Monday, December 30, 2019

What Was French Indochina

French Indochina was the collective name for the French colonial regions of Southeast Asia from colonization in 1887 to  independence and the subsequent Vietnam Wars of the mid-1900s. During the colonial era, French Indochina was made up of Cochin-China, Annam, Cambodia, Tonkin, Kwangchowan, and Laos. Today, the same region is divided into the nations of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. While much war and civil unrest tainted much of their early histories, these nations are faring far better since their French occupation ended over 70 years ago. Early Exploitation and Colonization Although the French and Vietnam relationship may have started as early as the 17th century with missionary voyages, the French took power in the area and established a federation called French Indochina in 1887. They designated the area as a colonie dexploitation, or in the more polite English translation, a colony of economic interests. High taxes on local consumption of goods like salt, opium, and rice alcohol filled the coffers of the French colonial government, with just those three items comprising 44% of the governments budget by 1920. With the local populations wealth almost tapped out, the French began in the 1930s to turn to exploiting the areas natural resources instead. What is now Vietnam became a rich source of zinc, tin, and coal as well as cash crops such as rice, rubber, coffee, and tea. Cambodia supplied pepper, rubber, and rice; Laos, however, had no valuable mines and was used only for low-level timber harvesting. The availability of plentiful, high-quality rubber led to the establishment of famous French tire companies such as Michelin. France even invested in industrialization in Vietnam, building factories to produce cigarettes, alcohol, and textiles for export. Japanese Invasion During the Second World War The Japanese Empire invaded French Indochina in 1941 and the Nazi-allied French Vichy government handed over Indochina to Japan. During their occupation, some Japanese military officials encouraged nationalism and independence movements in the region. However, the military higher-ups and the home government in Tokyo intended to keep Indochina as a valuable source of such necessities as tin, coal, rubber, and rice. As it turns out, instead of liberating these rapidly forming independent nations, the Japanese instead decided to add them to their so-called Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. It soon became obvious to most Indochinese citizens that the Japanese intended to exploit them and their land just as ruthlessly as the French had done. This sparked the creation of a new guerrilla fighting force, the League for the Independence of Vietnam or Viet Nam Doc Lap Dong Minh Hoi—usually called Viet Minh for short. The Viet Minh fought against the Japanese occupation, uniting peasant rebels with urban nationalists into a communist-tinged independence movement. End of World War II and Indochinese Liberation When the Second World War ended, France expected the other Allied Powers to return its Indochinese colonies to its control, but the people of Indochina had different ideas.   They expected to be granted independence, and this difference of opinion led to the First Indochina War and the  Vietnam War. In 1954, the Vietnamese under Ho Chi Minh defeated the French at the decisive Battle of Dien Bien Phu, and the French gave up their claims to the former French Indochina through the Geneva Accord of 1954.   However, the Americans feared that Ho Chi Minh would add Vietnam to the communist bloc, so they entered the war that the French had abandoned. After two additional decades of fighting, the North Vietnamese prevailed and Vietnam became an independent communist country. The peace also recognized the independent nations of Cambodia and Laos  in Southeast Asia. Sources and Further Reading Cooper, Nikki. France in Indochina: Colonial Encounters. New York: Berg, 2001.Evans, Martin, ed. Empire and Culture: The French Experience, 1830-1940.  Basinstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.  Jennings, Eric T. Imperial Heights: Dalat and the Making and Undoing of French Indochina. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011.

Sunday, December 22, 2019

Totalitarian Leaders Stalin, Marx, and Mustapha Mond Essay

In the book Brave New World, the World Controllers control every aspect of life from the color the citizens wear to the job that is assigned to each person. This is an example of a totalitarian government. The word Totalitarian is defined as â€Å"An adjective of or having to do with a government controlled by one political group which suppress all opposition, often with force, and which controls many aspects of people’s lives. A totalitarian government usually regulates what goods are produced by industry, what radio and television programs are broadcast, what books people read, and other severe controls on private life† (Barnhart 2210). There are many practices or philosophies of totalitarian rulers such as no freedom of religion, speech,†¦show more content†¦Stalin like all rulers wanted and needed to gain the trust of the people. Stalin achieved gaining the trust of the people by creating and enhancing the schools, homes, and hospitals (Caulkins 90). B ut there was a down side to the education of the children. This helped the literacy rate rise from nothing to equal to the rate of any western country. The children were taught to read but they did not learn to think independently. Stalin’s rule helped the Soviet Union. Under Stalin the territorial boundaries expanded (Byers 393). Stalin also had to uphold his regime; if you were someone in power like a factory owner, chief of the secret police, or a party official, you were given new cars, clothes and homes to name a few (Caulkins 92). The bureaucracy got the majority of the privileges that no other person could get. But Stalin never let them forget that what he gave he could also take away (Caulkins 92). Though Stalin gave to the people of the Soviet Union, He also ruled using fear. â€Å"Civilian crimes, such as robbery or killing your wife in a fit of rage, were dealt with in an orderly and just fashion. But â€Å"crimes against the State,† no matter how trivi al, carried the threat of death.† (Caulkins 93) Stalin improved the condition of the Soviet Union so well that writers and reporters tried to out praise each other when writing about

Saturday, December 14, 2019

When termination of pregnancy is permissible Free Essays

The debate about termination of pregnancies has been raging for a long time and it has been pitting the pro abortionists who believe that abortion is permissible under certain circumstances and the anti abortionists who believe that abortion is not permissible under any circumstance. From a logical perspective, the pro abortionists seem to be sensible because there are certain situations where abortion must be carried out. There are some situations where abortion is moral and ethical meaning that it is permissible. We will write a custom essay sample on When termination of pregnancy is permissible or any similar topic only for you Order Now One of the situations where abortion is permissible is when abortion is permissible is when the life of the mother is in danger. When the life of the mother is in danger, do you save the mother or the child?. This situation can be supported by the ethical theory of utilitarianism. This theory states that any act is ethical and moral if it is done to benefit the larger percentage of the society and an act is unethical if it is done to the detriment of a larger percentage of the society. It this theory is brought into the issue of pregnancy it is easy to understand why termination of pregnancy is permissible in case the life of the mother is at risk. The question that one needs to ask is; who between the child and the mother is more beneficial to the society? The mother could be a woman who has some other children who need to be taken care of. The mother could be a breadwinner in her family. This mother could be a public servant and her demise would affect the services she used to render to the nation. The mother is a relative and a friend to many people and her demise would affect them emotionally. However, this child does not have as much value to the society as the mother meaning that the life of the child is not as important as that of the mother (Sedgh 2007). Therefore , saving the life of the mother, from a utilitarian point of view is more beneficial to the society more than saving the life of the child. Saving the life of the child while letting the mother to die is not ethical because this will present a problem for the child who will have to grow without motherly care and love while the society will place an extra burden to the society which will have to bring up a child in the absence of the mother. Therefore, in case the life of the mother is threatened by a pregnancy, then termination of such a pregnancy is permissible and supported by the ethical theory of utilitarianism. Another instance under which abortion is permissible is when a woman becomes pregnant after an incident of rape. Though pregnancies arising from rape are rare it is important to note that some pregnancies occur after incidences of rape. Why is pregnancy that arises after an incidence of rape permissible? To start with, rape is a tragic act that violates the body of a woman and also affects her mental health a great deal. Psychiatrist s argue that the mental health of the woman can be safeguarded if a pregnancy arising from such tragic acts such as rape is terminated. From a legal point of view, it is argued that rape is an act of violation, a grave injustice meaning that it is unjust to force such a woman to carry a pregnancy arising from rape to viability. The pregnancy will keep reminding the woman of the violence committed against her and this would last for nine months of the pregnancy and whenever she sees the child. This would make the woman live with a lot of mental anguish. From a utilitarian perspective, it is quite ethical and moral to terminate this pregnancy because the mental health of the woman is of a higher value than the life of the fetus. From a humanitarian perspective, the fetus is also considered an aggressor against the integrity and the personal life of the woman and it is defensible and permissible to terminate the pregnancy as a way of defending the personal and human values of the woman because these values are robbed of her by the violent act of rape. Those opposed to abortion argue that termination of a pregnancy arising after an incident of rape is not permissible because that pregnancy can avoided according to these anti abortion activists, conception does not occur immediately after sexual intercourse meaning that pregnancy can be avoided in all instances of rape especially if the victim receives medical treatment immediately after the attack to remove the male semen from the uterus to ensure that fertilization does not take place. However these people fail to realize that rape is a traumatizing act that destabilizes the mental state of a victim meaning that making decisions such as visiting a medical center for immediate treatment may not be easy for the victims. It is good to avoid the pregnancy by seeking instant medical help but in case the pregnancy occurs then it is very permissible to terminate it to safeguard the mental health of the mother. There are other anti abortionists who argue that the unborn children resulting from rape have the right to live because they are as innocent as the mother. They claim that the rapist is the aggressor and not the unborn, but it is important to note that the child will always remind the woman of the violent action during the entire pregnancy and even after the birth of the child. The mother may not be able to give utmost love and care to the child because the child is unwanted and brings traumatic memories to the mother. This means that relieving the mental suffering of the mother is more important than the right to live of the fetus meaning that is ethically permissible to terminate a pregnancy arising from an incident of rape (Finer, 2000). The third instance where termination of a pregnancy is permissible is a situation where a woman gets pregnant as a result of incest. However, this situation depends with the nature of incest because if the woman willingly participates in an incestuous intercourse, then termination of such a pregnancy is not permissible. However, if the woman was forced by the second party to participate in an incestuous intercourse against her will, then a pregnancy arising out of such a situation can be terminated without moral and ethical questions being raised. This is because there are very few differences between a forced incestuous intercourse and rape. Both of them violate the dignity and the mental stability of the woman and a child arising out of such an intercourse is usually an aggressor towards the woman. The child will forever be a reminder to the woman of that degrading incident that violated her dignity and self worth and this will affect the mental health of the woman for a long time. Just like in rape where the pregnancy is terminated to safeguard the mental health of the woman, a pregnancy arising out of a forced incestuous intercourse can be terminated because the mental health of the woman is more important than the value of life of an unborn fetus, who in the first place is an unwanted child who will never get enough motherly love, care and attention from the mother. The fourth circumstance may appear controversial but a deeper look into the argument will expose the logic. According to some pro abortionists, women can be forced to carry a pregnancy to viability just because it is unethical to terminate that pregnancy but the question that arises is; is that woman ready to bring up the child. The woman may have engaged in a sexual activity with a man after mutual consent but gets pregnant accidentally, meaning that she wasn’t ready for the pregnancy. This kind of a pregnancy is called an unwanted pregnancy. In most cases, when women give birth after carrying an unwanted pregnancy to viability, they are never able to give their children the relevant motherly love, care and attention and they usually neglect these children meaning that they are never able to enjoy quality life. Some of these women especially in the third world countries throw the children away after birth or when they are very young and these children usually become street children. The big question that arises is; which is more ethical between giving birth to an unwanted child then let the child to suffer for their entire life or terminating an unwanted pregnancy before the fetus becomes a human being. The later seems to be more ethical because it prevents the lifetime suffering of an innocent child. This means that if a woman feels that she cannot really take care of the child she is carrying despite her being responsible for its conception, then the termination of such a pregnancy is morally and ethically permissible. Moreover, women have an ethical claim to their body meaning that thy have bodily autonomy which should be regarded as integral to the conception of an ethical and free society that embraces democracy. This autonomy is an ethical necessity meaning that no one should force a woman under any circumstance to carry a pregnancy to viability (Bankole,1998). There are some cases where women are forced to terminate pregnancies because of their careers. Is this termination of pregnancy defensible and permissible? When a woman really knows that she cannot be a good mother and abort the child they are carrying, they are making the most ethical decision ever because it would be quite unethical to give birth to a child one cannot care for. This means that in such a situation, abortion is permissible. Some of the instances described above may appear controversial especially to those who approach the debate with a closed mind. While religious doctrines and values are not inferior to the secular approach, it is important to note that religious values cannot be a background for tenets that apply to all citizens. List of references Bankole, A. 1998, Reasons Why Women Have Induced Abortions: Evidence from 27 Countries. International Family Planning Perspectives, 24 (3), 117–127 and 152. Retrieved 2006-01-18. Finer, L. 2005, Reasons U. S. women have abortions: quantative and qualitative perspectives. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 37 (3), 110–118. Retrieved 2006-01-18. Sedgh, G, 2007, â€Å"Legal abortion worldwide: incidence and recent trends†. Int Fam Plan Perspect 33 (3): 106–16. World Health Organization. 2004, â€Å"Unsafe abortion: global and regional estimates of unsafe abortion and associated mortality in 2000†. Retrieved 2009-03-22. How to cite When termination of pregnancy is permissible, Papers

Friday, December 6, 2019

Like Water for Chocolate free essay sample

The movie and book Like Water for Chocolate have a lot of comparisons but also dramatized scenes. Even though both movie and book give the same theme they also have different styles to approaching the theme. With different approaches to the moral of the story they differentiate in how they get it across to the viewer. Food in this story shows how Tita deals with her happiness and sadness. She makes people depressed with a wedding cake and makes people hot and love when she makes quail with rose pedals. Food is something that people can express emotion no matter what they make. In the movie Like Water for Chocolate the beginning of the movie it starts out being told by a narrator. Then it goes into it being told as it happens by Tita. I enjoyed the movie just as much as the book but I did like the dramatic scenes of the movie because it gave the viewers an idea of how things were in this time era more then it does in the book. We will write a custom essay sample on Like Water for Chocolate or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Sometimes a good dramatic movie is worth seeing because you get intricate with it. In the book, the scenes that are dramatized in the movie are not dramatized in the book because it is harder to make something seem bigger than it is while reading it. The book however put things in perspective of when it took place, by naming the chapters after the months that everything was happening unlike the movie where everything clashed together as a whole time line of events. The things you see or think about in a book are not the images that the author wants to you see in perspective but the way you read the words is how you see it. Putting both movie and book in perspective and after reading the book and watching movie I can say I enjoyed both. I do like the movie better however because it did give more dramatic scenes and story line then the book. I like how in the movie Tita was portrayed as this much lovelier woman then her sister who married her boyfriend when she was younger. With this controversy you see much more in the movie then the book in my eyes. In retrospect both show the roles of women and men and how they are supposed to act in the society and family household. Women in the family were to cook, clean and take care of the family while the men were out working, bringing home money for the family. It is hard to see this in both however because Tita’s father died and Pedro you don’t see doing this as much as he probably should in both movie and book. In the book, I can argue that when Tita was little she was in the kitchen with Nacha learning how to cook and prep the food for different occasions. She wanted her sister in there and have fun. â€Å"Tita managed to convince them to join her in watching the dazzling display made by dancing water drops dibbled on a red hot griddle†¦Rosaura was cowering in the corner, stunned by the display. Gertudis, on the other hand, found this game enticing†¦threw herself and showed her rhythm. Rosaura tried to join then†¦Rosaura resisted Tita trying to move her hands closer to the griddle†¦. Tita got spanked for that and was forbidden to let her sisters come in to her world of the kitchen† (Esquirel pg. 8). This whole scene in the book was in the first chapter, where as the scene in the movie was a short intricate of what happened in the kitchen. The scene in the movie was just when they were younger and Tita and Gertudis were throwing water onto the griddle, laughing and having fun. Another scene in the movie and book that are very separate and different is when Tita and Nacha were getting the ingredients for the cake they had to make for her sisters wedding. In the book in the month of February it talks about how Tita and Nacha were making marmalade for the filling of the cake. In this chapter it is talked about how to prepare it, cook it and put it in the cake. â€Å"Nacha and Tita had made several jars of preserves apricot, fig, and camote with pineapple- the month before the wedding†¦ Spared the task of making the marmalade the same day as the cake† (pg. 31). The book then goes on to talk about how to cook the marmalade and then also what Tita and Nacha have to do in order to cook it perfectly and not get burned by the fire. They also talk about how the smell of the aroma fills the kitchen and the smell of the apricots is sweet and revising. In the movie, they show nothing about the marmalade being made or cooked. The only scene in the movie about the preparation of the wedding cake is when Tita and Nacha are prepping the batter for the cake. Tita cries into the cake because she is sad about the wedding, it should have been her being married not making the cake for it. These are only two differences that the movie and book have in comparison to the story. There are many other differences that could be talked about that are major to the story but I like this two the best because they represent Tita’s life and what she did for her family. Many other sections of the book are not portrayed in the movie and in reality we cant get the entire aspect of the life of this family in the movie, like we can get while reading the book. After reading the book and after watching the movie we can kind of get an understanding of how family traditions were really important to these families during this time era especially in other countries. In the Tita’s family the family tradition was that the youngest daughter was to never get married because she would have to take care of her mother until the day she died. That is why Pedro had to marry Rosaura and not Tita; even though he didn’t love her he loved Tita. Sometimes we depict the life of those in other countries as wanting us to be like us because we don’t want to see people in poverty or as being stricter then how they should be. After reading the book and watching this movie the similarities and differences that are depicted throughout the story line. This story line is very dramatic and I like dramatic scenes because it shows more about it then it would if it sometimes it wasn’t over dramatic. I enjoyed the end of the movie better because it showed that Pedro and Tita still loved each other until the end of the movie. They proved that no matter what happens in their life they will wind up being together at the end. They die because of their love affair.