Human Rights Essay Example for Free

Human Rights Essay Human rights are commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being. Human rights are thus conceived as universal and egalitarian . These rights may exist as natural rights or as legal rights, in local, regional, national, and international law. The doctrine of human rights in international practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a cornerstone of public policy around the world. The idea of human rights states, if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights. Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day. Indeed, the question of what is meant by a right is itself controversial and the subject of continued philosophical debate. Many of the basic ideas that animated the human rights movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the atrocities of The Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights. The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition that became prominent during the Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the twentieth century. History of concept  Although ideas of rights and liberty have existed in some form for much of human history, they do not resemble the modern conception of human rights. According to Jack Donnelly, in the ancient world, traditional societies typically have had elaborate systems of duties conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights. These institutions and practices are alternative to, rather than different formulations of, human rights. The modern sense of human rights can be traced to Renaissance Europe and the Protestant Reformation, alongside the disappearance of the feudal authoritarianism and religious conservativism that dominated the Middle Ages. One theory is that human rights were developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics. The most commonly held view is that concept of human rights evolved in the West, and that while earlier cultures had important ethical concepts, they generally lacked a concept of human rights. For example, McIntyre argues there is no word for right in any language before 1400. and constituted a form of limited political and legal agreement to address specific political circumstances, in the case of Magna Carta later being recognised in the course of early modern debates about rights. One of the oldest records of human rights is the statute of Kalisz, giving privileges to the Jewish minority in the Kingdom of Poland such as protection from discrimination and hate speech. The earliest conceptualization of human rights is credited to ideas about natural rights emanating from natural law. In particular, the issue of universal rights was introduced by the examination of extending rights to indigenous peoples by Spanish clerics, such as Francisco de Vitoria and Bartolome de Las Casas. In the Valladolid debate, Juan Gines de Sepulveda, who maintained an Aristotelian view of humanity as divided into classes of different worth, argued with Las Casas, who argued in favor of equal rights to freedom of slavery for all humans regardless of race or religion. In Britain in 1683, the English Bill of Rights and the Scottish Claim of Right each made illegal a range of oppressive governmental actions. Two major revolutions occurred during the 18th century, in the United States and in France, leading to the adoption of the United States Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen respectively, both of which established certain legal rights. Additionally, the Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776 encoded into law a number of fundamental civil rights and civil freedoms. These were followed by developments in philosophy of human rights by philosophers such as Thomas Paine, John Stuart Mill and G. W. F. Hegel during the 18th and 19th centuries. The term human rights probably came into use some time between Paines The Rights of Man and William Lloyd Garrisons 1831 writings in The Liberator, in which he stated that he was trying to enlist his readers in the great cause of human rights. In the 19th century, human rights became a central concern over the issue of slavery. A number of reformers, such as William Wilberforce in Britain, worked towards the abolition of slavery. This was achieved in the British Empire by the Slave Trade Act 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. In the United States, all the northern states had abolished the institution of slavery between 1777 and 1804, although southern states clung tightly to the peculiar institution. Conflict and debates over the expansion of slavery to new territories constituted one of the reasons for the southern states secession and the American Civil War. During the reconstruction period immediately following the war, several amendments to the United States Constitution were made. These included the 13th amendment, banning slavery, the 14th amendment, assuring full citizenship and civil rights to all people born in the United States, and the 15th amendment, guaranteeing African Americans the right to vote. Many groups and movements have achieved profound social changes over the course of the 20th century in the name of human rights. In Europe and North America, labour unions brought about laws granting workers the right to strike, establishing minimum work conditions and forbidding or regulating child labor. The womens rights movement succeeded in gaining for many women the right to vote. National liberation movements in many countries succeeded in driving out colonial powers. One of the most influential was Mahatma Gandhis movement to free his native India from British rule. Movements by long-oppressed racial and religious minorities succeeded in many parts of the world, among them the African American Civil Rights Movement, and more recent diverse identity politics movements, on behalf of women and minorities in the United States. The establishment of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the 1864 Lieber Code and the first of the Geneva Conventions in 1864 laid the foundations of International humanitarian law, to be further developed following the two World Wars. The World Wars, and the huge losses of life and gross abuses of human rights that took place during them, were a driving force behind the development of modern human rights instruments. The League of Nations was established in 1919 at the negotiations over the Treaty of Versailles following the end of World War I. The Leagues goals included disarmament, preventing war through collective security, settling disputes between countries through negotiation and diplomacy, and improving global welfare. Enshrined in its charter was a mandate to promote many of the rights later included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. At the 1945 Yalta Conference, the Allied Powers agreed to create a new body to supplant the Leagues role; this was to be the United Nations. The United Nations has played an important role in international human-rights law since its creation. Following the World Wars, the United Nations and its members developed much of the discourse and the bodies of law that now make up international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Philosophy The philosophy of human rights attempts to examine the underlying basis of the concept of human rights and critically looks at its content and justification. Several theoretical approaches have been advanced to explain how and why human rights have become a part of social expectations. One of the oldest Western philosophies of human rights is that they are a product of a natural law, stemming from different philosophical or religious grounds. Other theories hold that human

Exploring Fear in Howl, Basketball Diaries, and Cats Cradle Essay

"yacketayakking screaming vomiting whispering facts and memories and anecdotes and eyeball kicks and shocks of hospitals and jails and wars" (Ginsberg 11). Like many authors of the modern literature movement, Allen Ginsberg explores the bomb's psychological affects on many Americans during the 1960s. Modern literature describes the chaos of the 1960s, caused by increasing societal problems and fear of the new atomic bomb. Writings such as The Basketball Diaries, "Howl" and Cat's Cradle express concepts of fear, power, governmental control, and death. Government uses society's fear of death and the end of the world to keep control and power over the people. The atomic bomb generates such universal fear and the corrupted government fails to respond to the chaotic behavior of society or the fears of the individuals. This fear that the government achieves not only maintains control, but also causes chaos and the false belief that the government is on the public's side. The chaotic enviro nment is a result of people crying out for help and the conflicting lifestyles arise when people face the terror of death. Historically, fear has been used to control populations. For example, asearly as the 1700s, white men controlled black slaves through the fear of being killed. During slave days, in the South, the ratio was nine blacks to every white person (Nash and Graves 213). When Nat Turner, a black slave, finally revolted, the United States government responded by sending the army with tanks and guns to resist the black men. The reaction of the whites imbedded the fearof revolts within the slaves. The blacks could have successfully revolted, but were controlled by the fear of the powerful white man. The white man held the power and con... ...ld such dangers have any significance to life? Jim Carroll tells the real story of his fear of the end and the mixed feelings of what matters, what doesn't. His fear is accompanied by confusion of how to live, today, with the possibility of being killed tomorrow. Throughout "Howl," The Basketball Diaries, and Cat's Cradle it is evident that the government controlled society with the fear of the bomb. We can see how this fear influenced individuals and society as a whole. The government caused the fear in society by possessing the atomic bomb and ignoring problems arising. Society blaimed the people for their reactions to the fear of the bomb. Furthermore, the government presented itself as protector, leading to increased confusion and chaos. In modern society, deciding who is the enemy and who holds the power, determines who controls the fate of the world. Â  

Bureaucracy, Intelligence and Homeland Security Essay

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 shook the nation to its core. Politicians felt a tremendous pressure not only to go on the attack against the terrorists, but also to secure the homeland. As a result the United States’ government responded the way it often does in a crisis – It created a huge new bureaucracy. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was designed to consolidate dozens of agencies under one roof. Theoretically this would streamline the process of protecting the homeland. The Intelligence Act of 2004 was designed to better focus this process while also protecting the civil rights of Americans. Proponents of the DHS argue that there has not been a major attack on American soil since 2001. This presents an incomplete picture of the security landscape however. DHS is still very much a work in progress. It has been plagued by numerous well-publicized problems. The Department of Homeland Security has not met the strategic goals and objectives set forth in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. Therefore, the DHS has not successfully provided national security. The Act and the Bureaucracy The consolidation of so many agencies under one roof was unprecedented in Washington. Early fears that the bureaucracy would be so unwieldy as to be out of control seemed to be justified. After 9/11 the government felt an intense pressure to do something. The lack of coordination between agencies was exposed by these attacks. Creation of the DHS was an attempt to remedy this problem, but the agency itself was a massive undertaking. In many ways it is an agency still trying to find its footing. The DHS began operations in 2003 with more than 180. 000 employees (Brzezinski, 2004). It oversees dozens of agencies with a dizzying array of responsibilities. From the start the agency has worked against long odds and excessive expectations. There is a gap between what the public expects of DHS and what DHS actually believes it can do. This makes it even more difficult for the DHS to operate effectively. A well known axiom within the intelligence community states that â€Å"The terrorists only have to be right once – we have to be right every time†. Meanwhile the American public is intolerant of failure. The reality that eventually the terrorists will succeed again is not well understood. In fact, â€Å"The very notion of trying to design a zero-terrorist-risk environment is dangerously futile† (Brzezinski, 2004). As the DHS scuffled through its first few years, Congress and the American people became impatient. In 2004 Congress took action to reform the DHS and the intelligence and security apparatus. In an effort to re-focus DHS activities to the modern threat environment, Congress passed the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. The Act revised a number of provisions of the National Security Act of 1947. It set guidelines for information sharing, inter-agency cooperation and covert operations. Five years later some of its provisions have been addressed; many have not. Prevention and Preparation The Department of Homeland Security is a vast organization with a vast number of duties. It is responsible for both day-to-day protection of the homeland and strategic long-term efforts to prevent terrorism in the future. Additionally it must respond to attacks already under way and is often called in on natural disaster situations. DHS duties on any given day include, but are not limited to: †¦ screening 1. 5 million airline passengers [and] inspecting 57,006 shipping containers†¦ very day DHS reviews 2200 intelligence reports. [It] stands watch over 8,000 federal facilities and pieces of critical infrastructure. (Brzezinski, 2004) The Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 was intended to further streamline inter-agency cooperation between the many departments of the DHS. In some cases, such as the apprehension of alleged terrorist cells in Buffalo, NY and Miami, FLA, better cooperation has been evident. However, reports of turf wars and lack of cooperation still surface periodically. In some cases the DHS has had a tin ear in regards to Congress and the American people. Frequent news stories have made the public aware of the vulnerability of U. S. ports. Only a tiny percentage of the cargo that passes through these ports is screened. Technology and manpower to do so thoroughly are still limited. In response to public pressure, Congress strengthened port security provisions in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. The response from DHS was anything but urgent: The Department (Homeland Security) resisted 100 percent screening and offered a half measure involving known shippers†¦ Congress in 2007 mandated full inspection of shipping containers, which has not yet been implemented. (Clarke, 2008) The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is primarily responsible for both passenger and cargo security. It defends its record by pointing to several accomplishments. These include: screening of 700,000 port workers and issuing of directives mandating 100% screening of â€Å"high risk† cargo (The Library of Congress, 2004). These efforts still fall short of what Congress has mandated. Much recent focus has gone into the issue of border security. DHS has made progress on, but not completed a border fence. Border Patrol personnel have been increased. Technology for detecting illegal entry is improving, including the use of Predator drones to detect illegal crossers so Border Patrol can then be deployed. In response to criticism the DHS and ICE, its immigration division, have been forced to end the â€Å"catch and release† policy that was in place for many years. According to the DHS, the number of illegal aliens interdicted at the border has decreased. DHS and the border patrol claim this as evidence that their efforts are successful. It is likely, however, that additional factors explain the decrease in interdictions. Events in Mexico, the downturn in the U.  S. economy and more sophisticated means of entering the country also play a role. The FBI and CIA in tandem with local police are employing more sophisticated surveillance and search tools as well as providing security at large events that could be inviting targets for terrorists. Infrastructure security has improved but many important locations still lack adequate security. These include local water/sewer plants, electrical grids, mass transit systems and energy facilities. In the process of trying to provide such protections the DHS has had to face criticism from civil libertarians. An ongoing debate continues about where national security crosses the line into being an erosion of hard-earned American civil rights. This debate is likely to continue in perpetuity. The changing landscapes of threat and fear alter the position of that line. After the 9/11 attacks, Americans were much more willing to trade civil rights for a perceived sense of security. In the years since many of the actions taken during that time, such as domestic warrantless wire tapping and random airport searches have come under heavy criticism. It is likely that the DHS is engaging in a number of unknown activities that would be highly disturbing to the general public. This has always been true of the American intelligence and security establishment. There is no evidence that these activities are any worse or more prevalent since the founding of the DHS. In defense of the DHS, the organization must toe a slippery line. It is expected to take extraordinary measures to protect the nation. What is too extraordinary is never well-defined or unchanging. Bang for the Buck? The Department of Homeland Security has not been without certain successes. The Science and Technology Directorate has been a standout among the many branches of DHS. Composed of some of the finest minds in the world, the Directorate has made significant advances in a number of different areas targeted toward fulfillment of the Intelligence Act of 2004. The US-VISIT program has made progress in the area of VISA overstays. Behavior spotting software is helping agents at ports of entry to identify and address suspicious behavior. DNA mapping technology is helping to more quickly identify biological agents and assess any potential threat. At the same time an early warning system for these agents is in development. All of these developments have both civilian and military applications. On the forefront of information security is the Einstein 3 project currently undergoing testing. A Washington Post report describes the initiative this way: â€Å"the plan called for telecommunications companies to route the Internet traffic of civilian agencies through a monitoring box that would search for and block computer codes designed to penetrate or otherwise compromise networks† (Nakashima, 2009). If successful, Einstein 3 could help ensure secrecy of vital infrastructure and security information. This is all the more important in light of recent reports of widespread hacking of government computers. Analysts suspect, but are still unable to prove, that North Korean or Chinese hackers are responsible for the repeated breaches in security. The American public may have assumed that the founding of DHS represented a massive financial investment in America’s security. In reality, the DHS budget is not substantially more than its individual agencies were already receiving. The truth of the matter is that Homeland Security is a shoestring operation† (Brzezinski, 2004). This explains a lot about why measures deemed critical and necessary in 2001, and again in 2004, still have not been implemented. The agency is supposed to be free of the turf wars that plagued the intelligence community in the past. Because the individual agencies still lobby for a limited amount of funds this is not the reality. The harshest critics of the agency believe that is too much about appearing to do something and not enough about actually doing something. The confusing color-coded terror warning system is one such example. Col. David Hunt (ret. ) writes of such efforts: â€Å"Colors, duct tape and wooden desks don’t stop 10 – kiloton bombs or terrorists† (2005). With a new administration in power the DHS is considering dropping or altering the color-code warning system. Each time the alert system is raised costs are incurred by local, state and federal governments. The public has become oblivious to the system since specific information about the threat or what to do are never given. The ability of Americans to travel freely is the key to its future prosperity. For that reason a great deal of attention has been given to transportation links such as railroads, subways and airlines. The results have been mixed. Airport security, perhaps the most visible of DHS efforts has come under withering criticism. Inevitably errors will make better news than successes. The errors are numerous however, and come not only in the execution of policy but in the policies themselves. For example: â€Å"Our government keeps no fewer than twelve watch lists that we can choose from. Mind you, not one consolidated list; that would be too easy† (Hunt, 2005). Much of airport security has been federalized, but that does not mean the system is operating smoothly. The watch lists are anything but accurate. Babies and young children have been flagged. Even a U. S. Representative, Sen. Edward Kennedy was stopped because he somehow appeared on a list. Random checks that result in searches of senior citizens, disabled people and children have been a public relations nightmare for the TSA, the organization within DHS responsible for travel safety. Coping with these problems makes the jobs of airport screeners, many of whom are still being trained, all the more difficult. The TSA has required airlines to make certain security changes like locking cabin doors. On a random number of flights an armed federal air marshal is seated in the cabin. The prevalence of these marshals is a secret held tightly by the TSA. Random security checks run by independent agencies still raise concerns about the ease of getting potentially dangerous material on board domestic aircraft. Meanwhile the lack of a terrorist incident since the attempted shoe bombing by Richard Reid has led to a false sense of security. Since the border issue reached critical mass during the second term of President George W. Bush spending on border security has increased. Critics worry that this increase has come at the expense of other critical DHS efforts. â€Å"Department officials concede that most of the Homeland Security money is being funneled into one mission – controlling the border with Mexico† (Alden, 2008). The DHS and border patrol are fulfilling mandates of the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. But lack funding to complete many other initiatives. Analysis and Conclusion The Department of Homeland Security was proposed as an organization free of political influence. The reality is much different. A giant organization with tentacles stretching in numerous directions is inevitably political when funding for it is limited. DHS has the problems of any other Washington bureaucracy. The organization has garnered mixed reviews from independent analysts. To date there has not been another serious terrorist attack in the United States since 2001. A number of Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda- inspired cells have been infiltrated and brought to justice. The DHS should be given credit where credit is due in that regard. At the same time the actions of DHS have raised concerns that the civil rights of Americans are being eroded. It is also misleading to assume that the lack of attacks since 2001 is a strong indicator that the country is safe. In fact it is dangerous to assume so. The efforts of U. S. forces overseas probably have had as much to do as anything with the lack of attacks on American soil. At the same time, the enemy who successfully executed the 9/11 attacks did so after years of planning. It is very likely that they, or some other enemy is studying the cracks in the Homeland Security apparatus in preparation for a future attack. This is a 21st century reality. DHS was given license after 9/11 to take shortcuts around the civil rights of individuals in the name of national security. Each successive generation of Americans will have to decide what they are willing to give up for a sense of security that may or may not be realistic. Has the DHS protected America from terrorist attacks? Yes and no. Some of the actions it has taken have had clear-cut results. Others have not. Can it protect the homeland for the foreseeable future? Probably not. The DHS has not met many of its original mandates, as well as the mandates from the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. In certain instances it has shown the kind of bureaucratic inflexibility that allowed for the 9/11 attacks to take place. The American government has to be right every time – The terrorists only have to be right once.

The New Exciting Beauties Of Mary Fleming s The Airship...

Even when individual parties are detailed, descriptions hold no more excitement or beauty. Whilst Anne Fleming admits ‘Evelyn sadly confided that he got no pleasure from natural beauty’, his description of the airship party focuses upon how new modern beauty defies natural beauty. ‘Acres of inflated silk blotted out the sky’ and ‘lights of other cars arriving lit up the uneven grass.’ This holds a certain nostalgia for pastoral beauty, and with the country landscapes of Hetton and Brideshead casting a great aesthetic influence in later novels, perhaps Waugh already senses here that any excitement of technological beauty is fleeting, and as the ugliness of war looms, a hankering for beauties’ past sinks in. The new exciting beauties prove†¦show more content†¦The description of Brenda applying makeup is deliberately unpleasant, as she ‘spat into the eye black’ and ‘choked slightly.’ This language impli es that creating the illusion of beauty requires uncomfortable effort, and the ugliness of her adulterous intent struggles to reveal itself from beneath it. For Waugh, to highlight the ugliness of adulterous women was biographically motivated, due to the revelation of his wife’s adultery during his writing process. This only adds to his association with decadence according to Freud, whom Charles Bernheimer suggests thought contemporary decadence resulted from people having too little sex rather than too much. So sceptical is Waugh of any positivity in female beauty that in Vile Bodies the term ‘pretty’ gains negative connotations. Adam ridiculously deems Mary Mouse and the Maharajah a ‘pretty pair’ as they publicly make love on the airship balcony. The negative use of the term is only furthered when Chastity ‘in the prettiest way possible’ simpers to the drunk major against the ugliness of the war backdrop. Thus Women’s ‘prettiness’ is a fickle attempt to disguise the ugliness around them. The sense of ‘pretty’ is by its very nature shallow and transient, it’s sentiment far from the stunning or the gorgeous that true beauty in romantic literature holds. Indeed, Waugh taps into another Romantic poetic conceit here. The