Pre-2013 Common Application Personal Essay Tips

Pre-2013 Common Application Personal Essay Tips Important Note for 2019-20 Applicants: The Common Application essay options have changed twice since this article was written! Nevertheless, the tips and sample essays below will still provide useful guidance and essay samples for the current Common Application, and both the old and new applications include the topic of your choice option. That said, be sure to read the most up-to-date article on the 2019-20 Common Application Essay Prompts. ________________________________ Heres the original article: The first step to writing a stellar personal essay on your college application is to understand your options. Below is a discussion of the six essay options from the Common Application. Also be sure to check out these 5 Application Essay Tips. Option #1. Evaluate a significant experience, achievement, risk you have taken, or ethical dilemma you have faced and its impact on you. Note the key word here: evaluate. You arent just describing something; the best essays will explore the complexity of the issue. When you examine the impact on you, you need to show the depth of your critical thinking abilities. Introspection, self-awareness and self-analysis are all important here. And be careful with essays about the winning touchdown or tie-breaking goal. These sometimes have an off-putting look how great I am tone and very little self-evaluation. Read Drews essay, The Job I Should Have Quit, for an example of option #15 tips for essay option #1 Option #2. Discuss some issue of personal, local, national, or international concern and its importance to you. Be careful to keep the importance to you at the heart of your essay. Its easy to get off track with this essay topic and start ranting about global warming, Darfur, or abortion. The admissions folks want to discover your character, passions and abilities in the essay; they want more than a political lecture. Read Sophies essay, The Allegany County Youth Board, for an example of option #25 tips for essay option #2 Option #3. Indicate a person who has had a significant influence on you, and describe that influence. Im not a fan of this prompt because of the wording: describe that influence. A good essay on this topic does more than describe. Dig deep and analyze. And handle a hero essay with care. Your readers have probably seen a lot of essays talking about what a great role model Mom or Dad or Sis is. Also realize that the influence of this person doesnt need to be positive. Read Maxs essay, Student Teacher, for an example of option #3Read Jills essay, Buck Up, for another example of option #3Read Catherines essay, Diamond in the Rough, for yet another example of option #36 tips for essay option #3 Option #4. Describe a character in fiction, a historical figure, or a creative work (as in art, music, science, etc.) that has had an influence on you, and explain that influence. Here as in #3, be careful of that word describe. You should really be analyzing this character or creative work. What makes it so powerful and influential? Read Felicitys essay, Porkopolis, for an example of option #4Read Eileens essay, Wallflower, for another example of option #47 tips for essay option #4 Option #5. A range of academic interests, personal perspectives, and life experiences adds much to the educational mix. Given your personal background, describe an experience that illustrates what you would bring to the diversity in a college community, or an encounter that demonstrated the importance of diversity to you. Realize that this question defines diversity in broad terms. Its not specifically about race or ethnicity (although it can be). Ideally, the admissions folks want every student they admit to contribute to the richness and breadth of the campus community. How do you contribute? Read Carries essay, Give Goth a Chance, for an example of option #55 tips for essay option #5 Option #6. Topic of your choice. Sometimes you have a story to share that doesnt quite fit into any of the options above. However, the first five topics are broad with a lot of flexibility, so make sure your topic really cant be identified with one of them. Also, dont equate topic of your choice with a license to write a comedy routine or poem (you can submit such things via the Additional Info option). Essays written for this prompt still need to have substance and tell your reader something about you. Read Loras essay, Eating Eyeballs, for a sample of option #6

Setting and Characters in Act Two of the Play Clybourne Park

Setting and Characters in Act Two of the Play Clybourne Park During the intermission of Bruce Norris play Clybourne Park, the stage undergoes a significant transformation. The former home of Bev and Russ (from Act One) ages fifty years. In the process, it erodes from a quaint, well-kept home into a residence that features, in the words of the playwright, an overall shabbiness. Act Two takes place in September of 2009. The stage directions describe the altered environment: The wooden staircase has been replaced with a cheaper metal one. ( . . . ) The fireplace opening is bricked in, linoleum covers large areas of wooden floor and plaster has crumbled from the lath in places. The kitchen door is now missing. During Act One, Karl Lindner predicted that the community would irrevocably change, and he implied that the neighborhood would decline in prosperity. Based on the description of the house, it seems at least part of Lindners forecast has come true. Meet the Characters In this act, we meet an entirely new set of characters. Six people sit in a semi-circle, looking over real estate/legal documents. Set in 2009, the neighborhood is now a predominantly African-American community.   The black married couple, Kevin and Lena, maintain strong ties to the house in question. Not only is Lena a member of the Home Owners Association, hoping to preserve the architectural integrity of the neighborhood, she is the niece of the original owners, the Youngers from Lorraine Hansberrys A Raisin in the Sun. The white married couple, Steve and Lindsey, have recently purchased the house, and they have plans to tear down most of the original structure and created a larger, taller, and more modern home. Lindsey is pregnant and makes every attempt to be friendly and politically correct during Act Two. Steve, on the other hand, is eager to tell offensive jokes and engage in discussions about race and class. Like Karl Lindner in the previous act, Steve is the most obnoxious member of the group, serving as a catalyst that exposes not only his prejudice but the prejudice of others. The remaining characters (each one Caucasian) include: Tom, the real estate lawyer representing the interests of Kevin and Lenas Home Owners Association. Tom continually tries (but usually fails) to keep the conversation on track.Kathy, the lawyer for  Steve and Lindsey, also tries to keep the proverbial ball rolling. However, she does go on brief tangents, such as when she mentions that her family (the Lindners from Act One!) once lived in the neighborhood.Dan, a contractor who interrupts the debate when he discovers a mysterious box buried in the yard. Tension Builds The first fifteen minutes seem to be about the minutiae of real estate law. Steve and Lindsey want to change the house significantly. Kevin and Lena want certain aspects of the property to remain intact. The lawyers want to make certain that all parties are following the rules established by the lengthy legalese they page through. The mood begins with casual, friendly conversation. Its the sort of small talk one might expect from newly acquainted strangers working towards a common goal. For example, Kevin discusses various travel destinations including ski trips, a clever call back to Act One. Lindsey talks happily about her pregnancy, insisting that she doesnt want to know the sex of their child. However, because of many delays and interruptions, tensions increase. Several times Lena hopes to say something meaningful about the neighborhood, but her speech is constantly put on hold until she finally loses patience. In Lenas speech, she says: No one, myself included, likes having to dictate what you can or cant do with your own home, but theres just a lot of pride, and a lot of memories in these houses, and for some of us, that connection still has value. Steve latches onto the word value, wondering if she means monetary value or historic value. From there, Lindsey becomes very sensitive and at times defensive. When she talks about how the neighborhood has changed, and Lena asks her for specifics, Lindsey uses the words historically and demographically. We can tell she doesnt want to directly bring up the subject of race. Her aversion becomes even more prominent when she scolds Steve for using the word ghetto. The History of the House Tensions ease a bit when the conversation removes itself from the politics of property, and Lena recounts her personal connection to the home. Steve and Lindsey are surprised to learn that Lena played in this very room as a child and climbed the tree in the backyard. She also mentions the owners before the Younger family (Bev and Russ, though she doesnt mention them by name.) Assuming that the new owners already know the sad details, Lena touches upon the suicide that took place over fifty years ago. Lindsey freaks out: LINDSEY: Im sorry, but that is just something that, from a legal standpoint, you should have to tell people! Just as Lindsey vents about the suicide (and its lack of disclosure) a construction worker named Dan enters the scene, bringing in the trunk that has recently been dug up from the yard. By coincidence (or perhaps fate?) the suicide note of Bev and Russ son lies in the box, waiting to be read. However, the people of 2009 are too concerned with their own daily conflicts to bother opening up the trunk.

Front-line Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Front-line Management - Essay Example In relation to the whole army, the front-line commanders are in fact several rungs removed from the generals and occupy the lowest post in the chain of command but in the eyes of the ground troops, the front-line officers are the army and the high command. Thus, FLM in its organizational sense is sometimes good-naturedly described as a position caught between a rock and a hard place. For this reason, the roles and responsibilities of FLM are so unlike those of the higher management layers, and that these differ in scope and importance according to the configuration of the organization. This paper gathers evidence to support the view that the smaller and younger the organization, the heavier and more difficult the tasks it imposes on front-line management although the rewards are sparse. Conversely, the FLM job is easier but more rewarding in larger and older organizations. The paper will also attempt to explain why such a curiosity happens. All managers are required to demonstrate a higher level of skills in planning, organizing, coordinating, communicating and reporting activities; in directing and delegating work; in training, directing, motivating, supporting and disciplining people; and in team building. The need for such skills follows the description of management as getting the work of many done through the guidance of one. More or less the same talents are needed in front-line managers, with some basic differences. ... Second, the front-line managers are placed right next to the "coal face" being the first layer of management in an organization. In most cases, the FLM position may be the holder's first exposure to management. For these reasons, the front-line managers bear the burden of developing a good working relationship not only with their superiors but also with their subordinates. This particular responsibility spares managers in the upper hierarchy. Front-line managers go by various designations, among them supervisor, foreman, team leader, office manager and senior administrator. In an organizational context, holders of FLM position are defined as managers with first-line responsibility for a work group of about 10-25 people. They are accountable to top-floor management for the following tasks: People management. Managing operational costs. Providing technical expertise. Organizing, such as planning work allocation and shifts. Monitoring work processes. Checking on quality. Dealing with customers or clients. Measuring operational performance. (Hutchinson & Purcell online) The basic elements of the modern FLM role include building and maintenance of an efficient organizational structure, creating and maintaining a productive workforce, and controlling the workflow. A front-line manager is responsible for managing the individual employee as to his performance and professional development as well a to his health and safety at work. The front-line manager must exert an effort to know his team, improve the social relationships among members, and ensure that jobs and people match. Towards these ends, he must monitor the employees' progress and keep an eye out for possible changes by keeping his communication lines open (Mullins,

Court Report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Court Report - Essay Example Medical Practitioner Board in Victoria is a statutory authority established to protect the community by ensuring doctors maintain professional standards and practice ethically and competently. The Medical Practice Act 1994 guides the operations of the Board and clearly states that the Board’s main purpose is to protect the public. According to the complainant she went to Dr. Leeks eight times in 1979 or 1980. She narrates that Dr. leeks fondled her breast and digitally penetrating her. But Dr. Leeks denies her allegations.Several complaints has been also forwarded to the Medical Board complaining Dr. Leeks of the use of electric shock in treating the children. The case was dropped since Dr. Leeks voluntarily stop practicing his profession to avoid further investigation. The Board investigates the complaints about any aspect of a doctor’s professional activity. It takes seriously all matters raised by the community and investigates them thoroughly. In this case the Board is carefully analyzing if the Country Court Judge Duggan is correct in accusing Dr. Leeks of sexual misconduct. The complainant also files a complaint to Dr. Leeks in the Medical Board. Since sexual misconduct is a serious allegation the case is referred to a formal hearing. Formal Hearings are open to the public and the media (although the identity of the complainant is protected by law) and both the doctor and the Board are entitled to legal representation.

Thomas Mun Essay Example for Free

Thomas Mun Essay Thomas Mun is the best known member of a group of seventeenth-century British merchant-economists called the mercantilists. (Magnusson, 12) This group proposed that England run trade surpluses in order to prosper economically. As set forth by Mun ([1664] 1954, p. 125), The ordinary means†¦to increase our wealth and treasure is by Forraign Trade, wherein wee must ever observe this rule; to sell more to strangers yearly than wee consume of theirs in value. †¦[T]hat part of our stock which is not returned to us in wares must necessarily be brought home in treasure. Little is known about the life of Mun. His grandfather worked for the Royal Mint; his father was a textile trader. Mun himself became a merchant early in life, lived in Italy for many years and quickly accumulated a great deal of wealth. His early experience as a merchant was acquired in Italy and in the Levant. (Johnson, 73) He later became involved with the East India Company, a large British joint-stock company that traded, primarily, in the Far East. In 1615 Mun was elected to be a Director of the East India Company, and he remained a Director of the firm for the rest of his life. After Mun achieved wealth and social status he was appointed to several British committees and commissions. Most of these commissions issued reports containing Muns name as part of a long list of committee members; but Mun himself wrote only two economic tracts. In 1628 the highly criticized India Company invoked the protection of the House of Commons, and Mun, as supposes Johnson, was responsible for The Petition and Remonstrance of the Governor and Company of Merchants of London trading to the East-Indies. At any rate, he claims that â€Å"much of the argument used in this petition reappeared in Mun famous book, Englands Treasure by Forraign Trade†, which was published posthumously by his son, Sir John Mun, in 1664. (Johnson, 73-74). It was this book rather than his first essay that made Thomas Mun famous as an economic writer; in comparison with it, Mun earlier Discourse of Trade From England unto the East-Indies was a â€Å"crude, shallow, and awkward attempt to exonerate the India Company†. (Johnson, 74) His first work (Mun, 1621) defended the East India Company against critics who claimed that the firm was exporting gold and silver to the Orient (in exchange for spices) and that this loss of precious metals was hurting the British economy. A Discourse of Trade was rather unmercantilist in its orientation. Rather than advocating a trade surplus and the accumulation of gold, Mun advanced any and all arguments he could think up to support the East India Company. He claimed that nations become wealthy for the same reasons that families become wealthy-by frugality and by making more than they spend. Likewise, nations and families become poor by spending too much money. (Mun, ([1621] 1930, p. 1-2). Thus, Mun reasoned, as long as the East Indian Company made money it could not make Britain poorer. Mun also pointed out that food, clothing, and munitions were necessities, so importing these goods as also all goods which sustain health or encourage the arts, improved the welfare of England. (Mun, ([1621] 1930, p. 3) On the other hand, importing luxury goods was harmful to the nation. Mun then went on to argue that the East India Company was importing only items necessary for consumption. Taking yet another line of defense, Mun argued that trade with India provided a market for English exports. In addition, trade with India was good for Britain because it eliminated trade with Turkey; had the same goods been imported from Turkey, Mun pointed out, the cost to Britain would have been much greater. (Mun, ([1621] 1930, p. 9, 12, 43) Finally, Mun argued that not all luxury imports were harmful; some imports were improved by British firms and re-exported, thus leading to a net influx of precious metals into England. The goods imported by the East India Company, Mun claimed, were generally goods needed by British exporters. There were still a few charges levied against the India Company that its defender sought to refute. To the charge that timber was wasted in building India Company ships, Mun ingenuously replied that trees were not mere objects to look at, but raw materials which ought to be used; moreover, shipbuilding gave employment to shipwrights. But, said the critics, the India Company ships were never in English waters and hence not useful for naval strength. The India Company had large stocks of timber and naval stores in its yards, Mun replied, and those things were available in case of emergency. ([1621] 1930, p. 30-32) And so, one by one, every objection to the India trade was answered, sometimes with skill, sometimes with naà ¯vetà ©. With a few explanations for the economic condition of the nation, Mun concludes his first writing. He attributes the loss of specie to overvaluation of money abroad, ([1621] 1930, p. 51) to the abuse of the exchanges (53) whereby exchange operations have â€Å"become rather a Trade for some great monyed men, then a furtherance and accomodation of reall Trade to Merchants as it ought to be.† Because of imperfect minting, heavy coins have been exported or melted into plate, while, meantime, unskillful merchants have overthrown trade. All these factors have combined to produce an excess of imports. While the Discourse made Mun an apologist for the East Indian Company, his second book, published posthumously (1664), established Mun as an important early economic thinker. What is most noteworthy about Englands Treasure by Forraign Trade is its much broader perspective. No longer does Mun try to defend the East India Company; rather he adopts the viewpoint of the nation as a whole. He looks at trade in general, rather than trade by the East India Company, and he makes the case that foreign trade enriches a nation whenever it leads to a trade surplus. Mun also examines the factors that cause a country to run trade surpluses. Finally, Mun advances a set of proposals that British leaders could implement if they wished to improve the national trade position. Englands Treasure was profound analytical work, and in it many concepts, as Johnson notes, were developed with care and often with real insight. Many his contemporaries like Hales, Malynes, or Misselden as well as successors were concerned with it and Adam Smith even unconsciously used Mun’s work as a pattern model for his book, Wealth of Nations. (Johnson, 77) The first seven chapters of Englands Treasure may, for purposes of analysis, be considered as a separate segment because they set forth the principles underlying Muns theory of national opulence. From the doctrine of the balance of trade, Mun concludes that foreign trade is the â€Å"ordinary means† whereby a nation increases its wealth and treasure. The trade balance is merely the difference between what a nation exports and what it imports. When a nation runs a trade surplus, its exports exceed its imports. Sales abroad, over and above what is bought from foreign countries, must be paid for by foreigners. In the seventeenth century these payments were made with precious metals-gold and silver. Trade surpluses thus enabled a nation to accumulate wealth and enrich a country. In contrast, domestic trade could not make England wealthier because the gain in precious metals by one citizen would equal the loss of another citizen. To generate trade surpluses, Mun noted, England must become more self-sufficient and reduce its need for foreign-made goods. Britain must also become more frugal so that more goods were available for export. Mun especially looked down on and discouraged the consumption of luxury goods. With the domestic money supply rising as a result of these trade surpluses, a danger lurks that people might try to purchase more goods. This would cause domestic prices to increase and would eventually lead to the loss of exports, since domestically produced goods would become too expensive to sell abroad. But these consequences, Mun noted, could easily be avoided. To make sure that the inflow of money from abroad actually goes to benefit a nation, all new money must be re-invested. Reinvestment would also create more goods to be exported in the future. Here Mun recognized the importance of capital investment, and he viewed a positive trade balance as a way to accumulate productive capital. Besides explaining the benefits of trade surpluses, Mun also explained what could be done to encourage such surpluses. First, there was price policy. Mun wanted exports sold at the â€Å"best price†; that is, the price that brings in the most revenue and wealth. Where England had a monopoly in world trade, or something close to a monopoly, her goods should be sold at high prices. But when foreign competition was great, British goods should be priced as low as possible. This would result in more sales for Britain and help drive out foreign competitors. When foreign competitors disappeared, Mun recommended that prices be raised, but not to the point that competitors are enticed to come back into the market. On the concept of the balance of trade and on the concept of financial capital, Mun builds his economic theory and justifies his economic policy. By the proper employment of capital (provided there is adequate domestic industry and frugality) a favorable balance can be obtained which in turn will provide more capital. Second, Mun explained that higher quality goods would be in greater demand throughout the world and would also lead to greater exports for Britain. He then explained how the British government could help improve product quality. Mun wanted the government to regulate manufacturers and to establish a council of trade (similar to the functions now performed by the US Department of Commerce) which would advise the government in matters pertaining to the regulation of trade and industrial activity. These regulations on British manufacturers should be quite strict in order to ensure that Britain produced high quality goods. Finally, Mun explained how national tax policy could help generate trade surpluses. He recognized that (in opposition to the national interest) some firms might want to import luxury goods. In such a case, government policies must bring private and national interests into harmony. Mun looked to taxation to achieve this end. Export duties were to be discouraged because they would cost Britain sales in foreign countries. Import duties should be low on goods that are subsequently exported and high on goods that tend to be consumed by British citizens. Excise or sales taxes, Mun argued, did little harm. Although they raised the price of food and clothing, Mun believed that these taxes would lead to higher wages and thus be shifted to employers. When higher prices for necessities lead to higher wages, the standard of living for British workers remains the same and the excise tax is paid by the wealthy. In order to avoid paying this tax the rich had only two options-they could work longer and harder or they could reduce luxury consumption. In either case, Mun argued, the nation would benefit. Mun, however, did not want the state to collect tax revenues and then engage in lavish or wasteful spending. Tax collections had to be saved so that they were available for national emergencies, such as wars. At the same time, the state should not accumulate so much tax revenue that the national supply of capital falls. As a compromise, Mun proposed that each year the state accumulates a surplus of taxes over spending that was equal to the annual trade surplus. The moral of Muns general theory of opulence was therefore that wise nations should maximize their exporting power by fostering the growth of both natural and artificial wealth but particularly the latter; meantime imports should be held to a minimum by curtailing excessive consumption. (Mun, ([1664] 1954, p. 9) Perhaps the greatest shortcoming of Muns monetary theory, as specified by Angell, lies in the failure to connect his price theory with his explanation of the forces which distribute the world stock of specie among nations. (Angell, 15) The later chapters of Muns book fail to maintain the analytical merits of the preceding part. Lapsing into his earlier style, Mun asserts more often than he proves. There are, however, a few theoretical elements which deserve attention. Mun points out that since the standard money of a nation measures not only the value of domestic goods but also that of foreign goods, any alterations in weight, fineness, or value of coins perforce create â€Å"confusion.† He points out that although the king may benefit temporarily from debasement, this gain is cancelled out when the kings revenues are received in debased coin. At just this point, Mun adds one item to the older analysis of debasement: he tries to show that the kingdom loses more in the first stages of debasement than the king gains, and that, for this reason, there is a net national loss. Muns explanation is not wholly successful because he fails to distinguish clearly between debtors and creditors. Although he is correct in pointing out that losses from debasement will fall heavily on landlords and debtors, and although he properly observes that the king would gain only on the new coined money, Mun fails to take into consideration the gains of the debtors, and this omission necessarily qualifies his theory of national loss. Mun and mercantilism came in for sharp criticism from other economists during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Adam Smith in the fourth book of the Wealth of Nations refuted the theory which Mun and other balance-of-trade exponents had developed. Adam Smith sharply criticized the mercantilists, and argued that less government restrictions on businesses would spur domestic production. All these anti-mercantilist views were quickly taken to heart by most economists. Mercantilist thinking, however, experienced a revival of sorts in the twentieth century. John Maynard Keynes praised the mercantilists for recognizing that the demand generated by trade surpluses would increase economic growth. Chapter 23 of The General Theory entitled Notes on Mercantilism, credits the mercantilists with understanding that countries could create jobs and incomes for its own citizens by generating a trade surplus, while the influx of money would increase business investment. (Keynes 1936, 344) Although Mun is not highly regarded by economists today, and although Mun did not make any path-breaking discoveries, he did leave his mark on the history of economics. The idea that government economic policy should be used to generate a trade surplus, and the idea that the way to achieve economic growth is through the growth of exports, constitute his two lasting contributions. References:    Angell, James. W. The Theory of International Prices: History, Criticism and Restatement. Cambridge, Harvard Univ. Press, 1926. Harvard Economic Studies, Vol. 28 Buck, Philip W., The Politics of Mercantilism, New York, Octagon Books, 1964 Johnson, E.A.J., Predecessors of Adam Smith: The Growth of British Economic Thought, New York: Prentice Hall, 1937 Keynes, John Maynard The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1936 Magnusson, Lars. Mercantilism: The Shaping of an Economic Language. New York: Routledge, 1994 Mun, Thomas. A Discourse of Trade from England unto the East-Indies, London, 1621, reprinted (Facsimile Test Society), New York, 1930.    Mun, Thomas. Englands Treasure by Forraign Trade (1664) in Early English Tracts on Commerce, ed. John R. McCulloch, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1954 Smith, Adam. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776), New York: Modern Library, 1937

Should Napoleon Bonaparte Be Considered A Hero? :: European Europe History

Should Napoleon Bonaparte Be Considered A Hero? What is a hero? A hero can be defined as a common man who rises to greatness on the basis of sheer talent. Should Napoleon Bonaparte be considered as a hero? Many would argue that Napoleon is a hero as his heroic nature provided France with the institutions and sense of national identity they needed. Others would argue Napoleon is not a hero, as his use of propaganda made the French public believe he was their savior. I believe Napoleon Bonaparte was a hero, as his many accomplishments modified the French society and ultimately the civilized world. Not only did he better France through his domestic policy, he also expanded the territory of France with many battles won through strategic warfare. He as well gave the citizens of France the sense of national identity and pride they needed. Napoleon's domestic policy, "was his greatest legacy to France" (Mitchner, pg 57). His domestic policies had such an immense impact on the way of life in France that they are used today in the civilized world. Through his domestic policy, Napoleon created the Bank of France. By creating the Bank of France Napoleon stabilized the French economy where the previous leaders of France had failed and made the franc the highest currency in all of Europe. Napoleon claimed "Equality must be the first element in education" (Mitchner, pg 59). This was the basis of the educating system Napoleon strived for. The Education reforms which Napoleon introduced in 1802 called lycees allowed this equality to occur and enhanced the way of learning for all of the citizens. Finally the serious rift with the Roman Catholic Church (which was created during the French revolution) was healed when The Concordat was introduced by Napoleon. Mending the rift between the Church and State allowed freedom of religion and rejuvenated the beliefs within the people of France. This contribution to France ended in French domestic tranquility. Napoleon was not only a great leader, he also was a military genius. As a military genius, Napoleon won many battles to expand France and was always welcomed back to France as a hero. His use of strategic warfare throughout many battles allowed him to be seen as a hero not only in France but all of Europe. Although his army was outnumbered by the Russians and Austrians in December 2, 1805, Napoleon' brilliant strategies resulted in a defeat of the opposing armies in the Battle of Austerlitz.

John Locke”S Social Contract Theory Essay

This paper analyzes the social contract theory of John Locke and how his values are consistent with the criminal justice system and private security settings of today. It will further discuss whether or not Locke’s’ values and principles apply to both criminal justice and private security venues. I will also summarize the major differences of the social contract theories; identify the key principles associated with Locke’s social contract theory; identify how these principles are inculcated in the U. S. Bill of Rights; identify how these principles play out in the criminal justice system and security settings of today and finally describe freedom in relationship to personal rights and ethical standards and obligations. To begin with, Locke’s theory is one in which he felt that man should have individual freedom and rights, which for all intense purposes equates to what democracy is in modern times. He believed in the concept of individual freedoms and government, also known as liberalism. He had a great respect for man’s moral judgment and thought that men were all â€Å"pleasant chaps†. Locke’s’ ideals were that of a capitalist mentality, and exercised perfect freedom in relation to fulfilling financial interests. He believed in an orderly society in which we should leave the state of affairs in every man’s hands within that orderly society. And last but certainly not least, he believed in separation of powers and in the system of checks and balances. How is liberalism in the criminal justice system today? We are very fortunate to live in a time where we can exercise our own individual thoughts. As I Iook at the criminal justice system of today, I believe that our right to have freedom of speech goes a long way in helping to make decisions based on who we should follow and what we feel is right and wrong. In order to see the major differences of the social contract theories, we must take a look at the major theories as a whole. Well to begin with, Hobbes believed in the absolute power of kings. He also believed in the â€Å"state of nature† which said that all individuals were naturally equal. He thought that they should do whatever they needed to do to survive. As a result, everyone suffered from continued fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man was solidary; poor; nasty; poor; brutish, and short. He believed that the government was a leviathan that would swallow up the people. His government was headed by the king and that king was better than a group. He warned against the church meddling in the king’s affairs and felt that the king was more powerful than God. He felt that the people should obey the king or choose to die. The other schools of thought came from what are called the enlightenment group which is comprised of Locke, Rousseau, and Montesquieu. They wanted to improve human conditions on earth. They generally valued natural rights as well as reason, religious tolerance, and science. We’ll begin with Locke. Locke agreed with Hobbs about the state of brutality and the natural law, but disagreed with other points. First, he felt that man by nature was a social animal. He believed that the natural right of an individual could never be taken away or even voluntarily given away. In the state of nature, men mostly kept their promises and honored their obligations, and though insecure, they were mostly peaceful, good, and pleasant. According to Locke, the natural rights of individuals limited the power of the king thus he did not have absolute power as Hobbes said, but acted only to enforce and protect the natural rights of the people. Although Locke spoke out for freedom of thought, speech and religion, he believed property to be the most important natural right. Rousseau felt that man was essentially good – â€Å"a noble savage† in the state of nature. This goes back to when there were mainly animals roaming around and the condition of man was uncivilized. Once societal standards came along, he felt that man became unhappy because society was artificial and corrupt. He felt that furthering society would be the cause of more unhappiness. He believed that the advancement of the arts and sciences did not benefit mankind. On the other hand, progress of knowledge made government more powerful and crushed individual liberty. He felt that the material progress had actually undermined the possibility of sincere friendship, replacing it with jealousy, fear and suspicion. He felt that we could secure freedom regardless of the will of the majority. In some respects he agreed with Locke, but he also felt that the community should be in charge. He was an idealistic thinker who derived the â€Å"We the People† in the constitution. He felt that religion divided and weakened the state. Montesquieu believed that all things were made up of rules and laws that never changed. He believed that there were three types of government: monarchy, ruled by a king, a republic, ruled by an elected leader and a despotism, ruled by a dictator. Of these, he believed that a government elected by the people was the best form of government. Along this line, he believed that the success of a democracy (a government in which the people have the power) depended upon maintaining the right balance of power. He further believed that all people were not equal and he approved of slavery. He felt that women were the weaker sex and should obey their husbands but also felt that women had the ability to function in government feeling that they had a calm gentleness that were helpful qualities in the decision making processes in government. Thomas Hobbes (1651), John Locke (1689), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) are the most famous social contract thinkers. Each drew quite different conclusions about the nature of political authority. Hobbes advocated absolute monarchy, Locke advocated natural rights, and Rousseau advocated collective sovereignty in the name of the general will. The Lockean concept of the social contract was invoked in the United States Declaration of Independence, which clearly states, â€Å"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the Governed†¦. â€Å",. The key principles associated with Locke’s theory are that in their natural state humans are drawn to doing good over evil; that they naturally know right from wrong, and that naturally humans prefer peace over chaos. His views are justly stated as (1) that all men are created equal; (2) that our rights are given divinely by our creator; (3) that government exists to secure and protect those rights, and (4) government exists by the consent of the governed, namely you and I. These principles play out with relation to the criminal justice system and private security setting of today by attempting to maintain peace and justice over chaos, and by helping society to live in its natural state. It is also within our realm to be fair and just with our response to crimes. One such specification is that we should be swift, balanced and just in our reaction to crimes and criminal behavior. Along these lines, it is essentially important that, for example, we decide on an appropriate punishment for the exercise of a capital punishment such as murder and rape. Locke set forth the view that the state exists to preserve the natural rights of its citizens. When governments fail in that task, citizens have the right and sometimes the duty to withdraw their support and even to rebel. Locke’s social contract theory inculcated in The U. S. Bill of Rights by his argument that governments, by virtue of the ‘social contract,’ are responsible for protecting the natural rights (life, liberty, and ownership of property) of citizens and he was in favor of participation of the people in government affairs, and their input is clearly embedded in the Declaration of Independence of 1776. We know that the Bill of Rights stipulated freedom of speech and prohibited cruel and unusual punishment. And finally freedom in relationship to personal rights and ethical standards and obligations has to do with our long list of personal freedoms and the ability to carry them out. We have the right to speak, to go where and when we want; we can go to work; go to church, we have the right to worship a God of our choosing; and we have the right to pursue happiness as stated in the U. S. Constitution. References Wikipedia: Thomas Hobbs Wikipedia: John Locke Wikipedia: Charles Montesquieu Wikipedia: Jean-Jacques Rousseau www. billofrightsinstitute. org www. lampstandfoundation,org/criminaljusticeprinciples www. rjgeib. com/thoughts/montesqui.