if it does. For one thing, the current international legal system bans Iran from developing Nuclear weapons, but also bans Brazil from developing them. Consistency would obligate the US to actively prevent Brazil from developing a nuclear deterrent, by using threats and sanctions similar to those that have deployed against Iran. However,– common sense would argue that this would be both futile and counter-productive, since it would not only be difficult but result in enormous costs, both militarily and in terms of the reputation of the US. The alternative- granting an exception to Brazil, comparable to those previously granted to India, Pakistan and Israel-, India in particular now wishes to not just be an exception by join the NPT as a weapons state, would undermine those very legal standards that the government argues in favour of.1\n\nAfter all, Brazil is unlikely to use such weapons aggressively, and the acquisition of such weapons by a regional hegemon(like Brazil) is unlikely to change the balance of power. It should be noted that most of the rising “responsible” regional hegemon like Brazil and South Africa opposed sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, [2] out of risk of enshrining a legal precedent.\n\nFurthermore, even if the US chooses to cleave to the premise that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty should be enforced as a matter of law rather than of policy, it is unclear why the US alone should take on the burden of its enforcement. As Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated, even disarming and politically reforming countries that lack a nuclear deterrent is a financially and politically ruinous process – one that cannot be achieved without the support of allies and intergovernmental organisations. Furthermore, given the reaction against the US in international opinion, [3] it’s worth asking whether or not the cure is worse than the cold when it comes to American influence around the world.\n\n[1] Fidler, David P., and Ganguly, Sumit, ‘India Wants to Join the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a Weapons State’, YaleGlobal, 27 January 2010, http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/india-wants-join-non-proliferation-tr...\n\n[2] Charbonneau, Louis, ‘Q+A: How likely are new U.S. sanctions against Iran?’, Reuters, 9 November 2011, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/09/us-iran-nuclear-sanctions-idUS...\n\n[3] Pew Global Attitudes Project, ‘Opinion of the United States’, Pew Research Center, 2011, http://www.pewglobal.org/database/?indicator=1\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ccc17a226beb465b2daac74bb5a75aa0",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Regardless of its origins, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty is the cornerstone of an international system that has prevented the rapid proliferation of Nuclear weapons for nearly half a century.\n\nThe dangers of Nuclear weapons, especially in the wrong hands, mean that the ownership of nuclear weapons is an issue which transcends moral standards of “fairness”. It may be true that the treaty should be revisited in the case of say India or Brazil, but this debate is not about the nuclear ambitions of fundamentally stable, democratic states that would willingly comply with all of the terms of the non-proliferation treaty if they were permitted to become signatories. Rather, the question of America’s right to act to enforce the treaty should focus on rogue states that present a significant danger to their neighbours, and whose acquisition of such weapons is likely to destabilize regional balances of power, and make the entire world less secure. Iran, Syria and Pakistan’s use of the language of anti-colonialism is a sign of nothing more than political opportunism.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "22a5f4b6ff565626c8601b4524126b09",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent What is not at issue is whether Iran will invade anyone. No one expects that, at least not immediately. Rather, the harm of Iranian possession of nuclear weapons is that they will provide Iran with immunity from retaliation which will encourage it to escalate its Cold War against Saudi Arabia in the Gulf, and increase its assistance to Hezbollah and Hamas.\n\nAs noted above, Pakistan has in fact behaved in exactly this manner. Safe behind its nuclear shield, it has provided increasingly blatant backing to anti-Indian terrorist groups and opp is right to note that there is little that can be done about that. The best bet is not to allow Iran to do the same thing\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2942805af9e5eb9060c8e664d0daf525",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Not all states are inherently rational, either by our standards or generally. North Korea is a xenophobic state based on the belief that they are racially and ideologically superior to all other states. [1] A government that does not consider its enemies fully human in its official propaganda is unlikely to blanch at the prospect of nuking them, even at their own expense. Even seemingly rational states make tactical mistakes, like Saddam Hussein did when he invaded Kuwait.\n\nNuclear Weapons raise the stakes, and have the potential to make the consequences of those errors far more serious and deadly.\n\nFurthermore, MAD does not operate solely due to the possession of Nuclear Weapons, but rather it requires that a state possess a “Second-Strike” ability. A “second Strike” ability means that a country has the capacity to nuke another country after it has already been attacked, whether through hardened silos or submarine launched warheads. Without such an ability, a state like Israel would risk losing its nuclear deterrent in an Iranian attack, and would therefore have every incentive to strike first if it thought such an attack might be about to occur. Iran, which is far less likely to be able to develop a “Second Strike” capability due to financial and technological limitations, would in turn almost constantly face a “use it or lose it” situation of its own.\n\n[1] Myers, B.R., ‘Excerpt: The Cleanest Race’, The New York Times, 26 January 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/books/excerpt-cleanest-race.html?pagew...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a4b076ed52522fe83fcfd7a1e36c7f07",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The United States would ideally move with the backing of the world community, but even if that is not present, we think that the United States is more than capable of making clear that it is not anyone’s puppet and that it is intervening solely to uphold international law.\n\nAny military action whether justified or not will cause resentment, but this not a reason to let genocide run amok or dictators get away with invasions nor is it a reason to let the same dictators get their hands on nuclear weapons, security is a vital interest whereas being liked by the rest of the world is not.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "74432c4722dcfac183998a19be84b8f0",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The possession of nuclear weapons by some states drives others to militarize, creating arms races.\n\ner, the government possesses nuclear weapons it can threaten to use them, and thereby deter a counter-invasion or prevent the International community from being able to intervene to depose it.\n\nThis can be seen in the relative coddling Pakistan has received both from its political and territorial opponent India, and from the United States since its development of Nuclear Weapons. [3] Actions that previously would have led to sanctions or worse, such as aid to the Taliban, assistance to the Nuclear Programs of Rogue States – most famously through the A.Q. Kahn network that supplied Libya, Iran and North Korea, [4] and complicity in terrorist attacks in India are brushed off with empty words [5] and meaningless semi-sanctions, India itself is deterred from making any response. [6] Indeed, US policy in recent years has been to try to buy off Pakistan rather than to coerce it.\n\n[1] Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, Fifth ed., 1978, pp.4-15, http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/morg6.htm\n\n[2] Kaplan, Robert D., ‘Why John J. Mearsheimer Is Right (About Some Things)’, the Atlantic, January/February 2012, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/01/why-john-j-mearsheim...\n\n[3] Miglani, Sanjeev, ‘Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, a deterrent against India, but also United States?’, Reuters, 9 April 2011, http://blogs.reuters.com/afghanistan/2011/04/09/pakistans-nuclear-weapon...\n\n[4] Kerr, Paul K., and Nikitin, Mary Beth, ‘Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues’, Congressional Research Service, 30 November 2011, pp.20-23, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34248.pdf\n\n[5] The Associated Press, ‘India reluctant to blame Mumbai blasts on Pakistan’, CBCnews, 15 July 2011,\n\n[6] Narang, Vipin, ‘Pakistan’s Nuclear Posture: Implications for South Asian Stability’, Harvard Kennedy Sc http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/07/15/mumbai-explosions-attacks-... Belfast Center for Science and International Affairs Policy Brief, January 2010, http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Pakistans_Nuclear_Posture_poli...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "74642ef17e7888b2af5fc55bcf31fff9",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent [Iran specific] Iran has threatened to destroy Israel\n\nIran has explicitly threatened to destroy Israel, President Ahmadinejad described Israel as a \"disgraceful blot\" that should be \"wiped off the face of the earth\". [1] Such a prospect would be disastrous, not just in its initial consequences, but for the entire region. Even an unsuccessful attack on Israel would provoke a counter strike. The US would take much of the blame for the casualties of such a strike even if it counselled Israel against it. The United States must prevent Iran from ever being able to put such threats into action which may mean having to engage in military action to prevent Iran gaining the capability.\n\n[1] MacAskill, Ewen, and McGreal, Chris, ‘Israel should be wiped off map, says Iran’s president’, The Guardian, 27 October 2005, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "28a0ebc45cf65a21dd47f220385f3ebd",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Nuclear weapons can fall into the wrong hands.\n\nEven if states do not use nuclear weapons themselves, or attempt to threaten their neighbours, they can sell their technology to other, less savoury states and individuals.\n\nThis was a particular problem with Pakistan. The former head of the Pakistani nuclear program, AQ Khan, sold technology on detonation mechanisms and Uranium enrichment to North Korea and Iran. [1] Iran is also likely to be willing to pass on its own nuclear information to other states, particularly Assad’s Syria. [2]\n\nSuch weapons could also find their way into the hands of terrorists. Iran has close links to Hezbollah and Hamas which it funds substantially, and a strong desire to hurt Israel. [3] North Korea has close links to a number of nasty groups ranging from drug cartels to Islamist terrorists.\n\n[1] Kerr, Paul K., and Nikitin, Mary Beth, ‘Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues’, Congressional Research Service, 30 November 2011, pp.20-23, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34248.pdf\n\n[2] Gekbart, Jonathan, ‘The Iran-Syria Axis: A Critical Investigation’, Stanford Journal of International Relations, Vol. XII, No. 1, Fall 2010, http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjir/12-1/fall10-final_5.pdf\n\n[3] Bruno, Greg, ‘State Sponsors: Iran’, Council on Foreign Relations, 13 October 2011, http://www.cfr.org/iran/state-sponsors-iran/p9362\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6930471b0716ff8a2fe9fe746e1945db",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The United States has an obligation to protect international stability due to its unique military strength.\n\nThe Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is one of the lynchpins on which the current Western-led international political and diplomatic order is dependent.1,2 Just as any normal legal system requires laws that are predictable and enforceable, so too does the international system. The Non-Proliferation Treaty provides this level of consistency and control over states’ nuclear assets.\n\nIn particular, one of those key principles is the assumption that once a country enters a treaty it will abide by its terms. If a country can leave a treaty at will, it means that no policy can be made with any degree of predictability. States are not able to formulate plans for future policies and development strategies if analysts and politicians are prevented from making reliable predictions about neighbouring state’s behaviour, economic policies and territorial ambitions.\n\nThis is particularly important with treaties relating to armaments, and of vital importance when it comes to Nuclear Weapons, because other countries choose to participate in military alliances and actions based on such assumptions.\n\nHistorically, arms build-ups and wars have occurred when the Great Powers fail to uphold the international legal system – fail to regard it as binding and inherently valuable and consequential. For example Germany’s willingness to disregard Czechoslovakian sovereignty prior to World War II. For that reason the United States has a vested interest in upholding the principles of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This is because the US is the major beneficiary of the present international system, both economically and politically.\n\nEconomically, the major loser in any upheaval around the world is almost guaranteed to be the United States or its corporations. However, the political incentives for the USA to continue upholding the non-proliferation treaty- by force if necessary- are far greater. A failure on its part to act will not just lead to nuclear proliferation, but also undermine other treaties banning chemical weapons and guaranteeing human rights as nations’ realize they are only pieces of paper.\n\n1. ‘The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons’, 2005 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), 1 July 1968, http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2005/npttreaty.html\n\n2. Kasprzyk, Nicholas, ‘Nuclear Non-proliferation and Regional Changing Strategic Balances: How Much Will Regional Proliferation Impinge Upon the Future of the NPT?’, in Krause, Joachim and Wenger, Andreas eds., Studies in Contemporary History and Security policy, 2001, http://kms2.isn.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/EINIRAS/343/ichaptersection_...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "66d312d95a8cc5260692e3bedff56119",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The development of nuclear weapons creates a self-perpetuating cycle of proliferation among other states.\n\nThe development of nuclear weapons encourages other countries to develop them as well. Rationally governed states without a nuclear deterrent are unlikely to allow themselves to be placed in a position where a nuclear armed neighbour can mount attacks against them with impunity. They therefore feel that they too need nuclear weapons in order to prevent the new nuclear power from taking advantage of their new capability.\n\nFor instance, the presence of an Iranian weapon would immediately threaten the Gulf States. Already unable to compete with Iran on a conventional level due to the vast disparity in size and population, states like the UAE would have every reason and motive to develop nuclear weapons as a deterrent. [1] A Saudi Prince actually floated the idea in 2011 that if Iran developed Nuclear Weapons, Saudi Arabia might follow. [2]\n\nAs more countries develop Nuclear weapons, the likelihood that someone will use them, either deliberately or by accident, goes up substantially.\n\n[1] Lindsay, James M., ‘After Iran Gets the Bomb’, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2010, http://www.cfr.org/united-states/after-iran-gets-bomb/p22182\n\n[2] Burke, Jason, ‘Riyadh will build nuclear weapons if Iran gets them, Saudi prince warns’, guardian.co.uk, 29 June 2011, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/29/saudi-build-nuclear-weapons-...\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d8ab2bc4db6aecb167d494f9ba2812f4",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent No country has an inherent right to invade or use aggression against another.\n\nGiven the moral bankruptcy of the NPT, and existing views of the United States in much of the developing world, [1] any move by the United States to prevent other nations from developing nuclear weapons by force will be seen for what it is: an act of neo-colonialism. This would be the case with any act to enforce a treaty that is considered unfair towards most of the world.\n\nThis is especially true in areas where there is a long history of US support for regional actors who are less than popular. In moving against Iran, the United States will be perceived as a stalking horse for Israel, whilst any efforts to invade North Korea Would cause great alarm in China as well as in neighbouring South Korea despite being a U.S. ally where some Koreans believe the US is more of a threat to the nation than the North. [2] In both cases, the image of the US in the region will be badly damaged, and the United States will face a hostile insurgency within the countries that they invade.\n\n[1] Pew Global Attitudes Project, 2011, http://www.pewglobal.org/database/?indicator=1\n\n[2] Larson, Eric V. et al., Ambivalent Allies? A Study of South Korean Attitudes Towards the U.S., RAND Corporation, March 2004, p.93 http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2005/RAND_TR141.pdf (n.b. before north detonated nuclear bomb)\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "95c1fcaa7ed748df3ec37efc93dd2f3a",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent [Iran specific] Iran has not invaded any other country in three and a half centuries; the same cannot be said for US allies including Israel, Pakistan, etc.\n\nFor all the censure Iran has faced as a rogue state, it has not, in fact, invaded another country for more than three centuries and despite internal aggression against western embassies the Iranian revolution seems to have made little difference. On the other hand, it has faced invasion on numerous occasions, whether from Russia, Britain or Iraq. Both Britain – whom the Iranians are still extremely suspicious off due to events such as the 1953 coup against Prime Minister Mosadeq [1] – and Russia – who together with Britain occupied Persia during world war II [2] - are nuclear weapons states.\n\nIran therefore has legitimate defensive reasons for developing Nuclear weapons. While Iran’s current government has pursued destabilizing policies in Lebanon and Israel/Palestine, the presence of Russia on its northern border and tensions with the United States justify their development. This is one reason why Iran’s nuclear program predates the current government and in fact goes all the way back to the Shah’s time. [3] Rather than being the product or continuation of Iran’s policies in the region, the nuclear program is independent of them, and justified on those basis.\n\n[1] Abrahamian, Ervand, ‘The 1953 Coup in Iran’, Science & Society Vol. 65, No. 2, Summer 2001, pp.182-215, http://www.webcitation.org/5kg6nFIXE\n\n[2] Globalsecurity.org, ‘Azerbaijan crisis (1945-1948)’, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/azerbaijan.htm\n\n[3] Milani, Abbas, ‘The Shah’s Atomic Dreams’, Foreignpolicy.com, 29 December 2010, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/12/29/the_shahs_atomic_dreams\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "49dfc2d6f968fe0bec1d3b2cb8cac546",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent Existing international treaties that grant nuclear weapons to the US and other countries no longer reflect the changing global balance of power.\n\nThe Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty is inherently unfair, in that it prevents countries that did not have nuclear weapons as of 1964 from developing them, but makes no effort to force those who already possess nuclear devices to disarm.\n\nThe result is that the list of countries with such weapons, the United States, Russia, Britain, France, and China, represents the balance of power as it existed at the time that the non-proliferation treaty was drafted. Countries that have entered the club subsequently, like India and Pakistan, did so in violation of the treaty and international law.\n\nAny sort of treaty that seeks to limit access to nuclear arms has to provide opportunities for countries like Brazil to enter the “club” as they gain political or economic power. In the absence of any such mechanism the current treaty system is nothing more than a tool of Western dominance in order to keep the status quo which is favorable to the current nuclear powers something which is bound to build up resentment.\n\nThis would in effect offer not only to the pursuit of nuclear weapons by the targeted regimes, but to the rest of their policies. States like South Africa and Brazil already find it difficult to support a strong international line against Iran [1] due to seeing the inequality of allowing some countries nuclear weapons programmes but seeking to punish others, especially when the nuclear weapons states that are signatories to the NPT have not moved towards disarmament as the treaty stipulates. [2] This would in effect alienate them completely.\n\nSecond, even if the harm was justifiable by the ends, it would seem that in the long run, invading- or even censuring- every country that attempts to develop Nuclear Weapons in violation of the NPT is impractical as the United States and the rest of the world have de facto admitted by ending sanctions on Pakistan and India in 2001, two years after their nuclear tests. [3] As such, there needs to be a political means that can separate states like Brazil from states like Iran, lest the policy collapse under its own weight.\n\nThe West, rather than using force, should attempt to repair the existing non-proliferation treaty framework, such that the standards for possession of nuclear weapons are based on behaviour rather than history.\n\n[1] Charbonneau, Louis, ‘Q+A: How likely are new U.S. sanctions against Iran?’, Reuters, 9 November 2011, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/09/us-iran-nuclear-sanctions-idUSTRE7A86Z220111109\n\n[2] Spektor, Matias, ‘How to Read Brazil’s Stance on iran’, YaleGlobal, 16 March 2010, http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/how-read-brazils-stance-iran\n\n[3] BBC News, ‘US lifts India and Pakistan sanctions’, 23 September 2001, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1558860.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b8e8e69bed142e0570421849865ab9d1",
"text": "national law politics warpeace house believes us justified using force prevent The principle of Mutually Assured Destruction makes war less likely.\n\nStates are fundamentally rational, and as such, nuclear proliferation has generally made war less likely, by promulgating the principle of mutually assured destruction (MAD).\n\nStates go to war with other states when they think they can win the conflict they will provoke. By making victory impossible, MAD makes wars unprofitable, and thereby prevents them from beginning in the first place. The Cold War never turned hot partially for this reason, and it is possible that the Israeli-Iranian relationship could be stabilized by both states possessing a nuclear deterrent. North Korea may well desire to Nuke the United States and Japan, and may well feel that there would be no moral issues with doing so, but they have refrained from doing so. As they have refrained from invading the South since 1950. There is substantial evidence that even the most irrational regimes can be deterred. No matter how dictatorial and authoritarian a state government, the prospect of complete nuclear annihilation will be effective in restraining its ambitions. [1]\n\nIn the case of Iran, the threat to Iranian cities by the Iraqi army moving on to the offensive and using chemical weapons motivated Khomeini to make peace in 1988. [2] It is worth noting that they have not explicitly attacked Israel themselves, preferring to work through proxies. It would seem unlikely that Iran, if it were to become the only nuclear power in the Islamic world, could avoid responsibility if Hamas or Hezbollah were to utilize a weapon.\n\n[1] Kenneth Waltz, “The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May Better,” I, Number 171 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1981), http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/waltz1.htm\n\n[2] Globalsecurity.org, ‘Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988)’, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/iran-iraq.htm\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
6d77bfb08d087835a24e14d47fb7e905
|
Negotiation is the only way to solve the underlying problem
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan stated in 2003 “terrorism will only be defeated if we act to solve the political disputes and long-standing conflicts which generate support for it. If we do not, we shall find ourselves acting as a recruiting sergeant for the very terrorists we seek to suppress.” [1] Terrorist campaigns don't just come out of nowhere (with the exception of some single individual acts), there is a grievance behind the acts. The terrorist is trying to have this grievance dealt with and believes the best way to this end is through violence. It is clear that the easiest way to end the conflict is simply to resolve the grievance. Even when there are no negotiations the state will usually attempt to resolve some of these grievances, however doing so unilaterally will simply show that the terrorist's violence is working without getting any guarantees of an end to the violence in return. Negotiation therefore benefits both sides. It is notable that 43% of terrorist groups that have ended since 1968 have done so as a result of negotiations compared to only 7% being defeated militarily. [2]
[1] Annan, Kofi, ‘Ability to reason vital in fighting terrorism, Secretary-General tells conference’, un.org, SG/SM/8885, 22 September 2003, http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sgsm8885.doc.htm
[2] Jones, Seth G., and Libicki, Martin C., How Terrorist Groups End, RAND, 2008, http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG741-1.pdf p.xiii, xiv
|
[
{
"docid": "1f1139362a07b8840e2e18d071e60343",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists There is nothing wrong with attempts to solve the individual grievance without reference to the terrorist group. The aim of resolving the grievance is to prevent more people joining the extremists and to isolate them from the people. When this is done it will be much easier to catch the people who are responsible for the terrorist atrocities and bring them to justice. Being willing to negotiate with the terrorist group on the other hand will likely lead to some of the concessions being that terrorists or former terrorist manage to escape justice for their acts as they will want such an amnesty to be a part of the concessions they receive in return for giving up violence.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "1738b698ffc14a8b2cd177f75bbf7a5a",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Buying time only helps the terrorists. It gives them time to arm themselves and gain allies abroad so enabling a more deadly series of attacks later on. Terrorist groups usually only have a very finite number of resources so the state should seek to press the terrorist group until it has nothing left to fall back on. It is notable that each time Israel has failed to destroy groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza they have quickly been resupplied b allies in Syria and Iran making them more difficult to fight next time. [1]\n\n[1] Spiegel, Peter, and King, Laura, ‘Israel Says Syria, Not Just Iran, Supplied Missiles to Hezbollah’, Los Angeles Times, 31 August 2006, http://articles.latimes.com/2006/aug/31/world/fg-hezbollah31\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9fb4d92c87c08fd5147b6e460f5845c2",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Negotiations are not needed to isolate terrorists. The vast majority of citizens will abhor violence as they simply desire a quiet life in which they can make a peaceful living. The best way for the government to isolate the terrorists is to ensure the security of the community and meet some of their grievances. When the community sees that they government is in a better position to provide what they want they will support the government. The situation in Iraq was unusual in that there were important people in the community who at one point or another actively supported Al Qaeda so there needed to be negotiations with these people. In most circumstances the important members of the community are on the sidelines so negotiating with them would not be analogous to negotiating with terrorists.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e4ed6a661192531fc5ace8c4e75e46ea",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Whether this happens really depends on the negotiations. Unfortunately negotiations without result are likely to strengthen the radicals who can show that the peaceful route is not going anywhere. The only way to strengthen the moderates is to give them what they want, and if this has to be done the concessions could have been given before there was a turn to terrorism.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "42f68891ed041e28489f3ffc02320ecb",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists In the long term negotiation and compromise of some form is needed to bring about a final peace but it is not correct that negotiations in the short term saves lives. First of all not all terrorist groups will initiate a cease fire if they are negotiating with the government, about half continue their violence while negotiating, [1] and even if they do there is no saying all their supporters will take part. Negotiating also shows that the government is weak; the determination to 'save lives' can end up costing more lives as the terrorists see that they violence is paying dividends. They may come to the conclusion that if they kill more they will gain more concessions.\n\n[1] Cronin, Audrey Kurth, ‘Negotiating with groups that use terrorism: Lessons for policy-makers’, Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue Background papers, 2008, http://www.hdcentre.org/uploads/tx_news/91AudreyKurth-CroninNegotiatingwithgroupsthatuseterrorism.pdf p.6\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5181d4263613b29aba5387d8676b0107",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists A precondition that terrorists must give up their arms and renounce violence before negotiations will ensure that negotiations never come and the violence will continue indefinitely. Terrorists realise that their influence is only as a result of their threat of violence; once this has been renounced the government will never have any reason to give them what they want. The only response to such a precondition is to force the government to drop that condition through violence.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a72e34cba9f669bba682e3f5c8584b0d",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Simply because a terrorist group has broken ceasefires numerous times does not mean that the next attempt will get nowhere – in ETA’s case the current ceasefire is holding. [1] We should also remember that not every time the terrorist group breaks a ceasefire it has been result of actions by the terrorist group – the state can also be the one that is walking away from talks. Ultimately there needs to be trust on both sides, to the terrorists the state seems as untrustworthy as the terrorists do to the state.\n\n[1] ‘Spain and ETA Always around’, The Economist, 17 August 2013, http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21583715-weakened-terrorist-group-remains-presence-basque-region-always-around\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "42a3b6458762ea4a2ca210713e103deb",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists It is very rare for such negotiations to provide a benefit to terrorist groups. Many states, such as the UK and USA, are unwilling to provide ransom payments so where they are provided they are often privately raised thus cannot be considered to be a result of negotiation. In such circumstances the state will have secured the release of hostages and the life of a state's citizens should be placed above comparatively small amounts of money. Where prisoners are being released as a confidence building measure the terrorists will usually be making some concession as well such as giving up some arms so the state does not end up worse off but there is more trust to enable negotiations to prevent more violence.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5025df23c7d58b3fb96aab36db18f327",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists There is no question that violence can sometimes achieve its aims but each individual campaign is different and is responded to in different ways thus for example a terrorist group that achieves minimal aims through violence cannot be used as a model by a group whose aims present an existential threat to the state. Thus for example the IRA achieved devolution after years of bombings but this does not them mean that the Real IRA was ever going to be successful in obtain a complete break with the UK.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "94a8dd1077f1eb257c3ef5420701204a",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists The real IRA also shows how negotiation is successful. The new group did not have the tacit support from abroad in the form of the Republic of Ireland or the USA or resources of its predecessor. The violent campaign destroyed any public support and the group disbanded, its leaders were eventually found liable for the bombing. [1] The political process through the Stormont Parliament is now the accepted way to peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland.\n\n[1] McDonald, Henry, ‘Four Real IRA leaders found liable for Omagh bombing’, theguardian.com, 8 June 2009, http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jun/08/omagh-real-ira-leaders-liable\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ae0b512fa999b0a73c2a438973c33b79",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists No negotiation encourages the hunt for a bigger lever\n\nWhen fighting terrorists the state either needs to answer some of the terrorists demands or fight back. When the state fights back the by the terrorists response is almost always more bloodshed using more and more extreme methods for example the first intifada was fought using sticks and stones, but when this, and the peace process that followed it failed, or rather did not show the results that was hoped for, the second was a major step up to suicide bombing. This is because when the terrorists fail they are unlikely to pack up; instead they will try to find a bigger lever to course the state into making the move they want. In this case Arafat hoped a round of violence would bring about concessions. [1] The best way to prevent this cycle of violence is to negotiate, even if this is mostly to buy time. Even when there is no cease fire there will be no reason for the terrorists to escalate if their demands are being taken seriously.\n\n[1] Pressman, Jeremy, ‘The Second Intifada: Background and Causes of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict’, The Journal of Conflict Studies, Vol. CCIII, No.2, Fall 2003, http://journals.hil.unb.ca/index.php/jcs/article/view/220/378\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7e550ecd2913000f34ec6a44bb2ef3d7",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Negotiation isolates those who are only interested in violence\n\nJust as negotiations strengthen the moderates they isolate those who are most radical and interested in a violent solution. This isolation is key to actually winning a fight against groups using terrorist methods because terrorists are almost always hiding within the community. The only way to prevent these acts is therefore to encourage their community to persuade the terrorists to reject violence, or if they are not willing to change to aid the state. The need for help from the community is recognised in almost all conflicts against terrorist groups and insurgencies. The state succeeds when it gets the moderates on board, this is shown by the conflict in Iraq where the United States turned the tide against al Qaeda in the Al-Anbar Awakening. This victory was only made possible through the engagement and cooperation with local leaders who wanted an end to violence so were willing to talk to, and join with the US military if the result was likely to be security. [1]\n\n[1] Smith, Niel, and MacFarland, Sean, ‘Anbar Awakens: The Tipping Point’, Military Review, March-April 2008, pp.41-52, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA486828 p.48\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "696df5f641aadc16f367e7bd5cae44cd",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Negotiation encourages moderation\n\nIn every terrorist movement there are different factions and disagreements about how best to achieve their collective aims, and often terrorist groups have either direct or indirect ties with political parties with whom they share the same goals. It is clearly then in the interest of the state to strengthen the more acceptable parts of the movement whether can seriously talk to. The only way to strengthen the moderates is to negotiate. This then makes their path to a solution the more credible course for the movement as a whole to take. To demonstrate a negative example the United States and Israel were unwilling to negotiate with moderates within the PLO for fifteen years during which time not only was there a lot more bloodshed but much more radical groups formed on the Palestinian side making negotiations much more complicated in the long run as there would be multiple groups who would need to sign up to a final peace treaty. [1]\n\n[1] Chamberlin, Paul Thomas, ‘When It Pays to Talk to Terrorists’, The New York Times, 3 September 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/04/opinion/when-it-pays-to-talk-to-terrorists.html?_r=0\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "68a2e2048d9d9e56cc139eae36f5dae6",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Negotiation saves lives\n\nAlmost all terrorist groups kill people, whether innocents or members of the military. Even those who limit casualties by giving warnings of their atrocities are unperturbed when they do end up taking lives. Negotiation can then be the best way to save lives both in the short and long term. In the short term negotiating can mean a cease fire, and if there are hostages their release. Over the long term negotiation is necessary if there is to be any peaceful conclusion to the conflict. As the right to life is the most fundamental right, and the duty of the states to protect its citizens is primary role of the state it is clear that the protection of these lives should be the main consideration for the state.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a9524605933bd3139a37e3825a2495c6",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Even if negotiation with one group is successful others will take their place\n\nTerrorist groups are rarely static, they change, evolve, and break up. Negotiating with one group may create peace with that group while at the same time causing a split that creates another group that is more willing to use violence. This is what happened in Northern Ireland where the peace process tamed the IRA and spawned the Real IRA, [1] a group that was more even more willing to kill innocents than its predecessor through attacks such as the Omagh bombing which killed 29 people in 1998. [2]\n\n[1] Moran, Michael, ‘Terrorist Groups and Political Legitimacy’, Council on Foreign Relations, 16 March 2006, http://www.cfr.org/terrorism/terrorist-groups-political-legitimacy/p10159#p5\n\n[2] Elliott, Francis, ‘Real IRA admits to Omagh bomb and disbands’, The Telegraph, 20 October 2002, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1410723/Real-IRA-admits-to-Omagh-bomb-and-disbands.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "165900b968eed314de955427199d7ad4",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Negotiation encourages more terrorism\n\nThere are two ways in which negotiation encourages more terrorism. First it shows that violence can achieve its aims, a group that has committed violent acts and received negotiations in return will believe that they will gain even more from greater levels of violence. Secondly as argued in the previous point negotiations with terrorist groups gives legitimacy to political violence. This in turn will encourage other groups to resort to violence to achieve their political goals as they have seen it work for another group. Thus for example when the Fatah movement and the Palestine Liberation Organisation were legitimised by a peace process and the recognition of a form of Palestinian government other groups such as Islamic Jihad and Hamas came to believe that they could take terrorist actions further in order to liberate Palestine through an armed struggle. [1]\n\n[1] Schweitzer, Yoram, ‘The Rise and Fall of Suicide Bombings in the Second Intifada’, Strategis Assessment, Vol.13, No.3, October 2010, http://www.inss.org.il.cdn.reblaze.com/upload/(FILE)1289896644.pdf p.40\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3bd0878850c9ee2766b43da850d81b55",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Terrorists can’t be trusted – better to crush them\n\nAny group that is willing to resort to violence cannot be trusted not to simply take up arms again as soon as they perceive some new grievance. Groups that believe they can achieve what they want through force of arms will turn to violence again and again. This can be seen all over the world; thus ETA regularly declares ceasefires and breaks them just as often (1989, 1996, 1998, 2006), [1] or civil wars that have seemed to be coming to a close reignite because one or more groups believe they can gain more from another round of fighting. Thus the Tamil Tigers fought what might be considered to be four separate wars with the Sri Lankan state with a lot of ceasefires along the way. [2] It was however not negotiations but the pursuit of a ruthless military campaign that finally brought the reunification of the country. [3]\n\n[1] Dingle, Sarah, ‘ETA militants declare end to armed struggle’, ABC The World Today, 21 October 2011, http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2011/s3344858.htm\n\n[2] ‘Sri Lanka profile Timeline’, BBC News, 16 May 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12004081\n\n[3] Smith, Niel A., ‘Understanding Sri Lanka’s Defeat of the Tamil Tigers’, NDU Press, 2009, http://www.ndu.edu/press/understanding-sri-lanka.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b7b43937cb015e9756006ba4370779a7",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Negotiations cannot take place while innocents are being threatened\n\nGovernments cannot negotiate while innocent civilians are being threatened by illegitimate violence. The state is the only wielder of legitimate violence in the form of the police and military that are needed to keep order and defend the state's citizens. To negotiate with terrorists is to provide them with legitimacy making violence an accepted way of achieving political aims. Before legitimacy is granted upon the terrorist group they must first give up their weapons and renounce violence. By taking such a position the state ensures that no lives will be taken during the political process.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7b42bc7e38e30a0aa943545ce3c95800",
"text": "terrorism house would negotiate terrorists Negotiation provides more resources to terrorists\n\nNegotiation can help the terrorists who are negotiating in several ways. First it buys time; if the terrorist group has previously been hard pressed by the state's military then this time can be used to rest, recover and resupply, in effect for preparing for the next campaign. This is what happens whenever there is a ceasefire, or a unilateral break, in the campaign in Lebanon or Palestine as those states which are aligned to the terrorist groups such as Syria and Iran seek to resupply their allies. [1]\n\nSecond in some cases negotiation can involve the state handing over resources to the terrorist group. This is most often the case with hostage negotiations where the terrorists demand the release of other terrorists who have been captured so boosting the groups manpower or else demand a ransom in return for the release of hostages. Somalia has over the last decade regularly seen payouts of ransoms to groups of pirates who have links to islamists [2] and are accused of having links to terrorists. While pirates are the highest profile ransoms the same occurs with terrorist groups, it is estimated that $70million has been paid to secure the release of western captives since 2010. [3] Releasing terrorists can also sometimes be used as a confidence building measure leading up to negotiations, which can mean helping the terrorist groups even before there are negotiations. This has most recently occurred with Israel releasing 26 Palestinian prisoners, including Yusef Irshaid who murdered an Israeli, three suspected ‘collaborators’ and planned car bombings, in order to restart peace talks. [4]\n\n[1] Spiegel, Peter, and King, Laura, ‘Israel Says Syria, Not Just Iran, Supplied Missiles to Hezbollah’, Los Angeles Times, 31 August 2006, http://articles.latimes.com/2006/aug/31/world/fg-hezbollah31\n\n[2] Spiegel Staff, ‘Terror on the High Seas: Somali Pirates Form Unholy Alliance with Islamists’, Spiegel Online, 20 April 2009, http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/terror-on-the-high-seas-somali-pirates-form-unholy-alliance-with-islamists-a-620027.html\n\n[3] Press Association ‘David Cameron To Tell G8 ‘Stop Paying Ransoms To Terrorists’’, Huffington Post, 18 June 2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/06/18/david-cameron-to-tell-g8-ransoms-terrorist-_n_3457570.html\n\n[4] Harris, Ben, ‘Who Israel released’, Jewish Telegraphic Association, 14 August 2013, http://www.jta.org/2013/08/14/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/who-israel-released\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
8e1d0140d363ed009097f5f5e377395f
|
A strategic missile defense shield will be an effective defense against ballistic missile attacks targeted at the United States and its allies
The missile defense shield the United States intends to build is the most effective and complete ballistic missile shield ever devised. When fully armed with a complement of anti-ballistic missiles both within the United States itself, and in allied nations in Europe, the shield will be virtually impregnable to external missile attack. This means the chance of a nuclear attack succeeding against it will be very unlikely, reducing the chance not only of a full-scale nuclear war between the United States and another nuclear power, but also against missiles fired by rogue states or terrorists, the biggest threats in terms of actual use of nuclear weapons (The Economist, 2009). Technologically speaking, anti-ballistic missile missiles have developed by leaps and bounds in recent years. The current system being put into operation by the United States is the Aegis combat system, designed for deployment on US Naval vessels. This new development has served to sidestep the problems associated with ground and space-based missile defense arrays, due to the slow response time of ground missiles, and the still unfeasible orbital deployment. The sea-based defense array, furthermore, lacks the problem of the land-based system in that it does not need to be placed in countries other than the United States in order to be effective (thus avoiding the political problems of the past). Technology and diplomacy have clearly made a national missile defense system highly desirable.
|
[
{
"docid": "1af2cb268e39e53eea450b07616e98d3",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence Anti-ballistic missile systems are a largely unproven technology, and still have many problems that do not make them a viable option for strategic defense, at least not at present. Furthermore, there is the excessively high cost of designing and building such a system, which has been in development for 25 years. It has cost billions of dollars over the decades, including $53 billion between 2004 and 2009, the largest single line on the Pentagon’s budget for those years. For all this, only an unproven system of questionable efficacy has been produced. It would be better to stop throwing good money after bad trying to develop a technology that may never be useful. Also, even if the technology were made effective, the same technology could be used as a countermeasure by enemy countries against the interception of their missiles, making the system even less effective, if not useless (Sessler, et al., 2000). Furthermore, the system does not protect the vital interests of the United States because it angers countries like Russia, which has actually begun increasing its conventional force distributions on its Western border with the rest of Europe, and to threaten to deploy short-range nuclear missiles on its border. The political destabilization caused by the missile defense program is not worth its ephemeral benefits.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "ac9a83ad17df8f57fdbd49cd779f93ef",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence Conventional war is a nasty thing, and can be just as destructive as nuclear war, if not as immediate. The threat of war is only increased with the breaking down of MAD, as countries will be able to engage one another without fear of the existential threat of nuclear holocaust. Furthermore, if many countries have access to missile defense systems they will likely be able to employ countermeasures against their enemies’ systems, bringing the chance of nuclear weapons deployment back to the fore.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1d3a22cca03424de1c251ebe9d2f64e6",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence Nuclear capability has historically created more stable international relations between countries, as described in the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). The United States and Russia never engaged one another in open conflict during the whole span of the Cold War, for example, for fear of setting off a nuclear cataclysm neither could survive (Waltz, 1981). MAD breaks down, however, with the advent of national missile defense systems. This is due to the fact that when a state cannot guarantee its second-strike, or even first-strike capability it becomes vulnerable. Countries without missile defense systems will be defenseless against those that have them. Furthermore, as the technology is disseminated and more countries possess missile defense systems, stability decreases as it will become a gamble as to which country can more successfully counteract the offensive and defensive missile systems of the enemy. Missile defense makes the world less, not more safe.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "829fcd58bd237af3f4417519a1a533dc",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence It is not always within the right of a state to develop weapons and technology, since international treaties ban, for example, the development of chemical and nuclear weapons. Furthermore, when the development of weapons will be detrimental to the state that builds them, it is in their interest no to do so. In the case of national missile defense, the United States is angering several countries, particularly Russia, and potentially upsetting the balance of mutually assured destruction (Harding, 2007). Clearly more than a right to self-defense must be considered when developing new kinds of armament.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5d82000ee0c3784b3712bfd1668d44df",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence MAD is not an effective means of maintaining world security. It relies upon states being too afraid to ever attack one another with nuclear weapons, but the risk of one doing so remains, irrespective of the doctrine. In terms of deterring conventional warfare, that assumes that the state being attacked would chose mutual destruction over potential, transitory subjugation. MAD has too many inherent risks and raises the very real chance, as weapons amass and proliferate, of their being used (Sagan, 1993). National missile defense systems provide a very real defense against not only full-scale attacks by other states, but against nuclear-capable rogue states, such as North Korea, which is seeking to develop intercontinental ballistic missile technology of its own. Should North Korea ever be able to attack the United States or its allies with nuclear weapons, the world will need the ability to counter it. National missile defense is simply a strategic necessity of the modern world in which nuclear weapons may fall into the hands of unstable, aggressive states who might actually try to use them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3a092d15d48de9c717a1f377dba846f2",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence While missile defense technology still has problems that need to be worked out, its future is very promising. The most recent technology, Aegis, is far more effective in testing than its predecessors and has been deployed on a number of Navy warships and in Japan and Australia (McMichael, 2009). The technology will with time become extremely effective at stopping enemy missiles. In a world with more and more countries developing nuclear weapons, many who oppose the United States and its allies, it is imperative that the United States has an effective defense against them. A missile defense system is the most promising such defense.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "59cc04110c8112854fa7581b06de4a29",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence The United States has rarely bent the knee to international pressure with regard to issues directly affecting its security, nor should it. Not only does the United States have a right, as do all states, to defend itself against any potential foreign aggression, it is also the primary purveyor of the public good of international security, policing the sea lanes and serving as the United Nations’ primary peacekeeper (Brooks and Wohlforth, 2008). This role places the United States in particular danger because it means it often contends with, and gains the enmity of, some of the most dangerous groups in the world. North Korea, for example, has been at odds with the United States for many years. Furthermore, the United States’ development of a missile defense shield has allowed it to feel safer. It is thus more willing to engage in dialogue concerning and implementation of nuclear arms reduction programs, as occurred with the recent New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) with Russia (Associated Press, 2011). This reduction is in compliance with the wishes of the United Nations, and is arguably more important for international security. Additionally, in the case of Russia, the United States has been able to reach a compromise by which Russia will not oppose its sea-based missile defenses, so long as they are not built on land on the Russian frontier.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "065b90b6d96827f11a795b400435b8c5",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence A robust missile defense shield will provide the protection previously afforded by the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction, allowing the US to dismantle much of its dangerous nuclear arsenal\n\nWith a fully functioning missile defense shield deployed, nuclear-armed ballistic missiles become obsolete, unable to ever reach their targets. This means countries’ strategic obsession with second-strike capacity, the ability to return fire with nuclear weapons should they be attacked by them (Mutually Assured Destruction), will cease to be an issue, as first-strikes are destined to be wiped out before they hit a single target. What this means is that countries with missile defense systems can feel secure without the need of retaining massive nuclear arsenals. This will alleviate the pressure to have stockpiles of warheads and will promote disarmament. Mutually Assured Destruction has become a far less secure strategy as nuclear proliferation has occurred to states with different strategic conceptions. This has been seen in the United States, which since its full adoption of the Aegis system has actively pursued a policy of reaching a new accord with Russia on nuclear arms reduction. This culminated in 2010 with the signing of the New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), an accord to reduce the number of strategic nuclear missile launchers by half (Associated Press, 2011). This new step toward nuclear disarmament could not be politically possible in the United States without a replacement defense, which only a national missile defense system can provide.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d95759cd3e30b30421856bd7b7042203",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence As a matter of principle, every country, including the United States, has the right to defend itself to the best of its technological and economic ability\n\nThe nation-state is the fundamental building block of the international system, and is recognized as such in all international treaties and organizations (Mearsheimer, 1993). States are recognized as having the right to defend themselves, and this right must extend to the possession of a strategic national missile defense system. The United States has every right to develop such a system if it will furnish a greater measure of defense for its citizens and interests. US military technology is the most advanced and prodigiously financed in the world, which is why it is generally the United States that stands at the forefront of new defense and combat systems. The National Missile Defense program is simply the newest tool in the arsenal of the world’s greatest military, whose purpose is entirely defensive. To shield itself from potential ballistic missile, and even nuclear, attack the United States has the right to build a missile shield to defend itself and its allies under its aegis. There is no principled justification for a country to not pursue defense initiatives that benefit itself and that it wishes to pursue.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a7992dff0ce56e80fe3a75eafd3f9c8f",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence Strategic missile defense technology is substantially more advanced and discriminating in application than nuclear weapons, making potential future wars less potentially devastating\n\nAn operational national missile defense system renders nuclear weapons, and intercontinental ballistic missiles generally, obsolete. When a country can shoot down all enemy missiles, those weapons lose their power. The future of war, once countries have access to the technology to build missile shields, will no longer be marked by fingers held over the proverbial red button. Rather, the incentive for conflict between states armed with effective missile defenses will be to seek diplomatic solutions to problems. The technology will likely be in the hands of many nations very soon, as the United States has already provided the technology to Japan and Australia, and will be building defense batteries in Romania from 2015 (McMichael, 2009). Furthermore, even should war break out, they will necessarily be far less destructive, as they will not feature the city-leveling power of nuclear missiles. With missile defense, war will be less likely and, should it occur, less destructive.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "2e5c60c3194a30fd6184eab1f37359c0",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence The political consequences of the system make the world less safe\n\nMany countries look upon the national missile defense program of the United States as a serious threat to their security. Russia stands at the forefront of this group, and has for several years actively opposed the development of an anti-ballistic missile technology. If the program is a success and only the United States and its close strategic allies possess the ability to develop such defenses, they will have a marked advantage over all other countries in terms of fighting ability, as the United States would be able to use its own ballistic missiles to intimidate and attack its opponents while being effectively immune to retaliation. Fears over the development of the system have led Russia to make extremely threatening postures on its European border; when the United States planned to deploy a battery of interceptor missiles in Poland in 2008, Russia responded by increasing troop numbers along its European borders and even threatened to deploy its own battery of short-range nuclear missiles on the border (Harding, 2007). This sort of conflict is extremely dangerous, and raises the chance of international conflict escalating into war. Such an outcome is extremely undesirable, and the defensive capabilities of a missile shield are not enough to warrant such risks. Furthermore, the United Nations has sought to end research into anti-ballistic missile technology, and has on several occasions called on the United States to stop its testing (Reuters, 1999). Much of the international community fears the instability that might arise from the breaking down of the current world order of nuclear deterrence between states.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "94fbb9823e68592d90222c9040f5e271",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence Mutually Assured Destruction breaks down when national missile defense systems are introduced, destabilizing world security:\n\nNuclear weapons create stability, as described in the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). Countries with nuclear weapons have no incentive to engage in open military conflict with one another; all recognize that they will suffer destruction if they choose the path of war (Waltz, 1981). If countries have nuclear weapons, fighting simply becomes too costly. This serves to defuse conflicts, and reduce the likelihood of the outbreak of war. When states have nuclear weapons they cannot fight, making the world a more peaceful place. Furthermore, armed with a nuclear deterrent, all states become equal in terms of ability to do harm to one another (Jervis, 2001). If a large state attempts to intimidate or to invade a smaller neighbor, it will be unable to effectively subdue it, since the small state will have the power to seriously injure, or even destroy, the would-be invader with a few well-placed nuclear missiles (Mearsheimer, 1993). The dynamics created by MAD are entirely lost when national missile defense systems are brought into the equation. Anti-ballistic missile missiles effectively eliminate the surety of MAD; it becomes a gamble of whether one’s nuclear arsenal will be able to penetrate the missile shield of the enemy. This increases the chance of a nuclear war, since an aggressor state can count on its missile shield to deflect the second-strike attempted by its opponent. Furthermore, in the case where both states in a conflict have missile defense arrays, as will likely occur as the technology is disseminated, the outbreak of war is also more likely, since each will try to race the other to the ability to counter each other’s offensive and defensive missiles. Clearly, the technology will only destabilize world relations, not offer greater security.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ecc3af4c8b8cfa5643f583291bd8537c",
"text": "defence science science general house supports development missile defence The system is an incredibly expensive venture that may not even work\n\nResearch and development of effective strategic defense systems has been ongoing since the Reagan administration, to little lasting benefit. The US government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars in the past two decades on developing missile defense technology, including nearly $60 billion in the past five years, and still it is incomplete and its effectiveness questionable. Many scientists have attested to the ineffectiveness of missile defense, as it currently stands. It is very difficult to hit a flying missile with another missile, and test-runs of the technology have been patchy at best (Sessler et. al., 2000). The dream of an effective missile defense shield that can successfully intercept enemy intercontinental ballistic missiles has yet to come to fruition. It would be better to stop throwing good money after bad and to fold up the project entirely.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
c5e27ce500b8fca26a6713cf7a9baea3
|
Force does more harm than good.
The use of force is incredibly damaging to the people you are trying to protect.
Military intervention inevitably leads to further casualties and loss of civilian life. All warfare has civilian costs due to imperfect strategic information, the use of human shields and the simple fact that more bombs, troops and guns leads to more violence and thus more death of those caught in the crossfire. Adding to this the propensity of forces to hide among civilian populations and, often, the lack of identifiable military uniforms, leads to further human costs and prolonged guerrilla warfare.
Adding to human cost is the infrastructural costs of prolonged warfare, particularly seen in interventions including bombing campaigns, leads to prolonged and sustained damage caused by the use of force both during war and in reconstruction.
For example, the NATO bombing campaign in Kosovo in 1998 led to 1,200-5,000 civilian deaths [1] .
If we are aimed at protecting the human rights of individuals, the massive loss of human life, and sustained damage to basic infrastructure necessary for the functioning of the state means the use of forces furthers human rights abuses, not stops them.
[1] "Kosovo: Civilian Deaths in the NATO Air Campaign." Human Rights Watch. United Nations High Commission for Refugees, n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,HRW,,SRB,,3ae6a86b0,0.html> .
|
[
{
"docid": "5bb105807da1d8e2723e235caeb397d6",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Although there are some subjective elements of rights, there is generally a consensus amongst most people that fundamental human rights, such as being alive, are universally good. Although we should not impede sovereignty for subjective things, genocide, ethnic cleansing and other systematic abuses of human rights are things that are universal and thus should be protected for all people around the world.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "e879989e31bb62ed192bbfbaf50aacaa",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society This is unlikely to happen in the majority of cases as not all countries have an anti-Western bias and not all intervening forces have to be Western or identifiably Western. Moreover, the best way to gain the support of a population is to tangibly impact their lives and demonstrate the commitment to their protection and their cause. The best solution for anti-intervention force bias comes with the intervening force itself when real people see troops fighting in a real way to protect them and their rights. There is no more powerful way to build trust than to save a member of someone's family or community in front of their eyes. Thus, this is a self-correcting issue. Although there may be initial issues with backlash from the region, most people will welcome those who are risking their lives to save them and their families.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ca09f3d944eb9dc68fbce47308d7b19a",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Most human rights abuses are motivated by ideological factors that are not rationally calculated through a \"cost-benefit-analysis.\" Much of the world's human rights abuses are committed along ethnic or religious lines and thus are not open to incentives and disincentives but are rather absolutist obligations they think they have from their religion or ethno-cultural beliefs.\n\nMoreover, most interventions are costly, damaging for the intervening forces and are generally unappealing to domestic populations in the states that are intervening. As such, the political will for intervention is usually quite low and not feasible. Most regimes will know this and thus take this \"message\" from the international community with a grain of salt and therefore have no impact on their actions.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "9352618188dcfe03a228997e94c31ee5",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Referring back to counterargument one, this again assumes the a priori existence of individual rights. Moreover, following this logic, as all individuals would, behind a \"veil of ignorance\", most certainly choose to live is a developed, prosperous nation, all developed nations would have the moral obligation to literally relocate the entire population of the developing world into their own countries. Simply because something may be seen as \"preferable\" to some people does not a moral imperative create.\n\nFurther, this experiment assumes universality of any conception of rights or \"human rights\". The subjective nature of what it means to be a human being between different faiths and cultures leads to different conceptions of what \"dignity\" means to humanity and thus enforcing the conception of \"dignity\" held by the militarily powerful on other states does not necessarily protect it, but in many ways can erode it.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a7ab255278630bfe4bbbec3f29a69204",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Individual rights are created by the state and do not exist in a vacuum, nor do they exist outside of the realm of the existence of a state. To argue that a “social contract” exists where one gives up their “rights” to the state is to suggest that these rights somehow exist outside of the scope of the state existing, which they do not. States empower individuals to have the capacity to do things and thus allow for practical rights to exist. The rights they allow or disallow, whether “human rights” or otherwise, are simply constructions of the state and its denial of certain rights is therefore in no way a breach of any contract or trust [1] . No state or external organisation has any right to decide what a state should or should not construct as its citizen’s rights and therefore has no basis for intervention.\n\n[1] Burke, Edmund. \"Reflections on the Revolution in France.\" Exploring the French Revolution. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/563/> .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "0a9ef349821fc0bf14f59b764d0a58f7",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Foreign intervention fragments the conflict.\n\nThe use of force by foreign agents fragments conflicts which perpetuates the war. The countries who are likely to and historically have participated in humanitarian intervention are developed Western nations such as the US, UK, Canada and France either unilaterally or under organisational banners such as NATO. In the vast majority of the world, the West is not well-liked and the education systems, media and local history have created negative perceptions of the West as \"imperialists\" and colonialists. Intervention can often be seen as \"neo-colonialism\" and the West trying to assert power to change regimes inside other countries around the world. This, combined with the inevitable human cost of the use of force, turns local populations against the intervening forces and allows government forces to cast any resistance movements that cooperate with the intervening forces as traitors to their country.\n\nThis is both bad in terms of causing large military opposition from both sides of the conflict against the troops who are intervening, but also fragments the conflict. Resistance movements splinter into those cooperating with the intervening forces and those who aren't. This fractures the resistance movements, reducing their chances of success and reducing the possibility of ceasefires by fragmenting the sides of the conflict making it hard to determine who effectively represents who at the negotiating table.\n\nA good example of this can be seen by the fragmentation of Sunni and Shi'a factions in Iraq post-intervention and the further entrenchment of Sunni opposition to the Shi'a after the Western forces specifically enriched the Shi'a through power and wealth for their cooperation1.\n\n1 \"Iraq in Transition: Vortex or Catalyst?\" Chatham House 04.-2 n. pag. Web. 7 Jun 2011.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "8dc67f3e2cf12d1594edbdb6f911ff7c",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society This is an illegitimate violation of national sovereignty.\n\nHuman rights are a social construct that are derived from the idea that individuals have created on the subject. States empower individuals to have the capacity to do things and thus allow for practical rights to exist. The rights they allow or disallow, whether “human rights” or otherwise, are simply constructions of the state and its denial of certain rights is therefore legitimate practice of any state [1] .\n\nThe imposition of one state’s conception of what rights should or should not be protected is in no way morally justifiable or universally applicable. Different religions and cultures create different constructs of human dignity and humanity and thus believe in different fundamental tenets and “rights” each person should or should not have.\n\nIt is not legitimate to impede upon another state’s sovereignty due to subjective consideration imposed upon the less powerful by the superpowers of the global system.\n\n[1] Burke, Edmund. \"Reflections on the Revolution in France.\" Exploring the French Revolution. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Jun 2011. < http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/563/> .\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "00a38b71e9437daf829f3d0c34a8d211",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society National sovereignty ends when human rights are systematically violated.\n\nStates violate their right to non-intervention through systematic human rights abuses by violating the contract of their state.\n\nStates derive their rights of control and on the monopoly of violence through what is called the ‘social contract.’ A state gains its right to rule over a population by the people of that state submitting to it their rights to unlimited liberty and the use of force on others in society to the state in return for protection by that state [1] . The individual is sovereign and submits his rights to the state who derives sovereignty from the accumulation of an entire population’s sovereignty. This is where the legitimacy and right to control a population by force comes from. When a state is no longer protecting its people, but rather is systematically removing the security and eroding away the most basic rights and life of those citizens, they no longer are fulfilling the contract and it is void, thus removing their right to sovereignty and immunity from intervention.\n\nThe necessity of intervention in such a case comes from the desperation of the situation. Regimes that use the machinery of the state and their enriched elite against their populations hold all the wealth, power and military might in the country. There is no hope for self-protection for individuals facing a powerful, organized, and well-funded national army. In such a case, the sovereignty of the individuals need to be protected from the state that abuses them.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "22373ea0cbf0916b36360a99c2320bba",
"text": "onal global law human rights international law politics warpeace society Interventions can be small and successful.\n\nIt is the interventions that take a long time to succeed, such as Kosovo, or even fail such as Somalia, or those where many people do not buy into the justification such as Iraq that are remembered. However this forgets that there have also been many small successful interventions and sometimes the threat of intervention is enough. Sierra Leone is the forgotten conflict of Tony Blair’s premiership in the UK. In 2002 Britain sent 800 paratroopers into Sierra Leone, originally just to evacuate foreigners from the country but became an intervention when the British helped government forces drive out rebels which may have saved many lives. However it may also have emboldened Blair to help with intervention in Iraq. [1] This example also shows that it is important to have support on the ground as the British were seen as being legitimate and there was a functioning government who could do the rebuilding. Where this luxury does not exist it is important not to do as happened in Iraq and disband the civil service and prevent those natives who are qualified from running the country even if they may have been implicit in the previous regimes actions.\n\nWhere possible as little force as possible should be used. In Libya NATO only committed airpower and supplied weapons so keeping the conflict as much a domestic affair as possible. Slowly as it becomes accepted that interventions will happen the threat will become enough. Sudan may well in part have accepted the secession of South Sudan due to the US backing of the peace deal in 2005.\n\n[1] Little, Allan, ‘The brigadier who saved Sierra Leone’, BBC Radio 4, 15 May 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/8682505.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "28765edd9a7359ff6274cc009cf8d34c",
"text": "While elections should of course focus a great deal of attention on policy, it is also critical that voters understand who exactly it is they are voting for. That means looking beyond the manifesto and getting an understanding of the candidate’s character and private dealings. Having access to their private financial records can go a long way toward revealing this information, as they provide valuable insight into both the candidate’s financial abilities, and his or her attitude toward the state.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d086a85cf35b591ecb0e24891c7f0b1c",
"text": "Employment practices are usually discriminatory against locals in Africa. Due to a lack of local technical expertise, firms often import professionals particularly for the highest paid jobs.\n\nThe presence of these extractive industries can also disrupt local economies, causing an overall decrease in employment by forcing the focus and funding away from other sectors [1] . Returning to the Nigerian example, the oil industry directly disrupted the agricultural industry, Nigeria’s biggest employment sector, causing increased job losses [2] .\n\n[1] Collins,C. ‘In the excitement of discovering oil, East Africa should not neglect agriculture’ The East African 9 March 2013 http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/OpEd/comment/East-Africa-should-not-neglect-agriculture/-/434750/1715492/-/csn969/-/index.html\n\n[2] Adaramola,Z. ‘Nigeria: Naccima says oil sector is killing economy’ 13 February 2013 http://allafrica.com/stories/201302130929.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "440828d727cabafe3e5da6a6fac27b8f",
"text": "Despite Africa’s demands for increased influence, they are not in a position of power and it is within their interest to maintain positive relations with the developed powers.\n\nThey have numbers but despite their economic growth in the past decade Africa is still more dependent than any other region on foreign help. The budgets of Ghana and Uganda, for example, are more than 50 percent aid dependent. [1] Moreover, they need foreign troops in order to maintain order and fight rebel groups. In 2013, there were 15 peacekeeping missions in Africa playing a necessary role in maintaining order in countries such as the CAR. [2]\n\n[1] Ayodele, Thompson et al., “African Perspectives on Aid: Foreign Assistance Will Not Pull Africa Out of Poverty” Cato Institute, 14 September 2005 http://www.cato.org/publications/economic-development-bulletin/african-perspectives-aid-foreign-assistance-will-not-pull-africa-out-poverty\n\n[2] “UN Peacekeeping”, Better World Campaign, http://www.betterworldcampaign.org/un-peacekeeping/missions/africa.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "25e99356614486a89bdd0c6d35fab7ad",
"text": "Firstly, Puerto Ricans have repeatedly rejected independence in referendums in 1967, 1993, and 1998, with the votes for independence always being fewer than those for statehood. But secondly, the reasons against Puerto Rican independence are myriad. If Puerto Rico were to vote for independence, it would be hugely costly. It is inconceivable that the U.S. would set Puerto Rico adrift without a large \"transition package\" and continued foreign aid of a large magnitude. This would be necessitated by the fact that Puerto Ricans are currently U.S. citizens, who would demand favourable treatment and help. Puerto Rico, as an island with 3.8 million people and no other significant natural resources, is not economically viable as a separate nation without significant external aid and free access to large markets like the US enjoys. With statehood, Puerto Rico can be economically viable and a contributor to the United States' wealth, but with independence it would be impoverished and isolated. [1] Moreover, the American 'melting pot' has always been about the fusion of different cultures together, not their disappearance, and this will be the same for Puerto Rican identity.\n\n[1] United States Council for Puerto Rico Statehood. “Statehood Issues”. United States Council for Puerto Rico Statehood. 2004.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ddbbb639cc06c4154ff7d6bea8811a07",
"text": "The chemical weapons inspections take the pressure off Syria. When there was a threat of intervention by an outside power there was a reason for the Syrian government to negotiate with the rebels to find a peaceful solution. It is clear that it was coercion that got the weapons inspectors in as the White House said “It was the credible threat of U.S. military action that led to the opening of this diplomatic avenue.” [1] But it halts future coercion. With weapons inspectors in the country the possibility of using coercion is non-existent; no country is going to consider an attack while they are there and the Syrian regime knows this. The inspections may be considered a diplomatic victory for Russia and the USA but it has come at the expense of the bigger prize of peace. For which there is now almost no prospect.\n\n[1] Zenko, Micah, ‘Would the Syria Deal Be a Coercive Diplomacy Success?’, CFR, 12 September 2013, http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2013/09/12/would-the-syria-deal-be-a-coercive-diplomacy-success/\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7701ddd113582ab9280dcc6ad0719c7c",
"text": "Safety arguments are a red herring; terrorism will not be effectively prevented by the erection of the border fence. We need a proactive strategy that gathers intelligence and works with counterterrorism officials abroad to disrupt recruitment and training centers for terrorist groups.1 If some immigrants can slip through, so can some terrorists. At any rate, the 9/11 hijackers and other Al-Qaeda terrorists traditionally have not come through the Mexican border but rather from abroad and by airplanes or seaports, or they are homegrown radicals. Spending billions of dollars in a vain series of attempts to seal ourselves in an impenetrable fortress simply helps terrorists fulfill their goals of making us live in a culture of perpetual fear. As for drug trafficking, this problem is largely born of the tremendous market for it that still exists in the United States. If the demand dried up, so would the suppliers; on the other hand, if there is still an incredibly lucrative market, no fence will stop them from ferrying large amounts of drugs over the border, and most of the weapons the narcotics traffickers use actually come from the United States as well.2 We need to look to other solutions besides simplistic fences.\n\n1 Bruguire, Jean-Louis. \"The holes in America's anti-terror fence.\"\n\n2McGreal, Chris. \"The battle of the US-Mexico frontier.\"\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "7b93bc688ae2047749507d70e5305245",
"text": "Just because something is difficult does not mean it should not be attempted.\n\nIsrael itself was no stranger to war crimes trials between Nuremberg and the ICTY: Adolf Eichmann, the logistical architect of the Holocaust, was tried and put to death by an Israeli court in 1962.\n\nSharon has been accused of things after the creation of the ICTY came in to force, such as deaths as a result of Israeli operations in Jenin in 2002 [1] .\n\n[1] Human Rights Watch, ‘Jenin’, 2 May 2002, http://www.hrw.org/node/79081/section/3\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b624d5ba5ca24a5cc65e79b05d3766e9",
"text": "Getting special forces or allies on the ground is not always an option. In countries like Somalia and Yemen where there have been conflicts between factions the authorities will not always cooperate and even if they do they may not control the territory where the strike team would need to operate. There will also be many times where it is simply too dangerous to try and snatch someone. If that person is a danger they need to be stopped in the quickest way possible; and that will be by the use of the UAV that is already far above monitoring the target.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6680ce6020cecb70b529188085d72caf",
"text": "Trade is good for democracy.\n\nVenezuela’s Hugo Chavez has been making sustained efforts to boost his influence in Latin America, with regional tours and substantial investments in neighbouring economies, fuelled by Venezuela’s oil money [1] . He is staunchly anti-American and a supporter of Iran. Meanwhile, he has been restricting freedom of speech in his own country, has done away with presidential term limits, and has essentially proven himself as yet another Latin American dictator in the making. If the US hopes to counterbalance his influence, it needs to become more economically connected to Latin America. Showing that the United States is willing to trade fairly with Latin America would undermine his message. This would not only be the case for the United States as it would also allow Brazil and other successful democratic Latin American states to boost their influence.\n\n[1] Carroll, Rory. “Chavez Opens His Wallet Wider to Boost Latin American Influence.” The Guardian. 9 August 2007. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/aug/09/venezuela.internationalnews\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "514704efdbbafabef178364d1ef0fb39",
"text": "Vaccines themselves are expensive to develop in the lab and to mass produce for widespread compulsory vaccination programs. In addition to these upfront costs, organizing compulsory vaccination programs across an entire country can be very complicated and expensive. For instance, mechanisms must be set in place to ensure that the program is indeed compulsory, which means establishing a database of those that have and have not received the vaccine.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
8730d3cef73baeebd5c636e35e9d5cee
|
There needs to be a response to bad behaviour internationally
The intention of international institutions is to bind countries together, to ensure they speak to each other and resolve differences, and to ensure they feel they cannot engage in aggressive actions. However when a state breaks these norms there needs to be a reaction. Russia has been willing to engage in aggressive acts time and time again. The recent occupation of Crimea is very similar to Russia’s war with Georgia in 2008; in both conflicts Russia used the excuse of Russians being in danger, in both cases Russia was there as a ‘peacekeeper’, and in both cases the action was in another sovereign country whose government did not wish Russian troops there. The result is an expansion of Russian influence and some form of annexation. [1] There was no action after the Russian conflict with Georgia except a mediated peace. [2] There now needs to be a response to actions in Crimea; throwing Russia out of the G8 is the least response.
[1] Friedman, Uri, ‘Putin’s Playbook: The Strategy Behind Russia’s Takeover of Crimea’, The Atlantic, 2 March 2014
[2] King, Charles, ‘The Five-Day War’, Foreign Affairs, November/December 2008
Traynor, Ian, Luke Harding and Helen Womack, ‘Georgia and Russia declare ceasefire’, theguardian.com, 16 August 2008
|
[
{
"docid": "72f23ea582629c0775e07727c6112e9c",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 If there needs to be a response to Russian actions it does not need to be this response. Much more useful would be economic sanctions against Russia; either targeted freezing of state assets and the assets of leaders, or more comprehensive sanctions that would damage Russia’s economy. Such actions would provide a real cost to aggressive action, not simply a symbolic cost. [1]\n\n[1] Verhofstadt, Guy, ‘Russia will bow to economic pressure over Ukraine, so the EU must impose it’, theguardian.com, 6 March 2014\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "7f728f56e5145487940161e89ecc019b",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 The G8 countries are the world’s most powerful countries. As such most of the powers involved in the G8 have at some point been involved in aggressive foreign interventions. The Iraq invasion did not lead to calls to throw the US and UK out, neither did the bombing of Libya lead to France’s expulsion. Using Russian actions in Ukraine as an excuse would be simple hypocrisy.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "144be1aef5502d97edb79c999457d59b",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 Sanctions by necessity harm both sides. However Russia is a much smaller economy than either the EU or US (both of which are seven-eight times bigger). Any economic retaliation and escalation will therefore harm Russia more. The threat to cut off gas supplies is a major threat but Russia can’t simply sell the gas elsewhere because its pipelines mostly go to Europe. In the 2009 ‘gas war’ which involved supplies to Europe being restricted (though not completely cut off) for 20 days Russia’s state gas company Gazprom lost $1.1billion in revenues. [1] A more complete cut off would have higher losses.\n\n[1] Pugliaresi, Lucian et al., ‘Is it time for Gazprom to hit the reset button?’, Oil&Gas Journal, 3 September 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "54b91673174042f6829fbbe6fc9f6fb8",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 It is wrong to say that Russia is not an industrialised country, it is considered by the World Bank to be a high income country. [1] It is also a democracy that holds regular elections. President Putin is held in high regard by Russians 67.8% of Russians approve of Putin’s job performance [2] – far higher than any other member of the G8.\n\n[1] The World Bank, ‘Russian Federation’, data.worldbank.org, accessed 7 March 2014\n\n[2] Luhn, Alec, ‘Ukraine crisis and Olympics boost Vladimir Putin’s popularity in Russia’, The Guardian, 6 March 2014 , note however the pollster is state run!\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "e8e74114c2e14927becbfc2bb0452140",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 The address by Putin was before Russia’s illegal intervention into Crimea and as such ‘settling regional conflicts’ almost certainly refers to Syria, not Crimea. Russia’s role in Syria has hardly been constructive, it has until recently stopped any resolutions on Syria [1] , but not so onerous as to require throwing the country out of the G8. With Putin in charge of the summit and so setting the agenda we can be sure that discussion of Crimea will be kept off the agenda so ensuring that any discussion is purely informal. Putin is hardly likely to make concessions at his own summit.\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Syria crisis: UN Security Council agrees aid resolution’, 23 February 2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "662b4ef7176a05f76866713bae78892c",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 Getting rid of Russia would not make the G8 irrelevant; it would simply return it to its core. The remaining members would me much more likely to agree and actually come up with meaningful outcomes to the summits. It might be a less effective steering committee for the global economy but at the same time it could ensure greater unity between the western powers.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1f82f85b4a44b6d3100299b9ecd3eed3",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 But Russia, as with any country – particularly any powerful country – is interested in symbolism and international prestige. Many analysts suggest that Putin’s takeover of Crimea may be about revenge for having ‘lost’ Ukraine, or out of a desire to set up a new greater Russia. [1] In each of these cases it is about prestige as the practical gains to Russia are small. Russia wants to be seen as a great power, kicking it out of one of the globe’s top clubs damages that ambition.\n\n[1] Speck, Ulrich, ‘Opinion Putin planning ‘Soviet Union lite’’, CNN, 4 March 2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "523455d59ae8db60446d28746bc8f7c6",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 While strength in numbers may seem to be useful when there are conflicts between Russia and the other G8 members this is not what the G8 should be about. Using the G8 in such a way will simply encourage Russia to dig its heels in and encourage the growth of other rival institutions. An example would be the BRIC summits between Brazil, Russia, India and China; would these have happened at all if the G8 has been more inclusive and recognised that these nations need to be involved in the G8? It is notable that the very first summit included discussion of the desire by India and Brazil to play a greater role in world affairs. [1]\n\n[1] Presidents of Russia, Brazil, China and Prime Minister of India, ‘Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries’ Leaders’, kremlin.ru, 16 June 2009\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "a60fa835ba123080933333600f2c813b",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 Aggressive acts violate the meaning of the G8\n\nThe focus of the G8 is on economic, monetary, financial and globilisation issues. Aggressive actions scare the markets – as shown by the rouble reaching new lows against the dollar and Euro – so run counter to the focus of the G8. [1] Russia has in the past also used its gas supplies as an economic weapon, this and acts of aggression such as in Crimea are repudiating the idea of globilisation. The G8 is important because there is “a good understanding among G8 members” clearly when one of those members is engaging in conflictual acts that understanding is damaged. [2] The G7 members on 2nd March 2014 in a statement responding to Russia’s aggression in the Crimea stated “Russia’s actions in Ukraine also contravene the principles and values on which the G-7 and the G-8 operate”. [3] Any member that does not follow the principles of an organisation should be suspended as a member.\n\n[1] BBC News, ‘Russian rouble hits new low against the dollar and euro’, 3 March 2014\n\n[2] Government of France, ‘The G8’, g8.fr, 2003\n\n[3] Office of the Press Secretary, ‘G-7 Leaders Statement’, whitehouse.gov, 2 March 2014\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "bbb937a27c513c73e666d3296b053562",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 Russia should never have been a member\n\nThe G8 has been meant to be a group of industrialised democracies. Russia is neither particularly industrialised, nor particularly democratic. Russia remains reliant on natural resources for much of its wealth; 30% of its GDP and 70% of exports. [1] Its most recent presidential election – that voted in Putin for a third term – was not exactly free and fair. The OSCE election observers concluded “There was no real competition and abuse of government resources ensured that the ultimate winner of the election was never in doubt”. [2] Its qualifications for membership have been questioned from the very beginning, when Russia joined the G7 were able to argue inclusion would bring it closer to the west. Yet Russia remains essentially an outsider in the group, it does not share western values and goes its own way. [3]\n\n[1] Aron, Leon, ‘The political economy of Russian oil and gas’, American Enterprise Institute, 11 April 2013\n\n[2] Eschenbaecher, Jens-Hagen, ‘Russia’s presidential election marked by unequal campaign conditions, active citizens’ engagement, international observers say’, OSCE, 4 March 2012\n\n[3] Dempsey, Judy, ‘Judy Asks: Is Russia Relevant in the G8?’, Carnegie Europe, 19 June 2013\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6e93d4e809ace434acc6850ef8ab05b5",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 The biggest action the west can take without sanctions\n\nEuropean states, which make up half of the members of the G8, have been reluctant to take stronger economic steps against aggressive Russian actions. Russia has warned the US “We will encourage everybody to dump US Treasury bonds, get rid of dollars as an unreliable currency and leave the US market.” [1] The European countries have more reason to be concerned because they rely on Russia for their gas supplies; 39% of German gas and 9% of total energy consumption is reliant on Russia. [2] If Russia were to retaliate to sanctions it could seriously damage the European economy. This means that throwing Russia out of the G8 or other institutions is the biggest sanction that does not have any risk of economic retaliation and escalation that damage everyone.\n\n[1] RIA Novosti, ‘Putin Adviser Urges Dumping US Bonds In Reaction to Sanctions’, 4 March 2013\n\n[2] Ratner, Michael et al., ‘Europe’s Energy Security: Options and Challenges to Natural Gas Supply Diversification’, Congressional Research Service, 20 August 2013, p.10\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "10e697af3b5e8b9e6a969d88cbbd58cf",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 Allows strength in numbers\n\nRussia was originally allowed in to the G8 to encourage it to reform, or rather to provide a place where Russia’s leader can be backed into reforming. The G8 is a western institution, a forum in which an aggressive Russia has no natural allies. This means that it is the perfect place for the western democracies to voice their concerns; Russia will find itself isolated at the table and on the back foot. While at its own summit it will be even more likely to give concessions in the interests of making its own summit a success. At the last G8 summit Putin hosted in 2006 Russia made some concessions to the US in order to try and obtain WTO membership. [1]\n\n[1] Rutland, Peter, ‘Russia and the WTO: deal, or no deal?’, National Bureau of Asian Research, Special Report no.12, March 2007. Pp31-36, p.32\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "aff9b21c997846f135e8dfa46ff56f62",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 Simply narrows the G8 making it irrelevant\n\nThe G8 has been losing its relevance with the rise of other countries economically. It can no longer claim to be the top eight economies as Canada is the world’s eleventh largest economy with India, Brazil and China all bigger. It is even lower (14th) if done by Purchasing Power Parity. [1] Newer more inclusive institutions such as the G20 that include other vital economies like China have been taking over its primacy on the economy. The G8 is no longer the best grouping to steer the global economy as was recognised during the 2008 financial crisis where the G20 took the lead. [2] Throwing out Russia would simply be making the G8 narrower and less important globally so reducing the institution’s influence.\n\n[1] The World Bank, ‘GDP (current US$)’, data.worldbank.org, 2012 figures\n\n[2] Cooper, Andrew F., ‘The G20 as an improvised crisis committee and/or a contested ‘steering committee’ for the world’, International Affairs, Vol.86, No.3, 2010 pp.741-757\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b0d103fe1ac9c57cf0362ef516dbb289",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 There needs to be a place to talk\n\nGerman Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier argues that \"The format of the G8 is actually the only one in which we in the West can speak directly with Russia\". [1] Russia’s proposed priorities for the G8 summit included “fighting the drug menace, combating terrorism and extremism, settling regional conflicts, safeguarding people's health, and establishing a global management system to address risks associated with natural and man-made disasters” [2] since Russia is clearly willing to discuss regional conflicts then it makes sense to use the summit to discuss Ukraine. Since Russia has not turned up to other suggested talks, such as a meeting of the Budapest agreement group [3] (UK, US, Ukraine, Russia – the agreement guarantees Ukraine’s territorial integrity [4] ), it makes sense to go to Russia’s summit which Russia can’t avoid.\n\n[1] kms/ccp, ‘Putin agrees to Ukraine 'fact-finding' mission after talk with Merkel’, Deutsche Welle, 2 March 2013\n\n[2] Putin, Vladimir, ‘Address by President Vladimir Putin on Russia assuming the G8 Presidency’, en.g8russia.ru, 1 January 2014\n\n[3] G uardian Staff, ‘Only talks between Russia and Ukraine can solve crisis, say US and UK’, theguardian.com, 5 March 2014\n\n[4] Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, ‘Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994’, cfr.org, 5 December 1994\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6c88a1bd57009f016fbbdc51200076ec",
"text": "onal global politics government leadership house would throw russia out g8 Will make no difference to Russia\n\nThrowing Russia out of the G8 to punish the country – whether for aggressive acts in its near abroad, for human rights violations, or simply for corruption and economic crimes – is unlikely to make any difference to Russia. [1] Being in the G8 provides very little tangible benefit; it is all about the symbolism of it being the top club. Russia however has created its own top club in the BRICS conferences that are very similar to the G8 as a series of informal gatherings of major world leaders. Russia could rightly argue that despite having fewer members it is broader and more inclusive as it includes members from the Americas (Brazil), from Africa (South Africa), and the important players from of Eurasia (Russia, China, India). Since these powers are the rising countries why would Russia want to be associated with the declining west?\n\n[1] Judah, Ben, ‘Why Russia No Longer Fears the West’, Politico, 2 March 2014\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
dd905ac5829b6b3c81b37cb0ec895411
|
All high schools accepting state funding should accept military recruiters once a year
The relationship between the state and the schools that it establishes and funds goes both ways; if schools accept state funding, the state is entitled to use schools as a platform for the military to appeal to future recruits. All state-funded schools, irrespective of location and student demographics but only high schools, would be expected to accept military recruiters once a year to speak to the entire student body. The event would be a condition of further funding for the school, however there would be no limits placed on a minimum number of students that needed to enlist as a result.
|
[
{
"docid": "5cbd02be18980098dc143e37268deca6",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace To only ask state-funded schools to accept military recruiters ensures that those entering the military out of school are disproportionally from state-schools rather than privately-funded schools, and therefore more likely to be middle and lower-class. Furthermore, there should be no quid pro quo regarding the funding of schools, conditions for further funding should be related to the success of students and the quality of teaching, not whether the school has furthered the state's desire to see its military substantiated. Schools should in fact protect students, not expose them annually to military recruiters who can incrementally pressurize them into a military career.\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
[
{
"docid": "74ce6d53dbbbdf7d31d4eaaface97b31",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The need for recruits, however genuine, does not necessitate recruitment within schools. There will of course be certain students who would be attracted voluntarily to a role in the armed services, however these students can be reached through means other than their schools. Furthermore, if the motivation of recruits is paramount, then recruits can do no more to prove their motivation than actively and independently seek out a role in the armed services, rather than having it forced upon them through visits to their schools.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "fd0ecde21a6b9d3c9c7fa85d1d4cff99",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people are not aware and are, in many cases, deliberately misled as to the risks of military service. School children, conditioned by modern television, film and video games as to the heroism of military service, do not often ponder the dangers inherent in conflict. Modern video games, in which war deaths are the norm and immediate 're-spawning' dulls all sensitivity to death, do not serve to educate the youth about the risks but downplay them to the point of banality. Studies indicate that military recruiters, whilst not actively seeking to downplay risks or obscure the truth, are reluctant to volunteer information that would dissuade potential recruits 1. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "5ba6e7499d7fe86b9a7184ea7cfa1a3b",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace However it is dressed up, all the military is interested in schools for is the chance to recruit students. The various educational materials (not always clearly marked as coming from the military) and courses on offer are all intended to interest students in a military career. Such methods are dishonest and should not be allowed in schools; Paul McGarr, a teacher in East London, stated that 'only when recruiting materials gave a true picture of war would he welcome them into his school'1. If students are genuinely interested in joining the military, they can go along to a recruitment centre outside school, potentially with their parents, and ask the necessary questions there. 1 Goff, H. (2008, March 25). Teachers reject 'Army propaganda'. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from BBC News:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "561b35be3d0eb6dc98a5450d2475311f",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The armed services have no right to preach to the youth, particularly when they are in a trusting environment like a school. To permit any organization to advertise to schoolchildren about job prospects is misguided at a time when their critical faculties are nascent and they are endowed with the belief that what is taught at school is to be imbibed with little rebuttal. Mandated school activities like the Lord's Prayer and Pledge of Allegiance do serve to promote nationalism, but do not do so in such a way as to threaten the lives or disrupt the career paths of school children. School children must be protected from organizations that have the potential to put pressure on them and guilt trip them into signing away the rest of their young adult life. If their choices are to be respected, they must be left to develop their critical faculties and then permitted to use information available to the general public to make a decision.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "47a41944c9fab07d2605aa348a9945e5",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace School children are not targeted for military service; the intention is to raise awareness about the work that the military do. A Ministry of Defence spokesman in the UK stated that they 'visit about 1,000 schools a year only at the invitation of the school – with the aim of raising the general awareness of their armed forces in society, not to recruit’. Furthermore, children interested in a military career are not instantly signed up, they are granted the time until they turn 18 to decide. In addition, before official enlistment, all potential recruits are sent away on a six-week camp to find out what a career in the army will be like1\n\n1 Goff, H. (2008, March 25). Teachers reject 'Army propaganda'. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7311917.stm\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "91c3c1d1c6b3040bb0ba6306d01319ab",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is not illegal in the United States for they have not signed the relevant documents. The USA has not signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child referred to opposite, although it has signed the UN's Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (United Nations General Assembly , 2000). However, the US military does not recruit under-18s anyway, so it is keeping to it's agreement. In any case, neither of these agreements stops recruiters visiting schools in order to make students aware of military career options once they turn 18.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "d646965c7a0f1f382bce7a2be272c04a",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military presentations in schools are not designed to be propaganda for their institutions, or the state as a whole, but educate the school children as to the undeniably important role that they play. State survival invariably is dependent upon the existence of a strong, well-trained armed force filled with motivated volunteers. Furthermore, demonstrations of modern technology and smart uniforms do not paint an unfair or inaccurate image of contemporary warfare. Such examples in fact illustrate the honesty of militaries in their portrayal to school children of modern combat. They act as not merely an educational tool, but a life lesson, demonstrating that the world of their video games is, in conflict zones at least, very much real.\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "6cce8390ac2d854891a870673a8d7ca2",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Recruiters do not minimise the risks of a military career, rather the armed forces have a good story to tell and they don't prevent themselves from saying so. Furthermore, it is policy for recruitment staff to 'explain the recruits' rights and responsibilities and the nature of the commitment to the Armed Forces'1. There really are great opportunities for keen, talented young people in the military, and almost all soldiers, etc. find it a very satisfying life. And compared with the past, soldiers today are much better looked after in terms of physical, medical and psychological wellbeing. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "99caeaf001dd3cc23f31b46c7a8d2ca6",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The military is an all-volunteer force and needs a percentage of school-age recruits each year\n\nOur military is an all-volunteer force and must recruit openly to keep up its numbers. The army, navy and air force need well-educated and motivated recruits; as the pool of potential recruits shrinks, efforts to attract young people must be permitted to 'intensify and diversify' 1 The alternative is a return to the conscription and national service that offers those recruits little choice. Military recruitment in schools permits the recruitment of only those with an interest in the armed forces, allowing those who wish to pursue other endeavours that opportunity. As such, visits to schools are not about forcing militaristic propaganda on children, but about making sure that 16-18 year olds know about the military as a potential career choice. After all, college representatives and local employers are allowed to make presentations to students, so it would be unfair to keep just the military out. If you accept that we need armed forces, then you must allow them to recruit openly. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "1f3269250a217b285cbb37ebfa60b8af",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace The purpose of the military entering schools is not solely recruitment but awareness\n\nMilitaries provide a public service that too often goes unnoticed and underappreciated; school visits raise the level of understanding for the important job they do. In the UK the army publicly states that it does not directly recruit in schools but does visit many each year \"with the aim of raising the general awareness of the armed forces in society\"1They always visit by invitation of the Head teacher. Compared to the USA fewer young people have local or family connections with the military, so it is important for them to learn about the role the armed forces play in our country. And in both the UK and the USA the military offers other services to schools, from educational materials to leadership courses and team-building exercises. Sgt. Maj. Jerome DeJean, of the U.S. Army's 2nd Recruiting Brigade, describes their role as 'a partner in education\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "564772b02ea09b682f2d052fac66a75c",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people should hear of the opportunities available in the armed services whilst in school\n\nSchool children are entitled, as part of their education, to a wide range of careers information, including potential roles in the military. It is a school's duty to offer not only paths to employment, but opportunities to engage with future employers like the military. With university places now increasingly competitive, schools must remain more vigilant than ever that they do not encourage purely academic paths to future careers. Furthermore, nationalism is a powerful factor in school curriculums worldwide, and permitting militaries into schools to talk to students is not an extension of already-permitted activities like the recital of the Lord's Prayer in British state schools or the Pledge of Allegiance in American schools. As such, it comes as little surprise that the predominant reason given for enlistment is service to country1. If schools are asked to ensure that such activities are carried out to foster national sentiment, it follows that military service should be, if not actively encouraged, respected sufficiently to grant the armed services an opportunity to engage with students. 1 Accardi, M. (2011, June 15) Army recruiters become a 'partner' In education Retrieved June 16, 2011, from The Huntsville Times:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "4bf16f51153b617bf679e1cfe03ae6a3",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Young people are aware of the risks of military service and therefore would not be easily misled by military personnel\n\nYoung people are not stupid – they know that there are risks involved in joining the military. In fact the media usually focuses on the bad news coming out of Afghanistan and Iraq, ignoring the good work of our military there. A career in the military also offers young people a lot of benefits, and it is only right that they should get to hear about those as well. As Donald Rumsfeld noted, ‘for some of our (US) students, this may be the best opportunity they have to get a college education’1. In addition, no one is signed up on the spot in the classroom; they always get the chance to think about it over a few months or more, and to discuss the decision carefully with parents and peers. As such, military recruitment in schools should be seen as no less unethical than the visits to schools of policemen, for whom there is similar risk but little public conjecture.\n\n1Vlahos, K. B. (2005, June 23). Heavy military recruitment at high schools irks some parents. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160406,00.html\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "ac993909104363a6c33e6672838fd01e",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruiters downplay the risks of a military career, tempting schoolchildren into a career they would not have chosen with honest information.\n\nRecruitment officers often make highly misleading pitches about life in the military. They play up the excitement and chances to travel, as well as the pay and benefits such as college fees and training in special skills. They don't talk about the dangers of military life, the casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the thousands of young soldiers who have lost limbs or been emasculated in recent years. And they don't mention the impact of war on soldiers' mental health, or the lack of support when they leave the military. If we must have the military in our schools, then they should be made to give a much more realistic view of military life. Evidence suggests that 'whilst staff are generally willing to answer questions honestly, information that might dissuade potential recruits from enlisting is not routinely volunteered'1. If we are to accept the military in schools, they must similarly accept the moral necessity of presenting the risks of the career in a fair and truthful manner. 1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "b527ce219a29ed37024ea446be988f17",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is illegal\n\nRecruitment in schools is against parts of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. A set of rules that the USA signed up to in 2002 forbids the recruitment of children under the age of 181. Despite this, the American Civil Liberties Union has found that US military recruiters target children as young as 11, visiting their classrooms and making unfair promises to them2. Though the military would argue that its school visits do not constitute recruitment, if recruitment of those under 18 is wrong, then advertising to those under 18 should similarly be considered wrong. In order to live up to its pledge in 2002, the USA should stop trying to recruit in schools. 1 United Nations General Assembly . (2000, May 25). Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: 2 American Civil Liberties Union. (2008, May 13). Military recruitment practices violate international standards, says ACLU. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from American Civil Liberties Union:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "09b87cd57c288c06577386ee926b0def",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace School children are too young to target for military service\n\nSchool children should be protected from targeted appeals for jobs they are unprepared for, both physically and emotionally. The army is short of manpower due to high casualty rates and the unwillingness of current soldiers to reenlist. This means that they are very keen to get into schools to sign up young people. But it is not right to let them get at students who are too young to vote, or even drive. 16 and 17 year olds are not grown-up enough to make life and death decisions, like joining the army. They may not be able to see through exciting presentations or resist a persuasive and experienced recruitment officer. Under the No Child Left Behind Act, military recruiters collect data on 30 million students. The act 'grants the Pentagon access to directories of all public high schools to facilitate contact for military service recruitment'1. A huge database contains their personal details, including social security numbers, email addresses and academic records. The purpose of this is to allow recruiters to pester young people with messages, phone calls and home visits. Schools should be safe places to grow and learn, not somewhere to sign your life away before it has even properly begun. Upon enlisting, recruits enter a contract that legally binds them to the Armed Forces for up to six years2; school children should not be exposed to pressure to sign their young adolescence away. 1 Berg, M. (2005, February 23). Military recruiters have unrivaled access to schools. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Common Dreams: 2 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice:\n",
"title": ""
},
{
"docid": "3db8bb9182ba021570169dab77afd5c8",
"text": " education general physical education university politics defence warpeace Military recruitment in schools is less education than propaganda\n\nAllowing members of the military into schools is a form of propaganda. They promote the military and make war seem glamorous. Soldiers in smart uniforms come into classes with specially-made videos and powerful weapons, making violence and state-organised murder seem cool. A recent report into the practice stated 'key messages are routinely tailored to children's interests: military roles are promoted as glamorous…(and) warfare is portrayed as game-like and enjoyable.’1 This encourages young people to support aggressive action abroad. It also promotes an unthinking loyalty to the state, whether its actions are right or wrong. By allowing the military in, schools are signalling to their students that these things are OK.\n\n1 Gee, D. (2008, January). Informed Choice? Armed forces recruitment practice in the United Kingdom. Retrieved May 18, 2011, from Informed Choice: http://www.informedchoice.org.uk/informedchoice/index.php\n",
"title": ""
}
] |
arguana
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.