The Rise And Challenge Of Neoliberalism To Neorealism Politics Essay

The Rise And Challenge Of Neoliberalism To Neorealism Politics Essay The neo or the new kind of liberalism and realism was developed in the 1970s as a significant change in theories of International Relations. The neoliberalism is an advancement of liberalism thinking, as it believes to a cooperation and interdependence between States and non-state actors, while the neorealisms theory is focused on the idea of conflict. For the liberals or neoliberals, they have a more optimistic view of peaceful relations, but compared to liberals the neoliberals are highly focused on creating institutions to manage the international system. The neorealists compared to realists argue that the causes of conflict are different. While realists believe that the self-interest of states create conflict, the neorealists explain that the conflict comes from the anarchy, as the lack of authority involves states to seek power and develop a system of self-help. The development of neoliberal theory was formulated by Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye (1977) based on interdependence model. The founder of neorealism school is Kenneth Waltz (1979), he stands out from realists about the question of the balance of power. For realists the equilibrium results from the willingness of politicians, but Waltz believes that the balance of power is an attribute to the international system which is composed of selfish units, regulate themselves. Thus for him, the less major powers there are, the more stable the international system is. Therefore the number of poles is reduced to increase system rigidity and more people choose carefully. Having in mind this above statement, the main purpose of this essay is to examine in some detail how neoliberalism is a response to neorealism and how it can challenge the realisms simplistic approach and neorealist theory of the international system. To begin with an analysis of the rise of neoliberalism, it is important to explain the main concept of this theory as this is also the rise of institutions, of pluralism, of rationality. Then, by different ideas from authors the discussion and argument on the debate will be analysed in order to identify the key points of neoliberalism to counter neorealism. The renewal of liberalism occurred after World War II to regulate international system for a peaceful world order. The ideas of neoliberalism are based on cooperation through international institutions and international organizations, which play an important role in the international distribution of wealth and power to maintain stability. Indeed, the major authors like Stephen Krasner (1982) and the founder of neoliberal thought, Robert O. Keohane (1984) has published a book After hegemony and both develop an hegemonic stability theory, they argue that the hegemon provides public goods through institutions (e.g. International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization), determine the content of rules and procedures of cooperation in order to act in the interest of all. Thus the hegemon provides a necessary and sufficient function for the creation and maintenance of international regimes. The neoliberals saw institutions concentrated on international regimes defined by Krasner (1983) as institutions possessing norms, decision rules, and procedures which facilitate a convergence of expectations. Neoliberalism also refers to a rise of pluralism, which is viewed as the source of liberal justification (Robert B. Talisse, 2005, pp. 60) that relies on the assumption of rationality. This leads to an interaction between states, as the rationality involves them to focus on strategy in which actions will lead to reactions by others, then the result will depend on the interaction of other state strategies (Tim Dunne, et al., 2007). Thus the pluralism involves multiple forces in the international system. As David Armstrong, et al., (2007, pp. 85) state neoliberals no longer looked inside states, at how they are politically organized, but rather followed neorealists in treating states as rational actors. The rise of neoliberalism leads to an emergence of international institutions, often called neoliberal institutionalism is focused on collective actors, as they provide rules and norms that support the interaction of states that will work all together. Neoliberals are much more pragmatic than liberals. The notion of international institutions (e.g. International Monetary Fund, World Bank) differs from liberals, especially after the publication of Robert O. Keohanes book After Hegemony (1984). The institutions have a huge influence on states and have provided a way to challenge neorealism. International institutionalism can explain non-security policy areas, the focus goes beyond trade and development issues, like cooperation in trade, monetary policy or environmental protection (David Armstrong, et al., 2007). Thus, institutions, by pushing states to work together, facilitate international cooperation in reducing inherent uncertainties in anarchy. Also one of the major difference with realism is how they see the concept of anarchy (Grieco 1988). Both theories agree on state action and anarchy in world politics. Even if neoliberals recognise their proximity to neorealists, how they manage their similarities is different. Like neorealists, states are important but run with other entities (institutions, organizations). The anarchy, for neorealists, is the absence of authority above states, leading to conflicts on international system. This also means that a state is the guardian of its own security and independence (Spanier, 1978 pp. 11), thus the guarantee of security and safety for states does not exist. The self-interest for neorealists is based on the measurement of gains and have preference on relative gains where states refer to power balances (Grieco, 1988). They believe in hegemonic cooperation, where the hegemonic state holds the position of power to arbitrate any coalition in international system with a preponderance of economic and military power (Hobson, J. M.,2000, pp 39). For neorealists, cooperation can be used to obtain some goals, but it is limited and risky as it introduces the possibility of attack from another state, even if the other state is an ally. According to Waltz for each state the prior research of security is achieved by relying only on itself. However would this lack of trust and cooperation towards other states tend to a dependence of the hegemonic state ? Neoliberals in response have demonstrated that anarchy cannot only deal with a constant threat of use of force by major powers. Miller, B. (1995, pp. 52) in his book called When Opponents Cooperation: Great Power Conflict and Collaboration in World Politics, has raised and competed theoretical perspectives to advance plausible explanations. He stated that the small number of great powers and the use of force are insufficient factors to induce cooperation in conflict resolutions. The cooperation under anarchy (Oye, K. 1986) is possible. Unlike neorealists, they argue that the concept of self-help is not the most profitable for a state because of the risk of war. The cooperation may respond to the self-interest of a state. Neoliberals argument is actually the strongest one because they introduced idea of complex interdependence (Robert O. Keohane and J. Nye, 1977) to explain how multiple actors, agencies and forces can be managed in the world system. Keohane and Nye do successfully cha llenge structural realists as they provide a better understanding of changing security. They explain, for example, that in post Cold War era the security changed through multiple communications in multipolar system. Moreover they argue that using force by military actions are costly and tend to negative effects on economic goals. This also leads to a risk of nuclear rise. Therefore, complex interdependence assumed that the military power is not necessarily effective in economic and political interests of states. If issues occurred between great powers and smaller states, the great powers should dominate. However, the US experience in Vietnam (1961) shows the failure of neorealist theory on bipolar system. Keohane (1997, pp 187) has remarkably explained that : Failure of great powers to control smaller ones could be explained on the basis of independent evidence that in the relevant issue- areas, the states that are weaker on an overall basis have more power resources than their stronger partners, and that the use of power derived from one area of activity to affect outcomes in other areas (through linkages) is difficult. Thus the complex interdependence has arguably challenged the neorealist theory in security concerns. The concept of Prisoners Dilemma, used by neorealists, is based on idea that they have a policy of self-help by default because they could not know the behaviour of other states. How to predict the behaviour of other states ? How to reduce the uncertainty in the situation of international anarchy ? The neoliberals responded by international institutions and international regimes creation. According to Keohane (1986) international regimes facilitate cooperation by reducing uncertainty. He argued that regimes were created to solve the Prisoners Dilemma concept where states share a common interest in cooperation. The regimes are operated between self-interest states aware of all the benefits they can get from the coordination of their policies. In contrast to neorealists, they are concerned with absolute gains getting the best possible deal. Grieco stated that State seeks to maximize their individual absolute gains and are indifferent to the gains achieved by others (Baldwin, 1993, pp 117). By using absolute gains neoliberals seek a long-term cooperation through institutions which are considered for neoliberal institutionalists as the mediator and the means to prevent to cheating in the world system (Baylis and Smith, 2001). Keohane and Nye (1977) have clearly defined the importance of institutions as powerful norms. Indeed, NGOs and networks are strongly effective in penetrating states and use domestic norms and rules to force political leaders to focus on global issues. The most significant argument is found in neoliberalism theory because international institutions encourage the opportunity of negotiations and focus on collaboration and distributional issues. Thus the collective aim is to achieve a positive outcome (Martin, Lisa L., and Beth A. Simmons, 1998). One of the relevant example to illustrate the importance of institutions is the World Trade Organization (the WTO agreement) created in 1995, its goal is to provide free trade agreements and settle disputes between nations. If governments are confident to other ones they would not establish barriers to trade and would not try to do so. Thus they will be more willing to cooperate. The WTO system widely contributes to strengthen that trust and the negotiations lead to agreements by consensus. Small countries can benefit from greater bargaining power. It is important to remain that without a multilateral regime such as the WTO system, the more powerful countries could further unilaterally impose their force on their smaller trading partners. Thus smaller countries would have to deal individually with each of the major economic powers and would have more difficulties in resisting to pressures. But with the WTO system, smaller countries may be more effective if they have opportunities to create alliances and share their resources (e.g. Association of Southeast Asian Nations, 1967). Besides, major economic countries will also find their interest as they can negotiate with almost all of their trading partners at a time. As emphasized earlier, neorealists greater focus on power and security as a core goal through military force and tangible assets, but for neoliberals the dominant goal is the welfare through institutions and organizations. Walts focus is based on anarchical structure of the international system, states compete each other in order to survive. Neorealists also share common ideas as defensive realism because anarchy causes a security dilemma leading states to worry about one anothers future intentions. Thus leaders mistakenly believe in aggression to make their state secure. For example: in the Cold War era, the Soviet Union with their nuclear weapons threaten the safety of America. One of the other popular neorealists, John Mearsheimer (2003), leader in offensive realism, believes in status quo power and blamed security competition between great powers. However the neoliberals concept on international institutions is the best means to avoid conflicts and hostility as they have an independent causal impact because they oversee global tasks that states do not (T. Dunne, et al., 2009). As they represent a third party or neutral parties they have a complete autonomy to deal with states and promote values and goals on a global scale. One of the dominant strand for liberalists and neoliberalists is the democratic peace theory, based on Kants notions of Perpetual Peace. While neorealists completely dismiss this idea of democracy where states have no conflict among each other, neoliberals use this peaceful argument to counter neorealists on their use of force. The democratic peace theory is the argument that democracies do not tend to, or rarely go to war with each other. People are directly affected by decisions of war, the public opinion is therefore important as it affects the political behaviour. Democratic norms emphasize on the importance of dialogue and negotiation, the same for trade relations. Besides, the main reasons that democracies do not go to wars or militarized conflicts against each other are the fact that state leaders have cultural and institutional restrictions (Doyle, 1986). Neoliberals stand as a challenge to neorealists in providing argument for peaceful and cooperative international relations through democratic peace. Michael Doyle (1983) finds three pillars based on : first, peaceful conflict resolution between democratic states, second the common values among democratic states and third economic cooperation among democracies (R. Jackson, G. Sorensen, 2007, pp. 44). It is argued that this theory is also used as a tool to create homogenous world and challenge states sovereignty in the era of globalisation. Whereas neorealists think that globalisation does not exist because states only have state-interests. For them the globalisation would be economically bad, with negative outcomes such as dangerous inequality, rebellion, conflicts. In response to this negative idea, neoliberals think that globalisation can lead to community of states and new interests. Moreover, the democratic peace theorys benefit is to identify and condemn countries for human rights violations. While neorealists dismiss cultural differences between states, neoliberals emphasize the importance of culture and morality. For both, democracy must be normalized meaning that they have normative quality in which how the world ought to be or the way the world should be ordered. Democracy remains a moving target (M. Brown, et al., 1996, pp. 268) and is used by neoliberals to challenge neorealists as a response to war and a collective solution for peace. The American hegemony is also a debate between neoliberals and neorealists. This is, on the one hand, viewed as a hard power by neorealists as the USA have ability to impose their will on other political states: in terms of military force, technological growth, they have permanent seat in the UN Security Council, nuclear weapon power and economic power. On the other hand, the concept of soft power (Nye, J.) has a different view of hegemony, as emphasized earlier, it used other means, like culture, ideology, institutions. If the power of the US, analyzed in terms of resources and influences, is obviously not what it was in the 1950s, but this decline should not be exaggerated. The pax Americana is more a myth than a reality, the US has never enjoyed a complete hegemony. Nye believes that they should consider sharing their leadership to face the transnational interdependence. Robert Cox (Canadian neoliberal) thinks that hegemony and leadership terms are confused to describe the domination of one power in the international system. He stated that hegemony is a leadership by consent and is not a power struggle, but rather functions in a subtle way, by a kind of universal consent. Nye finds that the power definition has a lack of uniformity. That is why he undertook two approaches of the power definition : The first one, is to identify the factors of power : they can be measured from natural resources, territory, population or as political factors from institutions, organisations. A clear understanding of the factors are important to then define the power. The second approach is the goals of the power. For neorealists and realists the goals are the defense of national interests. However, Nye added that action fields of power are numerous and different. The challenge for the US is how to keep their hegemony as long as possible. In hard power the goal is to keep superiority, the US should more take active part in foreign conflicts (they tend to do since 9/11). As they cannot intervene everywhere (due to internal expenses) they must make a selection, necessarily based on national interests. In this instance their hegemony would appear as a strong supremacy. In soft power, the US must continue to promote exchanges and keep their advanced technology. As a response to neorealist theory, neoliberals argue that the use of force and a bilateral system are not effective. Arguments are based on peaceful world order by the creation of international institutions, organisations and regimes. Indeed, these ideas have successfully challenged neorealist thoughts, as organisations like the WTO allowed to reduce conflicts and settle disputes. They especially lead to agreed members to cooperate through negotiations, the community of states is the main successful factor in order to avoid conflicts and wars. Finally, the notions of hegemony or power are used in both theories but have different meaning. Some similarities are also found in both, like universality, uniformity or anarchy and critics argue that instead of a debate this is more a neo-neo synthesis  [1]  .

An Indian Democracy Essay -- Essays Papers

An Indian Democracy Donald Grinde is the author of The Iroquois and the Founding of the American Nation, one of the earliest books to argue for an Indian influence on the formation of the American democracy. Since Grinde’s publication and Bruce Johansen’s a year later, there has been a great deal of debate over this issue. Many of the most prominent opponents of the influence thesis have failed to distinguish between the arguments of more extreme authors, such as Gregory Schaaf, who claim that the Iroquois Gayanashagowa was copied by the U.S. Constitution, and those with a more moderate stance, like Johansen and Grinde, who simply point to a clear influence (Johansen, 1998). This paper intends to argue along the lines of these latter authors. Our founding fathers did not copy the Gayanashagowa or Great Law of Peace, but our Constitution was written with reflection upon the Iroquoian government with the goal of synthesizing this model into a form that could satisfy the needs of the Ameri can people. Given the evidence presented by Grinde and Johansen, it is clear that Native Americans influenced early U. S. political minds—if not directly, then at least indirectly. Elisabeth Tooker is one of the strongest opponents of the claim that there was a native influence on the U. S. democracy. She addressed Schaaf’s extreme claim that the U.S. had copied the Gayanashagowa, which is clearly not the case. Tooker sites differences between the Constitution and the Great Law of Peace such as majority rule rather than unanimous consensus. This line of argument works well to refute Schaaf, who’s evidence is based almost entirely on his analysis of such parallels (Johansen, 1998) Tooker’s overall argument, though, is not effective ... ...en Founders . Ipswich, Massachusetts: Gambit Incorporated Publishers. Johansen, Bruce E (1996). Native American Political Systems and the Evolution of Democracy: an Annotated Bibliography. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press. Johansen, Bruce E. (1998). Debating Democracy: Native American Legacy of Freedom. Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers. Locke, John (1980). Second Treatise of Government. Indiana: Hackett Publishing Company. Moquin, Wayne, ed. (1973). Great Documents in American Indian History. New York: Praeger,. O'Brien, Sharon (1989). American Indian Tribal Governments. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Parker, Arthur C. (1968). The Constitution of the Five Nations. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques (1968). The Social Contract. Trans. Maurice Cranston. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.

Chinese Corporation Essay

1. What kinds of advantages can Chinese companies obtain if they move production into the United States? There are several advantages Chinese companies obtain by moving their production to the United States. For starters, they would be able to sell to companies that only purchase American made products. Also, the money earn from the U.S. base production generates profit for China; which allows the companies to help its country economy by expanding its business in both countries and providing jobs for the unemployed. Lastly, the companies would receive a huge tax-credit and save significantly on shipping. 2. What are some possible disadvantages and threats of moving production to the United States? Some American is not open to the fact that international companies are moving their production on United States’ soil. In fact, U.S. citizens are willing to boycott and financially hurt the companies if such a move was to happen; especially in an economy where American own businesses are failing. 3. Will more Chinese companies make investments in the United States as opposed to China and the future? Fully explain and justify your choice. I believe that there will be an increase in Chinese companies making investments in the United States. For starters, it will help the companies’ international business relationship. To add, there are several stimulus packages the companies would qualify for (such as the economic tax credit) by doing business in America. Also, their profit would increase. The U.S. dollar is more than Yens. So, they would be making twice as much money in the U.S. on the same product sold in China at a cheaper rate. And, the cost to ship would decrease, because the companies would not have to pay duties on products being shipped within the United States. Therefore, it is beneficial for Chinese companies’ to invest in the U.S.

The Physics Field of Fluid Statics

The Physics Field of Fluid Statics Fluid statics is the field of physics that involves the study of fluids at rest. Because these fluids are not in motion, that means they have achieved a stable equilibrium state, so fluid statics is largely about understanding these fluid equilibrium conditions. When focusing on incompressible fluids (such as liquids) as opposed to compressible fluids (such as most gases), it is sometimes referred to as hydrostatics. A fluid at rest does not undergo any sheer stress, and only experiences the influence of the normal force of the surrounding fluid (and walls, if in a container), which is the pressure. (More on this below.) This form of equilibrium condition of a fluid is said to be a hydrostatic condition. Fluids that are not in a hydrostatic condition or at rest, and are therefore in some sort of motion, fall under the other field of fluid mechanics, fluid dynamics. Major Concepts of Fluid Statics Sheer stress vs. Normal stress Consider a cross-sectional slice of a fluid. It is said to experience a sheer stress if it is experiencing a stress that is coplanar, or a stress that points in a direction within the plane. Such a sheer stress, in a liquid, will cause motion within the liquid. Normal stress, on the other hand, is a push into that cross sectional area. If the area is against a wall, such as the side of a beaker, then the cross sectional area of the liquid will exert a force against the wall (perpendicular to the cross section - therefore, not coplanar to it). The liquid exerts a force against the wall and the wall exerts a force back, so there is net force and therefore no change in motion. The concept of a normal force may be familiar from early in studying physics, because it shows up a lot in working with and analyzing free-body diagrams. When something is sitting still on the ground, it pushes down toward the ground with a force equal to its weight. The ground, in turn, exerts a normal force back on the bottom of the object. It experiences the normal force, but the normal force doesnt result in any motion. A sheer force would be if someone shoved on the object from the side, which would cause the object to move so long that it can overcome the resistance of friction. A force coplanar within a liquid, though, isnt going to be subject to friction, because there isnt friction between molecules of a fluid. Thats part of what makes it a fluid rather than two solids. But, you say, wouldnt that mean that the cross section is being shoved back into the rest of the fluid? And wouldnt that mean that it moves? This is an excellent point. That cross-sectional sliver of fluid is being pushed back into the rest of the liquid, but when it does so the rest of the fluid pushes back. If the fluid is incompressible, then this pushing isnt going to move anything anywhere. The fluid is going to push back and everything will stay still. (If compressible, there are other considerations, but lets keep it simple for now.) Pressure All of these tiny cross sections of liquid pushing against each other, and against the walls of the container, represent tiny bits of force, and all of this force results in another important physical property of the fluid: the pressure. Instead of cross sectional areas, consider the fluid divided up into tiny cubes. Each side of the cube is being pushed on by the surrounding liquid (or the surface of the container, if along the edge) and all of these are normal stresses against those sides. The incompressible fluid within the tiny cube cannot compress (thats what incompressible means, after all), so there is no change of pressure within these tiny cubes. The force pressing on one of these tiny cubes will be normal forces that precisely cancel out the forces from the adjacent cube surfaces. This cancellation of forces in various directions is of the key discoveries in relation to hydrostatic pressure, known as Pascals Law after the brilliant French physicist and mathematician Blaise Pascal (1623-1662). This means that the pressure at any point is the same in all horizontal directions, and therefore that the change in pressure between two points will be proportional to the difference in height. Density Another key concept in understanding fluid statics is the density of the fluid. It figures into the Pascals Law equation, and each fluid (as well as solids and gases) have densities that can be determined experimentally. Here are a handful of common densities. Density is the mass per unit volume. Now think about various liquids, all split up into those tiny cubes I mentioned earlier. If each tiny cube is the same size, then differences in density means that tiny cubes with different densities will have different amount of mass in them. A higher-density tiny cube will have more stuff in it than a lower-density tiny cube. The higher-density cube will be heavier than the lower-density tiny cube, and will therefore sink in comparison to the lower-density tiny cube. So if you mix two fluids (or even non-fluids) together, the denser parts will sink that the less dense parts will rise. This is also evident in the principle of buoyancy, that explains how displacement of liquid results in an upward force, if you remember your Archimedes. If you pay attention to the mixing of two fluids while its happening, such as when you mix oil and water, therell be a lot of fluid motion, and that would covered by fluid dynamics. But once the fluid reaches equilibrium, youll have fluids of different densities that have settled into layers, with the highest density fluid forming the bottom layer, up until you reach the lowest density fluid on the top layer. An example of this is shown on the graphic on this page, where fluids of different types have differentiated themselves into stratified layers based on their relative densities.

Arts of Africa, Oceania and the Americas essays

Arts of Africa, Oceania and the Americas essays Arts of Africa, Oceania and the Americas It is my third visit to the museum of Metropolitan art, this time we are focusing on the arts of Africa, Oceania and the Americas. In the meantime the instructor gives important facts, and explanations about the purpose and meaning of the objects created. One of my favorites is the Pendant Mask: Iyoba from the Benin culture and its representation of power. First of all, this pendant mask was created by the Benin culture in Nigeria. The texture and the fine materials of the pendant specify that it was worn by a king on ceremonial occasions. It is believed that this object was created by the royal ivory carvers of the king. The main material used in this mask is Ivory, Iron and Copper. Furthermore the Ivory was made out of the elephant tusk which was highly prized, and it was a symbol of wealth and purity. In addition to the value the materials had, this mask also represents the influence the mother of the oba (king) had in the Benin society. Moreover, Idia was the mother and advisor to one of the most powerful leader of Benin, Esigie who ruled in the early sixteenth century. Esigie created this pendant to honor Idia for helping to secure his claim to the throne and for the wise counsel that she provided him throughout his reign. As a result of Idia's role, the title of Queen Mother (Iyoba) was introduced to the Benin court, granting the mother of the oba (king) equal authority to that of senior town chiefs. Furthermore, the mask also gives information about the ancient Benin society. For instance, the mask displays multiple figures, each one with a different meaning for example, the mudfish that line her head and collar. The mudfish is one of the most primary symbols of Benin Kingship. This creature was associated with the qualities of aggressiveness due to its electric stings and the ability to survive in water and on land as the Oba move through both earth and t...

The Changing Role of HRM in the NHS Dissertation

The Changing Role of HRM in the NHS - Dissertation Example Since the inception of these new changes, the HRM practices have played some significant part in the national health services. There has been a remarkable change in HRM, which has reduced the challenges faced when the HRM is discharging their services to the citizens. One of the changes realized is transparency between the servants of HRM and the other government bodies. This has been realized through enhanced talks and auditing. The Officials of the HRM are also accountable to other higher government agencies as they act as a link between workforces and the managerial teams. There is also a public interview whenever new officials are recruited; this helps to bring about equality in employment (Goyal 229). Whenever there is a complaint against the practices of HRM, it has to undergo procedural steps for proper scrutinizing. This has helped to do away with propaganda and it enables proper representation of each party that is involved. There is also installation of safety measures to g uard the wellbeing of both the staff and the citizens. This contributes to high motivation among the staff because they feel secure while undertaking the activities of discharging their services to the people (Goyal 237). They are also entitled to a compensation, which enable them get some benefits. For instance, better policies are formalized, such as statutory benefits and insurance schemes. The HRM, aiming at achieving a better healthcare, conducts all these services and they have been pivotal in the development of a better image in the healthcare sector. The HR management is thus undertaking a new role of bringing a new understanding and flexibility in the delivery of health services, which results to the healthcare efficiency. The information system was appropriate as it used a common service center. For instance, there is the usage of human labor force in keeping records of sickness absence and the internal auditing of repots, which hinders accountability. Consequently, there is a problem of comprehensive evaluation of staff sickness absence. Evidently, a better information system needs to be implemented in order to improve the efficiency of line managers in order to deal with sickness absence accordingly. Sources have revealed that the formulation of proper policies, systematic procedures, and innovations in the key target areas are key in its accomplishment. For example, there is the provision of better terms and creation of a welfare unit to deal with the wellbeing of the staff .The sick staff has also been entitled to a full pay leave of six months and a half pay for the additional six months. Additionally, there is the development of a plan for purposes of catering for the needs of the emerging issues. Therefore, this has ensured the sufficient delivery of health services. A performance appraisal is conducted to evaluate each work and then a reward is given. Budgetary allocation of health services in the national budget has enabled creation of commi ssions and authorities that ensure that there is justice and equality in the administration of national health services through the HR management (Goyal 19). There is also the development of a similar treatment for all departments to ensure that equality prevails in all the represented

I have a dream--situational analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

I have a dream--situational analysis - Essay Example This was the most famous speech he ever made which almost immortalized him. Dr. King, even to this day, remains an icon of anti racist movement. The rhetoric "I have a dream" became part of all the freedom movements to come and his words "Let freedom ring" reverberated from all corners of the world, as a sanctified slogan of freedom loving humankind. The rhetorical situation had many constraints at the time. Even though it was John Kennedy, one of the most exalted Presidents of America, the sworn enemy of racism, Kennedy had realized that it would take years to remove the evil from its roots. He was a new President, still testing the water of American politics and was not yet ready for a civil war like situation with the racial frenzy South. Things had not changed much from the days of Abe Lincoln. President Kennedy had to send federal troops to admit James Meredith to the University of Mississippi, in 1962, the very thing he really wanted to avoid. The President also had to order the marshals to accompany Meredith while attending his University Classes. King knew that in Kennedy he had a sympathizer and now it is known that Kennedy had already decided to do a lot for the rights of the black population, during his second term as President. But in 1963, even Kennedy was not in a position to do much to aid King. King knew that he had to fight his own battles, possibly with subtle help from the President and his Attorney General brother, Robert Kennedy. King's first task was generating support from the Black Community. There were a few fractions fighting for the civil liberty in an unorganized way. He knew that their strength lies in unity and undivided, fractionless black community. He knew that unless he did that, the movement had no chance of success. He also knew that President Kennedy's assassination in 1963 and the aspiring Presidential candidate, Robert Kennedy's murder in 1967, had removed any hope of administrative support for the movement, and the mild, rather wily successor, Lyndon Johnson never showed any such intention either by word or deed. King had to depend on his own rhetoric, wit, oratory and determination to make a success of the fight for civil liberties. This entire speech, its timing, location was towards that one particular goal. He had to enthuse and inspire them ('Let freedom ring'), explain and get them committed ('We cannot turn back'), and make them march with him towards the glittering goal of 'Free at last!' His eloquent speech was interrupted many times by the admiring frenzy of the audience that is the result of great purpose and happiness of having found a suitably inspiring leader at last for the cause. The rhetoric produced both short term and long-term effects. For the first time in recent decades black community of America was maintaining a united struggle for their