Nazi Germany Totalitarian State free essay sample

Then into this devastated land, truncated by the Oder-Neisse borderline and hardly able to sustain its demoralized and exhausted population, streamed millions of people from the Eastern provinces, from the Balkans and from Eastern Europe, adding to the general picture of catastrophe the peculiarly modem touches of physical homelessness, social rootlessness, and political rightlessness. The wisdom of Allied policy in expelling all German-speaking minorities from non-German countries-as though there was not enough homelessness in the world alreadymay be doubted. But the fact is that European peoples who had experienced the murderous demographic politics of Germany during the war were seized with horror, even more than with wrath, at the very idea of having to live together with Germans in the same territory. The sight of Germanys destroyed cities and the knowledge of German concentration and extermination camps have covered Europe with a cloud of melancholy. Together, they have made the memory of the last war more poignant and more persistent, the fear of future wars more actual. We will write a custom essay sample on Nazi Germany Totalitarian State or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Not the German problem, insofar as it is a national one within the comity of European nations, but HANNAH ARENDT is author of a just completed IN LESS than six years Germany laid the nightmare of Germany in its physical, moral, and political ruin has become almost as decisive an element in the general atmosphere of European life as the Communist movements. But nowhere is this nightmare of destruction and horror less felt and less talked about than in Germany itself. A lack of response is evident everywhere, and it is difficult to say whether this signifies a half-conscious refusal to yield to grief or a genuine inability to feel. Amid the ruins, Germans mail each other picture postcards still showing the cathedrals and market places, the public buildings and bridges that no longer exist. And the indifference with which they walk through the rubble has its exact counterpart in the absence of mourning for the dead, or in the apathy with which they react, or rather fail to react, to the fate of the refugees in their midst. This general lack of emotion, at any rate this apparent heartlessness, sometimes covered over with cheap sentimentality, is only the most conspicuous outward symptom of a deep-rooted, stubborn, and at times vicious refusal to face and come to terms with what really happened. INDIvERENE, and the irritation that comes when indifference is challenged, can be tested on many intellectual levels. The most obvious experiment is to state expressis verbis what the other fellow has noticed from the beginning of the conversation, namely, that you are a Jew. This is usually followed by a little embarrassed pause; and then comesnot a personal question, such as Where did you go after you left Germany? ; no sign of sympathy, such as What happened to your family? -but a deluge of stories about how Germans have suffered (true enough, of course, but beside the point); and if the object of this little experiment happens to be educated and intelligent, he will proceed to draw up a balance between German suffering and the suffering of others, the implication being that one side cancels the other and ork on totalitarianism, The Origins of Totalitarianism, soon to be published by Harcourt, Brace. Her writings on history, philosophy, and political theory in   and other periodicals have won her a wide reputation. This report on Germany was written after a recent stay of several months in that country. Dr. Arendt was born in Germany, studied under Karl Jaspers in Heidelberg, and earned her doctorate at that university. She came to this country in 19 41. 342e may as well proceed to a more promising topic of conversation. Similarly evasive is the standard reaction to the ruins. When there is any overt reaction at all, it consists of a sigh followed by the half-rhetorical, halfwistful question, Why must mankind always wage wars? The average German looks for the causes of the last war not in the acts of the Nazi regime, but in the events that led to the expulsion of Adam and Eve from Paradise. 343 BUT, whether faced or evaded, the realities f Nazi crimes, of war and defeat, still visibly dominate the whole fabric of German life, and the Germans have developed various devices for dodging their shocking impact. The reality of the death-factories is transformed into a mere potentiality: Germans did only what others are capable of doing (with many illustrative examples, of course) or what others will do in the near future; therefore, anybody who brings up this topic is ipso facto suspected of self-righteousness. In this context, Allied policy in Germany is frequently explained as a campaign of successful revenge, even though it later turns out that the German who offers this interpretation is quite aware that most of the things he complains of were either the immediate consequence of the lost war or happened outside the will and control of the Western powers. But the insistence that there must be a careful scheme of revenge serves as a consoling argument, demonstrating the equal sinfulness of all men. The reality of the destruction that surrounds every German is dissolved into a reflective but not very deep-rooted self-pity, easily dissipated when ugly little one-story structures that might have been imported from some Main Street in America spring up on some of the great avenues to conceal fragmentarily the grimness of the landscape, and to offer an abundance of provincial elegance in super-modern display windows. In France and Great Britain, people feel a greater sadness about the relatively few landmarks destroyed in the war than the Germans do for all their lost treasures together. The boastful hope is expressed in Germany that the country will become the most modern in Europe; yet it is mere talk, and some person who has just voiced that hope will insist a few minutes later, at another turn in the conversation, that the next war will do to all European cities what this one did to Germanys-which of course is possible, but signifies again only the transformation of reality into potentiality. The undertone of satisfaction that one often detects in the Germans talk about the next war expresses no sinister renewal of German lans of conquest, as sq many observers have maintained, but is only another device for escaping reality: in an eventual equality of destruction, the German situation would lose its acuteness. S course, an escape fromalone; all the peoresponsibility. In this the Germans are not ples of Western Europe have developed the habit of blaming their misfortunes on some force out of their reach: it may be America and the Atlantic Pact today, the legacy of Nazi occupation tomorrow, and history in general every day of the week. But this attitude is more pronounced in Germany, where the temptation to blame everything under the sun on the occupying powers is difficult to resist: in the British zone everything is blamed on British fear of German competition; in the French zone on French nationalism; and in the American zone, where things are better in every respect, on American ignorance of the European mentality. The complaints are only natural, and they all contain a kernel of truth; but behind them is a stubborn unwillingness to make use of the many possibilities left to German initiative. This is perhaps most clearly revealed in the German newspapers, which express all their convictions in a carefully cultivated style of Schadenfreude, malicious joy in ruination. It is as though the Germans, denied the power to rule the world, had fallen in love with impotence as such, and now find a positive pleasure in contemplating international tensions and the unavoidable mistakes that occur in the business of governing, regardless of the possible consequences for themselves. Fear of Russian aggression does not necessarily result in an unequivocal pro-American attitude, but often leads to a determined neutrality, as though it were as absurd to take sides in the conflict as it would be to take sides in an earthquake. The awareness that neutrality will not change ones fate makes it in turn impossible to translate this mood into a rational policy, and the mood itself, by its very irrationality, becomes even more bitter. CUCH an escape from reality is also, of 344 BUT COMMENTARY count of what actually happened, and to eliminate the teachers who have become incapable of doing so. The danger to German academic life is not only from those who hold that freedom of speech should be exchanged for a dictatorship in which a single unfounded, irresponsible opinion would acquire a monopoly over all others, but equally from those who ignore facts and reality and establish their private opinions, not necessarily as the only right ones, but as opinions that are as justified as others. The unreality and irrelevance of most of these opinions, as compared with the grim relevance of the experience of those who hold them, is sharply underlined by their having been formed before 1933. There is an almost instinctive urge to take refuge in the thoughts and ideas one held before anything compromising had happened. The result is that while Germany has changed beyond recognition-physically and psychologically-people talk and behave superficially as though absolutely nothing had happened since 1932. The authors of the few really important books written in Germany since 1933 or published since 1945 were already famous twenty and twenty-five years ago. The younger generation seems to be petrified, inarticulate, incapable of consistent thought. A young German art historian, guiding his audience among the masterpieces of the Berlin Museum, which had been sent on tour through several American cities, pointed to the Ancient Egyptian statue of Nefertiti as the sculpture for which the whole world envies us, and then proceeded to say (a) that even the Americans had not dared to carry this symbol of the Berlin collections to the United States, and (b) that because of the intervention of the Americans, the British did not dare to carry the Nefretete to the British Museum. The two contradictory attitudes to the Americans were separated by only a single sentence: the speaker, devoid of convictions, was merely groping automatically among the cliches with which his mind was furnished to find the one that might fit the occasion. The cliches have more often an old-fashioned nationalistic than an outspoken Nazi tone, but in any case one seeks in vain to discover behind them a consistent point of view, be it even a bad one. With the downfall of Nazism, the Germans found themselves again exposed to he B perhapshabit most striking andasfrightening aspect of the German flight from of treating facts though reality is the they were mere opinions. For example, the question of who started the last war, by no means a hotly debated issue, is answered by a surprising variety of opinions. An otherwise quite normally intelligent woman in Southern Germany told me that the Russians had begun the war with an attack on Danzig; this is only the crudest of many examples. Nor is this transformation of facts into opinions restricted to the war question; in all fields there is a kind of gentlemens agreement by which everyone has a right to his ignorance under the pretext that everyone has a right to his opinion-and behind this is the tacit assumption that opinions really do riot matter. This is a very serious thing, not only because it often makes discussion so hopeless (one does not ordinarily carry a reference library along everywhere), but primarily because the average German honestly believes this free-for-all, this nihilistic relativity about facts, to be the essence of democracy. In fact, of course, it is a legacy of the Nazi regime. The lies of totalitarian propaganda are distinguished from the normal lying of nontotalitarian regimes in times of emergency by their consistent denial of the importance of facts in general: all facts can be changed and all lies can be made true. The Nazi impress on the German mind consists primarily in a conditioning whereby reality has ceased to be the sum total of hard inescapable facts and has become a conglomeration of everchanging events and slogans in which a thing can be true today and false tomorrow. This conditioning may be precisely one of the reasons for the surprisingly few traces of any lasting Nazi indoctrination, as well as for an equally surprising lack of interest in the refuting of Nazi doctrines. What one is up against is not indoctrination but the incapacity or unwillingness to distinguish altogether between fact and opinion. A discussion about the events of the Spanish Civil War will be conducted on the same level as a discussion of the theoretical merits and shortcomings of democracy.

The Assassination of Malcolm X

The Assassination of Malcolm X After spending a year as a hunted man, Malcolm X was shot and killed during a meeting of the Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU) at the Audubon Ballroom in Harlem, New York, on February 21, 1965. The assailants, at least three in number, were members of the black Muslim group the Nation of Islam, the group with which Malcolm X had been a prominent minister for ten years before he split with them in March 1964. Exactly who shot Malcolm X has been hotly debated over the decades. One man, Talmage Hayer, was arrested at the scene and was definitely a shooter. Two other men were arrested and sentenced but were most likely wrongly accused. The confusion over the identity of the shooters compounds the question of why Malcolm X was assassinated and has led to a wide range of conspiracy theories. Becoming Malcolm X Malcolm X was born Malcolm Little in 1925. After his father was brutally murdered, his home life unraveled and he was soon selling drugs and involved in petty crimes. In 1946, 20-year-old Malcolm X was arrested and sentenced to ten years in prison. It was in prison that Malcolm X learned about the Nation of Islam (NOI) and began writing daily letters to the NOI’s leader, Elijah Muhammad, known as the â€Å"Messenger of Allah.† Malcolm X, the name he acquired from the NOI, was released from prison in 1952. He quickly rose up the ranks of the NOI, becoming the minister of the large Temple Number Seven in Harlem. For ten years, Malcolm X remained a prominent, outspoken member of the NOI, creating controversy across the nation with his rhetoric. However, the close ties between Malcolm X and Muhammad began to whither in 1963. Breaking With the NOI Tensions quickly escalated between Malcolm X and Muhammad, with the final rift occurring on December 4, 1963. The entire nation was mourning the recent death of President John F. Kennedy when Malcolm X publicly made the uncouth remark that JFK’s death was as â€Å"chickens coming home to roost.† In response, Muhammad ordered Malcolm X to be suspended from the NOI for 90 days. After the end of the suspension, on March 8, 1964, Malcolm X formally left the NOI. Malcolm X had become disillusioned with the NOI and so after he left, he created his own black Muslim group, the Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU). Muhammad and the rest of the NOI brothers were not pleased that Malcolm X had created what they viewed as a competing organization- an organization that could potentially pull a large group of members away from the NOI. Malcolm X also had been a trusted member of the inner circle of the NOI and knew many secrets that could potentially destroy the NOI if revealed to the public. All of this made Malcolm X a dangerous man. To discredit Malcolm X, Muhammad and the NOI began a smear campaign against Malcolm X, calling him the â€Å"chief hypocrite.† To defend himself, Malcolm X revealed information about Muhammad’s infidelities with six of his secretaries, with whom he had illegitimate children. Malcolm X had hoped this revelation would make the NOI back off; instead, it just made him seem even more dangerous. A Hunted Man Articles in the NOI’s newspaper, Muhammad Speaks, became increasingly vicious. In December 1964, one article got very close to calling for Malcolm X’s assassination, Only those who wish to be led to hell, or to their doom, will follow Malcolm. The die is set, and Malcolm shall not escape, especially after such evil, foolish talk about his benefactor [Elijah Muhammad] in trying to rob him of the divine glory which Allah has bestowed upon him. Such a man as Malcolm is worthy of death, and would have met with death if it had not been for Muhammad’s confidence in Allah for victory over the enemies. Many members of the NOI believed the message was clear: Malcolm X had to be killed. During the year after Malcolm X had left the NOI, there had been several assassination attempts on his life, in New York, Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles. On February 14, 1965, just a week before his assassination, unknown assailants firebombed Malcolm X’s house while he and his family were asleep inside. Luckily, all were able to escape unharmed. These attacks made it obvious- Malcolm X was a hunted man. It was wearing him down. As he told Alex Haley just days before his assassination, â€Å"Haley, my nerves are shot, my brain’s tired.† The Assassination On the morning of Sunday, February 21, 1965, Malcolm X woke up in his 12th-floor hotel room at the Hilton Hotel in New York. Around 1 p.m., he checked out of the hotel and headed for the Audubon Ballroom, where he was to speak at a meeting of his OAAU. He parked his blue Oldsmobile nearly 20 blocks away, which seems surprising for someone who was being hunted. When he arrived at the Audubon Ballroom, he headed backstage. He was stressed and it was beginning to show. He lashed out at several people, shouting angrily. This was very out of character for him. When the OAAU meeting was to start, Benjamin Goodman went out on stage to speak first. He was to speak for about a half an hour, warming up the crowd of about 400 before Malcolm X was to speak. Then it was Malcolm X’s turn. He stepped up to the stage and stood behind a wooden podium. After he gave the traditional Muslim welcome, â€Å"As-salaam alaikum,† and got the response, a ruckus began in the middle of the crowd. A man had stood up, shouting that a man next to him had tried to pick-pocket him. Malcolm X’s bodyguards left the stage area to go deal with the situation. This left Malcolm unprotected on the stage. Malcolm X sidestepped away from the podium, saying â€Å"Let’s be cool, brothers.† It was then that a man stood up near the front of the crowd, pulled out a sawed-off shotgun from beneath his trench-coat and shot at Malcolm X. The blast from the shotgun made Malcolm X fall backward, over some chairs. The man with the shotgun fired again. Then, two other men rushed the stage, firing a Luger and a .45 automatic pistol at Malcolm X, hitting mostly his legs. The noise from the shots, the violence that had just been committed, and a smoke bomb that had been set off in the back, all added to the chaos. En masse, the audience tried to escape. The assassins used this confusion to their advantage as they blended into the crowd- all but one escaped. The one who did not escape was Talmage â€Å"Tommy† Hayer (sometimes called Hagan). Hayer had been shot in the leg by one of Malcolm X’s bodyguards as he was trying to escape. Once outside, the crowd realized that Hayer was one of the men who had just murdered Malcolm X and the mob started to attack Hayer. Luckily, a policeman happened to be walking by, saved Hayer, and managed to get him into the back of a police car. During the pandemonium, several of Malcolm X’s friends rushed to the stage to try to help him. Despite their efforts, Malcolm X was too far gone. Malcolm X’s wife, Betty Shabazz, had been in the room with their four daughters that day. She ran up to her husband, shouting, â€Å"They are killing my husband!† Malcolm X was put on a stretcher and carried across the street to the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center. Doctors tried to revive Malcolm X by opening up his chest and massaging his heart, but their attempt was unsuccessful. The Funeral Malcolm X’s body was cleaned, made presentable, and dressed in a suit so that the public could view his remains at the Unity Funeral Home in Harlem. From Monday through Friday (February 22 to 26), long lines of people waited to get a last glimpse of the fallen leader. Despite the numerous bomb threats that frequently closed down the viewing, approximately 30,000 people made it through. When the viewing was over, Malcolm X’s clothes were changed into the traditional, Islamic, white shroud. The funeral was held on Saturday, February 27 at the Faith Temple Church of God, where Malcolm X’s friend, actor Ossie Davis, gave the eulogy. Then Malcolm X’s body was taken to the Ferncliff Cemetery, where he was buried under his Islamic name, El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz. The Trial The public wanted Malcolm X’s assassins caught and the police delivered. Tommy Hayer was obviously the first one arrested and there was strong evidence against him. He had been taken into custody at the scene, a .45 cartridge was found in his pocket, and his fingerprint was found on the smoke bomb. The police found two other suspects by arresting men who had been connected to another shooting of an NOI ex-member. The problem was that there was no physical evidence tying these two men, Thomas 15X Johnson and Norman 3X Butler, to the assassination. The police had only eye-witnesses that vaguely remembered them being there. Despite the weak evidence against Johnson and Butler, the trial of all three defendants began on January 25, 1966. With the evidence mounting against him, Hayer took the stand on February 28 and stated that Johnson and Butler were innocent. This revelation shocked everyone in the courtroom and it was unclear at the time whether the two really were innocent or whether Hayer was just trying to get his co-conspirators off the hook. With Hayer unwilling to reveal the names of the real assassins, the jury ultimately believed the latter theory. All three men were found guilty of first-degree murder on March 10, ​1966, and were sentenced to life in prison. Who Really Killed Malcolm X? The trial did little to elucidate what really happened in the Audubon Ballroom that day. Nor did it reveal who was behind the assassination. As in many other such cases, this void of information led to widespread speculation and conspiracy theories. These theories placed the blame for Malcolm X’s assassination on a wide number of people and groups, including the CIA, FBI, and drug cartels. The more likely truth comes from Hayer himself. After the death of Elijah Muhammad in 1975, Hayer felt overwhelmed with the burden of having contributed to the imprisonment of two innocent men and now felt less obligated to protect the changing NOI. In 1977, after 12 years in jail, Hayer handwrote a three-page affidavit, describing his version of really happened that fateful day in 1965. In the affidavit, Hayer again insisted that Johnson and Butler were innocent. Instead, it was Hayer and four other men who had planned and committed the murder of Malcolm X. He also explained why he killed Malcolm X: I thought it was very bad for anyone to go against the teachings of the Hon. Elijah, then known as the last Messenger of God. I was told that Muslims should more or less be willing to fight against hypocrites and I agreed w/ that. There was no money payed [sic] to me for my part in this. I thought I was fighting for truth and right. A few months later, on February 28, 1978, Hayer wrote another affidavit, this one longer and more detailed and included the names of those really involved. In this affidavit, Hayer described how he was recruited by two Newark NOI members, Ben and Leon. Then later Willie and Wilber joined the crew. It was Hayer who had the .45 pistol and Leon who used the Luger. Willie sat a row or two behind them with the sawed-off shotgun. And it was Wilbur who started the commotion and set off the smoke bomb. Despite Hayer’s detailed confession, the case was not reopened and the three convicted men- Hayer, Johnson, and Butler- served out their sentences, Butler was the first to be paroled in June 1985, after having served 20 years in prison. Johnson was released shortly thereafter. Hayer, on the other hand, was not paroled until 2010, after spending 45 years in prison. Source Friedly, Michael. Malcolm X: The Assassination. Carrol Graf Publishers, New York, NY, 1992, pages 10, 17, 18, 19, 22, 85, 152.

Marketing Issues Affecting Telecommunications Services Assignment

Marketing Issues Affecting Telecommunications Services - Assignment Example Secondly, the traditional specialist basis of the British telecommunication system has given way to a more conglomerate structure which has eroded the traditional distinctions between the major areas of telecom. The UK telecommunication system is in midst of a period of major structural changes as all types of telecom institutions are diversifying their range of business under the impact of greatly intensified competitive pressures, international pressures, major changes in the structure and style of regulation, technology and changes in the market environment. The major factor creating structural change in the telecoms institutions is competition: the competitive environment has intensified considerably. The UK represents a case study of the power of competitive pressures to induce a structural change in a telecommunication system. The globalization of telecommunication markets and the increasing integration of markets both domestically and internationally create pressures on regulation when it is not competitively neutral as between institutions within a national system and between countries (Palmer, 2008). Telecommunication institutions such as Nokia need to identify major areas in the sector that will lead to financial success at times of stiff competition. Nokia needs to diversify its services to the international market. This is referred to as internationalization of services and it goes beyond the basic nations of trade and exporting to encompass all aspects of the business activity that go beyond national borders. Most telecommunication institutions tend to focus on marketing in a domestic context. For the next five years, the Nokia needs to have a thorough understanding of their target market including its size and the share they hope they can realistically achieve.  

Letter Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 11

Letter - Essay Example In this case, a major in Computer Information System would help me achieve my ambition in life by enabling me become equipped to join the information and technology world and develop the technology required to continue making the life of human beings better on earth.  While emphasizing on the importance of changing my major to Computer Information System, humanity cannot live oblivious of the fact that experiences at home, school, and work are undergoing many changes due to the various technological advancements taking place in today’s world.  Hence, as an individual who desires a career in a fast-changing environment, whereby I will always improve my performance while at the same time improving my knowledge, I believe that a major in Computer Information System will help me achieve this long-held ambition. Therefore, I kindly request you to help me achieve my ambition and realize my full potential. In addition, it is my considered opinion that I will be able to make an impact,  however  small, once I undertake a major in Computer Information System. In case of further clarification, please contact me by phone at [phone number] or by email at [e-mail

Gambling addiction Essay Example for Free

Gambling addiction Essay The text states that the one problem in gambling has visibly endured is known as problem gambling. Government officials have long demanded a solution from gaming operators to address this major issue. Too many issues go along with problem gambling such as crime, family and work problems, and financial damage. Fortunately, the gaming industry as a whole has sought to be proactive in combatting the issue. They feared being viewed in the same light as the tobacco or firearm industry by ignoring major problems with their products. Are the steps that they have taken enough, or is gambling in general a major threat to society that should be avoided? The American Psychiatric Association refers to problem gambling as pathological gambling. There are generally speaking two different types of problem gamblers; action problem gamblers and escape problem gamblers. Gambling addiction is just as valid of an illness as addiction to alcohol or drugs. Its prevalence is linked directly to the ease of access of gambling in our society. However, just like drugs and alcohol, only a small percentage of the population is prone to this illness. Gambling addicts in general either lose all of their money, accumulate massive debt, file for bankruptcy, and in the worst cases commit suicide because they are hopeless. What steps has the gaming industry taken to prevent these horrible outcomes? I spoke to my long-time friend Alan Erskine, who now works as the Public Affairs Coordinator at the American Gaming Association in Washington D. C. I needed to find out if they were taking appropriate precautions to prevent these people from self-destruction. He assured me that, â€Å"The gaming industry has made many contributions to curbing problem gambling. The first is the creation of the National Center for Responsible Gaming, which is the largest funder of scholarly studies on how to best curb addiction. The industry also makes various efforts to educate customers about possible negative effects of gambling. This includes: posting signs around the casino floor, advertising the problem gambling hotline and ensuring customers are not intoxicated while gambling. † I was glad to hear that they were this proactive, but is it enough? The National Center for Responsible Gaming is the only national organization exclusively devoted to funding research to enhance the understanding of pathological gambling. They also search to find effective methods of treatment for the disorder and work to improve prevention, diagnostics, intervention and educating the public about responsible gaming. However, if gambling is the root of the issue to begin with, is it worth expanding gaming in our society? Is educating people really enough to curb the issue? There are countless organizations to prevent drug and alcohol addiction, but the problem still persists. Some critics of legalized gambling would argue that it is the direct cause of the increase in problem gambling and that any of their efforts are just reactive in order to protect their own interests. Alan Erskine responded to this claim stating, â€Å"The industry recognizes that a small segment of the population cannot gamble safely. Studies have shown that about one percent of the population cannot gamble safely. † His response does hold water. The mental disorder of pathological gambling does affect only a small portion of the population. Should the rest of society be restricted just because there are some who can’t gamble responsibly? The same case could be made for alcohol. Only a small percentage of people are alcoholics. The rest of the population should not be prohibited to drink just because a select few cannot handle it responsibly. All the industry can do is provide outlets for people to get help, and educate the public on the dangers of its abuse. The NCRG has yielded very helpful results in order to understand the nature of the psychological disorder. These include statistics on the scope of people affected, more effective treatment options, the role of genetics, and new instruments to measure, screen and diagnose pathological gambling. The more we understand about how this pathological disorder works, the more we can do to diagnose and treat it before the victim gets themselves and others into serious trouble. In conclusion, it is a bit of a cop out to simply blame the gaming industry for the rise in gambling addiction. They have been extremely proactive in trying to curb the issue and bring it to public eye. Even though they didn’t want to be viewed in the same light as other industries like tobacco, alcohol and firearms, it seems inevitable that they would be grouped together. They all provide goods and services that some can enjoy responsibly and others become addicted to and harm themselves or others. Research has consistently pointed out that addiction to gambling produces the same reactions in the brain that you would find from drug and alcohol addiction. However, they should be distinguished from these industries in the fact that they have donated a great deal of time and resources in order to find ways to diagnose, prevent, and treat this pathological disorder. While the acceptance of gambling in society does allow an outlet for those who can become addicted, the vast majority of people have proven they can do responsibly and the industry continues to take significant steps in order help those who suffer from gambling addiction.

fight club Essay -- essays research papers

Chuck Palahniuk’s Fight Club, that perhaps gained more exposure through the film adaptation, is narrated by a character whose name is never revealed but who is often referred to in critiques and reviews as Joe, a reference to the character’s discovery of an old Reader’s Digest article in which the bodily organs and functions of various people refer to themselves in the first person. The name ‘Joe’ is used in this context throughout the novel to comically articulate the character’s mood or mentality, for example on page 59, he says I am Joe’s Raging Bile Duct. Joe discovers a cure for his insomnia in various support groups for diseases that he does not have, taking solace in the pain and open suffering of others until he encounters Marla, another ‘tourist’ as he describes her, who disrupts his self prescribed ‘therapy’. After his apartment mysteriously explodes while away on business, Joe moves into a dilapidat ed house with what is later revealed as an alter ego in the form of the character Tyler Durden. The pair set about creating an anarchistic ‘club’ where the primary physical objective is to fight, for reasons that will be textually observed in relation to this notion of identity. Tyler and Joe eventually develop what is essentially a small organisation, which is often narrated in almost militaristic descriptions, where a group of followers receive instructions and engage in seemingly anarchistic activities that are orchestrated by Tyler, motivated by issues of socio-econ...

Economic Class

Economic â€Å"Class† † What barriers make it difficult for the poor to change their economic class? † There are several examples that can be given and this paper will outline some of the reasoning. Barriers can be anything from inherited social standings, to birth wealth, or even geographical locations, even to the amount of funding for extracurricular activity, racial and gender domination are also a barrier. There are many different things causing there to be barriers causing it hard for people to change the barrier of economic class.Keeping a good social standard is sometimes difficult to sustain, making it hard to change. Author Gregory Mantsios â€Å"Class in America† in 2003, has many different ideas on the way economic class is. Social standings and consequently life chances are largely determined at birth. Individuals who have gone from rags to riches abound in the mass media, statistics on class mobility show these leaps to be extremely rare (Mants ios711). Most economic success is because of the wealth that these individuals receive at birth. Over 66 percent of the consumer units with incomes of $100,000 or more have inherited assets (Mantsios711).In the stories that are read in most cases there is more wealth due to being born into it than earning it by hard work. Most people do not choose to be put into an economic class; rather it happens on its own. If someone grows up knowing only low income or having very little as a child, they seem to carry that on with them as they get older. It is hard to go from something you’re used to all your life to something so different. Poverty is a very difficult barrier to overcome, no matter where someone is from or where they now live. Author Diana George â€Å"Changing the Faces of Poverty: Nonprofits and the Problem of Representation†. 001 writes, â€Å"You don’t have to leave your own country to find third-world poverty. † (George623). Most groups that are asking for money to help the starving children are usually in a different country. As people see Children, Inc. showing photos of children that make people feel helplessness for. People want to help solve the hunger issues by sending money but sometimes feel uneasy with doing it because we are afraid that the money is not always going for what these people think it is. Habitat for Humanity helps individuals here in the United States to get back on their feet and try to overcome a barrier of no food or places to live.Habitat for Humanity aims to eliminate poverty housing from the globe (George 625). Being in small cities is also sometimes a barrier to overcome because there are not as many jobs or access to jobs. There are run down houses that people without jobs, find it hard to find the funding to do upkeep on them. Poverty condemns millions of people throughout the world to live in deplorable and inhuman conditions. These people are trapped in a cycle of poverty, living in places offering little protection from the rain, wind and cold (George 626). Living in run down houses causes many different illnesses and can cause death as well.It is hard seeing young people living in this situation as well as older people. Finding better housing is something most people strive for. It is just more difficult when not living in a better neighborhood with better housing. Author Peter Singer â€Å"The Singer Solution to World Poverty†, writes, an American household with an income of $50,000 spends around $30,000 annually on necessities, according to the Conference Board, a nonprofit economic research organization, (Singer 879). Therefore, for a household bringing in $50,000 a year, donations to help the world’s poor should be as close as possible to $20,000 (Singer 879).When living in run down areas, and communities with having no means to improve, makes it very hard to change. For some people seeing others doing things they would love to do and know they can not, makes some people feel hopeless and gives them thoughts of never being able to change. Approximately 12 percent of American population-that is, nearly one of every eight people in this country-live below the official poverty line (calculated in 2001 at $9,214 for an individual and $17,960 for a family of four). Among the poor are over 2. million homeless, including nearly 1 million homeless children (Mantsios 701). At last count, nearly 33 million Americans across the nation lived in unrelenting poverty (Mantsios 703). Having extracurricular activities make it hard for poorer people than more wealthy. Some people go to private schools, where they have many options for fun and activities after school. Having options like taking different language classes after, going to sleep away camps, some with sons of ambassadors and children of doctors. Going on family vacations regularly, two or three times a year is more than likely.They know ahead of time that they will most definitely g et into a very good college with or without scholarships with ambitions to be president. As for others, go to a small to medium public school where most options are very little. Going to a YMCA day camp is the most camping experience a lot of poorer people get to experience. They are children of hard working individuals in factory’s and school employees. This is how several of them get to do sports as well. They have ambitions to be presidents as well as school teachers.Racial and gender issues stop people from going farther in life than they would like as well. Racial and gender domination are other forces that hold people down (Mantsios 712). Women experience the effects of sexism whether they are well-paid professional or poorly paid clerks. As women, they face discrimination and male domination, as well as catcalls and stereotyping (Mantsios 712). Similarly, a wealthy black man faces racial oppression, is subjected to racial slurs, and is denied opportunities because of h is color (Mantsios 712). The experience of women and minorities are differentiated along class lines.Although they are subordinate positions vis-a-vis white men, the particular issues that confront women and minorities maybe quite different depending on their position in the class structure (Mansios 712-713). Class -oppressed men, whether they are white or black, have privileges afforded them as men in a sexist society. Similarly, class-oppressed whites, whether they are men or women, benefit from white privilege in a racist society. In today’s society, people would think that this would not be an issue anymore, but it seems to still be problems with it.Oppression is cumulative, and those who are poor, black, and female are often subject to all of the forces of class, race and gender discrimination simultaneously (Mantsios 713). It seems that if you are a black woman that you would be in a lower class than a white female. Being female and of ethnic race you would be considere d in the lower class and that causes many issues for someone to succeed. Being in a society that does goes by classes has caused many issues for several classes to succeed in a position that is very wanted.Americans judge too many people, and it does show that it can be a major barrier for someone to get past. No one likes for others to know their situations, people try to hide things from others so that no one know if they are in the lower class. Trying to fit in is something that most Americans allow themselves to do. Everyone wants to be considered in the same category of class. Why do people judge so much and why do they say and do hurtful things to people that are in a lower class than themselves? It is just how the human race is and more than likely will always be.It has been this way for many years and will continue to do so. Some people are raised in many different levels of human nature, and it grows with each individual as they become adults, but looking down on someone an d belittling them, all because they are not as rich as them, or have as many material things as they do needs to come to a stop. That causes too many people to stop trying to overcome obstacles in their way to make a better life for themselves and their families. Getting out of a rut is a hard thing to accomplish. This is a major barrier to overcome. Works Cited George, Diana. Changing the Face of Poverty: Nonprofits and the Problem of Representation. † 2001. The Norton Field Guide to Writing with Readings. Ed. Richard Bullock and Maureen Daly Goggin. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 2010. 622-33. Print. Mantsios, Gregory. â€Å"Class in America-2003. † 2004. The Norton Field Guide to Writing with Readings. Ed. Richard Bullock and Maureen Daly Goggin. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 2010. 697-717. Print. Singer, Peter. â€Å"The Singer Solution to World Poverty. † 2009. The Norton Field Guide to Writing with Readings. Ed. Richard Bullock and Maureen Daly Goggin. 2nd ed. New Y ork: Norton, 2010. 873-80. Print.