impacts of the War on Terror on the Policing of US Borders

impacts of the War on Terror on the Policing of US Borders â€Å"Some nations need to be more vigilant against terrorism at their borders if they want their relationship with the U.S. to remain the same† (Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, September 20th 2001). With reference to this statement, critically examine the impacts of the war on terror on the policing of the borders of the United States of America Introduction The 9/11 attacks and subsequent feelings they produced bear many similarities to the Pearl Harbour attacks of 1941 with respect to national identity and patriotism. With both events, the matter of immigration became a prominent issue, especially when considering the concern in America relating to the ‘enemy within’ (Schildkraut, 2002). These concerns manifested themselves in post 9/11 discussions on how best to police the borders of the US. Statements such as, ‘our enemies are hiding in open and available information,’ (Accenture, cited in Kestelyn, 2002: 8) led to calls for greater levels of surveillance, profiling and security, all of which have substantially increased post 9/11. The result has been the rapid expansion of the homeland security market both on American soil and overseas (Amoore, 2006). Rana and Rosas (2006:2) highlight, ‘the mobilisation of the amorphous category of terror, construction of enemy combatants and the collapsing of terrorists with immigrants,’ in creating a renewed fear around borders and illegal immigrants. The scope of the war on terror was expanded in America, where once the threat was considered to be those of Arab, Middle Eastern and Muslim descent, it now spread to include migrants crossing the borders of Canada and Mexico into the US. While Canada has received criticisms from US government officials relating to their border control policies, the focus of this paper will be on the US-Mexico border and in particular the border wall. The post 9/11 expansion of security manifested itself in large parts around the US-Mexico border, culminating in the signing of the Secure Fence Act in 2006 by then President George W. Bush thus allowing for 700 miles of physical barriers to be built along the border. This essay will take the title statement from Colin Powell and discuss how America has become more vigilant post 9/11 and observe the impacts. In addition, while reviewing the range of new measures enacted at the US-Mexico border, this paper will centre on displaying how these measures have been justified by those putting them in place. During these discussions the terms post 9/11 and war on terror shall be used interchangeably as both signify the period of time after the terrorist attacks. History of the Border It is important to note that while border control has long been a primary function of the state, it has been substantially heightened in the wake of 9/11 and the ensuing war on terror (Andreas, 2003). This has been exemplified by The US VISIT programme, run by consulting company Accenture who have created a ‘virtual border.’ This system allows the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to view, regulate and manage the lives of potential visitors (Amoore, 2006), thus preventing any potential threats from coming into contact with US soil (Accenture, 2004). This practice of surveillance and governing multiple aspects of people’s daily lives is a vital component of biometric borders that when all brought together provide ‘a set of unique physical characteristics that can be used to identify you’ (UK Border Agency, 2013). Given the proposed advantages of surveillance, it comes as no surprise that the US, like most modern countries, moved into an age of biopower in which the state regulates its subjects through, ‘an explosion of numerous and diverse techniques for achieving the subjugations of bodies and the control of populations’ (Foucault, 1976:140). Biopower has somewhat signalled the delocalisation of the border in that border functions have been separated from the physical border itself (Bico, 2002; Salter, 2004). However, the US-Mexico border post 9/11 illustrates a clear display of sovereign power with increased networks of disciplinary and military institutions at the actual border acting outside and above the normal law (Nail, 2013). The idea of being above the law and exhibiting high profile displays of force at the border is addressed in the subsequent section discussing the state of exception with consideration to the unique nature of the US-Mexico border. The State of Exception The events of 9/11 led to the US government declaring a state of emergency, a period in which policing powers are expanded. Philosopher Giorgio Agamben sees this as enabling the US government to create a state of exception, a legal measure that precludes normative laws (Agamben, 2004). This approach allows for constituents to be declared as homo sacer, the act of taking away basic civil and human rights from the individual. Accenture’s virtual border and the enhanced powers of the DHS illustrate Agamben’s view in that by providing biometric information required for the US-VISIT you are being stripped to a state of bare life. Agamben’s work around homo sacer, the idea he refers to as bare life (1998, 2000, 2005), has led to a number of scholars applying his work to post 9/11 events such as the new security methods applied at the US borders and the shameful actions documented Guantanamo Bay (Butler, 2004, Zizek, 2002, 2004). Undoubtedly, the creation of a state of exception increased calls for tougher border security and led to the implementation of a new 700 mile US-Mexico border wall and a rise in the number Border Patrol agents from 11,156 in 2005 to 20,119 in 2011 (Correa, 2013). While it has been resisted by many of those living along its path (Haddal et al, 2009), the DHS was able to use their considerable power to move, with force if necessary, those who opposed it. Correa (2013) collected data from residents in Cameron County, Texas, who had lost parts of their land or been forced to move with the implementation of the barrier. Resident Debra Langley described her mixed feelings in being forced to lose a substantial part of her farm due to the new border wall. While not wanting to move, Debra classified herself as a patriot and referred back to the days after 9/11 where George W. Bush said: ‘Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists’ (Bush, 2001). This sentiment has allow ed for the DHS to implement many of their expansive border measures such as drones, watchtowers and sensors with limited opposition as people are unwilling to question immigration and border policies for fear of coming across as unpatriotic. Considering the creation of a state of exception and limited opposition to tougher border policing it comes as little surprise that the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act and the National Environment Policy among other environmental laws were waived in favour of constructing the 700 mile fence (Bartholemew, 2008; Correa, 2013). DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff came under a number of criticisms for his role in the implementation of the border wall with The New York Times (2008) saying: ‘To the long list of things the Bush administration is willing to trash in its rush to appease immigration hard-liners, you can now add dozens of important environmental laws and hundreds of thousands of acres of fragile habitat on the southern border.’ The environment has been so adversely affected by the physical barrier of the border wall yet it took until 2009 for the US government to act in trying to asses and restore the damage that has been caused. In criminalising the entire border area, nature was seen simply as part of the border and thus included in the criminalisation process (Nial, 2013). Even with laws being in place and the expected criticisms arriving from pro environmental sections of society, the government still had enough support to move forward with their projects. Collier (Collier, in Correa, 2013) sees the depiction of Mexican immigrants as a threat to the nation by the state and DHS as providing one of the main justifications for the barrier. Equally important is the role of politicians jumping on the immigration bandwagon in their attempts to garner votes during election periods post 9/11 (Correa, 2013); both notions shall be discussed in the remainder of this essay. Politicians US politicians quickly recognised the importance of supporting enhanced security in combatting the war on terror. The focus of attention swiftly turned to the border wall post 9/11 with its effectiveness coming under increased scrutiny. With George W Bush signing the 2006 Secure Fence Act, the impetus was placed on President Obama to follow suit; in 2012 Obama spent $11.7 billion on the wall to secure a number of areas considered at risk (Dwoskin, 2013). The official reason provided by the DHS for building the US Mexico border wall at a cost of $49 billion (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2009) was to stop unwanted migration. However, records since its construction display no conclusive reduction in illegal migration, while in contrast, migrant deaths, incarceration and excessive costs have rapidly increased. Nail (2013:113) describes the barrier as ‘a wall that was built to stop illegal migration, and has objectively failed to do so, yet continues to receive funding and political support regardless.’ While the potential backlash of scaling back the wall discourages many politicians from criticising it, providing support for greater security measures rarely sees a backlash from politicians or the general public. A method of justification discussed previously was depicting Mexican immigrants the greatest threat to America, we shall now discuss how this has developed post 9/11. Migrants The rhetoric of some politicians has undeniably resulted in some US citizens’ xenophobic fears of Muslims shifting towards the US-Mexico border, as it is presented as the new biggest terrorist threat to America (Correa, 2013). The Californian Congress representative Duncan Hunter and Senator John Cornyn provide two examples of high profile politicians calling for greater surveillance and military presence at the border citing terrorism as their rationale (Benett, 2005; Eaton, 2010). This portrayal of the US-Mexico border as a hub of international terrorism allows for the continued justification of militarising border regions in order to ‘protect’ America (Inda, 2006). Although illegal immigrants have been classified as ‘new’ security threats (Andreas, 2003), it is incorrect to believe that viewing them as national security concerns is a new phenomenon (Adamson, 2006). Long before 9/11, migration had been a focus of concern for America going back to th e Cold War when borders began to be far more closely scrutinised. This scrutiny rose significantly post 9/11 with a prominent reason being that securing and maintaining your border are, ‘arguably necessary preconditions for the maintenance of state security in other areas’ (Adamson, 2006:176). While it was thought that the end of the Cold War would signal a reduction in militarised borders (Mearsheimer, 1990), this has not been the case with the US Mexico border post 9/11 where in order to secure and maintain the border, we have seen a spike in amount of military apparatus used as a method of policing. Alongside this, there has been the merging of predominantly geopolitical intelligence work and domestic law enforcement work with the Pentagon taking a far more active role in matters of border enforcement (Andreas, 2003). This has resulted in surveillance of immigrants within the US increasing, especially since discourse on the ‘enemy within’ has risen. Interior policing has also expanded rapidly with 359,000 internal removals made in 2008, up from 180,000 in 2001 (Coleman, 2007). While this would appear to signal more is being done, we can look the role of private companies in operating the US Mexico border and see this simply as the circulation of illegal imm igrants. Politicians classify the border and especially the border wall as being in place to stop illegal migration yet the US government has hired private companies to secure the border. Boeing Corporation, G4S and Wackenhut are three such companies, all of whom, as private companies aim to generate the greatest amount of profit and thus not necessarily stop all illegal migration which would destroy their market (Nial, 2013). This circulation of illegal migrants enables the companies to maximise their profits and allows politicians to utilise the figures from arrests and illegal migrants entering the country to justify the increased levels of policing on the border (Norrell, 2007). Conclusion Looking at the history of policing on the US-Mexico border there have been notable changes since the war on terror began. Correa (2013) notes there has been a level of racial anxiety around the border since the 1920’s (resulting from the simple use/ definition of a border as keeping the enemy out), which has now culminated in the border existing in a ‘permanent state of racial emergency’ (Michaelsen, 2005: 89). The war on terrors’ main impact was the subsequent creation of the quasi- military DHS who facilitated the rapid militarisation of regions around the border, much to the detriment of the region’s nature and human population. Alongside this, it has legitimised groups such as The Minutemen who patrol the border stopping illegal immigrants attempting to cross (Marinucci and Martin, 2005). Considering there are high profile politicians such as John McCain boasting of making the US-Mexico border into ‘the most militarized border since the fal l of the Berlin Wall,’ (McCain, 2013), it appears there will be no subside in the levels of border policing. For any change to occur, the socio-historical construction of the US Mexico border as a violent and threatening area must subside (Correa, 2013). Bibliography Accenture. (2004). US DHS to develop and implement US VISIT program at air, land and sea ports of. Retrieved March 4, 2014, from Accenture. Adamson, F. B. (2006). Crossing Borders: International Migration and National Security. International Security, 31(1), 165-199. Agamben, G. (1998). Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. (D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.) Meridian. Agamben, G. (2000). Means Without End: Notes of Politics. (V. Binetti, C. Casarino, Trans.) University of Minnesota Press. Agamben, G. (2004). No To Bio-Political Tattooing. Paris: Le Monde Diplomatique. Agamben, G. (2005). State of Exception. (K. Attell, Trans.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Amoore, L. (2006). Biometric borders: Governing mobilities in the war on terror. Political Geography, 336-351. Andreas, P. (2003). Re-Drawing the Line, Borders and Security in the 21st Century. International Security, 28(2), 78-111. Bartholemew, W. (2008). South Texas groups sue DHS to restore environmental laws along the border. Retrieved February 28, 2014, from Sierra Club Lone Star: http://www.texas.sierraclub.org/ press/newsreleases/20080530.asp Benett, W. (2005, December 30). Hunter touts 700-mile border fence. Retrieved March 3, 2014, from North County Times: http://www.nctimes.com/news/article_aaec1e24-c6bd-549e-bcc1-a8ffe647148f.html Bigo, D. (2002). Security and Immigration: Toward a Critique of the Governmentality of Unease. 27, 63-92. Bush, G. W. (2001, September 20). Address to a joint session of Congress and the American people. Office of the Press Secretary. Washington DC. Butler, J. (2004). Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence. London: New York Press. Coleman, M. (2007). Immigration geopolitics beyond the US–. Antipode, 39(1), 54-76. Correa, J. G. (2013). After 9/11 everything changed: Re-formations of state violence in everyday life on the US-Mexico border. Cultural Dynamics, 25(1), 99-119. Dwoskin, E. (2013, March 13). Sealing the U.S. Border Would Cost an Additional $28 Billion a Year. Retrieved February 26, 2014, from Bloomberg Business Week: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-13/the-price-tag-for-sealing-the-u-dot-s-dot-border-isnt-pretty Eaton, T. (2010, March 18). Texas senators ask Obama to help prevent border violence Cornyn, Hutchisonwant Obama to meet them at U.S.-Mexico border. Retrieved March 3, 2014, from Austin American-Statesman: http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/texas-senators-ask-obama-to-help-pre-vent-border-383990.html Editorial. (2008, April 3). Michael Chertoff’s Insult. Retrieved February 28, 2014, from New York Times. Foucault, M. (1976). The History of Sexuality (Vol. 1). Gaskill, M. (2011, August 2). United States border fence threatens wildlife. Retrieved March 2, 2014, from Nature: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110802/full/news.2011.452.html Haddal, C., Kim, Y., Garcia, M. (2009, March). Border security: barriers along the U.S. international border. Congressional Research Service report for Congress. RL 33659. Home Office, U. B. (2013). Enrolling Your Biometric Information. Retrieved January 25, 2014, from Home Office, UK Border Agency: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas-immigration/studying/adult-students/applying-inside-uk/biometric/ Inda, J. (2006). Border prophylaxis: technology, illegality and the government of immigration. Cultural Dynamics, 18(2), 115-138. Kestelyn, J. (2002). For want of a nail. Intelligent Enterprise, 5(7), 8. Marinucci, C., Martin, M. (2005, April 29). Governor endorses Minutemen on border / He parts with Bush on armed volunteers stopping illegal immigrants in Arizona. Retrieved February 25, 2014, from San Francisco Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Governor-endorses-Minutemen-on-border-He-parts-2685866.php Mearsheimer, J. J. (1990). Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War. International Security, 15(1), 5-56. Michaelsen, S. (2005). Between Japanese American internment and the USA Patriot Act: the bor-derlands and the permanent state of racial exception. A Journal of Chicano Studies, 30(2), 87-111. Nail, T. (2013). The Crossroads of Power: Michel Foucault and the US/Mexico Border Wall. Foucault Studies, 15, 110-128. Norrell, B. (2007, August 25). Privatizing Misery, Deporting and Imprisoning Migrants for Profit: The Hidden Agenda . Retrieved March 2, 2014, from The Narco News : www.narconews.com/Issue46/article2769.html Office, U. G. (2009). Technology Deployment Delays Persist and the Impact of Border . US Government Accountability Office. Pellegrini, F. (2001, September 28). TIME/CNN Poll: Americans Give Bush a Big Thumbs-Up. Retrieved February 26, 2014, from Time U.S.: http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,176815,00.html Rana, J., Rosas, G. (2006). Managing Crisis Post 9/11 Policing and Empire. Cultural Dynamics, 18(219), 218-234. Salter, M. (2004). Passports, Mobility, and Security: How Smart Can the Border Be? Policy in International Studies, 5(1), 71-91. Schildkraut, D. (2002, September). The More Things Change American Identity and Mass and Elite Responses to 9/11. Political Psychology, 23(3), 511-535. UK Border Agency. (2013). Retrieved March 4, 2014, from Enrolling your Biometric Information: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/visas-immigration/working/tier2/ministerofreligion/applying/biometric/ Zizek, S. (2002). Welcome to the Desert of the Real! Five Essays on 11 September and Related Dates. London and New York: Verso. Zizek, S. (2004). Iraq: The Borrowed Kettle. London and New York: Verso. 1

Keynesian and Classical economics

INTRODUCTION:The general theory by Maynard Keynes states that the level of employment is determined by the marginal efficiency of capital, marginal propensity to consume and the real interest rates, he also the level of output and employment is determined by aggregate demand and that the aggregate demand can be increased through an increase in government expenditure.Keynes therefore advocated for government intervention in steering the economy while the classical economist argued that the government should not interfere with the running of the economy, on unemployment according to Keynes theory this problem could be resolved by the use of government policies, the two theorists differ in the causes and the solutions of unemployment, to the classical economists unemployment is caused by excess supply which is caused by high wage rates, high wage rates means low demand and therefore this causes unemployment, therefore the Classical economist believe that the economy should be left to ad just itself until an equilibrium is reached at full employment.Says law was developed by Jean Say who was a French businessman, according to this theory there cannot be demand without supply, according to this law a recession which is characterized by high unemployment is not caused by low demand or lack of money, however an increase in money supply will result to inflation. The Say’s law therefore clearly identifies the difference between the Keynes theory and classical economists in their explanation of the economy.Classical Economists and Say’s law:Classical economist supports Say’s law that supply causes demand and that there is never over supply, the Law states that people will supply things to the economy so that they can get money to buy other goods in the economy that are of the same value they have supplied. This is in line with the classical economists who argue that money does exist in an economy and that money will flow in the economy and this flow o f money flows from the businesses to the people through paying jobs.The classical economist states that the price level is changed by the level of money supply, also that the amount of supply will always be at full employment such that producers will not change the level of supply but will adjust the price levels to achieve the required demand level, therefore because supply creates its own demand then in the long run the economy will be at equilibrium and this means very low or no unemployment.According to the Says law the classical economist therefore defined the model of the economy as follows P X Q = M X V, where P is the price level, Q is the quantity of goods sold, M is the money supply and V is the velocity of money flow. As the level of money supply increases assuming that the level of money supply is constant then the price or the quantity of goods sold will increase. If on the other hand the money supply increases and assuming that the velocity level remains constant then the price level or the quantity demanded will rise, therefore our outcome for the model means that an increase in money supply is inflationally and that an increase in the velocity of money flow will lead to economic development.Keynes Theory and Say’s law:Keynesians dismisses Says law as a false statement, he argues that supply and demand should be separately analyzed, on supply Keynesians says that supply generates income, people will then consume this income, the largest portion of income goes to consumption while the rest is saved, they analyzed the consumption levels of the income in terms of marginal propensity to consume which will rise as the level of income rises.The Keynesian economist therefore considered the model of the economy as Y = C + I + (X-M) where Y is income, C is consumption, I is the investment X is exports and M is imports. The model is further analyzed as C = (a + b Y) where a is the autonomous income level, b is the marginal propensity to consume and Y is the income level.Conclusion:We can conclude that the Says law is the major difference between the Keynes theory and the classical economists, the classical economist support the Says law and also advocate for a free market economy while Keynes argues that the government can solve the problem of unemployment in an economy through an increase in spending to increase the aggregate demand that results to lower unemployment levels.References:Alan Coddington (2003) Keynesian Economics: The First Principles, Rout ledge publishers, US  Alfred William (1991) The Classical Economists and Economic Policy, University of Michigan press, Michigan  George Douglas (1967) Macro-economic Theory: A Mathematical Treatment, Macmillan publishers, US  Steven Kate’s (2003) Two Hundred Years of Say's Law: Essays on Economic Theory's Most Controversial Principle, Edward Elgar Publishing, US  John Fender (1981) Understanding Keynes: An Analysis of the General Theory, Wiley publishers, US

Knowledge is power Essay

â€Å"A man without knowledge is like an idol† –Nidhi So knowledge is life and it gives power to human being which makes him different from the other living organism Knowledge according to Oxford dictionary is ‘’Facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject’’ â€Å"No thief, however skillful, can rob one of knowledge, and that is why knowledge is the best and safest treasure to acquire.† ― L. Frank Baum. The Lost Princess of Oz, so the greatest treasure of life is knowledge It is only by knowledge we can discern between right and wrong. If an animal kill a human being we say it’s because it has no knowledge but if a human being kills a human being then he or she is punished as human being has the knowledge that he should not kill other human beings Abhimanyu was the son of Arjuna and Subhadra. Subhadra was the sister of Sri Krishna. He use to tell her of the war techniques once when Abhimanyu was still in th e womb. He was telling her of how to break the challenges of chakra-vyuha but she dozed off but While Subhadra dozed off, Abhimanyu continued to carefully follow Sri Krishna’s narrative of the Chakra-vyuha. But, after talking for some time and not receiving any response from Subhadra, Sri Krishna realised that she was savouring a sweet nap. Sri Krishna, who had at that time come up to the seventh step of the Chakra-vyuha, gave up his narration and returned with Subhadra to the palace. The unfortunate Abhimanyu could never obtain the technique of breaking all the circles in the chakra-vyuha, but whatever he had heard Sri Krishna say, he carefully preserved in his memory. He grew up to be a brave, handsome young man. Many years later, during the Mahabharata war at Kurukshetra, the Kauravas set up a Chakra-vyuha and challenged the Pandavas to come forward and break it. However, only Arjuna knew the technique of doing so but he was fighting elsewhere. At that stage, to save the honour of the Pandavas, Abhimanyu came forward and offered his services for the task of breaking the chakra-vyuha. Despite his incomplete knowledge of the technique he entered the grid and overcame one circle after another until he came to the seventh one, the breaking of which he had no knowledge. Brave and ambitious he was but in vain as he had no knowledge. By this we can come to the conclusion that knowledge is power and half  knowledge can be dangerous We have to be careful in this world when we live as we read about Abhimanyu there are many people with this half knowledge and it can be very dangerous that even it can put our life in risk Mahatma Gandhi says of â€Å"Seven Deadly Sins and one among that is Knowledge without character Man has to spend his life to acquire knowledge but it should be to save the world and not to destroy it as for example nuclear energy is good for man use but if it is used for war it can end ruin the whole world in frac tion of seconds, as the dropping of nuclear bomb during second world war has its pain even today in Hiroshima and Nagasaki Knowledge plays an important role in all spheres of human life and activity. It is a powerful factor which helps man to attain success, power and position in life. There is no doubt that physical strength and money are instruments of power. A man who is physically strong or whose purse is full commands power over others but the power of knowledge is still greater. Knowledge directs his actions and enables him to find the difference between right and wrong, good and bad. It helps him overcome his weakness and faults and face dangers and difficulties with courage and confidence. It gives him mental, moral and spiritual advancement. Besides this, it is through knowledge that man has gained mastery over nature. Man is physically weaker than many animals. He cannot run fast as fast as a panther. He cannot see as far as an eagle can. His sense of smell is weaker than that of a dog. He cannot carry as heavy loads as some beasts of burden do. He cannot fight tigers and lions with his bare hands. Yet he has managed to become the most powerful creature on earth. His po wer comes from knowledge. Those who have wide-range of knowledge and experience can capture power and influence. The possession of knowledge gives them a distinct advantage over the semi educated people. Half knowledge is regarded as ‘the curse of god’ and also it is worse than ignorance. He explored land, water and space by virtue of his knowledge. Man has made progress in all fields starting from science, technology to arts etc. Knowledge gave man the feeling of strength and power. Knowledge develops human faculties. It leads to the excellence of the mind. It enables one to give sound judgment. Education and knowledge are desirable for democracy. We should try to spread the knowledge base in all fields in the masses. In Indian rural scene, the knowledge levels about family, school education, problems of woman. child rearing and other social issues are very  poor. Illiteracy and social backwardness combine to put the rural masses at the receiving end. Lack of knowledge leads to poverty and absence of methods of productivity and economic prosperity. This vicious cycle continues. Restraint, tolerance, understanding and capacity to manage affairs come with knowledge. If knowledge is imparted to our rural children, youth, women and men, they would emerge as the major social power. There is no end to the gaining of knowledge, It is only the foolish man who thinks he knows everything. Modern knowledge is very intricate and wide is scope The soldier, the man of the sword, thought he was the master; but he was really in the hands of the priest, the man of the pen. The pen was mightier than the sword. It was the same in ancient India. The learned Brahmins were for ages the real rulers of Indian States. They dominated the lower, ignorant castes; and their knowledge enabled them to manage the Rajas and Maharajas. Knowledge is not the property of the rich. No class has its monopoly over it. Anyone who perseveres in this endeavour may excel the others. It is not a thing to be bought with riches. Like wealth or beauty, it does not drop in value by time. Knowledge is power because all the power in the world owes to it. The power of knowledge has proved its supremacy over everything. As a whole, nothing benefited the mankind more than knowledge. A giant ship engine failed. The ship’s owners tried one expert after another, but none of them could figure but how to fix the engine. Then they brought in an old man who had been fixing ships since he was a young. He carried a large bag of tools with him, and when he arrived, he immediately went to work. He inspected the engine very carefully, top to bottom. Two of the ship’s owners were there, watching this man, hoping he would know what to do. After looking things over, the old man reached into his bag and pulled out a small hammer. He gently tapped something. Instantly, the engine lurched into life. He carefully put his hammer away. The engine was fixed! A week later, the owners received a bill from the old man for ten thousand dollars. â€Å"What?!† the owners exclaimed. â€Å"He hardly did anything!† So they wrote the old man a note saying, â€Å"Please send us an itemized bill.† The man sent a bill that read: Tapping with a hammer†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. $ 2.00 Knowing where to tap†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.. $ 9,998.00 Effort is important, but knowing where to make an effort makes all the difference!

Analysis Of Martin Luther King Jr s Letter From...

Daniela Reynoso October 26, 2014 Government I Iverson Fall 2014 Midterm Throughout history, there have been many significant documents and speeches that enlighten and inform us on what is and was happening during those times. Abraham Lincoln’s speech, The Perpetuation of our Political Institutions, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s Letter from Birmingham Jail are two important pieces of history. In Lincoln’s speech he speaks about the dangers of slavery in the United States and warned everybody that people who disrespected American laws could destroy the United States. On the other hand, Martin Luther King Jr. defended the strategy of nonviolent resistance to racism, and argued that people have a moral responsibility to break unjust laws. Based on these facts, Martin Luther King Jr does not agree with Lincoln’s counsel. In Lincoln’s Speech he is developing on the idea that we are a democratic nation and we have to survive through all time because if we do not, we will not be a democracy anymore. It is either we stay demo cratic or commit suicide because there is no point in living if we are not democratic. Then, Lincoln continues to say that to avoid committing suicide (or to stay democratic) we have to follow all of our laws. We cannot let passion get in our way like it has before. For example, wanting more money or the development leading to slavery. We have to be reasonable, cold, and obey all the rules. Even though Lincoln does believe that there are bad and good laws,Show MoreRelatedAnalysis of Martin Luther King Jr.s Letter from Birmingham Jail962 Words   |  4 Pagesintangible, it is still necessary. Some forms of inspiration come as passionate love while others appeal as injustice. Martin Luther King Jr.s Letter from Birmingham Jail was a response to A Call for Unity by eight white clergymen. His inspiration for writing the letter was the clergymens unjust proposals and the letter allowed him to present his rebuttal. Martin Luther King Jr. effectively crafted his counter argument by first directly addressing his audience, the clergymen, and then using logosRead MoreSociological Analysis of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail1214 Words   |  5 Pagesï » ¿ Sociological Analysis of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail Abstract The paper analyses Martin Luther King, Jr.’s â€Å"Letter from a Birmingham Jail† from a sociological point of view and shows how three major theories (structural functionalism, social conflict, and symbolic interactionism) are treated in the letter. The paper shows different appreciation of King’s ideas and works by his contemporaries and modern people. It also explores the concepts of â€Å"nonviolentRead MoreAnalysis of Martin Luther King Jr. ´s Letter From Birmingham Jail771 Words   |  3 Pagesagainst the prejudice that they have to face, accomplish justice that every single one of them are fighting for. Dr. Martin Luther King, a leader of the protest against prejudice was able to pursue the rights for African American people. However eight of his fellow clergymen criticized his procedure to protest, but they still supported him. In the Letter from Birmingham Jail, King wanted to encourage others to rebel against the wrong, even if it is not wise it is right, he was optimistic and yetRead MoreAnalysis Of Martin Luther King Jr. s Letter From Birmingham Jail1399 Words   |  6 Pagesmade. For people who are oppressed, what they see as the greater good may be vastly different from the views of those who are unoppressed. Martin Luther King Jr. s, Letter from Birmingham Jail illustrates how a seemingly innocent attempt at gaining one s rights can be seen as controversial and wrong by others. King was put into jail because of the peaceful protests he led. To those who shared King s method of thought, nonviolence would have been the way to maximize the gains in society by allowingRead MoreAnalysis Of Martin Luther King Jr.s Letter From A Birmingham Jail1493 Words   |  6 Pageswould have disagreed with this assertion, and died in part to keep this idea from spreading. Socrates was sentenced to death by an Athenian court, though the punishment did not fit the crimes he was accused of. We assume that any knowingly innocent person would have escaped this sentence if given the opportunity and support to do so, yet Socrates refused to and died soon after. Over 2,000 years later, Martin Luther King is also imprisoned on petty crimes and sees his actions in line with SocratesRead MoreAnalysis Of Martin Luther King Jr. s Letter From Birmingham Jail1794 Words   |  8 PagesMartin Luther King Jr. s 1963 Letter from Birmingham Jail, a rhetorical masterpiece, was written in response to eight clergymen’s statements condemning his nonviolent direct actions. He defends the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights nonviolent, direct action against individuals, institutions, and laws that look the other way while unjust racial prejudice against African Americans runs rampant in Birmingham. Using three main appeals, Ethos, Pathos, Logos, Dr. King communicates the struggleRead MoreAnalysis Of Martin Luther King Jr. s Letter From Birmingham Jail1251 Words   |  6 Pages â€Å"A just law is a man-made code that square s with the moral law, or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.† (3) In 1963 in this particular statement made by Martin Luther King Jr. in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, he explained how man-made (white men) laws were created to persecute the black race, and how it is his duty to fight against such laws. He was the one who articulated the progressive hope of many African Americans along with other â€Å"colored†Read MoreRhetorical Analysis Of Martin Luther King Jr s Letter From Birmingham Jail1499 Words   |  6 Pagescritically we become acquainted with these concepts therefore become better writers ourselves. While learning about rhetorical writing and composition we have analyzed Billy Collins â€Å" Commencement Address at Choate- Rosemary Hall† , Martin Luther King Jr’s â€Å"letter from Birmingham Jail† and Lloyd Bitzer’s essay on â€Å"Rhetorical Situation†. In this paper I will analyze and make connections between the concepts of audience, genre and rhetorical situation in connection to the fore-mentioned readings. In doingRead MoreRhetorical Analysis Of Martin Luther King Jr s Letter From Birmingham Jail1831 Words   |  8 Pageseffective when all three rhetorical appeals, Logos, Pathos, and Ethos, come together to form an indisputable argument. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr and Malcolm X are two of the most influential figures of the past few decades; similarly, their work is summarized as some of the most persuasive and controversial of all time. The audience of both of their pieces, â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail† and â€Å"The Ballot or the Bullet† include oppressed African Americans and the white oppressors themselves. Each man takesRead MoreRhetorical Analysis Of Martin Luther King Jr. s Letter From A Birmingham Jail873 Words   |  4 PagesAfter criticism from eight Alabama clergymen for his nonviolent demonstrations, Martin Luther King Jr. was compelled to enlighten them on the current issues plaguing the African American community. During his confinement in a Birmingham jail, King wrote Letter from a Birmingham Jail to address most of the clergymen s concerns about his protest. In his letter, King emphasized why his actions were not unwise or untimely and explained that now was the perfect moment to act. His studies and sermons