European society Essay Example for Free

European society Essay The eighteenth century saw a revolution sweeping Western philosophy and a simultaneous upheaval and transformation in Western social life. In this period, the west, particularly the European society and state seemed cold and heartless. The dislocations of industrialization and urbanization exposed the weaknesses of the old system and stimulated a need for more innovative political institutions adaptable to the new socio-economic conditions. This desire for change was accompanied by strong nationalist sentiments. Initial Western nationalism was lauded as a liberal form of mass political engagement and allegiance to the secular power of emerging states, consistent with popular rule. Accordingly, its birth was announced with the representation, rights, and toleration of Englands constitutional monarchy and its banner the â€Å"liberty, equality and fraternity† of the French Revolution against absolutism. Many scholars estimate the birth of the American nation from 1750-1775 (see for example, Weeks, 1994). In the late nineteenth century to the early twentieth century, social, political, and economic turmoil and instability transformed many Western countries into the world’s most chaotic amphitheater of disruption. People who thought that their cultural and political borders were violated waged a series of insurrections and rebellions. This strong feeling and desire to fight violations of inalienable natural rights came to be known as nationalism. Nationalist feelings became a decisive power in the Romantic Era. In nationalism, the individual is â€Å"the very center, the arbiter, the sovereign of the universe† (Kedourie, 1993, p.17). The political implication of this was that self-determination constituted the supreme good. Later political philosophers building upon Kantian ideas proposed that: humanity is naturally divided into nations; each nation has its peculiar character; the source of all political power is the nation; for freedom and self-realization, people must identify with a nation; loyalty to the nation-states overrides other loyalties; and the primary condition of global freedom and harmony is the strengthening of the nation-state (Smith, 1983). In the early years of the twentieth century, the striking similarity displayed by the nationalist movements throughout Southeast Asia derived from their common inspiration in Western ideology and their largely identical economic bases – the former guiding the intellectuals who lead the movements in their respective countries; the latter supplying the driving power from the masses. However, it must be pointed out that nationalist movements in this region did not have the support of more than a very small fraction of the native peoples, who for the most part are not aware that the question of autonomy even exists, and whose major concern is simply survival (Emmerson, Mills, and Thompson, 1942). In Southeast Asia, native nationalism has been the forced growth of a transplanted Western seed. In spite of the centrifugal forces of a plural society artificially bound together solely by the profit motive, nationalism has taken root among the indigenous peoples. It has penetrated most deeply among the native peoples who are united by a common language, pride of race and glorious historical traditions (Emmerson, Mills, and Thompson, 1942). Thus, â€Å"Within each group, nationalism has proved to be a cohesive force, welding people who were until its advent hardly conscious of the existence of compatriots beyond their own village, absorbing disparate religious and regional loyalties, and nationalizing such international influences as they experienced. However, from the perspectives of Southeast Asian countries as individual units, nationalism has proved a disruptive force. It has made each racial group more self-conscious, more prone to assert itself at the expense of other groups, and either tends toward a disastrous break-up of the present mosaic by some vigilant outsider playing upon this grave weakness in the body politic and social, or leads toward the forced assimilation of the weaker minorities by the most powerfully placed group. † (Emmerson, Mills, and Thompson, 1942, p. 144) The establishment of national unity through was essential ingredient in the emergence of democracy. According to Marx (2003), nationalism is an essential prerequisite to democracy, since â€Å"it establishes the boundaries of the community to which citizenship and rights are then accorded, without which democracy is impossible† (p. 31). And the birth of nationalism was related to the political baptism of the lower classes whose empowerment helped bring democracy, with both nationalism and democracy thereby relatively and impressively inclusive (Marx, 2003). While many have witnessed nationalism and democracy going together, for the past few years, nationalism has been largely considered a disruptive force on the prospects for democratization. For one, national unity gives rise to the question of the state and its boundaries, which is believed to be more fundamental than that of regime type and that can disrupt debate about appropriate political forms. Nationalism in this sense is a disruptive force because it gives rise to issues regarding religious beliefs, language, and customs. Moreover, nationalism is largely seen as being potentially disruptive to achieving democratic outcomes since it stimulates mass mobilization which frightens authoritarian rulers, causing them to suppress activities that may stop the progress of the whole process of political change. The argument that nationalism is a disruptive force is validated by the experiences of southern Europe and Latin America. The disintegration of all of the federal Communist states along republican lines adds force to this argument; however, it is not as clear-cut as this in the post-Soviet experience. According to McFaul (2002), ten years after the collapse of communism, only Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are democracies, while the other republics are under regimes that are either facade democracies or nondemocratic. Nationalism was also seen as a disruptive force on the eve of the First World War. It played an important role in the rivalries between superpowers: Germany vs. France (revenge for 1871), Russia, vs. Austria-Hungary (expansion into Balkans), and Germany vs. Great Britain (control of seas, arms race). Nationalism was also a disruptive force regarding the emergence of unsatisfied nationalities: Poles, Irish, Serbs, Czechs, and many others In Poland, following the 1830 uprising, conservatives began to drift away from nationalism. By the 1850s, only few on the right were interested in talking about nationalism, which came to be seen as a dangerous term signifying disruption, disorder, and even revolution (Porter, 2000). Within Poland itself many nobles may have shared the hopes of the Czartoryski circle, but since they could do little to further such a cause, they retreated to apolitical lives (Porter, 2000). Not only were the conservatives uncomfortable with the politics of the patriotic activists, but they found it difficult to speak the language of national romanticism. â€Å"They might appreciate some of the poetry of Mickiewicz or Slowacki, but they soon discovered the disruptive force of the progressive historiosophies to which the concept of the nation had been so firmly linked. † (Porter, 2000, p. 31) References Emerson, R. , Mills, L. A. , and Thompson, V. (1942). Government and Nationalism in Southeast Asia. New York: Institute of Pacific Relations. Kedourie, E. (1993). Nationalism, 4th expanded ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Marx, A. W. (2003). Faith in Nation: Exclusionary Origins of Nationalism. New York: Oxford University Press. McFaul, M. (2002). The Fourth Wave of Democracy and Dictatorship: Noncooperative Transitions in the Postcommunist World. World Politics 54(1), 212-44. Porter, B. (2000). When Nationalism Began to Hate: Imagining Modern Politics in Nineteenth Century Poland. New York: Oxford University Press. Weeks, W. E. (1994). American Nationalism, American Imperialism: An Interpretation of United States Political Economy, 1789-1861. Journal of the Early Republic, 14, 485-495.

New Orleans :: American Melting Pot

New Orleans   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In a country containing so much diversity and history, it is practically impossible to locate one city which embodies American diversity. A colony started by the French was the first area to fully integrate culture and religion. The city of New Orleans, now prosperous from its diversity, epitomizes the "American Melting Pot". It is complicated to relate such different backgrounds, but with an overview of history, culture, religion, and integration on a small scale, a reader is capable of applying the values to the American culture as a whole.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  In 1699 the first plans for New Orleans were born. French-Canadian, Pierre le Moyen, Sieur d'Iberville left France to found a colony on the Gulf of Mexico. Sieur d'Iberville set up a fur trading for originally on the north gulf coast, then moved the establishment to Dauphin Island. Once again, he moved the fort and created an inland colony near Louisiana. Sieur d'Iberville was in charge of all of France's responsibilities in the southern portion of the territory. Wen Iberville died in 1706 the land under his jurisdiction was given to ho brother, Jean Baptiste de Moyen Sieur de Beinville.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Beinville had great plans for the development of the French colonies and in 1717 he submitted plans for a new settlement to the Company of the West. In 1718 France agreed with Beinville's plans and authorized him to establish the settlement, according to his plans, one hundred miles up the Mississippi. Four years later the capitol of the Louisiana territory was transferred to the new settlement now know as New Orleans.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The new colony was called "New Orleans'; in honor of the Duke d'Orlean. Duke d'Orlean supposedly had something to do with the funding for the new colony. The Duke favored John Law, the founder of the Company of the West, and supported many of the company's ventures, the construction of New Orleans inclusive.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The new, growing colony needed a government, so a democratic council was formed. New Orleans was under the rule of a law making body called the Superior council which was first formed in 1712. The Superior Council was well liked by the people because it was a small representative democracy. During the 1720's and 30's Beinville was replaced as mayor by Sieur de Pierre. The colony did not experience much growth between these years so Beinville was reappointed governor in 1733 and left the colony permanently in 1742.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Spain took over the government of New Orleans in 1766. The Spanish sent the new governor, Antonio de Ulloa, to reign over their newest asset.

Leadership Empowerment Principle

The leader manifests an important role in each group or organization. He has the main objective of directing and leading the group towards the effective and efficient accomplishment and achievement of their tasks and common interest. He acts as the mediator and the source of power or command inside the group or organization for the management aspect of the diversity, individuality, and unity of each member for the processing and delegation of their different tasks and responsibilities. In general, the leader manifest as the core and central unit of the group making his the head element towards the realization and achievement of their common interest. In the contemporary perspective of group management, the aspect of leadership can be achieve and realize inside the group through different approaches each focusing on a certain aspect in the said aspect. Each leader is uniquely characterized by their specific style and nature of approach towards their purpose inside the group or organization. Every particular leader particularly focuses on a specific element on his leadership style which he views to be important and beneficial to the agenda of managing his group. This certain leadership style can be acknowledged through the realization of the elements he employs in managing his group and its influence to the effectiveness of their organization. In the aspect of realizing the leadership style for self-assessment, the author of this paper particularly examined specific points and elements for the assessment of his leadership style and the effectiveness of his approach. Based form the specific element highlighted in his approach, the author of this paper has realized the certain qualities in his leadership approach and the specific aspect he needs further development for greater effectiveness. From this assessment, the author of this paper has particularly learned the certain strength in his qualities namely the Chain of Command approach in leadership. In this quality, the author of this paper acknowledges that he finds certain strength in developing a sole authority for decision making and setting himself apart from the group for the chain of command. Through which that he is able to effectively manage his member and delegate the specific tasks necessary in their process. As also viewed in this assessment, the author of this paper also expresses interest in developing on the qualities of the centralized leadership particularly on developing group communication elements necessary for this approach. This leader particularly sees an opening for improvement in this aspect to develop an organization environment wherein he is a member but also the leader that directs everyone’s activities. Further on assessment, the author of this paper realizes that his style is best characterized as a partnership approach towards group management wherein aside from being the one with sole authority, he is also the supporter, coach and facilitator for each member’s activities. His style is to communicate and coordinate the activity of the group through imposing several tasks and responsibilities for each member particularly on the decision-making aspect. Thus, each member has their own tasks, responsibility, and specific decision taking part as co-leaders and members in the group. In particular, the author of this paper has the style of sharing the responsibility with the members and acting out as the supporter and facilitator for them. This style is also manifested by the author of this paper as part of his interest of developing a highly empowered leadership style in the group wherein the members are self-directed and has the full ownership of their tasks and most aspect of their jobs. The current approach of the author of this paper is mainly included as the initial step in developing the said approach wherein he is training the member to become independent on their responsibilities with the leader acting as the supporter and the coordinator for the organization tasks. This is mainly implemented on the interest of focusing more attention to the external forces and elements in the group as the members have already became self-directed and responsible for their group activity. Indeed, the leadership style and approach of each person is important as the effectiveness and efficiency of this aspect and the entire group process relies on the management and directing approach of their leader. Each style or approach has its respective element which is highlighted in the process towards the development of its effective application in the group. The effectiveness of this style relies on the characterizing factors and elements of the group, the issues that the organization must face, and the application approach of the leader which must be inclined towards the achievement and realization of the common good and interest of the entire organization. Bibliography Ohio Literacy Resources Center. Transformative Leadership: Leadership Development. http://literacy.kent.edu/Oasis/Leadership/over2.htm#lead. November 30, 2007. Â  

Essay on World War I - 801 Words

World War I World War I involved more countries and caused greater destruction than any other war, except World War II. An assassins bullet set off the war, and a system of military agreements plunged the main European powers into the fight. Each side expected a quick victory; but the war lasted four years and took the lives of nearly ten million military troops. Military drafts raised larger armies than ever before, and extreme patriotism gave men a cause they were willing to die for. Progaganda whipped up support for the war by making the enemy seem villainous. On June 28, 1914, an assassin gunned down Archduke Francis Ferdinard of Austria-Hungary in Sarejevo, the capital of Austria-Hungarys†¦show more content†¦The Balkan States sided with Serbia and the Allies. Serbia?s enemies were on the side of the Central Powers. The alliances were brought into action when Austria declared war. It took a week for all Europe to be at war. (Bender) Germany won early victories in World War I on the main battlefields. The western front hardly moved for three and a half years in spite of fierce combat. The fighting went back and forth until 1917 when a revolution broke out in Russia which resulted in Russia asking for a truce. (World Book Encyclopedia) The United States remained neutral at first, but many Americans turned against the Central Powers after Germany began sinking unarmed ships. In 1917 the United States joined the Allies. As a result the Allies gained the manpower they needed to win the war. In 1918, the Central Powers surrendered. (World Book Encyclopedia) World War I grew into the greatest war the world had ever seen. The amount of money spent was enormous. The war costed about two hundred billion dollars. The United States alone spent as much money as it did on all the expenses of the government from 1791 to 1914. (World Book Encyclopedia) More than sixty-five million men were mobilized for the armies and navies. Over eight million lost their lives, and more that twenty-one million were wounded. Civilian populations worked as never before to produce enormous quantities of guns, ammunitions,Show MoreRelatedThe World War I Is War1653 Words   |  7 PagesWorld War I is war famous for European nations fighting against themselves. It began to take shape when countries like France and Germany beginning to form their own allies. It all started with the powerful Austria-Hungary wanted to have Serbia as part of their own empire. However a group of Serbian nationalists known as Black Hands dislike the idea. So they wanted to send a message to the Austria-Hungary government by killing Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Gavrilo Princip, member of the Black Hands,Read MoreWorld War I And The Great War1249 Words   |  5 PagesWhenever you come across World War I, don’t you ever deeply think about how it all started? Who would have known that just 2 pulls of a trigger could have triggered a demoralizing World War? World War I, also known as â€Å"The Great War,† was a war that primarily took place in Europe. It officially started on the 28th of July in 1914 and it unexpectedly lasted until the 11th of November in 1918 (about 4 years). The most predominant countries that fought in this war include Great Britain, France, RussiaRead MoreWorld War I And The Great War1325 Words   |  6 PagesAnnie Poll Period 3 AP European History Free-Response Essay 31 March, 2016 World War I is often called â€Å"The Great War†. This was because it was the first war to affect such a large geographical area and involve so many countries. These countries’ governments had complicated relationships with each other and even the people who they governed. This war was largely unavoidable because of these complicated relationships and diplomacies. The first example of these relationships were the onesRead MoreWorld War I Changed The World1115 Words   |  5 Pages21 million more had serious injures. World War I changed many lives around the world as eight European countries as well as the United States, fought against each other and formed allies. It the beginning, it was meant to be the war that ended all wars. This Great War was unlike any war before; there was new technology such as tanks and machine guns, as well as new tactics such as trenches and war at sea. The physical geography affected the outcome of the war in great measures, both on land and seaRead MoreThe Great War Of World War I2218 Words   |  9 PagesEven though ‘The Great War’ ended over 100 years ago, people are still arguing about how it all started. Beginning in 1914, and involving over 30 countries, World War One was the first major war to impact the world. Russia, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Serbia could all be considered factors that helped rise World War One. Before the war, countries faced many internal and external conflicts, leading to rising tensions and concern across Europe, and later the world. Out of the many nations who participatedRead MoreWorld War I And The Great War1829 Words   |  8 PagesWorld War One has been constantly referred to as a watershed point in the history of the Western world. Argue this position by drawing on examples from political, economic and cultural spheres. World War I, also known as the First World War or the Great War, was a global war centred in Europe that began on 28 July 1914 and lasted until 11 November 1918. More than 9 million soldiers and 7 million civilians died as a result of the war.It was one of the deadliest conflicts in history, paving theRead MoreWorld War I And The Great War2006 Words   |  9 PagesWorld War I, also known as the First World War, or the Great War, was a global war centred in Europe that began on 28 July 1914 and lasted until 11 November 1918. More than 70 million military personnel, including 60 million Europeans, were mobilised in one of the largest wars in history. Over 9 million combatants and 7 million civilians died as a result of the war, a casualty rate exacerbated by the belligerents technological and industrial sophistication, and the tactical stalemate caused byRead MoreThe First World War I1305 Words   |  6 PagesMrs. Schartner U.S. History 2 AP/IB 19 October 2015 Unit 3 Notebook Essay The First World War fought from 1914 to 1918 was one of the largest and most brutal catastrophes fought in the 20th century. With nearly the entire European continent fighting a barbaric and everlasting war, the U.S. had eventually to get involved in order to reinitiate stability to Europe. Ultimately, the U.S. taking involvement in World War I had a profound political, economic, and social impact on the country. It increasedRead MoreWorld War I ( Wwi )959 Words   |  4 PagesWorld War I (WWI) had many main events from 1914 – 1918. It was known as the Great War and the war to end all wars. It also introduced us to many new technology to including Barbed wire, machine guns, artillery, poison gas, airships, aircraft s, new naval vessels and tanks. All these wartime machines and equipment resulted in unprecedented carnage and destruction, with more than 9 million soldiers killed by the end of the war. This First World War or the Great War, was a global war centered in EuropeRea d MoreThe Legacy Of World War I962 Words   |  4 PagesWorld War I the first of its kind would mark an entire generation; could what today is known as the lost generation have been avoidable or was President Woodrow Wilson just prolonging the inevitable by his neutrality. The following will guide you through a brief outline of the WWI and how one man s justifications sent an entire nation to war. Woodrow Wilson, a man with questionable motives when speaking in terms of neutrality during World War I. Was Wilson’s neutrality an attempt to spare the