100% Secure Payment
© 2025 Copyright:
BoutEssays. All rights reserved
Christianity played a tremendous role in the 18th century European colonization of the New World, as exemplified by Robinson Crusoe. The story of Crusoe’s isolation on the island, especially concerning his “missionary” attempts with a savage named Friday, shows the importance of Crusoe’s religion in his life. Christianity allows Crusoe to see many things about Friday and his fellow savages, such as the similarities between Friday’s people and the Europeans. But it also keeps him blind to other aspects of Friday’s life, for instance, his not wanting to change to another way of life. The following will show the two sides of Christianity’s affects on Crusoe’s way of life and thought process during the time that he spends on the island.
Get original essayChristianity is a strong force in Crusoe’s life, particularly during the years that he spent in isolation on the island. The thirty-five years spent away from European society gives him a chance to reflect on what God means in his life. He goes from a distant relationship with God when he is first shipwrecked on the island, to complete devotion and a want to spread this to others who do not “know” God. He receives this chance to spread the Word of God to a savage he names Friday. Through his “missionary” attempt, Crusoe discovers many characteristics in Friday that are similar to his own. For example, he finds that God “has bestowed upon [Friday’s people] the same powers, the same reason, the same affections, the same sentiments of kindness and obligation,...and all the capacities of doing good and receiving good, that He has given to us” (212), and this thought comforts Crusoe. He has no reason to fear Friday because of these similarities, they broke the barrier between Crusoe and Friday as well. Crusoe puts aside his apprehensions and attempts to learn from Friday. By gathering information, he can better understand Friday and further their relationship.
Among the similarities that Crusoe discovers is that Friday has similar religious beliefs to his own. One similar characteristic is the belief in one Almighty being; the European version is God while Friday’s is Benamuckee. There are also similar types of religious hierarchy, and Crusoe once observes during a conversation with Friday “that there is priestcraft even amongst the most blinded ignorant pagans in the world” (219). This hierarchical structure helps Crusoe’s attempts to rule Friday because of Friday’s faith in his “savage” religion. Through his talks with Friday, Crusoe expands his mind and begins to see that Christianity, or elements of that religion, can be found all over the world, and this helps the various peoples understand one another. These characteristics also help his mission to convert Friday. With a foundation already laid, Crusoe merely needs to “Christianize” what Friday already regards as truth. Friday believes that Crusoe’s teachings are fact and therefore wants to model his life on Crusoe’s.
With these new discoveries, Crusoe sees that Friday wants to learn, for “he was the aptest schollar that ever was” (213). With great care, Crusoe shows Friday that the European way of thinking is the best and he must therefore follow Crusoe’s lead. Friday takes a submissive role, allowing Crusoe to become his master. The determining of the savage’s name symbolizes Crusoe’s extreme power over Friday, for Crusoe “made him know his name should be Friday...[and Crusoe] likewise taught him to say Master” (209). The name “Friday,” given to him because that was the day he was saved by Crusoe, is generic and shows what little worth he is to Crusoe; that is, he is only a reminder of the calendar that Crusoe keeps. Crusoe also teaches Friday to live properly, or according to European ways. This means that Friday is expected to give up his savage ways, especially his cannibalism, for Crusoe “found Friday had still a hankering stomach after some flesh, and was still a cannibal in his nature...[and] by some means let him know that [he] would kill him if he offered [the flesh to him]” (210). All in all, Crusoe displays a great amount of patience with Friday, aside from the cannibalism that Friday has a tendency toward, but his other characteristics and habits. This is mainly because Friday is changing his life to suit Crusoe’s and does not inconvenience Crusoe in the least.
Along with this patience that Crusoe exhibits, there is also intolerance for Friday’s way of thinking. Crusoe does not allow Friday to have a say in what he is being taught. Crusoe takes his position of Master to Friday seriously and “[makes] it [his] business to teach him everything that was proper to make him useful, handy, and helpful” (213)--proper, that is, according to European rules. With Friday being servant to Crusoe, there is a great loss of freedom, freedom that he had known throughout his whole existence. Although he is not a slave by formal definition, Friday feels obligated to serve Crusoe because he saved Friday’s life. This debt to his master makes Friday’s conversion something that he has to do to please his master. This submission suits Crusoe’s life perfectly. Being European, he naturally feels superior to Friday and welcomes this opportunity to be master of someone. Because this story is written through Crusoe’s eyes, there is no way of knowing exactly how Friday actually feels, but Crusoe never wants to know in the first place. If he knew how Friday felt, his Christian conscience would stop him from his missionary attempts, and he would once again be alone on the island, with no one to control.
Although Crusoe sees that there are similarities between his own religion and that of Friday’s, Crusoe wants to re-teach Friday about religion. He wants Friday to learn Christianity and delete all knowledge of his own beliefs, but he finds that “it was not so easie to imprint right notions in his mind about the devil, as it was about the being of a God” (219). Without an already present image of European notions, Crusoe has a difficult time showing Friday the European way of thinking--one being that there is a being with almost the same powers as God, a foreign thought to Friday. Friday’s religious beliefs are “wrong,” and Crusoe wants him to realize this and change his ways to those of a true Christian.
Along these same lines Crusoe finds Friday ignorant, not just because of his savage ways, but also because Friday knows nothing about Christianity or how important it is to live a Christian life. Crusoe has found God in everything on the island, and he wants to see Him in Friday as well. This religious faith is a strong force that pushes Crusoe, and he does not want it to leave him either. Through this strong faith in God, Crusoe belittles Friday and shows once again how he is master of this savage. Even though Friday learns quickly what Crusoe is teaching him, he will never be as smart as Crusoe wishes him to be. Crusoe will always be looking for perfection in Friday, and he will never be satisfied with the results. Crusoe also compares himself with God, He being the ultimate Master. As a master, Crusoe wants his follower to be the best example of his authority.
Through the eyes of Robinson Crusoe, readers are invited into the world of the colonizing European. This colonization was overshadowed by the strong faith of Crusoe in Christianity. With this faith, Crusoe was able to successfully convert the savage Friday. Through his “missionary” attempts, Crusoe was able to see the similarities between himself and Friday, but also turned a blind eye to other aspects of Friday’s life. Through this novel, Daniel Defoe comments on eighteenth century Europe, a supreme power that showed its mastery over other countries much in the same way that Crusoe did with Friday. Literature gives its audience a view that could not otherwise be seen.
Usually, the time around Christmas is when my nerved get the best of me. I love giving gifts to my family and friends, but one part I dread about is picking which gives goes with whom. I chose to write a Christmas reflection essay with a purpose to show up personal experience, so maybe someone will find him/herself in it too.
Get original essayDuring the holidays, I just love celebrating and dining with my family. I love them with all my heart. When I was young, I always saw my dad being very enthusiastic about the holidays so i think I got that from him. Being the only boy in the family, and having seven sisters, I have assumed the role as the protective one in the family, that I can attest to. I am also very fortunate that I get to have a career that enables me to take care of my family’s finances too. Being the only brother they have, even though I know that they should all respect me, at times I feel like they don’t look at me as the “father-figure” even if I’m their big brother.
Around Christmas time when I have to go out and shop for these seven beautiful ladies I lose it completely. They are seven women, how am I supposed to remember what each of these girls like. It gets really difficult when they unwrap their gifts and they like the gift that some one else has got every one gets running to me and despite my best I am stuck.
I have tried every thing from stationary to jewelery, from pants to pets but I just dont get it what these women really want. Again Christmas is round the corner and I have been intimated that this year I should not be repeating any of the gifts that I have had ever bought in the past. And when I ask them that they could give me a list of thing that they are expecting as gifts, they would have this philosophy that gifts are never asked for. In fact around the same time the last year, I kept a suggestion box in the living room hoping that some one would at slip a slip about what they want but no, when I opened the box it had slips that read pick it on your own we wouldnt tell. I cant tell you that how frustrated I was.
This time around, I just decided that I would just randomly pick things once I see them down the street. Because even if I pick or not pick, they would always be saying something about it either way. So once I started walking, a got a make-up set, a DVD player, a huge mirror, a wall clock, an aquarium, a stuffed toy and a Cartier fake handbag. I gift wrapped ever single one of them and on the day itself, place it underneath our Christmas tree.
In addition, I made sure that I didn’t put their specific names on the gifts. I just told all of them that they can pick whatever gift they want from the pile and that’s exactly what they all did. And I knew it! All of them reacted the same way as they would even from past Christmases anyways. The only big difference was that Kelly, my youngest sister, was just so happy and thanked me for the gift. She got the Cartier fake handbag.
Christopher Columbus and Alvez Nunez Cabeza de Vaca were both explorers for Spain, but under different rulers and different times. The more famous, Christopher Columbus came before de Vaca's time. Columbus sailed a series of four voyages between 1492 and 1504 in search for a route to Asia which led to his accidental discovery of new land inhabited with Indians. Christopher sailed under the Spanish monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella for his journey to the Indies, whom he was loyal to by claiming everything in their name. De Vaca, followed in Christopher's footsteps and journeyed to Hispanionola for Spain's emperor Charles V, the grandson of Ferdinand and Isabella.
Get original essayThe both of them Columbus and de Vaca composed a series of letters addressing the main issue of their journey to the new land, but both were expressed in a different manner, included different material, and were motivated to write for dissimilar reasons. Columbus' and de Vaca's purposes to compose letters are quite divergent. Christopher Columbus' main objective in his Letter to Ferdinand and Isabella Regarding the Fourth Voyage, was to list his unnoticed achievment, justly sufferings and dedication in order for the monarchs to save him. He had his heart set on Ferdinand and Isabella's pity to obtain their permission to go to Rome and other places of pilgrimage.
In the Letter to Ferdinand and Isabella Regarding the Fourth Voyage Columbus had the intention to please his majesty by claiming his devotion which he has ever borne to the service of his Highnesses.
" He also states that the purpose of his expedition was not for his own good, and that "[he] did not sail upon this voyage to gain honor or wealth," but for his "true devotion and ready zeal" to serve his Highnesses. During his fourth voyage, Christopher endured many hazards, like imprisonment, which triggered him to compose a letter filled with his many accomplishments that he believes went unnoticed. Columbus had hopes to generate some sort of pity from the monarchs.
Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca wrote his letters for entirely different reasons. His sole purpose was to inform others of his sufferings and his discoveries of the Native Americans. He also wanted to "justify his conclusions regarding Spanish policy and behavior in America" which is mainly addressed to Charles V. De Vaca believes that "[his] only remaining duty is to transmit what he saw and heard in the nine years [he] wandered lost and miserable over many remote lands." Therefore, he conveys to Charles V the many incidents that occurred throughout his struggle for survival while in Texas. In his opinion, he thinks that the information he is revealing will be useful to others and will be of no trivial value for those who go in his majesty's name to subdue countries.
The descriptions which Christopher Columbus and Alvez de Vaca reveal are entirely different. Columbus wrote information that was insignificant. His explanations are very vague and are only little in depth when something interests him greatly, like his discovery of the beautiful Espanola. Columbus wrote about the Indians and their land as if they were not of importance. The majority of his descriptions of explorations were about himself or based on himself. On the other hand, Alvez de Vaca claims that he is telling the "truth" and are strictly factual. De Vaca remembers all the particulars, in other words, every significant detail. Alvez mentions both positive and negative qualities of his experiences. It seems as if he is attempting to prove to everyone that the Indians are good people (attempting to change their instilled views).
Of the many aspects of the Native American's lives, de Vaca mentions the different roles people play and the many Native customs. Some customs Alvez had the opportunity to experience were funerals, marriages, starvation, the system of food, relationships with each other, and mainly the ways how to survive. His actual hand's-on experience enabled him to be very detailed in his narrative. Another reason of his detailed composition was because unlike Columbus, he was interested in the people and the land.
Columbus, C. (1503). Christopher Columbus, Letter to Ferdinand and Isabella Regarding the Fourth Voyage (1503). Retrieved from http://mankel.free.fr/AmericanDream/columbus_02.html
Columbus, C. (1493/ 1995, July). The Letter of Columbus to Luis De Sant Angel Announcing His Discovery. U.Shistory.org.
Historic documents. Retrieved from http://www.ushistory.org/documents/columbus.htm Vaca C. (n.d). Adventures in the Unknown Interior of America. Retrieved from http://explorion.net/adventures-unknown-interior-america/adventures-unknown-interior-america
As of 2005, there are 133 million Americans who had at least one chronic illness (Bodenheimer, Chen, Bennett 2009). This number is overwhelming and has only been increasing to this day. One’s quality of life exponentially decreases when battling a chronic illness as they are in constant pain. Not only do these people suffer physically but mentally as well with the accompanying factors related to their disease. Those who do not speak fluent English may not be able to fully understand how to help prevent some diseases even if a medical professional is talking to them. There can be stigmas attached to certain diseases, such as HIV, which may prevent those from getting early treatment. The experience of those with chronic disease, including those around them, can have an effect on them personally and can significantly affect how they proceed in managing the associated disease
Get original essayThe encumbrance of chronic illness is getting worse and is more prevalent in minority and low-income communities. Their situation can put a great burden on those who not as fortunate to have good health care if any health care at all. There need to be policies established to help these people cope with whatever disease that they have. Prevention and management of chronic illness is an important factor in maintaining a good quality of life. In this paper we will go over studies and experiences related to chronic illness in minorities and low-income communities (Mosack, Abbott, Singer, Weeks, Rohena 2005).
I chose this topic because for the past year my mother has been battling a chronic illness, transverse myelitis, which is an inflammation of the spinal column. One day, she suddenly began to loose feeling below her shoulders and was rushed to the hospital. After a month in the hospital and rehab she came home. A year later she is doing much better but she still cannot not walk correctly and has constant nerve pain. I see her struggling every day even though she is fortunate enough to have excellent health care and support.
This lead me to think about how those who do not have great health insurance, or any at all, deal with such crippling illnesses. There is a serious correlation between minorities/low-income communities and chronic illness. This can be related to the lack of prevention knowledge and management of the disease. The process of finding information on the topic was easy as there are many articles and studies based on it. With minorities and low-income communities often being immigrants, they may not be informed about how we treat diseases in their illness in the United States, as they are not fully assimilated yet. Some of these articles their experiences make it obvious that there is a significant problem with how they deal with chronic illnesses (Charmaz 2006).
The studies that are observed for this paper include those that use tools to analyze the distribution of environmental hazards and which populations are the most vulnerable among those who live in California (Cushing, Faust, August, Cendak, Wieland, Alexeeff 2015). This can be useful when attempting to determine if low-income or minority communities truly are more at risk than others. Another study compares the experiences of three immigrant groups and evaluates their health-seeking behaviors (Choi 2003). This can be used to determine how different groups of people see primary and preventative care, to ensure that everything is being done to make sure they are taken care of. Another study attempts to get every policy field on board with promoting health (Gelormino, Melis, Marietta, Costa 2015).
Other studies try to assess the individual feeling of vulnerability that is associated with familial risk (Walter, Fiona, Emery, Jon, Braithwaite, Dejana, Marteau, Theresa 2004). The experience of the family members of those with chronic diseases affect how the relatives cope with the risk that they have a chance of being in the same position. Another study studies the World Health Organization and their description of environmental disparities and the associated health outcomes (Kruize, Droomers, Van Kamp, Ruijsbroek 2014).
When one is diagnosed with a chronic disease the first thing people usually do is look for meaning in their condition. One study addresses how people who have chronic diseases may see their situation and comparative health (Charmaz 2006). This information is gathered from 165 people who have a chronic disease, by measuring their different activities as an indicator of physical status. It is determined that that the people who are interviews scrutinize their feelings toward the disease, making it difficult to get certain things done.
In the next study an environmental justice-screening tool was used to compare the distribution of environmental hazards and the vulnerable populations among California inhabitants (Cushing, Faust, August, Cendak, Wieland, Alexeeff 2015). Seventeen indicators were created from 2004 to 2013 publicly available data into a relative collective impact score. They compared cumulative impact scores across California zip codes based on their location, urban or rural atmosphere, and ethnic/racial makeup. They evaluated which indicators were most unequally distributed with respect to ethnicity/race and poverty. The results show that environmental health threats burden communities of color in California more than other communities. Trying to reduce disparities in pollution affliction can use simple screening tools to determine which areas need the most help.
Now lets determine how different immigrant groups may see health differently. In this study, the author investigates how health-seeking actions of immigrants are changed during the acclimatization process by comparing the experiences of three Asian Pacific immigrant groups in Hawaii: Filipinos, Koreans, and Marshallese (Choi 2013). A total of 91 participants were interviewed. All three of the groups faced substantial changes in their health-seeking behaviors, but in different ways varying from group to group. Koreans tended to experience a reduction in pursuing both primary and preventive healthcare after immigration. Filipinos and Marshallese actually boosted their health-seeking actions. The previous health care experiences in their home country, combined with individual characteristics, the social framework of the host country, significantly influenced the formation of health-seeking behaviors after immigration. The study concludes that interventions should depend on the individual and take into account the foundation of behavioral modification and troubles that each immigrant population experiences.
From here we need to determine how policies can be changed to promote health. This study attempts to just that. If the marginalized groups are not health oriented, they tend to be affected more by possible negative effects of policies. By examining urban/medical literature since 2000, a review of evidence on the built environment and its health equity impact was completed (Gelormino, Melis, Marietta, Costa 2015). This review analyzed socioeconomic inequalities that are related to different workings of the built environment. As a result, the authors suggest an agenda, which assumes that key features of built environment, “identified as density, functional mix and public spaces and services,” may impact individual health through their impact on natural environment, behaviors, and social context. These consequences might be unevenly strewn depending on the social position of individuals. Generally the expected connections proposed by the foundation are well documented in the literature, yet proof of their impact on health disparities remains unreliable due to impenetrable factors, variety of study design, and difficulty to oversimplify evidence that seem to be dependent to local contexts.
Environmental health hazards can lead to chronic illness. In this next study we will determine where this hazards are most present. An environmental justice-screening tool called CalEnviroScreen was used to compare the distribution of environmental hazards and vulnerable populations among California inhabitants. Seventeen indicators were created from 2004 to 2013 publicly available data into a relative collective impact score. They compared cumulative impact scores across California zip codes based on their location, urban or rural atmosphere, and ethnic/racial makeup. They evaluated which indicators were most unequally distributed with respect to ethnicity/race and poverty. The results show that environmental health threats burden communities of color in California more than other communities. Trying to reduce disparities in pollution affliction can use simple screening tools to determine which areas need the most help.
How do chronic illnesses affect minorities and those in low-income communities? It is determined that from the Cushing study, from 2015, that environmental factors, which can cause chronic illness, is most prevalent in minority and low-income communities. This puts them at greater risk than the rest of the population. A reason that they might not be taken care of as much is shown in the Choi study from 2013. It is shown that each group sees health differently so there is no blanket policy that can help everyone. On the topic of policies, the Gelormino study from 2015 covers how the built environment
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
Get custom essayThe plight of those with chronic illnesses is apparent. The constant, intense pain they go through is difficult to understand, as it is not always obvious. Minorities and low-income communities are at a great disadvantage compared to the rest of the country and measures need to be taken, in health care policies, to alleviate their physical and mental pain. The issue of chronic illness is incredibly significant to those who work in the health care field, as they will be the ones who might be able to help draft future policies. We need to be asking ourselves questions. Is it right that minorities and low-income populations have a harder time dealing with chronic diseases? As future health science professionals, what can we do to help these people?
After his appointed year in office, Cincinnatus retired to his farm. Rome continued to fight both internally and externally. Military disaster followed when a Roman invasion force against the Aequians, led by the Consul Mincius, were trapped in the Alban Hills. In such a time of emergency, a Dictator with supreme power could be elected by the senate. This, in 457 B.C., was the course of action they took and it was unanimously decided to send for Cincinnatus. A party of senators arrived at his farm and told him of the dangers threatening Rome. The group of senators arrived telling Cincinnatus that he had been nominated dictator. Cincinnatus decided to help out his county instead of dishonoring his country.
Get original essayThe love for his country is beyond astonishing and well-loved. For such an amazing skill of arms, he was allowed to ride through the city in triumph. Cincinnatus, a farmer from Rome, had to make many decisions throughout his life. As he fought the Plebeian Tribune Gaius Terentilius Harsa, Cincinnatus stopped Terentilius from enacting his laws. Horatius nominated him for dictatorial term of six months. After all this, he left his farm and everything he had behind. Being his second time dealing with politics and the army assembled, Cincinnatus took his army to fight the Aequi. Cincinnatus, a very noble and humble man, did not want to cause any unnecessary bloodshed. He told the Aequi that he would let them live if they surrendered.
In just two weeks he had raised an army, crushed his enemy and laid down his office to return to farming. It is these events that were glorified as a model of how a Roman nobleman ought to behave. Such strictness and modesty were looked upon as characteristics of the ideal Roman citizen. It was thought that a Roman should only serve his country, not wish to have it serve him. Cincinnatus was a hero who did his duty and no more.
I would choose to lay down my authority instead of ruling Rome under dictatorial power. Being myself, I would much rather be on my farm in peace, rather than being in control of thousands of people. My job as a citizen is to protect my country and fulfill my duties at times when needed. When you look back in your life and see how great of a role model and hero you were, that matters more than power and money.
Cinco d? M??? i? ?nnu?ll? ?b??rv?d ?n M?? 5. It celebrates th? d?f??t of th? Fr?n?h ?rm? during th? B?ttl? ?f Puebla (B?t?ll? d? Puebla) in Mexico ?n M?? 5, 1862. It i? n?t to be ??nfu??d with M?xi??'? Ind???nd?n?? Day. Cinco de Mayo i? not a public h?lid??. It f?ll? on Sunday, 5 M?? 2019 ?nd m??t bu?in????? f?ll?w r?gul?r Sunday ???ning h?ur? in the United St?t??. Cin?? d? Mayo, ?r th? fifth ?f M??, is a ?r?tt? ???ul?r holiday to ??l?br?t? in the United St?t??, ?lth?ugh it? roots li? in M?xi??.In 1861, Mexico w?? in a ?t?t? ?f fin?n?i?l ruin ?nd di?tr???, ?nd the n?w ?r??id?nt, at the time, B?nit? Juár?z w?? f?r??d t? default on debt ???m?nt? to v?ri?u? European g?v?rnm?nt?. Th??? g?v?rnm?nt? d??id?d to send tr???? to Veracruz, Mexico to d?m?nd their money. All but Fr?n?? withdr?w their forces. Instead, N???l??n III, the rul?r ?f France ?t th? tim? dr?v? ?ut Juár?z ?nd his g?v?rnm?nt. On M?? 5, 1862, the French tr???? — ?b?ut 6,000 in numb?r — ?tt??k?d a ?m?ll town in east-central Mexico called Puebla d? L?? Ángeles. Th?? w?r? l?d by G?n?r?l Charles Latrille d? Lorencez and armed with h??v? artillery. In r????n??, Juár?z sent 2,000 of hi? m?n t? Pu?bl? to fight th? Fr?n?h tr????. Th? b?ttl? didn't l??t l?ng, fr?m ?unu? to ?und?wn. In th? b?ttl?, th? Fr?n?h lost about 500 soldiers, whil? th? M?xi??n troops l??t l??? than 100 m?n. Th? winning ?f th? B?ttl? ?f th? Pu?bl? r??r???nt?d a gr??t victory for th? Mexican g?v?rnm?nt and h?? been solidified in Mexico's hi?t?r?. The ??l?br?ti?n ?f thi? d?? i? v?r? diff?r?nt in th? Unit?d St?t?? than it i? in M?xi??.
Get original essayCinco d? M??? is ???n as a d?? t? ??l?br?t? th? ?ultur?, ??hi?v?m?nt? ?nd ?x??ri?n??? ?f ????l? with a M?xi??n b??kgr?und, who liv? in th? United States. Th?r? is a l?rg? ??mm?r?i?l element to th? d??, with businesses ?r?m?ting M?xi??n ??rvi??? ?nd goods, ??rti?ul?rl? f??d, drinks ?nd mu?i?. Other aspects of th? d?? ??nt?r around tr?diti?n?l ??mb?l? of M?xi??n lif?, ?u?h ?? th? Virgin d? Guadalupe, ?nd M?xi??n-Am?ri??n? who h?v? ??hi?v?d f?m?, f?rtun? and influence in the Unit?d St?t??.
One ?f the l?rg??t Cin?? d? M??? ??l?br?ti?n? are in ?iti?? such as Los Angeles, San J???, San Fr?n?i???, S?n Antonio, S??r?m?nt?, Ph??nix, Albuquerque, D?nv?r and El P??? in th? USA's ??uth-w??t?rn r?gi?n?. In these ?iti??, a large proportion ?f th? population h?? M?xi??n origins. M?n? people hang u? b?nn?r? ?nd ??h??l di?tri?t? organize l????n? ?nd special ?v?nt? t? ?du??t? th?ir ?u?il? ?b?ut th? ?ultur? ?f Americans ?f Mexican d????nt. In ??m? areas, particularly in Pub?l? de L?? Angeles, ??l?br?ti?n? ?f regional M?xi??n mu?i? ?nd d?n?ing are h?ld.
Cin?? de Mayo is n?t a f?d?r?l h?lid?? in the United St?t??. Org?niz?ti?n?, businesses ?nd ??h??l? are ???n ?? u?u?l. Publi? transit ???t?m? run ?n th?ir u?u?l ??h?dul?. ?r??? ?f ??m? cities, ?????i?ll? th??? in th? S?uthw??t, l???l ??r?d?? and ?tr??t events m?? ??u?? ??m? l???l congestion t? tr?ffi?.
Cinco de M??? ?ffi?i?ll? ??mm?m?r?t?? th? anniversary ?f ?n ??rl? victory b? M?xi??n forces over French f?r??? in th? Battle ?f Puebla ?n M?? 5, 1862. It is n?t th? ?nniv?r??r? of the defeat and ?x?ul?i?n ?f th? Fr?n?h forces b? th? M?xi??n?, whi?h ???urr?d in 1867. It i? also n?t, as is often assumed, th? d?? ?f M?xi??'? celebrations ?f ind???nd?n??, whi?h are ??tu?ll? held on S??t?mb?r 16. It i? believed th?t th? origins ?f Cinco d? M??? celebrations lie in the r????n??? ?f Mexicans living in C?lif?rni? in th? 1860? t? Fr?n?h rul? in M?xi?? ?t th?t tim?.
Behind the ??l?r ?nd music ?f Cin?? de M??? li?? the B?ttl? ?f Puebla, th? 1862 vi?t?r? of th? Mexican ????l? fighting to b? free fr?m ??l?ni?l d?min?ti?n. Parades, brightly colored dresses, ?izzling ?tr??t f??d, f??tiv? mu?i?, ?nd laughter fill? the streets every M?? 5, a d?t? circled in r?v?luti?n?r? r?d on ?n? M?xi??n calendar. On May 5, 1862, a r?gt?g M?xi??n army d?f??t?d the b?tt?r-??ui???d h??t? of the Second French Em?ir? ?t th? B?ttl? ?f Puebla. Th? b?ttl? itself did n?t d??id? th? w?r — th? Fr?n?h r?turn?d to ???tur? Puebla ?nd M?xi?? Cit? in 1863. Fr?n?? controlled Mexico until 1867, when Mexican tr???? ?v?rthr?w th?ir g?v?rnm?nt ?nd returned t? b?ing ?n ind???nd?nt r??ubli?. Ov?r tim?, th? B?ttl? ?f Pu?bl? gr?w in national significance. Th? vi?t?r? strengthened th? morale of a v?r? ??ung M?xi?? ?nd became th? rallying ?r? ?f resistance t? f?r?ign d?min?ti?n. In ??mm?m?r?ti?n of thi? day, Cinco de Mayo began as a ??l?br?ti?n of th? Fr?n?h defeat, but the h?lid?? h?? gr?wn and ?h?ng?d with time. F?r M?xi??n? in Puebla, as w?ll as M?xi??n-Am?ri??n? in th? Unit?d States, it h?? b???m? a ??m?l?x ??mb?l ?f M?xi??n ?ultur?, r??ili?n??, and ?h?r??t?r.
Cinema had always impressed us with both simplicity in the term of understanding them and its complex effect on the audience psyche and we are doing this research to know the effect that these movies have on the public mind and to which extend does these movies contribute in the fight against terrorism and in which way the Kurdish cinema contribute in fighting them as well and we couldn’t so in the future and when other works are done it would give a full contribution rather than a slight one whether that is from financial aspect or the phycological effect that it has on the viewers. The research question is probably going to be “what is the difference between Hollywood cinema and Kurdish cinema in their contribution in fighting terrorism”? and this research doesn’t study the question of how does cinema effect negatively on the masses and maybe that one will be a subject to be viewed and analyzed later on another futuristic research. Human beings had always dreamt of a way to increase their life spam away to live for longer periods and in art they found what they have been looking for. First in painting where it grew at its best value during the Renaissance when the art of painting began to flourish before that artists drew what was there or what they see in front of them, but during the Renaissance they started to go beyond that, painting the many aspects of life or how they would look at it from their own perspectives and there were 2 endgames behind paining of which were one primarily aesthetic for the beauty of it looks [1] second the psychological aspect which is duplicating reality in those paintings, then another invention came to existence in 1888 and that was the photographic image for every although it was a more advance version of art but a static image may show moving objects as blurry and not very clear or even hard to understand cu it needs someone with some vision to understand a photographic image, then later on another invention came into existence which was the video camera and after the Lumière brothers started making their films that time in 1895 that was the birth of modern psychiatry and that was brought up by Freud and Joseph Breuer’s and the birth of psychoanalyses was established by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). Freud trusted that individuals could be relieved by making cognizant their oblivious musings and inspirations, in this way picking up 'understanding'. The point of analysis treatment is to discharge subdued feelings and encounters, for example make the unconscious conscious. In his early on literature his thought Back in the late 19th century Freud's conviction was that it was difficult to 'graphically speak” to the dynamic nature of our reasoning in a good structure”. Of course, the reader would have some questions on their minds like what is the relationship between cinema (movies) in general and the psychology and the audience well in the late writings in this particular research we are going to go through all these stages one by one starting with our hypothesis which is going to be “Kurdish cinema has lower contribution in fighting terrorism than Hollywood does”.
Get original essayHere we are going to have that subject viewed in not just an esthetic but also analyze some of the Kurdish movies that regard terrorism in its contents and some of Hollywood movies from 1970’s to 1990’s for the many changes that occurred in cinema during these time frames. Then later on we are going to review some of the Hollywood movies after 9/11 incident.
To better understand cinema’s and terrorism history we were better off choosing to review some of Hollywood’s oldies that are related to our subject and as the great cinema theorist Siegfried Kracauer said that “cinema is the mirror of the prevailing society” like how Hollywood cinema in the 1970s had little things to do with reality an escapist one we should refer to it as, villains in the story lines has almost absurd reasons of why they commit their attacks for example there was a movie back in (1974) with the name of (the talking Pelham 1-2-3) is one of the biggest examples on movies that the villain in it was motivated financially the gang is led by a British mercenary threatening peace in new York city by kidnapping a subway train to perform some sort of a million dollars ransom with the government. The same pattern has been duplicated in these two movies also Two Minute Warning (1976) and Rollercoaster (1977) when a bunch of criminals threaten to hit public places (black mailing the government specifically in terrifying plans to put a mass of population in danger. In 1980s that pattern was changes from escapist to somewhat like less escapist and more directed towards real terrorism especially when America witnessed the 444 days long hostage crisis (1979), and after the American involvement of the Lebanese civil war (1983), for example like in Delta Force (1986) in this movie the terrorist were shown in ugly manners which of course they are shown without there head gear bandages and are viewed from a low angle showing there unarranged hair style and looks that send only the message of fear into the hearts of whomever watches, The movie draws a picture of some gang members highjack a civilian airplane take all the way to Lebanon to an urban jungle in Beirut specifically, here a team was made to defeat them terrorists had gotten ready to get to where the hijackers, when they get there they kill bunch of them and get the people who were kidnapped into there homes safely, so in the 1980s movies were meant to be eye opening for a matter that is as significant as terrorism and there threat to the public, movies in the 1990s was just like the 1970s style movies when the jihadist or villains have an certain ideology but the ideology is just a mare mask behind their real motives which is always financial and not ideological, and most of them were like a group of terrorists come and take on a bank, park or skyscraper basically (public places) and take hostages defeat all attempts of government to rescue the hostages and then a hero comes alone and defeat a bunch of them single handedly just like in Die Hard II (1992), Red Alert (1992), Passenger 57 (1992), Speed (1995), Sudden Death (1995), Die Hard III (1995), The Rock (1996), Operation Broken Arrow (1997), or Air Force One (1997) in all these movies villains had won for a short amount of time then after the hero showed up there luck would change for the worse facing there own defeat, one by one till the hero of the movie alone faces the last one of them and strikes him down to make it the end of all evil, only for these movies for they had shown the real face of terrorism like in True Lies (1994), Executive Decision (1996), and The Siege (1999), for they had shown the jihadists true capacity and hunger for bloodshed and how far they would go to make the most damage possible to achieve there vile means, for example if we so to speak review the role of the jihadist or how they were viewed in true lies (1994) which mainly talks about a group of jihadists (Crimson Jihad) they call themselves they tended to has managed to deliver some nuclear weapons out of one of the soviet unions, trying to blackmail the government of the united states, and to prove that they had those weapons they actually detonated one of them on an inhabitable islands of the Florida keys, threatening all countries alike, then Spymaster Trilby (Charlton Heston) asks his troops to find the group leader Aziz and his men before getting a nuclear bomb in front of the white house in the back of a car, the role of the hero here is played by (Arnold Schwarzenegger) the character name is Harry Tasker from “Omega Sector”, a Unit that was meant be a covert unit work in counter-expansion of terrorism .
When was a time when a trauma happens to someone in a movie in the movie theater and we go clinch our hands and react to it even though it doesn’t happen to us because it’s getting projected rather than happening in reality, well that’s when William James “described the tendency of visual images to evoke motor actions more than a hundred years ago, using the term ideomotor actions: “Wherever movement follows unhesitatingly and immediately the notion of it in the mind, we have ideo-motor action”. The term had originally been coined to describe involuntary actions during hypnosis and séances, but James pointed out that seeing something and responding automatically with an appropriate movement is one of most common ways movements are caused, “the normal process stripped of disguise.” and William James himself had separated the reason behind committing such acts is a methodology called the mirror rules and the success rule the mirror rule basically is like the saying “monkey say, monkey do” but that one is not only available for monkeys in fact all animals has that kind of instinct birds mammals do have it even insects have it and of course human beings have that trait to like all other animals and the second rule the success rule and it was called this way because human beings repeat what had worked earlier in a certain situation like what we call simulation and that’s when human beings learn like wile playing chess or something has an effect on our subconscious and we actually had learned from it. The success rule shows up not simply in basic engine aptitudes, yet in addition in increasingly inconspicuous, complex social communications. Assume you stop at a similar bistro while in transit to work every morning, and it has two lines at the counter, staffed by two customary servers, A great biologist Richard Dawkins once said something like human brains work by simulation in his book the selfish gene so we mostly simulate what we see in mass media like books movies tv and reflect it In our brains into something most related to us, Van Gogh didn't live to see May sixth discharged. In August 2004, van Gogh's short film submission activated hubbub in Muslim circles when it was appeared Dutch open TV. submission demonstrated a semi-exposed Muslim lady, inked with Koranic sections, describing how she had been forced into an organized marriage, mishandled by her better half, sexually assaulted by her uncle and after that severely rebuffed for adultery. On the morning of 2 November 2004, a Dutch Moroccan Muslim, Mohammed Bouyeri, shot van Gogh off his bike on a bustling Amsterdam Road, cold bloodedly cut the producer's throat with a bended blade and stuck a letter to his chest with another blade. Bouyeri's letter railed against the 'unbeliever fundamentalists' who were 'threatening Islam' through films like submission. The demise of Theo van Gogh must be the most stunning representation of the ways in which movie producers have turned out to be involved in the present purported Worldwide Period of Dread. The Dutchman's butcher not just shows the dangers that producers what's more, writers keep running in facing the subjects of psychological oppression and religion amid a time of outrageous political polarization.
As we argued before we’re going to review some of Hollywood movies In the 2000s though Hollywood cinema has changed radically from just like in 70s and 90s of little bit of in accuracy in describing terrorism and of course very far away from the movies in the 80s and their most honest version of describing terrorism, it rather went from framing the terrorists it focuses on non-reality (escapism) or even if it mansions terrorism it would mention it in a unrealistic irrelative patterns far away from anything real especially after 9/11 dangers were delineated as extraterrestrial (War of the Worlds, 2005) or people dying from infection as in (I am Legend, 2007) or then again because of fast environmental change like in (The Day after Tomorrow, 2005), if there is an example of movies that did address terrorism was The War Within (2005) it mainly focuses on a Pakistani prisoner who was actually captured for a crime he didn’t commit and tortured badly after he got out of prison his ideology had changed into a more radical one then he finds some terrorist organization that already put in mind The vicious experience changes Hassan into an extreme who looks for vengeance for the bad form done to him. He interfaces with a fear monger cell that is highly involved with arranging an assault on the Amazing Focal Station in New York. Be that as it may, his rationale is put under extreme weight by logical inconsistencies and clashing feelings: the war, in which he sees himself, is battled 'inside' – in his very own mind. Finally, The Kingdom (2007) can be perused as an elective situation to the genuine War on Dread in its delineation of effective counterterrorism as the consequence of collaboration among Western and Center Eastern police powers. A group of FBI examiners works intimately with the Saudi police Colonel Al Ghazi (Ashraf Barhom) to chase down Abu Hamza, a mid-level al-Qaeda usable, who is in charge of a besieging assault on an American compound in Saudi-Arabia. Generally speaking, the film offers an 'idealistic scene of injured Americans heading home, mission achieved,' as Jim Hoberman commented.
As we reviewed some of Hollywood movies that regards terrorism as a matter to be fought here, we reviewed some Kurdish movies and decided to evaluate them according to heroes’ villains’ circumstances so we start with:
In this movie a mother has to choose between getting her child beheaded or blowing up the holey roshnbery which means (hall of enlightenment), showing two sides of cruelty that these terrorist groups has, one is not only to make a hard decision and chose to save her daughter and kill innocent lives or she can save the innocent teenagers and not kill them on behalf of her daughter’s life.
In an interview with the director and screen play writer of the movie wahid kfri he said about the origin of that story:
“in the beginning of the story a 30 or so years old women get ready to perform a musical play and then she practice her beautiful music then a group of terrorists hear her out in a distance, they come before 1 hour of the musical play and kidnap her, make the women chose between her daughter and the teenagers who in the eyes of those terrorists are sinners because of 2 sins celebrating the valentine’s day and waiting for the musical play (which is haram) and must be irradiated.”
In the beginning of the movie there will be a scene of a terrorist group car coming by and then stops at a point and it appears that they have a hostage which is the hero of our story, and then take her inside a home which seems to be the base of operation for that terrorist group, then the leader of that terrorist group appears in a scene and tells one of his assistance to remove the hdband and saw the leader of that group, looks of horror seems to appear on the mother’s face as she looks to her right and sees a tortured man next to her, the tortured man looked horrible tired and blood was coming out of his head, then the terrorist group gives an objective to the mother of which to blow the hall of roshnbery, the mother looks confused as if she had refused the offer just from the looks on her face, then the terrorist group seems to have the trump card which was her daughter, a second option was given to the mother and that was beheading her precious daughter in front of her, she takes the guitar that has a bombe sticking to it and seem to not have any other option, the terrorist group take her to the place of which they want it to be destroyed, the mother get down of the terrorist’s car heading towards the location and there she sees a sight of all these teenagers gathered and celebrating the valentine’s day and she stops thinking of all these innocent lives that she is about to take, remembering she has only a single choice to make between two bitter options either she chose to do nothing and lose her daughter which is really sad and the other of bombing the building which has all these poor teenagers in it which is also something horrible.
A tragic story of a 12 years old boy who travels with his mother encountering a terrorist group that ends them up being dead accept for the boy,
The movie starts with a scene of a director in a car heading from Baghdad to Sulaymani, the next scene is of him winning an award of best movie on loving once nation in Baghdad, flashbacking through his memories of that day wile staring at his phone that plays a video of that day, a child next to him with his mother (Baran Omer the hero of our story here) looks at the director’s phone and asks to see the glassy award, the director gives it to him, the mother talks to the boy telling him to return the award to the director and apologize for the director the then the child hides the award in his mother’s hand bag a couple are in the back of the car seemingly they were husband and wife, no that much time had passed had passed since they got married, flirting and talking in the back of the car, then a terrorist group will come in, make the passengers step out of the car, the terrorist group starts searching the passengers, one of them finds the award in the mothers hand bag they take it then the who seems to be the leader of the terrorist group yells “ don’t you know that acting is haram” hen break the award in front of the director, he director seems to be upset of what happened to his award after that the leader of that terrorist group says to his group kill them all, the director comes forth telling the terrorists to stop and claim that the award is his not the mothers trying to change their closed minds, seemingly nothing worked, they took the wife that was setting in the back seat from her husband, then started shooting at every one of the passengers until all are dead or at least what they think they have killed every one until the last of them, after a while they leave, then the young boy wakes up, go to his mother trying to check if she wakes up, no answers from the mother, the little boy then goes to where the award had been broken first by the terrorists leader and pics up a peace of the award and goes along the way.
After talking to the director of the movie about what did inspire him to create that movie exactly and what was the image, he wanted to show terrorists to the audience, the answers were:
“I was on my way home from Basra after winning an award for the best short movie that time and went to see if there were any fly tickets, and there were none so had to go back by car, so we did and on our way while the sun was yet to rise and had the award in my hand, that time was the beginning of the war against ISIS (the Islamic state) and people who would pass these roads without encountering ISIS checkpoints were lucky, the car driver asked me of what do I have in my back and I told him that it contain an award, he said be a good man and throw it away its an enough reason to get your head off by these Islamic state members don’t you know that that is haram acting and directing, and I said to him that even if they cut my head off I wouldn’t throw that award away, because it means a lot to me, and it didn’t happen that was the amazing part of it all, if it happened I wouldn’t be here and make that scenario from the first place”
And said specifically “first point in the movie was the director who purposely went to an Arabic city Baghdad claiming the award of best director there while knowing that the road ahead of him is full of dangers and might lose his life on his way home, the second point was the child who saw the award and wanted it for himself then meeting the terrorist group that ended up killing all the passengers accept for the little boy and although every one died and the terrorists might think that they have won but in the end he boy survived carrying out the hopes and dreams of the director who gave him his award kindly.
A tragic story of a journalist with his wife and two children in a journey that will cost him his life searching and investigating a bombing of a car in Kirkuk.
In the beginning of the story there are two different scenes one of a journalist which investigate an explosion that happened in Kirkuk called al-hasera explosion and another group which were the planners and the conductors of that attack which killed an innocent child and others, the hero of our story in the beginning gets a phone call from his friend, then he talk about how much he is concerned about that attack because a child was killed inn that action, then comes another scene of this man’s daughter playing with her dolls innocently, the journalist at that time is investigating still on that vile explosion and his daughter comes in asks her father the journalist to bring her a new doll and cloth for her current doll, then the journalist prepares for going out while the children are playing and the mother is busy by housekeeping, the father goes out asking weather the family want something else other than his daughters doll, his wife answers with no only come back to us safely and as fast as possible then the journalist go out with a friend of his own saying that the government should focus on making not just a mare journal but a whole tv channel on hidden vile acts that happen in Kurdistan, then the journalist said to his friend “lets go buy the doll for my little girl” his friend answered isn’t it a bit late can’t we delay that to later on finally the journalist answered with “I can’t my kids are everything I’ve got in my life I can’t delay it for later”. Then it appears that the terrorists responsible of the explosion are after the journalist and are actually stalking on him somehow, the journalist had picked his daughter’s doll and headed towards the Kurdistan journalist syndicate there they find a group of people they seem to be rehearsing for a play, one of them (which seems to be in charge of that group) says that “friends, do you know why I’m telling you to work hard on this show? because a very close friend of mine is coming by he is a journalist and a specialist in theatrical plays to see us practicing and give us some tips, that’s why we have to work hard so that we won’t embarrass ourselves in front of him”, then the journalist kids asks their mother of why their father has been late because he said he wouldn’t be late on them and now everybody is worried, the mother says “ok I’ll be calling him few minutes later”. The journalist reaches for the syndicate where his friend is waiting for him to give him tips in his play, after when he was done, he headed to drink some tea and the terrorist gang seems to be following him and finally find him and shoot him dead and run away, the mother calls her husband the journalist, the children stare at there mother waiting for answers but no answers from the journalist, they try to call him over and over and the phone rings next to the dead body of the journalist laying dead on the floor, a group of police officers follow the trace of the terrorist group prosecute them and finally captures them.
In an interview with the director of this movie I asked what did inspire him to make this movie and his answer was about the fact that a friend of his own an tv anchor with the name of Saman a very famous anchor used to work with him in GK Tv channel and “have actually been killed by terrorist just because he was working with a PUK channel he was being stalked until he got into a car selling area and they have shot him dead.
In the Hollywood movies we see most villains has almost all has no depth of character because that seems to be more likeable by the audience which is something that is shared by both sides both jihadists in Hollywood or Kurdistan films commit atrocities but the only difference is when in Hollywood movies jihadists are fought hardly and then gotten beaten up by the heroes and the Kurdish ones all had almost sad stories with almost the hero loses everything he/she got and why we are criticizing that? And that’s because as we talked about earlier the mirror rule and success rule (simulation) comes in the rule of rewards that and in one side it shoes you no matter how malicious jihadists seems to be there is always someone to stop them and bring justice to them that’s in Hollywood movies, while Kurdish movies were skeptical for when it came to the mirror rule and the success rule for when it comes to the mirror rule how would the public see jihadists? Probably as scary beings that spread chaos into the lands with nobody telling them to stop, and that’s according too the success rule is going to take the reward away making audience scared and would give the exact opposite reaction needed to be taken from the masses and that is not being scared and even so they’ve got a fighting chance.
Cinema had always impressed us with both simplicity in the term of understanding them and its complex effect on the audience psyche and we are doing this research to know the effect that these movies have on the public mind and to which extend does these movies contribute in the fight against terrorism and in which way the Kurdish cinema contribute in fighting them as well and we couldn’t so in the future and when other works are done it would give a full contribution rather than a slight one whether that is from financial aspect or the phycological effect that it has on the viewers.
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
Get custom essayThe term had originally been coined to describe involuntary actions during hypnosis and séances, but James pointed out that seeing something and responding automatically with an appropriate movement is one of most common ways movements are caused, 'the normal process stripped of disguise.' and William James himself had separated the reason behind committing such acts is a methodology called the mirror rules and the success rule the mirror rule basically is like the saying 'monkey say, monkey do' but that one is not only available for monkeys in fact all animals has that kind of instinct birds mammals do have it even insects have it and of course human beings have that trait to like all other animals and the second rule the success rule and it was called this way because human beings repeat what had worked earlier in a certain situation like what we call simulation and that’s when human beings learn like wile playing chess or something has an effect on our subconscious and we actually had learned from it. The success rule shows up not simply in basic engine aptitudes, yet in addition in increasingly inconspicuous, complex social communications.
The globe is in panic as a result of the pandemic, a pandemic that has ravished and caused a lot of harm generally. The United States of America was at the receiving end of the pandemic, it was left unguided and the resultant effect of the pandemic was devasting, creating a large unemployment rate no one has ever seen since the great depression of 1929. Economics forecasted a dip in various country’s GDP and evidently, it happened. This essay tends to look at the effect of the shift from monetary policy to fiscal policy in the US bearing in mind the cash flow model as a quantifier.
Get original essayAll countries experienced the economic effect of the pandemic and as a sort, some were proactive in handling the crisis economically and some weren’t. The USA was amongst the few who thought they could scale through its established policy but its reliance on the monetary policy was failing as the GDP dropped and a whole lot of people lost their jobs, some were in no shape to function and a few who worked remotely yielded little or nothing. Stafford claims that varnishing conditions would boost resource sharing between the business and the household because the structures share overlapping resources. The American Rescue Plan Act of2021, also known as the COVID-19 Stimulus Package or simply the American Rescue Plan, was passed by the 117th United States Congress on March11, 2021, and signed into law by President Joe Biden. The primary reason for this was to help move things forward a little faster in the united states recover from the economic and health destruction caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting continuing recession. It first proposed on January 14th, 2021, and it is based on several provisions in the CARES Act, which began in March 2020, and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, which began in December 2020.
Fiscal policy is ‘how a government adjusts its spending levels and tax rates to monitor and regulate a country’s economy,’ according to Investopedia.A necessary parameter to monitor this fiscal policy hangs within the power of the circular flow model since it’s a quantitative and analytical tool. Because of its inherent potential to influence the total amount of production generated, or GDP, fiscal policy is an essential tool for economic management. The first and most important effect of a fiscal extension is to increase relative demand for goods and services. As a result of the increased demand, both relative production and aggregate prices rise. The rate at which increased demand raises production and overall prices is determined by the state of the business cycle. If, on the other hand, the economy is in a slump, with underutilised productive potential and unemployed jobs, increased demand would usually result in more production without changing the price level. However, if the economy is at full employment, a fiscal expansion would have a greater impact on prices and a lesser impact on gross production. Shifting our gaze to the circular flow, it is predominantly established that the circular flow model being defined or seen as a demonstrative method of how money soars through the nation. As depicted, money flows through an indefinite chain from producers to employees as remunerations and streams back to producers as revenue for products. By the circular flow model, an economy is an infinite circular sequence of money. Because the cycle of cash influxes and outpourings specify the business solvency. The circular flow calculation aids in the maintenance of sufficient cash flow for the company and serves as a foundation for cash flow management. The circular flow model starts with the immediate household segment that engages in consumption spending and the business sector that goes into manufacturing the products, according to Noor (2012).
However, two more areas are also included mostly here in the circular flow of revenue, the first is the government sector and the second is the foreign trade sector. The government does or carries out the role of injecting money into the circle via government spending on programs such as Social Security and the National Park Service or a good instance would be situations like the pandemic. Exports, which bring in cash from international buyers, often bring funds or revenue into the circle. Furthermore, businesses that capitalise money to buy capital stocks contribute to the economy’s money supply. The resultant effect of the American Rescue plan is aimed at providing financial support to households and mostly those who are not able to cope with the hard and scouring economy, the plan which extends to both workers (employed) and the non-workers (unemployed), in turn, they will help boost the economy by purchasing from manufacturers and these manufacturers will be able to generate funds which inversely will be used to pay its employees thus creating an endless supply run of cash in and out of the US.
It’s important to conclude that the circular flow model will inevitably provide statistical and quantitative analysis of the cash flow of the nation, proportionally its basic purpose will be to understand how money shifts within an economy. However, it severs the economy further into two primary players, which are the households and businesses. It further divides the markets in which these players compete into markets for products and services and markets for production. Mankiw (2001) admits that his circular flow model is a ‘simple model’ that ‘would include, for example, the functions of government and foreign trade’ in a ‘more complex and practical circular-flow model’. Since they are expenses paid to a foreign country, imports are like drips in the circular flow of money. The government introduces policies to increase exports and decrease imports in order to further reduce or eliminate this. The circular flow of money now, with the legislation, emphasizes the importance of implementing export promotion and import control policies.
"Is there any greater evil we can mention for a city than that which tears it apart and makes it many instead of one? Or any greater good than that which binds it together and makes it one?...And when all the citizens rejoice and are pained by the same successes and failures, doesn't this sharing of pleasures and pains bind the city together?" (Republic 5.462b)
Get original essayPlato thus declares the need to establish unity, so crucial to sustaining virtue in his "Just City". Interestingly, this modern and seemingly indisputably beneficial concept of unity is harshly criticized by Plato's greatest pupil, Aristotle. According to Plato, the guardians of the Just City must seek complete unity in order to prevent corruption and rule well. To achieve this goal, the wives and children of the guardians must be treated no differently. Children must grow up not knowing their parents, nor parents their children. Instead of having a simple family, all children will call men of a certain age "father", women of a certain age "mother", and children of the same age "brother" or "sister", thus enhancing the joys a single nuclear family by providing a multitude of relatives. This way, Plato argues, the joy of familial bonds will be multiplied immensely. The citizens will treat each other as kinsmen and share in each others' experiences: "Whenever anything good or bad happens to a single one of its citizens, such a city above all others will say that the affected part is its own and will share in the pleasure of pain as a whole" (Republic 5.462e.). To further the establishment of unity, Plato also proposes the use of eugenic breeding among the guardians: "the best men must have sex with the best women as frequently as possible" (Republic 5.459e) in order to ensure wise rulers and eliminate nepotism.
The other important change that must be instituted to create unity is the abolition of private property amongst the guardians. Earlier in The Republic, even before this proposal, Plato states that the guardians must guard against "Both wealth and poverty. The former makes for luxury, idleness, and revolution; the latter for slavishness, bad work, and revolution as well" (4.422a). If all property and possessions are held in common, the guardians will be free of concerns regarding wealth acquisition and other mundane issues: "the pettiest of the evils the guardians would therefore escape: The poor man's flattery of the rich, the perplexities and sufferings involved in bringing up children and in making the money necessary to feed the household, getting into debt...All of the various troubles men endure in these matters are obvious, ignoble, and not worth discussing" (Republic 5.465c). The guardians will also avoid dissension among themselves "by not calling the same thing 'mine'" (Republic 5.464d). Instead, the rulers will be able to devote themselves entirely to ruling well, and to the good of the state. Complete commonality in property, children, and wives, therefore, is necessary to ensure complete unity, which in turn ensures a perfect, virtuous city.
Aristotle, in Book II of Politics, attacks almost every point made by Plato regarding unity and common ownership. First, Aristotle asserts that the nature of a city prevents it from experiencing natural unity. The essence of a city is in plurality: "Not only is the city composed of a number of people: it is also composed of different kinds of people, for a city cannot be composed of those who are like one another" (Politics 2.2.1261a22). The very attempt to unify the city, according to Aristotle, will destroy the city: "it is obvious that a city which goes on becoming more and more of a unit, will eventually cease to be a city at all...it will first become a household instead of a city, and then an individual instead of a household" (Politics 2.2.1260a10). In addition, a viable city must be self-sufficient, a condition that requires a level of diversity which Aristotle argues is not present in a city with a high degree of unity.
Another interesting point that Aristotle makes is the distinction between the concepts of "all collectively" and "each separately." When people call something "mine" and "not mine" simultaneously (adhering to Plato's view of a unified city), according to Aristotle, it ceases to be either. Common ownership provides that many people can call something "mine", but they do so collectively, not separately. As a result, when people cannot say that something is "mine and mine only," they tend to care less about it because their ownership is only fractional, "determined by the total number of citizens" (Politics, 2.3.1262a1): "What is common to the greatest number gets the least amount of care...People are more prone to neglect their duty when they think that another is attending to it" (Politics, 2.3.1261b32). Aristotle then reasons that children will be neglected as a result: "each citizen will have a thousand sons... any son whatever will be equally the son of any father whatever...all will equally neglect them" (Politics, 2.3.1261b32).
Aristotle also criticizes the dilution of affection and friendship that would result from common ownership of women and children. Whereas Plato argues that a son would show the same amount of affection for each of his thousand fathers, Aristotle maintains that in reality, these relations will only be nominal, and will completely lose their meaning. A sort of "watery friendship" will ensue: "Just as a little sweet wine, mixed with a great deal of water, produces a tasteless mixture, so family feeling is diluted and tasteless... there is so little reason for a father treating his sons as sons, or a son treating his father as a father" (Politics 2.4.1262a40), because people only tend to care for what is their own. The lack of any real family ties will also result in an increase in crimes against relatives and incest, because parents do not know who their children are.
Regarding property, Aristotle believes that Plato's idea of unity and common ownership is actually harmful to the community. Aristotle declares that the problems that Plato attributes to private property are in actuality caused by flaws in human nature. Aristotle affirms that common property will cause much dispute, because people may not be able to work well together and will fight over the same property. On the contrary, if everyone owns private property, there will be less room for discontent because people will tend to take care of their own possessions: "When everyone has his own separate sphere of interest, there will not be the same ground for quarrels" (Politics 2.5.1263a21). Aristotle then argues that private property will allow for "moral goodness" in that people will share their own property with friends for common use, according to the Pythagorean proverb: "Friends' goods are goods in common." This way, private property actually allows for generosity and virtue. People will also derive greater joy from private property: "to think of a thing as your own makes an inexpressible difference, so far as pleasure is concerned" (Politics 2.5.1263a40).
In criticizing Plato, Aristotle attacks both the means through which to establish unity and the goal of unity itself. First, Aristotle believes that Plato's proposals will not achieve unity. He questions the link between commonality and unity by arguing that Plato's attempt to enforce commonality - sharing wives and children and abolishing private property - will actually cause disunity. People will have weakened feelings towards each other and will fight over property. Aristotle then questions the link between unity and virtue. In the Platonic model, by eliminating private property, people have nothing to be generous or greedy about, so therefore, according to Aristotle, they cannot be considered either virtuous or selfish. As presented in The Nicomachean Ethics, to be virtuous one must make a conscious choice between the moral and the immoral path. Only private property allows for this choice. Aristotle attacks the object of unity by arguing that the city, once unified to the extreme, will cease to be a city at all. It will resemble instead a household or an individual, in that it will be more unified and less self-sufficient. Aristotle's main points all point towards two major reasons why a city should not aim towards Plato's goal: unity is both against the nature of a city and against the nature of man. Unity, then, cannot be the "supreme good of a city," as Plato contends, because the "'good' of each thing is what preserves it in being" (Politics, 2.3.1261b6).
While Aristotle provides a convincing argument against unity, at times he appears to treat Plato's contentions too harshly. Quite often, Aristotle appears to take Plato's statements too literally. Plato never says, for example, that the city should be so unified as to become an individual, but instead argues for unified interests and purposes. In addition, Plato's Just City is merely a metaphor, intended to encourage the individual to search for justice: "Perhaps, then, there is more justice in that larger thing, and it will be easier to learn what it is. So...let's first find out what sort of thing justice is in a city and afterwards look for it in the individual" (Republic 2.369a). He states himself that his city probably cannot exist in practice. Aristotle also seems to purposely misread Plato, and often takes his concepts out of context. For one, Plato's proposed sharing of wives, children, and property is meant only for the guardians of the city, in order to ensure that they will rule well: "This then, is how the guardians of your city have their wives and children in common" (Republic 5.461e). Aristotle's arguments, however, are based upon the enforcement of unity throughout the entire city. Only then would the city cease to be self-sufficient. In Plato's model, however, there are three distinct classes of people, and the lowest class, the workers, farmers, and artisans, are still required to specialize in a craft in accordance with the tenet "one man, one art" to ensure that the city is self-sufficient.
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
Get custom essayDespite their differing views on the merits of unity, both Plato and Aristotle agree that the spirit of friendship, or philia, helps hold the city together "because it is the best safeguard against the danger of factional disputes" (Politics, 2.4.1262a40). Friendship, then, "is the chief good of cities," and can be defined as mutual affection between people. However, Plato believes that unity results from friendship, while Aristotle maintains that unity dissolves friendship.
In “The Merchant of Venice”, William Shakespeare explores the cities of contrast which are Venice and Belmont. These two locations in Italy are so antithetic to each other that even characters’ behaviours fluctuate from city to city because of this disparity between them. This Shakespeare play commences in Venice which is the world of reality. Therefore, the scenes played in the real world focus on wealth, trade, history and urban life. And so, the use of language is more formal in terms of decorum and they use a lot of conceits. Besides, Venice is predominantly male society in opposition to female dominated Belmont. Furthermore, Belmont which is a fantasy place represents ideality. Here, love outweighs other rational stuff such as money. Thus, people use simpler and humorous language, which is more proper for there than trading town, Venice; altogether, there are two locations introduced to the reader in stark opposition by Shakespeare in this play.
Get original essayTo begin with, the play writer uses parallel scenes between Venice and Belmont in “The Merchant of Venice”. One of the biggest differences between these two locations is crash of money and love. Venice is a city which is the centre of trade in Italy. Everything is financial there and this situation even reflects people’s speeches. Act I Scene I starts in the street with the dialogue between Antonio, Salerio and Solanio. In the very first line, Antonio says “I am so sad.”[1] and its reason is that he may lose his ships in the open seas although he thinks that he does not know the reason why he feels mournful. Also, in Act I Scene III, while Bassanio wants loan from Shylock, he tells that if he cannot pay his money back, Antonio will and Bassanio shows Antonio as guarantee for himself so that he cannot pay the money back. And Shylock continues; “He is a good man to have you understand me that he is sufficient.”[2], which means that if one person has wealth, he is reliable in this trade center. On the other hand, Belmont that Portia lives is a fantasy place which is created by Shakespeare himself. It is a place of poetry, of the sweet music, of spheres, of classical literature.[3] This city is wealthy, as well, but this property is inherited just like Portia’s wealth coming from her father unlike Venice people who merchandise to be rich and to reach their level. Moreover, this city is constructed on love. For instance, in Act II Scene I, Portia tells Prince of Morocco; “In terms of choice I am not solely led / By nice direction of a maiden’s eyes;”[4]. She implies that physical appearance of men is not the only way to her heart, there are other conditions for her in order to get married, too. She looks for the right man and wishes to fall in love with him, yet her father’s will does not let this. She has everything but love because of her father who is still in control in her life. Besides, Bassanio goes to Belmont to solve his financial problems whereas Portia goes to Venice to solve her love issues. Portia likes Bassanio and he does use her feelings to reach money. In Act I Scene I, when he finally commences to say something about Portia after talking a lot, the reader understands that money is the real aim for him. He mentions a girl who is rich and loves him much, which he discovers that from her looks. Bassanio: “In Belmont is a lady richly left, And she is fair and, fairer than the word, Of wondrous virtues. Sometimes from her eyes I did receive fair speechless messages.”[5] Furthermore, beautiful language is the symbol of decorum. Venice is a trade centre and these people merchandise to earn their own living; therefore, they should use appropriate language to be in a good situation in public. Also, they try to show their intelligence to one another by using that kind of language. Again, in the first scene, while talking about shipwreck, Salerio even personifies it; “And see my Andrew dock’d in sand, / Vailing high top lower than her ribs, / To kiss her burial”[6]. However, in Belmont, ladies do not have to use that much ornamental language so they prefer simpler and more humorous one. They speak freely however they want without thinking how to be sophisticated. City’s being ideal may be a factor for this, too. To give an example, in Act III Scene IV, Portia says in return to Nerissa’s question; “Fie, what a question’s that, / If thou wert near a lewd interpreter!”[7]. She does not like the question and she adds that if she had a dirty mind, she would understand it like she wants to turn to man for sex. She is not shy about it and says this directly.
Additionally, these two worlds differ from each other in terms of predominant gender roles in them. It can be easily said that Venice is a patriarchal society whereas Belmont is a feminine society. At the same time, this play reveals the gender discrimination in those times. In Act V Scene I, after the scene which rings are exchanged in the court of justice in Act IV, Bassanio and Grationo goes to Portia’s house in Belmont. However, ladies, Portia and Nerissa, blame them; that is why, gentlemen do not take serious their relationships and they lose their rings or give them some other women. Generally, in patriarchal societies, men do not care about such issues, they do commence to talk about how they are completely right and say that women cannot talk to men in this way. Here, gender roles are subverted by Shakespeare and men start to defend themselves. Firstly, Gratiano swears that he did give the ring to the judge’s clerk, then mentions about his physical appearance such as “a youth, a kind of boy, a little scrubbed boy”[8] so that ladies believe in what he says. Likewise, Bassanio defends himself that he lost the ring defending it, as well. Then, he continues; “… What should I say, sweet lady? / I was enforc’d to send it after him, / I was beset with shame and courtesy;”[9] Nevertheless, Venice is a male dominated city and ladies go to the court of justice as by turning to men before that defending scene. Here, Portia challenges traditional gender roles at the same time by acting like a man. Of course, their first aim is not to be recognized by Bassanio and Gratiano in the court and to help them. However, they could have done this without turning into men. Probably, ladies know that no one would listen to them and they cannot defend Bassanio and Gratiano in the court if they were women.
Moreover, Venice and Belmont can be associated with the Old Testament and the New Testament. Because Venice is a trade center, there are many foreign people from different religions in this city and Shylock who is a Jew is one of them. He is supposed to show mercy instead of insisting on getting a pound of flesh from Antonio in order to give him a lesson. Thus, Judaism is associated with the Old Testament in the play because of this strict emphasis on the agreement. On the other hand, ladies in Belmont show more mercy like God’s, just like in the last act which is about the rings of Bassanio and Gratiano, and it is linked to Christianity and the New Testament.
What is more, Venice is a historical place in contrast to Belmont, which is a fairy-tale construct. The reader can see the historical sings in Shylock’s desire for Antonio’s flesh and in the historical anti-Semitism addressed in the play: Shylock is a Jewish man and the reason why he wants Antonio’s flesh that much is that Antonio humiliated him beforehand, and now he wants revenge, he wants his blood. In Act I Scene III, when Shylock sees Antonio for the first time as the guarantor of Bassanio; “I hate him for he is a Christian; But more for that in low simplicity He lends out money gratis, and brings down … He hates our sacred nation; and he rails,”[10] However, Shylock cannot obtain what he wants, or Christian blood at the end of the play and he is converted into Christianity. Shakespeare generalizes Shylock as Jewish people and Antonio as Christian people. According to Christian belief, all Jews will be converted into Christianity one day in the future. With the conversion of Shylock, the play writer means all Jews. Nonetheless, the audience does not come across such historical events in Belmont. People are totally free in terms on liberty of speech and thought in this ideal world. Even though Portia has these liberties, as well, she is not completely free even in a fairy place. She must obey his father’s will to marry a man. Susan Oldrive writes this in her article; “Portia cannot even veto her father’s choice of a husband, a right increasingly accepted in Elizabethan times.”[11] Briefly, every city has its own problems regardless of whether it is real or ideal.
Lastly, there is a difference between the possibility of pastoral life regarding the cities. Urban life is dominating in Venice due to trade. There are numerous people from different cultures and they are like stranger to one another in urban areas. People do not have much with each other as long as it is not necessary. It is seen in the relationships between Bassanio and Shylock, and Antonio and Shylock. Bassanio goes to Shylock to borrow money, all his target is to have money so as to reach Portia, not to become friend or something else. And, Shylock knows Antonio as a man who lends money to people carelessly and hates Jewish. Also, their use of language is appropriate for this urban life, as well. However, rural life turns to scale in Belmont. Generally, people are inherited in rural areas just like Portia who is rich thanks to her father’s legacy. Besides, there is not that much cultural diversity on the contrary of Venice. The reader does not see this in the Belmont scenes, either. In addition to them, Shepherds and peaceful atmosphere of Belmont could be good examples for this rural life. Shepherds which symbolize Jesus Christ are again about religion. For this reason, regarded as a saint, Portia can be associated with shepherd, too. In the sense of peaceful place, there is hardly ever trouble in this place. Commonly, all the arguments happen in Venice, not in Belmont.
Venice and Belmont are two locations in Italy that William Shakespeare uses as the scenes in “The Merchant of Venice”. These two places are opposed to each other. First of all, Venice embodies reality; therefore, wealth that they think everything financially, mercantilism which is their way of earning money, history, urban life and the New Testament are focused in Venice city. On the contrary, Belmont symbolizes ideality; thus, love which is the most crucial matter for them and the New Testament are given there. Belmont citizens are more easy-going unlike Venice’s. These characteristics redound up the language that people use. In Venice, people use financial and more beautiful language which is necessary especially for mercantilism while in Belmont, people choose to use more plain and free language. At the same time, these characteristics of the cities are identified with culture that includes language, as well, and William Shakespeare compares and contrasts these two different worlds successfully in “The Merchant of Venice.”
Works Cited
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
Get custom essayD. J. Snider. “The Merchant of Venice (conclusion).” The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. 6, No. 4, pg. 361-375. Lehnhof, Kent. “The Merchant of Venice: Venice and Belmont.” Chapman University Symposium. April 19, 2016. Magri, Neomi. “Places in Shakespeare: Belmont and thereabouts.” De Vere Society Newsletter. June 2003. Oldrieve, Susan. “Marginalized Voices in ‘The Merchant of Venice’.” Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature, Vol. 5, No. 1, A Symposium Issue on “The Merchant of Venice” (Spring, 1993) Pg. 87-105. Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. [1] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 7, Line 1. [2] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 19, Lines 13-14. [3] Magri, Neomi. “Places in Shakespeare: Belmont and thereabouts.” De Vere Society Newsletter. June 2003. [4] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 26, Lines 13-14. [5] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 12, Lines 161-164. [6] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 8, Lines 27-28. [7] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 74, Lines 79-80. [8]Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 104 Lines 161-162. [9] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 106, Lines 215-217. [10] Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Great Britain: Collins Classics, 2011. Pg. 20, Lines 37-43. [11] Oldrieve, Susan. “Marginalized Voices in ‘The Merchant of Venice’.” Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature, Vol. 5, No. 1, A Symposium Issue on “The Merchant of Venice” (Spring, 1993) Pg. 90.