Using these four passages and your own knowledge, asses the view that the US policy of Marshall in 1947 was motivated mainly by the altruistic desire to help the economic recovery of Europe
Using these four passages and your own knowledge, asses the view that the US policy of Marshall in 1947 was motivated mainly by the altruistic desire to help the economic recovery of Europe. The situation in Europe after the Second World War was truly desperate; many states were in ruins due to the devastation that caused unimaginable poverty and distress. At the surface, the US's plans to help Europe through the Marshall Plan are altruistic; however, looking deeper, the benefits that the US receives are high and rewarding. So much so, that it could be construed that the US had ulterior motives within their altruistic attempt on rebuilding the European Economy and thus benefiting themselves. During the interwar period, the US had based its foreign affairs on a "policy of glorious isolationism" - a policy that would have separated the US from the affairs of the world that did not concern them. At the end of the Second World War, the US's view had changed considerably in that they now wanted to help the European Community through 'the offer of aid through Marshall's new programme...'1 it was 'made available to all European countries without distinction,'2 making it seem that the US were being all inclusive within their scheme to help. At the surface, this would have been altruistic in that Marshall was helping Europe because he saw the devastation left behind from the Second
How and to what extent has modern liberalism departed from the ideas of classical liberalism?
How and to what extent has modern liberalism departed from the ideas of classical liberalism? Modern liberalism has made several significant departures from classical liberalism, most significantly resulting from their different views on what exactly constitutes freedom. Whereas classical liberals such as Adam Smith and John Locke believed in negative freedom - the freedom of interference by others, modern liberals see freedom as positive - the right of accessing the opportunities and resources needed to fulfil ones potential. It is from this key ideological difference that other differences arise. Perhaps the most significant departure from classical liberalism that this has resulted in is the Modern liberals' perception of the state. Traditionally, Liberals have been very suspicious of the state as a body with the potential to limit personal freedom, and therefore something to be treated with caution. Locke famously stated that the state lay "within the realm of coercion", prompting Liberals to be wary of state interference and seeing its role as to protect the individual from having their freedom impinged upon by others, rather than to interfere with positive aims. The Modern Liberal view stands in contrast to this original perspective; they believe that they state should intervene for positive impact, for example, the provision of equal opportunities, as without the
To what extend do you agree with Rhodes view that the British Empire was beneficial to both Britain and the colonies?
This term in history we have been learning about the British Empire and what impacts the British Empire had on the countries they conquered and on the world itself. The British Empire was the largest Empire in history and for a period of time it was the world's globally strongest countries. By 1921 the British Empire was in command of a population of about 458 million people roughly one quarter of the world's population. The land that Britain had conquered covered about a quarter of the earth's surface area (14.2 million squares miles. The legacy that is the British Empire is well known throughout the world; at the peak of its power, people often said" The sun never sets on the British Empire, "As the sun will always be shining on one of Britain's colonies all over the world." However people had many different interpretations on the empire some say they were positive some say negative. There is evidence to support Cecil's Rhodes view the empire was beneficial for both sides. However there is more persuasive evidence that the empire had negative effects. Furthermore if considering why each gave the interpretations that they did , it is obvious that Cecil's Rhodes interpretation is particularly unreliable .In this essay I will be examine different interpretations on the British Empire to answer the following question "To what extend do you agree with Rhode's view that the
Discuss the extent to which discrimination is prohibited under English and Welsh law (25 marks)
Discuss the extent to which discrimination is prohibited under English and Welsh law (25 marks) Article 14 of the European convention on Human rights protects individuals from discrimination. Traditionally English law has intervened to control discrimination in a very limited way, it is initially applied only to the areas of race and sex and only in relation to discrimination for certain purposes. E.g. they targeted race discrimination after WW2 when we had significant immigration from the commonwealth. Whereas the coverage is much larger today and broadly apply to employment discrimination, housing, education and the provision of services. The English law previously provided no remedy against unjustifiable discrimination, therefore in Applin v Race Relations Board (1975) Lord Simon referred to the "unbridled capacity to discriminate" at common law. This was in line with the traditional civil liberties in Britain and the view that an individual could do anything that the law does not prohibit. Therefore if sexual discrimination were to be tackled legislation would have to be passed. The First but limited attempt to prevent racial discrimination was the Race Relations Act 1965 which was later followed by the Race Relations Act 1968 which had a wider scope and extended this prevention of discrimination in law into further areas. On the other hand in areas such as sex
Outline and Evaluate Hardin's 'Lifeboat Ethics'.
Outline and Evaluate Hardin's 'Lifeboat Ethics'. In 'Lifeboat Ethics', Hardin puts forward an argument against helping the poor. He claims that the nations of the earth may be seen as a series of lifeboats with limited resources. The richer nations are well-managed and self-sufficient, whilst the lifeboats of the poorer countries are overburdened and overcrowded, so many of their people have fallen out and are in the sea around the richer lifeboats begging to be let in or given handouts. However, the lifeboats of the richer nations are limited in resources and do not have space to allow anyone else in. Whilst it may appear just to rescue the poorer people from the water or share wealth with them, this would result in disaster. The 'boat' would sink or the resources would run out, meaning that everyone would drown. Hardin thus argues that his metaphor demonstrates that, overall, it would be disastrous to help the poor; the world's resources would be exhausted and no-one would survive. However, it can be demonstrated that Hardin's argument fails on several grounds. Not only are many of the assumptions made by Hardin questionably accurate, the lifeboat metaphor itself is too. Hardin fails to represent the situation and the effects of his proposals as they truly are and his argument remains unconvincing. Indeed, by demonstrating his metaphor to be mistaken, it is possible to
Referring to both pharmaceutical and tobacco companies, explain how transnational corporations can influence the health of people in countries at different stages of development.
Referring to both pharmaceutical and tobacco companies, explain how transnational corporations can influence the health of people in countries at different stages of development (15) Both pharmaceutical and tobacco companies can be transnational corporations and some wield enormous international power and influence covering over one hundred countries with billions of pounds worth of profit; in 2009, GlaxoSmithKline had a net income of approximately £6 billion! Some corporations have, for example, used their profits to help fight widespread diseases in less economically developed countries (LEDCs), such as GlaxoSmithKline's help in the fight against Lymphatic Filariasis in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Some have set up health programmes in more economically developed countries (MEDCs) to reduce common health problems in these areas, such as different types of cancer. However, some corporations only supply people with the means to deteriorate their health, such as some tobacco companies like British American Tobacco, especially in LEDCs, but both pharmaceutical & tobacco companies play an important role in the health of the world's people. A pharmaceutical company is a company, which develops, produces and markets drugs licenced for use as medications, so obviously these companies play a huge role in the health of people worldwide as they provide medication against diseases
How successful has the WTO been in achieving it’s objectives?
How successful has the WTO been in achieving it's objectives? / Ben Weland / 13/10/2002 The World Trade Organisation (WTO) was founded in 1995 and resulted from a series of General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade, which started after the Second World War in 1947. The WTO is the first global, constantly operating organisation responsible for the promotion of free trade and the settlement of possible trade disputes through independent disputes panels. A WTO ruling has to be accepted by a member state, otherwise the respective country may face trade sanctions. Major decisions are made on a basis of unanimity in the trade rounds, the most recent one happening in Doha, Quatar. This essay should clarify what the WTO's five main objectives are and to what extent they have been achieved in recent years. Establishing and promoting free global trade is seen by many as the main objective of the WTO. It is the orthodoxy of the time that free trade is the economic policy most economic thinkers believe in, especially because empirical evidence seems to support the argument. Mercantilism, with it's main idea that wealth is finite and should therefore be kept in the country by encouraging exports and stopping imports, has long gone out of fashion. The argument goes that free trade is the way to optimise world output and income levels in the long run. The problem is that it is possible
Outline how and why federalism has changed since the 1960s.
Page 1 of 2 Outline how and why federalism has changed since the 1960s. In the 1960s, the government had a creative federalist approach. The aim of Lynden Johnson's Great society programmes was to try to eliminate poverty within the US. This in turn meant large government grants were given to states, which was seen to increase the level of interference from the federal government. Johnson also provided categorical grants instead of block grants, which meant the states had much less control over their spending. He also supplied a lot of federal aid, increasing the dependence of states on the federal government. It wasn't just the executive increasing the role; the judiciary were also pushing the government this way, with cases such as Gideon vs. Wainwright and Miranda vs. Arizona. Since the 1960's the some have stated that New Federalism has been the main objective of the executive and judiciary due to the previous creative federalism. From the 1970s there was an ideological shift, with the rejection of liberal values from the 1960s. President Nixon started the development of the idea that the federal government was too powerful, and that the states needed to have more power of their local rights. He felt that the federal government should be small to promote self reliance and the American idea of 'rugged individualism'. As a reaction to creative federalism and the great
To what extent is the oil crisis of 1973 a turning point in postwar economic development?
Chin Ying Lin Olivia (2) 6L 07/02/2010 To what extent can the oil crisis of 1973-4 be regarded as a turning point in the development of the international economy? The 1973 oil crisis was an event when the members of Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) proclaimed an oil embargo in response to the U.S. decision to re-supply the Israeli military during the Yom Kippur war and lasted until March 1974. In this essay, a "turning point" is defined to be a landmark- an event marking a unique or important historical change of course or one on which important developments depend. While acknowledging that the oil crisis certainly had dramatic and lasting impact on the development of the international economy: in terms of signifying the start of a worldwide shift in power away from the U.S for the first time, bringing about catastrophic repercussions on the international economy and also leading to the formation of the G-7 ; to regard it as a " turning point" would be an overstatement, due to the temporary nature of the crisis, as well as preceding events such as the collapse of the Bretton Woods System, and the continuity of dominance of the US in the global economy, albeit with lesser power than before the oil crisis. All these suggest otherwise: either that other events qualify more as a "turning point" than the oil crisis, or that there remained continuity of
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is the name given to the process where parties in a dispute come to a compromise (or settle their dispute) without going to court.
Assignment 2.9 a)Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is the name given to the process where parties in a dispute come to a compromise (or settle their dispute) without going to court. The main reason people use ADR is to save the expense of using the courts and solicitors. There are four types of ADR mediation, negotiation, conciliation and arbitration. Negotiation is the simplest form of ADR. Where two people have a dispute they can negotiate a solution themselves. The advantages to the parties involved are that it is completely private and it's fast and cheap. This is where parties to a dispute cannot settle it themselves they may instruct solicitors who will negotiate on their behalf. Even when negotiation fails at these early stages of a dispute and court proceedings start, solicitors will usually continue to negotiate on their client's behalf. This results in many cases being settled out of court. Mediation is where a neutral person (the mediator) helps the parties to reach a compromise. The job of the mediator is to consult with each party and see how much common ground there is between them. S/he should act as a facilitator, taking offers between the parties. The mediator doesn't offer an opinion. Mediation is most suitable where there is some chance that the parties will co-operate. such a in family disputes. Mediation is not legally binding on the
