Garrett Hardin In lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against The Poor Essay

Garrett Hardin in "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against the Poor" Garrett Hardin writes about saving the poor in his essay "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against the Poor" found in The Blair Reader. Hardin writes about how the rich countries are in the lifeboat and the poor countries are swimming in the ocean. He also writes about how the United States helps other countries. Hardin feels that if the government keeps helping other countries and letting people in then America will also drown. "We must convince them if we wish to save at least part of the world form environmental ruin"(page 765). Why should I help the poor countries? Why should I let the immigrants in? I see no reason for helping someone that is not an American. These non Americans are taking my hard-working money that they did not earn. I am tired of the United States of America giving my money to the poor countries. The government is giving these people my money for which I worked hard. The government does not ask for my permission to give these people my money. By letting these people on our lifeboat the government is drowning us all. "If we do let an extra 10 people in our lifeboat, we will have lost our 'safety factor,' an engineering principle of critical importance" (page 757). I cannot take a chance in helping people if it is going to put me in risk. Instead of giving the money to non Americans it should be used only in America. The money used to help the poorer countr...

Julius Caesar Seminar Questions

Julius Caesar Seminar Questions 1. When Caesar says that Cassius thinks too much, I agree. Cassius tends to look into the details and over think simple situations. He becomes very meticulous about how the group of the conspirators is organized. Also, while Cassius is the one who originally comes up with the idea of the conspiracy and that he wants Brutus to be in charge, he thinks through the plan, yet does not want to take responsibility. Cassius just about argues with himself, due to too many thoughts running through his mind. He thinks about so vile a thing as Caesar! But, O grief, where hast thou led me?I perhaps speak this before a willing bondman. Then I know my answer must be made. But I am armed and dangers to me indifferent,† (1. 3. 11-115), proving that his thoughts are all over the place. 2. Brutus does not want the conspirators to swear an oath of allegiance because he feels that it is bad â€Å"to think that or our cause or our performance did need an oath; when e very drop of blood that every Roman bears, and nobly bears is guilty,† (2. 1. 136-139). Brutus obviously feels that if their intentions and motivations to carrying out the assassination of Caesar, they do not need an oath.An oath causes people to get lazy because they begin to lean on the idea that, no matter what happens. 3. Caesar’s response to Calphurnia’s fears adds credence to Brutus’ and Cassius’ fears about Caesar because he does not heed warnings. This response might add to the pattern Caesar might follow when other senators bring up new ideas. This can be very serious for others that want to have somewhat of a say when it comes to their opinion on a serious matter. Calpurnia notes that his â€Å"wisdom is consumed in confidence,† (2. 2. 49), showing that Caesar has the idea that what he thinks is what is to happen, without any other opinion. 4.The significance of Caesar’s â€Å"north star† speech at the Capitol is that Caesar establishes his ideals around his role in power. Caesar frames his arrogance and stubborn nature by stating â€Å"there is no fellow in the firmament,† (3. 1. 62). In his eyes, he walks on water to all of those that are his supporters and followers. Caesar is overly confident, providing reason to the motivations of the conspirators in their quest to assassinate Caesar. 5. The third plebeian’s cry of â€Å"Let him be Caesar,† (3. 2. 52) is ironic because, while the people do not know of the truth being the conspiracy, the goal was to take out Caesar, not replace him.While their quest seems successful, the true hardships have yet to begin. 6. In the play, Shakespeare portrays the common man as almost incoherent. The people constantly seem to be easily swayed by the words of each and every important character. Also, all of the common people are followers. Not one stands up to the officials. At one moment, they are saying, â€Å"This Caesar was a tyrant,â₠¬  (3. 2. 74) and the next they say that they must â€Å"tear him to pieces! He’s a conspirator,† (3. 3. 29), now angered with the retaliation against Caesar. 7. Shakespeare portrays the noblemen in the play as gallant but also cowards.While they follow through with what they originally decide to believe in, in the end, they are left questioning their motives. While I commend them for following through with their original endeavors, they begin to get rather brutal. An example is when Antony creates a hit list and says that, â€Å"these many, then, shall die; their names are pricked,† (4. 1. 1-2). The noblemen want to be noble and honorable, yet they go to such brutal extremes. 8. The idea that Brutus never gives in to Cassius shows a little bit of stubbornness, but it also shows determination. Brutus feels that he knows what is best for the conspirators.The difference between the ways Brutus is resilient and that of Cassius is how firm Brutus is. He makes his p oint, but shows its advantages to different members. He shows compassion when he says that â€Å"when every drop of blood every Roman bears, and nobly bears, is guilty of a several bastardy if he do break the smallest particle of any promise that hath passed from him,† (2. 1. 134-140). Brutus is saying that an oath would be pointless because if a man were held responsible for every promise he ever broke, the consequences would be endless. 9. Calpurnia and Portia both seem like protective and honorable wives.Calpurnia is more focused on her husband taking his warnings seriously. She is not focused on the details of everything that happens, but is focused on the main idea that Caesar’s, her husband, life is in danger. Portia, on the other hand, is more focused on what Brutus is doing. She wants to be informed of the action rather than simply protecting her husband from what is happening, whether she as an explanation or not. She is angered that, at the moment, apparently , â€Å"within the bond of marriage†¦it is expected I should know no secrets that appertain to you [Brutus},† (2. 1. 280-282). She feels wronged by this.Portia is driven by facts and information, while Calpurnia is driven by intuition and her feelings. 10. Cassius tells Brutus that if he himself fears the reign of Caesar, that he, Brutus, must stop it. Cassius provides Brutus with logical and emotional factors for reasons as to why Brutus should lead the conspiracy. Cassius informs Brutus that, â€Å"There was a Brutus once that would have brooked th’ eternal devil to keep his state in Rome as easily as a king,† (1. 2. 159-160). Cassius makes the point that Brutus would never let Rome fall by the hands of Caesar. Cassius is basically telling Brutus what to think and what to feel.While this is cleverly manipulative of Cassius, it shows that Brutus has some mental weakness due to the fact that he is even able to be subject to mind games. 11. Brutus and Cassiu s are both leaders. While Brutus takes charge and responsibility of the conspiracy, Cassius is the one who took responsibility of persuading Brutus to join in and become the leader. While this shows a manipulative side of Cassius, Brutus has the same. He manages to convince all of the conspirators that an official oath is not necessary, when, in reality, it is often used as a sacred promise to follow through with a plan.In my mind, a sacred oath would have been somewhat important to the success of the plan, but, as Brutus points out, â€Å"what other oath than honesty to honesty engaged that this shall be,† (2. 1. 126-128). In Brutus’ mind, honesty and honor is all that is needed in a group decision to proceed with the assassination of Caesar. Cassius strongly disagrees, but, while both men have conflicting ideas, their core values are quite similar, showing in their agreement to create the conspiracy. 12. Cassius wants to create the conspiracy for more personal reason ing.Cassius, speaking about Caesar, notes that â€Å"this man is now become a god, and Cassius is a wretched creature and must bend his body,† (1. 2. 115-117). From this, one can tell that Cassius is more focused on his personal aspirations to be free of Caesar’s grip on politics. Brutus, on the other hand, is more focused on the well being of the people of Rome. He wants them to have a fair, focused, and just ruler. While Brutus and Cassius’ motives for enabling the conspiracy could not be more different, the men find common ground on which they agree to attempt a successful assassination of Caesar.

The Conflict Between France And Germany During The Franco War

Prussian Franco War According to the video â€Å"Prussian Franco War† it shows the conflict between France and Germany in the Franco War (1870-1871). This war began after the alliance between German states caused by Prussian overthrowing France. The Prussia chancellor Otto Von Bismarck sent a telegram to William I, who was a Prussian king. It stated that France insulted Prussia. However, it was a dishonest version of Bismarck to unify Germany nations. France declared the war on Prussia and this was a tactic of Bismarck to unify German states with Prussia and the new German Empire started. The unification of Germany demonstrated the nationalism between these countries. The negative reaction of France led to the ruins of Paris, the high human cost and a big revolution between these nations. France lost the control over the entire Europe. Prussia became the leading country in the German imperial and it dominated the entire Europe. According to the encyclopedia Britannica, nationalism is â€Å"a mov ement in history when people have established territorial authorities†¦.The strong belief that the interests of a particular nation-state are of primary importance. Also, it is the belief that a people who share a common language, history, and culture should constitute an independent nation, free of foreign domination†. Germany’s unification with Prussia demonstrated nationalism. Nationalism influenced by Napoleon III through Europe was turning against France. Nationalism was also influencedShow MoreRelatedTo what extent was Germany to blame for the start of World War 11473 Words   |  6 Pagesï » ¿To what extent was Germany to blame for the start of World War 1? During the beginning of the 19th Century Europe was crossing a period characterized by great technological advancements and scientific optimism, but it was also subject to hostile relations between many of its main powers. These hostilities transformed into war on the 28th of June 1914,when a 19 year old terrorist, Gavrilo Princip, assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, creating the cause of war that one month laterRead MoreSpanish Civil War: The Struggle Between Fascism and Communism 1431 Words   |  6 PagesThe Spanish civil war of 1936-1939 was an important conflict in Spain’s history. This war was initiated by a military revolt led by General Francisco Franco on the 17 July 1936 and ended with Franco’s victory on the 1 April, 1939. This victory resulted in the replacement of the Second Spanish Republic with the conservative dictatorship of Franco. This conflict triggered the clash of the various cultures and ideologies within Spain. One im portant example of an ideological clash was that of CommunismRead MoreThe Causes of the Outbreak of World War One Essay1385 Words   |  6 PagesThe Causes of the Outbreak of World War One The first world war was caused by a combination of these two factors and no-one reason can be assigned full responsibility because of the heavy linkage between the two. The Balkans have been at the head of most European problems, even today there is still conflict in the region. During the run up to the 1st world war were again the key focus of world attention. Austrian mismanagement was probably the most prominent in theRead MoreWas the pattern of Alliances in Europe from 1879-1907 shaped primarily around Germanys concerns for its security?1658 Words   |  7 Pagesby Germany’s concerns about its security’ Germany became a formidable power in Europe after its unification in 1871. This power shift meant that Germany was a key player in the international politics of the time. With multiple crises occurring in the region, and tensions between countries growing, needs for alliances and agreements grew. The Dual Alliance, Three Emperors Alliance, Triple Alliance, Mediterranean Agreement, Reinsurance Treaty, Franco-Russian Alliance, Entente Cordiale and Anglo-RussianRead MoreOtto Von Bismarck s Success992 Words   |  4 PagesPrussian ascent to power in Europe and the unification of Germany through the 1864 Second Schleswig War, 1866 Austro-Prussian War, and 1870 Franco-Prussian war. However, this new German Empire at the heart of Europe provided a destabilizing presence and encroached on the existing powers. The newly powerful German state would surely be eroded by war on the European continent. Bismarck showed his talent in isolating Denmark, Austria, and France as he facilitated Prussiaà ¢â‚¬â„¢s rise, but demonstrated his trueRead MoreThe Realpolitik Foreign Policy Of Otto Von Bismarck1723 Words   |  7 Pagesand ascended the German throne, leading Germany into a militaristic path, failing to maintain Germany’s allies, and plunging it into one of the most famous wars of history, World War I. Bismarck was originally an expansionist who aimed to make Prussia a powerful part of Germany, however, by 1870, he gave up his expansionist ideas and became content with the land that Germany already had power over. Bismarck’s cautious foreign policy favored peace over war, creating treaties and maintaining Germany’sRead MoreThe Hidden Agenda of New Imperialism909 Words   |  4 Pagesexpansion that the Europe’s powers did during that period. Queen Victoria’s diamond jubilee exhibited the power and wealth that the British Empire possessed to the entire world. Such demonstrations could only be matched by the French, Dutch and Russians which possessed similarly wealthy empires. Evidently, many other nations aspired and envied those wealthy nations because their nations had not conquered large empires. Most noteworthy among these nations were Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy and JapanRead MoreIb Contemporary World : The Economic, Political, And Religious Po larization Of Society1164 Words   |  5 Pagesdictators to power in Europe between the wars.† Economic Polarization of society Germany and economic polarization Beginning with Zollverein (1833) By abolishing tolls, the Zollverein made Germany a common market. Industrialization was much farther behind than the rest of Europe → Germany tried to catch up, but did not succeed in doing so. Weimar Republic Several misjudgements in WWI that brought Germany farther down in terms of economics War on two fronts- Russia and France. Without being defeated byRead MoreNationalism and War Essay1087 Words   |  5 PagesNationalism and War Does nationalism have a relationship with the causes of the wars between 1792 and 1914? This can be disputed through the events of the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, the unification struggles of Germany and Italy in the late 1800’s, the Alliance systems of the late 1800’s and the assassination of the Austrian archduke before the outbreak of World War 1. During the French Revolution in 1792, an effort was made to remove Austrian presence from French lands. ThisRead MoreA New Middle Class Government And The Declaration Of The Second Spanish Republic1362 Words   |  6 Pagesthe Spanish Civil War in 1936, Spanish society struggled to establish a stable, representative democracy for only the second time in its long political history. With the spread of industrialization, the rise of a new working class, and the emergence of a new era of political movements, ideals, and philosophical ideologies or â€Å"isms† throughout Europe and the United States—communism, socialism, marxism, anarchism, fascism, etc., Spanish society grappled to find common ground between more traditional