U.S. Supreme Court Case Tennessee vs. Garner Study

U.S. Supreme Court Tennessee vs. Garner - Case Study Example The various arms and appendages of law while towing the practical manifestations of their powers do sometimes give way to special situations that alter and remold the conscience of a society and bring them under direct and enhanced observation and scrutiny of the masses and the intelligentsia. Infact such instances happen to be the important turning points in the legal and judicial history of any nation and do many a times lead to the evolution of the existing statutory provisions in the light of the current and emerging changes in the society. US Supreme Court case Tennessee vs. Garner is one such thought provoking event in the legal history of the US that strikingly challenged the existing statutory provisions pertaining to the use of force by the law enforcement agencies and called for reinterpretation and reshaping of this earlier taken for granted aspect of the policing in the US. October 3, 1974 was one other usual day in the life of the Memphis Police Officers Leslie Wright and Eton Hymon, when they were ordered to respond to a "prowler inside call". Both the officers promptly arrived on the scene of crime and after receiving relevant feedback from the neighbors, proceeded to scan the house being targeted. Hymon noticed a person running across the backyard and with the aid of his flashlight, was reasonably able to discern that the suspect, Edward Garner was an unarmed teenager of slight built (Findlaw, 2008). When Garner tried to climb over a fence, Hymon shot him in the back of his head to prevent him from escaping from the scene of crime (Findlaw, 2008). Later on a paltry ten dollars and a ring stolen from the house being scanned was found on the body of the suspect. Hymon acted in direct exercise of the authority given by a Tennessee statute to its police officers, sanctioning a deadly use of force so as to apprehend a fleeing suspect (Findlaw, 2008). The father of the deceased teenager filed a suit in the Federal District Court, to seek damages for the death and violation of his son's constitutional rights (Findlaw, 2008). The District Court upheld the constitutional credentials of the given statute and declared the officer's actions to be legal and valid (Findlaw, 2008). However, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, while responding to an appeal by the appellee-respondent, reversed, stating that the use of force against a fleeing suspect in pursuance of the requirements of the Fourth Amendment is subject to be qualified in the light of the criteria of reasonableness (Findlaw, 2008). The basic issue that this case brings to fore is the ascertaining of the constitutionality of the deadly use of force by the law enforcement agencies against an unarmed, fleeing suspect (Findlaw, 2008). It questions the gross generalization of the provisions pertaining to the use of force by the law enforcement agencies against the relatively innocuous suspects who try to flee. Should the nature or proportion of force used by a police team against an escaping terrorist be same as that used against a harmless teenager, who attempts to escape from the scene of some petty crime This case highlights the human rights of the fleeing suspects and pragmatically checks the unrestrained use of force by t

Case study- Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Case study- - Coursework Example This will result in many followers and will raise the popularity of cloud computing. a) For a new entrant it is hard to invest huge amount in infrastructure to build own data centre. Here cloud computing lessens their cost to substantial level (Pay-Per-Use facility might be recalled of as an example). Capacity Planning: - This is a course of action that an organization use to determine the production required to meet varying demands for its products. Here though Amazon is a retail organization, they shift their business from retail to cloud computing technology, since lots of small organization who are dealing with large data sets are opting to be their clients. In the long run to reduce the risk of server downtime they are simultaneously useing public and private cloud. Scalability: This is the capacity of a system to accomplish large number of works in a competent style with ultimate achievement of growth. Amazon is handling a large number of data of many organizations with flexible computing power, messaging and other services. Circumscribing this dimension, Amazon is equipped with huge resources directed towards helping an array of small firms entering new business and struggling to maintain huge database. On the other way, subscribers of Amazon for example, Zynga is using a business model where they use private and public cloud jointly. At the juncture when Zynga decides to launch any new application they use public cloud because they are uncertain about their future applicability. Once this application stabilizes in the market they shift to its own cloud computing dynamics for the reduction of risk related to the server downtime problems. TCO: Total cost of ownership is an estimation of cost method and is used to assist consumers and project managers to establish direct and indirect costs of a product or

Imagining My Future Essay Example for Free

Imagining My Future Essay My hand flies to my heart, the other to Matthew’s hand. I startle awake from an endless nightmare. Luckily, I haven’t awakened my sleeping husband, who I must say sleeps like a rock. I stretch out and sit up, the covers pooling around my waist. The moonlight continues to shine into our room from the balcony. I give Matthew a quick kiss on his hand and slowly crawl out of bed into the depths of our house. I wander the empty hallways of this home Matthew and I have built. Pictures line the wall from our wedding, to the birth of our three wonderful children, Braden, Katarina and Adam. I couldn’t imagine any better life. As my hand skims the wall, my feet sink into the plush purple carpet that lines the hall. I touch the cold metal of my first son’s door knob and hesitantly open the door. Braden is twelve-years-old, and as athletic as his father. The first thing he learned to say was â€Å"Dada† and knew how to skate before he could walk. Hockey must be in his genes – he’s the captain of his Pee Wee B hockey team. He has a great future set in front of him. I tip-toe over to his queen size bed covered with blue sheets. Braden takes after his father in looks as well. His eyes are the rich color of the sky and grass combined; his hair a dark chestnut brown; a smile that is so perfect, he didn’t need braces. As I stroke his hair and pull the covers up, I remember the first time I dropped him off at school and I imagine how he’ll deal with going to a new school next year since its seventh grade. I turn off the music he plays every night to help him fall asleep, and exit his room as quiet as I entered. Katarina is only a year younger than her brother. She’s only eleven and is as independent as a teenager. She’s sprawled out on her queen size bed covered with bright colors that swirl around. I watch her breathing, a slow rhythm of ease as she dreams ever so peacefully. She takes after me, which I’m thankful for. Her eyes are a rich green, her hair a bright blonde, but Kat was born with teeth like her great-grandmother. She’s almost to the ripe age to get braces. I hope she won’t get teased when she gets them; it’s a grave fear of mine. Kat is always striving to be her unique self, and doesn’t exactly care what others think of her. Her fearlessness is something most other girls her age crave for. She’s a bookworm, just like her mother as well. Matthew and I brought her skating multiple times, but she didn’t really get the same sensation her momma felt as a figure skater. Instead, she’s a dancer – hip-hop and ballet – and she’s extremely gifted. Where she received her gracefulness on feet is something I question myself with everyday. She’s my angel, her father’s little girl, and her brothers’ best friend. I glance over to her window which is right above her bed. The moonlight casts a light upon her drooling face and I manage to hold back a giggle. I wonder how many hearts Kat will break when she enters the scary and dreaded place of high school. My littlest boy, Adam, sleeps the farthest away from his parents. He has the intelligence of Einstein and is constantly questioning everything. He isn’t big into the high-contact sport as his older brother, but is enjoying music quite much as well as tennis. Adam is eight, and loves his guitar. He plucks the strings night and day. His looks are that of mine and Matthew’s. As he sleeps, he snores a bit and fidgets, but the stuffed tiger his grandmother gave him is tucked safely away in his arms. Right now, Adam wants to be a rock star. I only hope he achieves the dream he decides on. His clothes are scatter around his floor and being as restless as I am, I can’t help but not pick them up. CD’s of oldies line shelf after shelf. I watch him move and he silently calls out for â€Å"Grandma.† Grandma Fern passed away few months ago and little Adam was her absolute favorite. When Adam found out about her death, he was devastated. He took up a vow of silence and wouldn’t come out of his room. Finally, Matthew and I were able to soothe him out to talk to us. He’s been back to his talkative self ever since. I close the door and hear the â€Å"click† of the door. I wander back up to my room, and dance to the balcony. I flop into the overstuffed red love seat Matthew and I placed outside. In the distance, I can see a glimmer of the soft lake that is only minutes away from my home. I cross my legs and sigh to myself. â€Å"Well hello there. Didn’t you ever learn to close the door?† a deep, rough voice says. I quickly whip my head around to see the man I call my husband. â€Å"Oh, dear I’m so sorry! I was caught up in how beautiful the night sky looked. I didn’t even think about the door.† I say hastily. â€Å"Well, I’m glad you forgot. You can’t keep this to yourself, you know.† Matthew says as he joins me. I’ve known him since I was a junior in high school and I’ve been infatuated with him ever since. His face is turned toward the night sky, and I can’t help but wonder how this fascinating creature is with me. Matthew has been playing hockey ever since the age of five, and has a knack at it. He played for the Fighting Sioux in college, and was moved up to the professional league when the Washington Capitals signed him to their roster. He was ecstatic about the offer. My children and I can’t go and stay with him i n Washington State, but we go to every game we can. He’s my children’s hero, and my own to love. I place a single hand on his cheek, an act I’ve always done towards him. â€Å"It’s almost morning wife. What are you going to make for breakfast?† he teasingly asks me. He knows whatever I cook, he has to help with. â€Å"Well, I was thinking some bacon, maybe an omelet. Unless you prefer something more five star.† I instantly challenge him. He picks me up and throws me over his shoulder as if I was as light as a feather. He lays me on the bed and suddenly we are in a game of chasing each other around the bedroom. He never ceases to amaze me. Of course, Matthew lets me win and we stroll downstairs to the kitchen, starting up the coffee, and planning out what to feed our children.

John Kenneth Galbraith Biography

John Kenneth Galbraith Biography Archibald Galbraith, a Canadian schoolteacher, once climbed onto a platform atop a  steaming pile of manure to address a group of Liberal party voters before the coming Ontario  elections. â€Å"Before I begin,† he said, â€Å"I must apologize for speaking from the Tory platform.†Ã‚  Later on, his teenage son, John Kenneth, would congratulate him on the dig, to which he  [Archibald] would respond, â€Å"It was good. But it didn’t change any votes.† (Arthur Scheslinger,  1984, p. 7) So, from an early age, John Kenneth Galbraith was between the world of politics and  pragmatism.   John Kenneth Galbraith was born in 1908. His father’s involvement in politics had a  profound impact on the young John Kenneth, politicizing him at an early age. He originally  studied Agricultural Economics at the Ontario Agricultural College, but would eventually say  that he took his first â€Å"real† economics course at UC Berkeley, and that the economics instruction  in Canada was â€Å"very poor† (Dunn, 2002, p. 350). As a graduate student at UC Berkeley, he  continued his study of agricultural economics and worked as a research assistant for a â€Å"very zany  old man by the name of Edwin Voorhies† (Kreisler, 1986). He stated that it was his study of  agricultural economics that left him with a strong feeling that â€Å"social science should be tested by  its usefulness,† an idea inspired by Veblen’s dichotomy between exoteric knowledge (knowledge  that is valuable and applicable) and esoteric knowledge (knowledge tha t has no practical  application, but because of that, is considered more â€Å"prestigious†). Galbraith believed that social  sciences should be exoteric, not esoteric. In his book Economics and The Public Purpose,  Galbraith develops this idea further, saying, â€Å"The ultimate test of a set of economic ideas is  whether it illuminates the anxietes of the time† (Galbraith, 1973, p.198). In the 1930’s, while Galbraith was studying to receive his Ph. D, it was clear that  economic theory was not addressing the anxietes of the time. Economists were struggling to  explain how free markets had led the United States to economic ruin. One in four Americans  were jobless. Production had all but ground to a halt. Obviously, there were egregious errors in  the accepted dogma, which stated that free markets left to their own devices would bring about  efficiency and employment. Galbraith said that his method of coming to an understanding was to  Ã¢â‚¬Å"for years†¦start with [Alfred] Marshall, see the world as it is, and make the requisite  modifications† (Dunn, 2002, p. 351). Upon graduating, Galbraith traveled to Washington D.C.  and took a position assisting with the implementation of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, before  taking a position as a tutor at Harvard. At Harvard, he made speeches supporting the reelection of Roosevelt, cement ing his initial ties with the Democratic party. Not long after, he was offered  a fellowship at Cambridge, where the discussions centered around Keynes, who had just published his General Theory of Employment, Money, and Interest (Dunn, 2002, pp. 350-355).   Galbraith returned from England to his tutor position at Harvard a confirmed Keynesian. He spent a few more years tutoring at Harvard (where he met John F. Kennedy) and then took a  job as resident economist for the American Farm Bureau Federation in Washington. Galbraith’s  observation of the farm industry solidified his belief in the power of government to move  industries forward. In 1930, farm households accounted for a quarter of the population, whereas  today they account for only 1% of the population and yet on the whole, they now produce more  than they did in 1930. This is due to strong government support of the farming industry. That  national planning could â€Å"transform a weak, disorganized, and poverty prone sector of the  economy into America’s most spectacular productive success†¦preserved his political concerns†Ã‚  (Arthur Schlesinger, 1984, p. 8). Galbraith became head of the Office of Price Administration in  1941 during World War II, and at the same time began his long career as a ghostwriter, penning  spe eches for Samuel Rosenman and Robert Sherwood (Arthur Schlesinger, 1984, p. 8). Galbraith then became editor of Fortune magazine, where he worked directly for Harry  Luce, founder of Time Inc., whom he called â€Å"one of the most ruthless editors I have ever known,  or anyone has ever known† (Kreisler, 1986). Galbraith has credited Luce with dramatically  improving his writing via ruthless editing. Galbraith credited Fortune with giving him a  Ã¢â‚¬Å"marvelous introduction to the corporate mind,† because the focus of the magazine at the time  was â€Å"the anatomy of the big corporations† (Dunn, 2002, p. 353). The decision making processes  of major corporations would be a recurring phenomenon that he would write about in many of  his publications. Galbraith returned to Academia in 1948, having spent five years as editor of Fortune. He  was nominated to a position teaching economics at Harvard. However, members of Harvard’s  board of overseers regarded him as a â€Å"dangerous Keynesian,† and as a result, â€Å"took the step,  almost unprecedented in modern times, of blocking the appointment† (Dunn, 2002, p. 353). However, Galbraith had many political allies, and among them was Harvard’s president, James  B. Conant. Conant was such a fan of Galbraith that he threatened to resign unless the board of  overseers backed down. Eventually they did, and Galbraith became a tenured professor at  Harvard. It was then that he began work on his first major bestseller, American Capitalism: The  Concept of Countervailing Power. Galbraith begins his discussion of capitalism in America by pointing out the following  conundrum: Mainstream economic theory asserts that in the case of monopoly, prices will rise,  business will screw consumers, fail to innovate, and as a result, the economy will be in bad  shape. He then notes the work of Joan Robinson in developing the idea of monopolistic and  oligopolistic competition, noting that oligopolistic industries behave in the same way as  monopolies would, and through informal agreements can have the exact same effect. Then, using  the actual data collected by the American government, he shows that the majority of industries  are in fact oligopolistic. But he goes even further than that, saying that almost all industries will  eventually become oligopolistic for the following reasons: At the birth of an industry,  competetion is necessary and possible, as no firms have clear and significant advantages yet. But  over time, it will become increasingl y difficult to enter the industry because of the barriers to  entry created by high capital requirements and increasing returns to scale. At the same time that  increasing returns to scale start to set in (as they inevitably do), existing firms will also gain the  advantage of experience and prior organization. The convergence of these factors leads, in most  cases, to an industry with a few power players and a larger but still relatively small number of  hangers-on, who exist by filling niches that aren’t worth the time of the large firms. Galbraith poses a question in American Capitalism, and before getting to that question, it  is important to get a sense of the context in which he asks it. After World War II, America was  experiencing incredible prosperity. But underlying this prosperity was the fear of depression. The  Great Depression was still fresh in the collective consciousness, and the average man’s faith that  capitalism would bring about efficiency and full employment was shaken. And yet, as the years  after the war progressed, things were stable and employment was plentiful. It is also important to  note that the era of non-depression Keynesianism was beginning, and much to the chagrin of the  business community, government was becoming a much more participatory force in markets. The business community was reacting violently against this expansion of government, claiming  that it was a complete disaster, wasteful to the very extreme and bound to cripple growth. The  state of the American economy in the 1950’s then was that of big government, near-ubiquitous  monopoly or oligopoly, and an underlying fear of depression. Yet, by almost any measure, the  economy was a success. The problem, according to Galbraith, was that, â€Å"in principle, the economy pleased no  one; in practice it satisfied most. Social inefficiency [government spending], unrationalized  power [monopoly and oligopoly], intrusive government [regulation], and depression were all  matters for deep concern. But neither liberal nor conservatives, neither the rich nor all but the  very poor, found the consequences intolerable† (Galbraith, 1954, p. 85). What fascinated  Galbraith was how an economy which was so flawed in theory could work so well in practice. The question he asked was: Why are things so†¦well†¦good? Thus, he states that his aim in  American Capitalism is to â€Å"examine in turn the circumstances that have kept social inefficiency,  private power, government intervention, and unemployment from ruining us in the recent  present† (Galbraith, 1954, p. 85). The first answer that he gives is that oligopoly is much more conducive to techonological  innovation than classical competetion. â€Å"There is no more pleasant fiction than that technical  change is the product of the matchless ingenuity of the small man forced by competition to  employ his wits to better his neighbor. Unhappily, it is a fiction,† he says. â€Å"Technical  development has long since become the preserve of the scientist and engineer† (Galbraith, 1954,  p.86). His argument is that due to the costliness of development, it can only be undertaken by a  firm with considerable resources. In highly competitive industries, no one firm has considerable  resources. Moreover, because innovations can easily be imitated, it is not economical for a small  competitive firm to bear the research and development costs for an entire industry. Galbraith then turns his keen eye to the idea of inefficiency. He deals with this issue by  asserting that America’s relative opulence shields us and is moreover a cause of such  inefficiency. At the time that the classical economists were writing, an opulent economy had yet  to be observed. For Malthus and Ricardo, â€Å"inefficiency was, indeed, an evil thing. It denied  bread to the hungry and clothing to the naked† (Galbraith, 1954, p.102). The true power of  Galbraith’s insight is his ability to point out the obvious. He criticizes his fellow economists for  bringing the mentality of the nineteenth century, with all its poverty and degradation, to the  opulent twentieth century. Galbraith finds this error both amusing and absurd, saying, â€Å"He [the  mainstream economist] worries far too much about partially monopolized prices†¦for tobacco, liquor, automobiles, and soap, in a land which is already suffering from nicotine poisoning and   alcoholism, which is nutritionally gorged with sugar, which is filling its hospitals and cemeteries  with those who have been maimed or murdered on its highways, and which is dangerously  neurotic about body odors† (Galbraith, 1954, p.102). His point is that these inefficiencies are in  fact a sign of the wealth of America. They are the symptom of a wealthy economy, and thus we  ought not to worry so much about them. He also discredits the idea of intrusive government,  noting that, â€Å"alarm over pending action by government on economic matters, which frequently  reaches almost pathological proportions when the decision is pending, almost invariably  evaporates completely once the action is taken. One of the profound sources of American  strength has been the margin of error provided by our well-being† (Galbraith, 1954, p.106). But the most significant reason that monopoly has failed to capsize the American  economy, according to Galbraith is the exercise of what he calls countervailing power. The  assumption always made by economists, when they would consider the case of markets, was that  the check on an individual firm’s power wold come from the supply side of the industry. Galbraith disagrees. He admits that the existence of monopoly power in a competitive market  does in fact encourage the entry of more producers to appropriate some of that power for  themselves. â€Å"In other words,† he says. â€Å"Competition was regarded [and is] a self-generating  regulatory force† (Galbraith, 1954, p. 112). But in a market that is not competitive, the incentive for some economic agent to  approptiate that power still exists. But it need not come from the supply side. That power is, in  practice, usually appropriated by strong buyers or coalitions of buyers, who can sometimes take  even more than their share. Because of the tendency of power to be organized in response to  existing power, â€Å"countervailing power is also a self-generating force† (Galbraith, 1954, p. 113). According to Galbraith, it is the large retailers who, by way of their absolute power over  manufacturers, bargain for the consumer and protect the consumer from the high monopoly  prices that would otherwise result. Likewise, the considerable market power of large firms is  checked by trade unions for a simple reason, there is something to be bargained for Galbraith  notes that trade unions are most powerful in the least competitive industries. This is because the  surplus that a company derives from monopoly power acts as an incentive to unions. In the very  competitive industries, producers and workers are operating at bare minimum profit and the  incentives to organization insignificant. These are the basic ideas laid out in American Capitalism. The book in many ways lays  the framework and tone for the books he would publish in the sixties and seventies. But while  American Capitalism was Galbraith’s first major bestseller, it was The Affluent Society that  skyrocketed him to fame. The Affluent Society builds on many of the concepts introduced in his  first book, but with several key differences. Though Galbraith could not suppress his urge to  social commentary, The Affluent Society is a much more prescriptive book, growing out of his  chapter on technical development in American Capitalism. To his original analysis he adds a  significantly moral component. The Affluent Society concerns itself with the policies that ought  to be undertaken once the basic needs of the people have been met. Galbraith’s main argument is  that our ratio of private good (cars, televisions, automobiles) to public goods (schools, roads) is  inequitable an d ridiculous. The premise of his argument is that once our basic desires such as  food, clothing, and shelter have been satisfied, large corporations employ advertising to concoct  new demand for products. The traditional economic and utilitarian argument for goods qua  goods falls on its face if consumer demand is not sovereign. What is really necessary is the use  of society’s productive resources in the public realm in juxtaposition with growth in the private  realm. He calls this idea â€Å"social balance,† saying, â€Å"the problem of social balance is ubiquitous,  and frequently it is obtrusive. As noted, an increase in the consumption of automobiles requires a  facilitating supply of streets, highways, traffic control, and parking spaces† (Galbraith, 1958, p.  193). He also confronts the existence of poverty in an affluent society as being the result of  outdated nineteenth century attitudes. â€Å"A poor society,† he says,  "had to enforce the rule that  someone who did not work could not eat. An affluent society has no similar excuse for such  rigor† (Galbraith, 1958, p. 251). But he admits that, â€Å"nothing requires such a society to be  compassionate. But it no longer has a high philosophical justification for its callousness†Ã‚  (Galbraith, 1958, p. 251). In the 50’s, America was in the midst of the cold war and attempts at engineering a better  society were very suspect. Galbraith throughout The Affluent Society understands the inherent  and ideological opposition to big government and social policy, but he is adamant in stating,  Ã¢â‚¬Å"that cities’ residents should have a nontoxic supply of air suggests no revolutionary dalliance with socialism† (Galbraith, 1958, p. 191). In fact, Galbraith eventually finds socialism and central planning to be in many ways  similar to the kind of capitalism that developed in America in the latter half of the 20th century. 9 In The New Industral State, Galbraith focuses his effort on understanding what he calls the  Ã¢â‚¬Å"technostructure.† In an era when the division of intellectual labor is so overwhelming, the  management or even management team of a powerful corporation doesn’t actually make most of  the decisions. The decisions are instead made collectively by teams of experts. Galbraith coins  the term technostructure as, â€Å"embracing all who bring specialized knowledge, talent or  experience to group decision-making. This,† he says, â€Å"not the management, is the guiding  intelligence, the brain, of the enterprise† (Galbraith, 1967, p.71). Many of Galbraith’s ideas resonate to this day. Unfortunately, most do not. It would be  tempting to end this essay optimistically, expounding poetically on the way Galbraith’s ideas  continue to influence national policy. In reality, although he was a well-respected and powerful  man, many of his ideas continue to be ignored by mainstream economists and politicians. Rarely  does one hear a contemporary economist talk about countervailing power, or reference the  Ã¢â‚¬Å"technostructure.† While as a society we owe much to Galbraith and his ideas, the discipline of  economics has for all intents and purposes laid his practical ideas by the wayside. But whether or  not his continued influence on economics is felt by the mainstream, his contribution to the  discipline remains poignant and accessible for those who choose to seek it out on their own. Galbraith’s main contribution to economic thought was his tackling of the problem of  power. He was convinced that the most glaring, most significant, and most ignored problem in  the field of economics was the effect of power on economic activity. Understanding why  Galbraith was so affixed by this idea of power is actually quite simple; he was surrounded by it. Through his political work, Galbraith knew not only Kennedy, but several other presidents and  all the most powerful officials in the democratic party. Through his work at Fortune he became  acquainted with the heads of the largest and most powerful corporations in the world. He saw,  10 clearly, the extent to which the decisions of these men (and the technostructures supporting  them) affected the direction and performance of the economy of the whole. Given that he was an  astute man, for him to ignore the influence of power on economies, in order to advance a series  of aesthetically pleasing models and equations, would have been not only unthinkable but  dishonest. Galbraith wanted badly to be useful, to â€Å"change votes,† as his father would have said. To him, sitting in a room concocting theories did not qualify as usefulness. He longed to be in  the thick of policy-making. Later in life, he wanted badly to avoid what he called â€Å"Belmont Syndrome†1 Thus, his struggle to be relevant was not only ideological but moral. John Kenneth Galbraith died peacefully at home in 2006. He left behind not only an  extensive body of economic work, but two novels. His first novel, The Triumph, written in 1969,  was about U.S. foreign policy disasters in Latin America. His second novel, A Tenured  Professor, written in 1990, was about an eccentric Harvard professor, and lampooned the elite  institution. He lived ninety-seven years, almost all of them (excepting the first few) were  preoccupied with upending the â€Å"conventional wisdom.† He remains one of the most famous and  controversial economists of the twentieth century, and a fine novelist.

The Extent to Which William Golding Portrays Mankind as Being Inherently Evil :: William Golding Lord of the Flies Essays

The Extent to Which William Golding Portrays Mankind as Being Inherently Evil Although I do not think he shows humans to be completely, irrevocably evil, I think that Golding paints an increasingly dim picture of humankind. As his faith in humanity's intrinsic good fails, Golding's foresight of a dark future for man is reflected in the colour of his metaphorical oil paints as he writes this allegorical novel. Even supposedly innocent children are shown to be incredibly sinful and the rules and regulations they are brought up under fade away into insignificance. This mirrors William Golding's belief that people are born corrupt and malevolent, they are not influenced into bad ways; rather it is something about us as a species. Throughout his story, Golding demonstrates the true nature of people coming out into the open - manifesting itself more openly after being restrained by society for so long. At the start of Lord Of The Flies, there is chaos amidst horrendous storms, with panicky schoolboys unregulated and vulnerable. Together though, they set about their predicament in a very well meaning, sophisticated way - everything is orderly and civilised in true boy-scout fashion. The boys act above their ages and decide they ought to "...call the others...have a meeting"(I, p. 22), to organise themselves and to build shelters after their adult 'election'. Like in Parliament, only one person is allowed to speak at once and the conch helps to enforce this. With the well meaning and democratic Ralph in charge, even specific jobs are allocated amongst the children with Jack's choir designated the island's hunters. However, even at this early stage, the children test the limits of this new adult-less world. Jack says to Piggy, "Shut up, Fatty"(I, p. 28). Then, the name-calling continues with Ralph even, abusing Piggy's trust and revealing his former private nickname merely for a cheap laugh. Even the tiniest child joined in the resulting combined uproar of laughter - every one glad that there is no authority to discipline them. Later, when Piggy approaches Ralph about his betrayal, Ralph is caught between "...apology or further insult"(I, p. 33) as his conscience begins to falter. As the story progresses, incidences illustrating the immorality of the boys become more frequent and more prominent. Still in the first chapter, Ralph, Simon and Jack revel in the wanton destruction caused by their hands when they roll a boulder into the canopy below - they were transfixed by this "triumph"(I, p.37) and utter an excited "Wacco!"(I, p. 37). The first time the boys chance upon a pig, Jack crucially hesitates whilst considering the consequences of taking life. Though, as later on Jack renounces his social conditioning and

The Excellence Of Women In Shakespearean Tragedy Essay -- William Shak

Excellence, from the root excellent, is the achievement of something extremely good in life. These achievements can be of a literary nature, or a cosmic nature, however the excellence that pertains to the coming essay, is that which is found within the female characters of Shakespearean tragedies. Despite the patriarchal ways of life during Shakespeare's age, he constantly conveys the ladies of his plays with nothing short of "excellent ... beauty, wit, and virtue." [Doran 135] Doran's article "The Idea of Excellence In Shakespeare" is a detailed work, which engages itself in the wide scope of Shakespearean sonnets and all his theatrical work concerning excellence. Doran says very frankly that due to Shakespeare?s representation of women, through his plays, it is very clear that he prides himself with excellence in general. Although Doran brings to our attention the importance, and possible disaster, of over emphasizing glorious attributes, the act of which is known as a hyperbole [134], Shakespearean females, even when denied fancy dialect and metaphors, still are able to expose their virtues of loyalty, honestly, love, and patience in most everything they do. Doran begins his detailed account of specific females with none other than Cordelia, but due to further argument I will pass over his analysis of Lear?s daughter and continue with his depiction of Desdemona. Doran introduces Desdemona by stating, ?[her] virtues are ? independence, honesty, loyal ty, and great generosity.? [147] Within a standard reading of Othello these characteristic are by no means shadowed, they are vividly portrayed in most, if not all, of her actions. Her independence is conveyed by her decision to marry Othello without the good grace of her ... ...ults are that of a divine member, a goddess. To conclude Shakespeare presents all his ladies as self-righteous, independent, loving women who deserve to be noticed. Each woman holds her own sense of excellence with regards to her virtues. In particular, Desdemona and Cordelia, especially rise up to the occasion. Both of these women know who they are, how they got to be who they are, what they want, and how to get what they want, nothing, I repeat nothing, explains the excellence of a women better than that. Work Cited Doran, Madeleine. ?The Idea of Excellence In Shakespeare.? Shakespeare Quarterly 27.2 (1976): 133-149. Greenfield, Thomas A. ?Excellent Things In Women: The Emergence Of Cordelia.? South Alantic Bulletin 24.1 (1977): 44-52. Harding, D.W. ?Women?s Fantasy of Manhood: A Shakespearean Theme.? Shakespeare Quarterly 20.3 (1969): 245-253.

The Three Tier Essay

The five-paragraph essay is a form of written argument. It is a common requisite in assignments in American schools. The format requires an essay to have five paragraphs: one introductory paragraph, three body paragraphs with support and development, and one concluding paragraph. Because of this structure, it is also known as a hamburger essay, one three one or a three tier essay. The introduction serves to inform the reader of the basic premises, and then to state your thesis, or central idea. When a thesis essay is applied to this format, the first paragraph typically consists of a narrative hook, followed by a sentence that introduces the general theme, then another sentence narrowing the focus of the one previous. (If the author is using this format for a text-based thesis, then a sentence quoting the text, supporting the essay-writer's claim, would typically go here, along with the name of the text and the name of the author. Example: â€Å"In the book Night, Elie Wiesel says†¦ â€Å"). After this, the author narrows the discussion of the topic by stating or identifying a problem. Often, an organizational sentence is used here to describe the layout of the paper. Finally, the last sentence of the first paragraph of such an essay would state the thesis the author is trying to prove. The thesis is often linked to a â€Å"road map† for the essay, which is basically an embedded outline stating precisely what the three body paragraphs will address and giving the items in the order of the presentation. Not to be confused with an organizational sentence, a thesis merely states â€Å"The book Night follows Elie Wiesel's journey from innocence to experience,† while an organizational sentence directly states the structure and order of the essay.