Refute paper Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Refute paper - Article Example It bears emphasis that the title of the piece as well as the timing in which it has come to light is of key importance to the understanding and analysis of the motives behind it. For those that are unfamiliar, Michelle Malkin is a conservative pundit that represents the extreme far right of the Republican Party. As an Asian American woman, she seeks to give a distinct ethnic flavor to a party that has previously been viewed as male, pale, and Yale. As a partisan critic, Malkin makes her money on being a polemic. Regardless of the virtue of the Democratic stance on a particular issue or the honest nature in which the current president makes a decision, Malkin’s readership have come to expect negativity on such topics as this is what helps her to pay the bills and provides such a rabid fan base as she enjoys among extreme elements of the conservative right in the United States. With this in mind, Malkin’s article begins with a snarky headline and image that depicts Presid ent Obama in the attire of the grim reaper. Furthermore, the headline makes a strong allusion to the flap that had earlier enraptured extreme elements of the conservative party regarding Obama’s religious nature. The article is entitled â€Å"Obama’s Layoff Bomb†. ... e will be an imminent layoff bubble which will burst very soon after the election (not surprisingly especially if Barak Obama were to be elected for a second term). Although the article itself expresses the claim of objectivity in the research, it is clear from even a cursory review that no such objectivity is included. Malkin’s rubric centers around the following flawed perceptions of the economy, BLS information, and the strong/innate belief that the Democratic party and liberalism specifically is responsible for nearly all of the ills of current society (Malkin 1). Firstly, with respect to Malkin’s use of BLS data to prove a point, the unfortunate fact of the matter is that the economy of the United States has been and a marked improvement since the second quarter of 2008 in nearly every imaginable financial metric and indicator. This has been proven by increase in new home sales, low inflation rates, the positive affects that QE1,2 have had on economic growth, and t he general decrease in unemployment figures. Although the economy is still decidedly weak, it is shortsighted and narrow-minded to offer up a view that merely because a slight decrease over the past month in the number of job cuts in firms precipitates a coming avalanche of job cuts if/when Barak Obama is re-elected to the office of President of the United States. Furthermore, such an approach does not factor in the cyclical nature of the employment sector within the United States economy. Although figures rise and fall on a host of global, domestic, and regional factors, there remain significant and measurable trends with relation to overall employment and layoff statistics that transcend the presidential election. Although this is no doubt a factor to a certain subset of employers, who wins the

Mid term Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Mid term - Essay Example To address the demonizing of government by those enjoying the fruits of a system created for the good of all people, is similar to the analogy of biting the hand that feeds you. At his inaugural address in 1981, Ronald Reagan stated, â€Å"Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem,† and with that premise began the anti-government sentiment that is still alive today. Not in an anarchical sense, rather a frustration felt among certain people or groups that have determined nothing good coming from the feds. One must take into consideration all of the productive or good aspects of government before branding the leadership in Washington as the evil empire determined to destroy all society. Without the power within our government to implement change or assist the people of the United States in times of need would call for the shallow attempts at placing blame for the woes of the masses; however, the opposite is true. Such legislative authority builds roads, provides health care, supplies clean water, finances entitlements and Social Security payments, without those services and many others our nation would join the statistics of the third-world countries. The Tea Party agenda desires less government and more freedom to control our collective destiny, by lessening the footprint of government, a utopia will emerge in society; nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, to eliminate any major function of government such as Social Security leaving retirement savings to the individual would be catastrophic. Not to mention the security afforded by a strong military and law enforcement that if minimized would jeopardize millions of lives. Freedom, when applied in logical terms, can be achieved in the most restrictive governmental ideology. Our misconception of the U.S.S.R. during the Cold War and prior to the removal of the Berlin Wall was home to millions that went to school, shopped at local stores, and

The role of the Supernatural and Witchcraft in Macbeth Essay Example for Free

The role of the Supernatural and Witchcraft in Macbeth Essay How would an audience in the time if Shakespeare reacts to the role of the Supernatural and Witchcraft in Macbeth? William Shakespeare wrote The Scottish Play to celebrate the Coronation Of James I of England who was also James VI of Scotland. Elizabeth I had just died and common beliefs and prophecies were taking a major part in peoples livelihood. Two imparticular, which were such as the Supernatural and Witchcraft. This was all starting to take place within the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1533 1603) The public were increasingly occupied with speculations and legends of people being called Witches just because they were slightly different in some way or form. In 1564 a law came in force to prevent Witchcraft from taking place. Murder by Witchcraft would become punishable by death, thus acknowledging witches with supernatural powers. It is estimated that in Scotland alone 8,000 so-to-be witches were burned to death between 1564 and 1603. In 1604 an additional law was passed in Scotland, which declared anyone found to be practising Witchcraft should be executed. James I himself became personally involved with Witchcraft. James I then went on to publish work about Witchcraft Demonology in 1597. Although some people rebelled against this persecution, the belief in witches was widespread, and continued to the last execution in the late 17th century. Adding to the hatred of Witchcraft was the fact that the country at that time was Christian. This also gave the country a literal belief in Heaven and Hell so the audience would have been horrified to hear the witches chant. Fair is foul and foul is fair With their religious beliefs in that time, for them this moral reversal will have come as a horrifying shock to hear this being spoken on stage. Scotland was not the only country which Witchcraft took over peoples life. In Salem U.S.A, there were the famous Salem Witch-Trials. It started from to girls accusing someone of being a witch and that person was executed due to this accusation. Soon, others people started accusing others for little disputes and also friends and family were accusing each other and this continued so much most of the villagers were accused and put to death. These trials were so famous and still are, several books were written about this yet the most famous one written by Arthur Miller called The Crucible. They believed that witches could do many things such as create the death of a person, but, it was also believed that they could not murder them. It was also believed that they could sail in a sieve which is shown with the sentence from one of the witches Sail in sieve Ill thither sail, I give thee wind This also shows another power of the witches that they could create any weather that would suit them. When shall we meet again? In thunder, lightening or rain? This does not become different from another sentence in the play until you notice the question mark at the end which could mean that they already know when they are going to meet but the question is what weather would they like to meet in and so one of the witches can create this system. A witch would also have what is called a familiar. These would be such as black cats, frogs and toads or a black bird like a sparrow. These were said to of being given to them from the devil as a link to the underworld. These all caused fascination within the public as seen in Salem but also with royalty with Queen Elizabeth I starting the fascination and James I continuing this onwards. I think that the audience in the theatre would react cautiously to the moral reversal chanted by the witches. The people of that time were mostly Christians it went against their beliefs and so would have been Horrified and shock From the opening scene in the play Shakespeare establishes the true fact that this will be based around witches and the supernatural. Following from this Shakespeare reflects on what they believed witches were able to do. These are such as change the weather; this is reflected by the question that the witches ask. The question they ask each other is in what weather they would like to meet in. When shall we three meet again In thunder, lightning or rain? By adding the question mark, this tells us that they have already decided where and when, but they will purposely choose what weather and by one of the powers that witches were believed to have they will make this weather system arrive for when they have planned to meet. The witches then go on to speak of another quality that they were believed to have and that is a link to the underworld, familiars. Familiars are such as black cats, frogs and toads, sparrows. These are said to be their link to the devil. The witches speak of a grey cat and toad. I come Greymalkin! Paddock Calls The Greymalkin being a grey cat and Paddock a toad. The scene closes with one of the main themes of the play. Fair is foul and foul is fair This is what the witches believe and preach. It means that anything which is good (Fair) is bad (Foul), but if anything is Evil (Foul) to them it is good (Fair). This is a moral reversal and also a paradox of what we believe in the world today. The closing of the scene is where Shakespeare brings Macbeth into the play but does not allow the audience to see him. The audience would now be wondering what kind of a man Macbeth is. Is he a person of the supernatural because the first people to speak about him are the witches, or possibly is he a good man but because of what the witches believe in and will they try and bring his death to him?. In the second scene Shakespeare uses this to establish the fact that there is a battle going on with Scotland and Norway at that time. The audience is then informed via a bloody captain that it was not certain that Scotland would win the battle until Macbeth appears, and the captain quotes For brave Macbeth well he deserves that name The audience are also informed of the bravery of Macbeth and Banquo. From this point Shakespeare also uses dramatic irony, this is used where Macbeth is told that the Thane of Cawdor has been claimed as a traitor to his country and so shall be executed. The reason that this is called irony is that the audience already know that Macbeth will be crowned Thane of Cawdor, but Macbeth is unaware of this. Shakespeare at the beginning of scene three brings in the witches again and proves to everyone that they really are witches and also that they possess the powers that people believed they could possess. Shakespeare also shows how petty, vengeful and impatient that they could be, A sailors wife had chestnuts in her lap, And munched, and munched, and munched-Give me, Quoth I, Aroint thee witch, the rump-fed ronyon cries. Her husbands to Aleppo gone, master o th Tiger. Now that the witches have appeared the audience will now be waiting impatiently for the appearance of Macbeth. The audience know that Macbeth will be appearing soon due to what the witches quoted in the first scene. When Macbeth appears and makes his first speech, he will shock the audience and give an instant impression on the audience. So foul and fair a day I have not seen This could be irony for the future of Macbeth may this be what happens to him on the future, This will shock the audience as this is very similar to what the witches chanted as their main theme and so Macbeth would be associated with the witches and be influenced on their doings. What Macbeth really means by this, is that the weather is foul but it is an air day due to Scotland winning the battle. When the witches are talking to Macbeth and Banquo, Banquo is curious and confused why Macbeth should be concerned when the witches prophet good news to Macbeth. However the witches have seemed to put him in a trance-like state when he is told that he will become king and this brings Banquo into a imagery of clothing and uses this to make the point that Macbeth is in a trance-like rapt. The witches then turn to Banquo and make three claims to him. Lesser than Macbeth, and greater. Not so happy, yet much happier Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none After these claims to Banquo the witches seem to disappear into thin air and Banquo is very suspicious of them unlike Macbeth. Macbeth has deep and dark desires and thinks about Banquos children becoming king as if this could have some threat to Macbeths future. After their first acquaintance with the witches, Angus and Ross appear with news for Macbeth. The news that they have brought to Macbeth is that the Thane of Cawdor has been declared a traitor to Scotland and so he will become Thane of Cawdor himself. This is ironic because this is one of the claims the witches have given to Macbeth. Macbeth then startles the audience when he says that greatest is behind and means that all that is left for him to achieve is to get onto the throne. This will also tell the audience that even the best of men can be tempted by evil. Banquo though refers to the devil as evil and so represents good in the moral reversal that is about to take place in both of them. And oftentimes, to win us our harm, The instruments of darkness tells us truths, Win us with honest trifles, so betrays In deepest consequence. When Macbeth speaks his first major soliloquy the audience finally get to hear his innermost thoughts as he asks himself questions, Two truths are told Of the imperial theme I thank you gentlemen. This supernatural soliciting Cannot be ill, cannot be good. If ill, why hath it given me earnest of success, Commencing in truth? I am Thane of Cawdor. If, good why do I yield to that suggestion, Whose horrid image doth unfix my hair, And make my seated heart knock at my ribs, Against the look of nature? Present fears Are less than horrible imaginings? My thought whose murder yet is but fantastical, Shakes so my single state of man, that function Is smothered in surmise, and nothing is But what is not. It is Macbeth who mentions murder, even though the witches have mentioned nothing of the sort and so this shows that this is suggestion is one that Macbeth has thought of himself. He also decides that it is not a possibility that it will come to murder. If chance will have me king, why chance may crown me Without my stir. And also that he will leave it to chance whether he will become king or not. Come what come may, Time and the hour runs through the roughest day. This then leaves the audience with a sense of hope that Macbeth is not going to allow him to be tempted. It is when Duncan declares his oldest son, Malcolm, as his heir to the throne Macbeths attitude to the throne changes and so instead of waiting for the chance to become king he now sees Malcolm as an obstacle to himself and there from another short soliloquy he allows the audience to now he has evil desires inside and so prays that the stars should not shine on his evil desires. The Prince of Cumberland that is a step, On which I must fall down, or else oerleap, For in my way it lies, stars hide your fires, Let not light see my black and deep desires. The eye wink at the hand: yet let that be, Which the eye fears when it is done to see. He does this because stars are a form of light and light represents goodness. We now start to think that this maybe the start of Macbeths evil paths coming to light, it is then that Lady Macbeth is introduced. Lady Macbeth delighted by her husbands letter, she knows MAcbeth is ambitious to get on the throne but also realises that he lacks the ruthlessness needed to get there. She knows he only wants to win his honours honestly, would like to be king but will not cheat to gain the throne. A messenger informs Lady Macbeth of the kings immanent arrival and she is then very excited and sees this as a perfect opportunity to get Macbeth on the throne. She then speaks a horrid and for the audience a shocking prayer to evil spirits. Come you sprits That tends on mortal thoughts, unsex me here, And fill me from the crown to the toe-top full Of direst cruelty: make thick my blood, Stop up th access and passage to remorse, That no compunctious visitings of nature Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between Th effect and it. Come to my womens breasts, And take my milk for gull, you murdring Ministers, Wherever in your sightless substances You wait on natures mischief. Come thick Night, And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell, That my keen knife see not the wound it makes, Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark, To cry Hold, hold! This prayer from Lady Macbeth is shocking to the audience because of the language that she uses. Here she is asking for the evil spirits to come to her and to fill her from the crown to the toe-top full with evil and replace her milk into bitterness and evil. She has prayed for this because she has decided that she will not let this opportunity to pass of becoming Queen. She has also prayed for this as she knows that Macbeth has not got the evil and ruthlessness inside him to carry out the murder. Lady Macbeth has also asked for it to be a dark night and so that the stars and heaven can not see her do this deed because the light and heaven are representations of goodness. So, when the arrival of Macbeth occurs, she then shocks the audience again but also Macbeth when declaring that Duncan will not see the morning. She has the idea of deception. O never shall sun that morrow see Lady Macbeth has now totally committed herself to the deed and has not given Macbeth any chance of changing her mind. She is entirely devoted to now becoming Queen and will not by any means let this prospect surpass. Macbeth is now in two minds and delivers a soliloquy to the audience to let them know exactly what he is feeling like and what he is wrestling with in his internal conflict. that but this blow Might be the be-all and the end-all here, We still have judgement here, Hes here in double trust: as his host, Who should against his murderer shut the door, Not bear the knife myself. his virtues Will plead like angels I have no spur To prick the sides of my intent, but only Vaulting ambition, which oerleaps itself, And falls on th other - He admits the only thing driving him is ambition and informs Lady Macbeth that he will not murder Duncan. But he gives her different excuses than what he really feels so that he does not appear weak in her eyes. Lady Macbeth then launches a powerful harangue on Macbeth, accusing him of exactly what he did not want, and that is to be accused of not being a man. She goes on to create an atrocious image of her killing her baby and appears to have joined the forces of evil and she will surely not let this opportunity of becoming Queen Pass. She now appears to have had her wish of being filled with evil fulfilled. ..I have given suck, and know How tender tis to love the babe that milks me- I would while it was smiling in my face Have plucked my nipple from his boneless gums, And dashed the brains out, had I so sworn as you Have done to this. The people of the time of Shakespeare believed that the witches could cause hallucinations and this is what occurred to Macbeth when he sees a dagger coming towards him. Macbeths mind is filling of dark and evil desires and is also tormented by images of blood, fear, and the unknown. Is this a dagger which I see before me, The handle toward my hand? Come let me clutch thee. Art thou not, fatal vision, sensible To feeling as to sight? Or art thou but A dagger of the mind, a false creation, Mine eyes are made the fools o th other senses, Macbeth now explains that he is sure that this dagger which he sees in front of him is definitely a false creation and is not real but a hallucination. Macbeth then personifies murder and feels he is going to do a deed similar to what someone else did before him yet in different circumstances. With Tarquins ravishing strides, towards his design Moves like a ghost. Murder is against Macbeths nature and against the natural order of thing. The darkness is Shakespeares way of using language to symbolise evil powers rising up against the powers of goodness and light. Macbeth wonders whether he is going insane where symbolizing all the evil building up in Macbeth heart. He then decides to take out the murder and so maybe he has decided to carry out the murder because he really is an evil man as possibly he didnt need the influence of the witches to take out the deed. Or possibly he is acting on impulse and without thinking it through properly or he is still under the influence of them. The first sign of Lady Macbeths conscience is when they come to kill Duncan but cannot because she thinks that Duncan looks like her father. Th attempt and not the deed Confounds us. Hark! I laid their daggers ready, He could not missem. Had he not resembled My father as he slept, I had donet. This gives the audience a slight indication that evil has not totally taken over her and in the end good will triumph over evil. Macbeth slays Duncan as he is sleeping and sleeping is often referred to as innocence. He horrified himself by the fact that he could not say Amen. At this point the audience do not know whether the deed has been done, so, this is even more proof that Macbeth had done the deed. In the time of Shakespeare it was believed that if you did a deed like this the devil would take your soul and would stop you from saying anything that would be linked to Christianity. This would have horrified both the audience and himself because then Christian beliefs were essential and this would have been an essential part of their belief. Lady Macbeth then decides to take over the situation and tells Macbeth to wash his hands but he then fears for a blood-stained soul. Macbeth has destroyed the natural order of things and knows himself must pay. .Go get some water, And wash this filthy witness from your hand. Give me the daggers. The sleeping and the dead Are but as pictures. Tis the eye of childhood That fears a painted devil. If he do bleed, Ill gild the faces of the grooms withal, For it must seem their guilt. Lennox then talks of the night of Duncans death and tells us about the rough night gone past. The night would have been done by nature to warn everybody that unnatural things are going on (e.g. the death of Duncan).They have broken the natural order of things in ways that horses have eaten each other the weather was terrible And also as the owl was sweeping through the air like a hawk whereas owls normally fly close to the ground. This was not classed as a familiar but an evil bird due to it only coming out at night and night equals evil. The night has been unruly. Where we lay Our chimneys were blown down, and as they say, Lamentings heard I th air, strange screams of death, A falcon towering in her pride of place Was a mousing owl hawks at, and killed. And Duncans horses a thing most strange and Beauteous and swift, the minions if their race, Turns wild in nature, broke their stalls, flung out, Contending gainst obedience, as they would make War with mankind. Tis said they eat each other. On discovery of Duncans body Macduff uses imagery which goes beyond the facts of murder and talks of unleashed chaos and a sacrilegious deed. This is a sacrilegious deed due to the king being believed to have been appointed by god and so this was so bad it would have been like destroying a church or other religious building. This was claimed to have unleashed chaos because it looks like someone has not just stabbed Duncan but has continued to do so with force many times. Also the body is so bad to view Macduff claims that you would turn you to stone like a new gorgon. Confusion now hath made his masterpiece. Most sacrilegious murder hath broken open The lords anointed temple and stole thence The life o th building! Approach the chamber, and destroy your sight With a new Gorgon. Do not bid me speak. See, and then speak yourselves. The quote that a new Gorgon is in reference to a Greek goddess that had snakes for hair and if you saw her you would turn to stone and Macduff says that if you saw the body of Duncan you would turn to stone as the sight is so ghastly. When Macbeth first kills the guards this may be the point where he may not be sticking to the plan. This would in fact be worse for him due to nobody will not be able to give evidence. Scene four tells us what has really happened. However, there is much stress on the unnaturalness of the murder and how it has begun to poison nature. The forces of evil seem to be at work due to it been dark like night when it is supposed to be light. It is believed that it was light due to good not being able to look down on the death because it is ashamed to see the body of Duncan. Banquo is representing good and apart from Macbeth is the only other person that knows about the witches prophecies. Macbeth is concerned about Banquo coming to the truth in his mind because he is a very intelligent person. Also Macbeth is obsessed about the witches prophet that one of Banquos children will become King. Macbeth tells us about why he is afraid of Banquo and he orders the death of Banquo but also Banquos son Fleance just to make sure that no one else could become king soon. In the soliloquy Macbeth tells us about Banquos good and strong points but also that he feels he has sold his soul to the devil for the sake of Banquos children and he has done it for no purpose of his own and all for nothing. No son of mine succeeding. Ift be so. For Banquos issue I have filed my mind, For them the gracious Duncan have I murdered To make them kings, the seed of Banquo kings Even now Lady Macbeth also thinks the same as Macbeth, that now they are King and Queen they have done it all for nothing. Naughta had, alls spent. Macbeth tells us of the nightmares that he has which stops him from sleeping. This was another point on which it was believed that the witches could cause this and stop people from sleeping altogether. There is also a growing distance between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. He starts to hint to her that something terrible will be done, but deliberately chooses not to tell her and even deceives her by telling her to pay particular attention to Banquo at the feast. Perhaps this is because he wants to protect her or because he wants to show her that he is a man and is capable of acting on his own. The final words of this scene are important and ominous. Macbeths words give the audience an insight to what is really going on in his mind. Macbeth tells us that his wickedness grows stronger and even more vicious. He has now committed himself to the path of evilness and he has now gone too far to turn back on the right road. The scene of Banquos murder is a scene of where we see the most references to good and light overpowering darkness and evil. Give us a light there, ho Evil is a force that is equals darkness and this is also when the murder is going to take place. By this Banquo who represents good, asks for more light. By this Shakespeare uses this as a metaphor of good overpowers evil. When Macbeth orders the murder of Banquo and Fleance it seems to the audience that evil will overpower good and Macbeth who now represents evil will come through. At the murder scene Banquo is killed and Fleance escapes and so lets the audience realise that evil may not totally take over and the witches predictions were indeed the truth. O treachery! Fly good Fleance, fly, fly, fly! Thou mayst revenge. O slave! One reason why they also may ask for more light is that Banquo represents good and that represents light, so when Banquo is killed some of the light will have dimmed, so there is less light. In the next scene there is a banquet in Macbeths castle and Macbeth sees the ghost of Banquo and this could be caused by the witches, as it was believed that they could cause hallucinations and they may cause this. Which of you have done this? His quote asks the others which of them have played this trick on him; also he is asking who has killed Banquo, although he knows totally well that in a sense he has killed him. This hallucination is caused by his guilt and has been sent by the witches to torment him and drive him insane. The banquet is now totally in turmoil, and chaos has broken out. This may also represent how Macbeths reign will affect the country and what may happen in the future to scotland. Lady Macbeth says that she cannot tell whether it is day or night, which is apparent to Macbeth also. They cannot tell whether it is day or night but also they cannot tell good from evil. This is similar to what the witches said. Fair is Foul and Foul is Fair. Act three scene six again allows Shakespeare to inform the audience of the state that Scotland is in under the reign of Macbeth. May soon return to this our suffering country Under a hand accursed The next act is where we see an important view of the witches. They throw their nauseous ingredients into the charmed pot; they talk in rhyme giving the impression of them creating a magic spell being chanted. Eye of newt, and toe of frog, Adders fork, and blind-worms sting, Like a hell-broth boil and bubble. Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn and cauldron bubble. These here are just some of the nauseous ingredients they put into their pot. Their gruel is also an image of confusion and reflects Elizabethan beliefs about the nature of the world and the relationship between good and evil. The witches refer to Macbeth as something wicked and so this may say that they quite like him. I have made this prediction due to the quote. Fair is Foul and Foul is Fair When they refer to Macbeth as something wicked they are almost saying that he is worse than them. By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes: Open locks, Whoever Locks. Macbeth is determined to know his future, and the witches are also determined to use Macbeths human failings and readiness to use their predictions as a way of destroying him. Macbeth, Macbeth, Macbeth, beware Macduff, Beware the Thane of Fife. Dismiss me. enough This is a warning to Macbeth that he must beware of the Thane of Fife, or as the Thane of Fife, Macduff. Macbeth takes this as it is said and is aware of Macduff. Macbeth has another Apparition come to him and gives him this warning; .laugh to scone The power of man, for none of woman born Shall harm Macbeth. This warning to Macbeth says that he should be aware of any person not born of a woman. Macbeth takes this as everyone is born of women and there is no possibility of him been moved off the throne. .Macbeth shall never vanquished be, until Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill. This is a warning to Macbeth that he will only be taken off the throne when Birnam wood moves up to Dunsinane Castle where Macbeth lives. When Macbeth hears this he interpretates it as the wood will pickup its roots and walk up to the castle. He then instantly thinks that he has no problem of been taken off the throne until he dies. First he requests one more view, and this is that he wants to find out who will take the throne after him. Macbeth is then shown a line of eight kings. These are not too important to Macbeth at first until he notices that they all resemble Banquo. This is his worst fear that no-one of his ownfamily is going to carry on the family in his name and so Banquo will be not so happy, yet much happier. This tells Macbeth that all this that he has done was all for nothing and brought more pain to him and his wife that they would have had without the deeds they have committed. Thou art too like the spirit of Banquo. Down! Thy crown does sear mine eyeballs; In Act four scene two we see the only other female character apart from Lady Macbeth, Lady Macduff. She is the total opposite to Lady Macbeth, as she is caring, gentile and also a loving mother and wife. She is very close to her child and Macduff, and she is loyal to them both. Lady Macduff is not interested in politics and has no deep and dark desires. The murdering of Lady Macduff and all her children would be deeply shocking to the audience especially with it been carried out on stage. They are all honest and innocent so their deaths would be needless. This shows how low Macbeth has got and how badly he has sunk in terms of morality. They do however; serve to determine Macduff to seek revenge and to swear to kill the tyrant. I have done no harm Act four scene three enlightens the audience as to the character that Macbeth has now become. He has now become a complete contrast to what he was at the start of the Scottish play. For brave Macbeth well he deserves that name On receiving the news about the murder of his family Macduff is urges by Malcolm to enrage his heart and get revenge on Macbeth. I grant him bloody, Luxurious, avaricious, false, deceitful, Sudden, malicious, smacking of every sin That has a name. There are also points to prove about how Macbeth is running the country and in what state it is in. Stands Scotland where it did? Alas, poor country! Act five scene one is the last time that we see Lady Macbeth and she is still complete contrast to what we see of her in the beginning. She is suffering like the prediction she made after the death of Duncan. This is that she told Macbeth that if he kept on thinking about it then he would drive himself insane and loose control and go mad. She has done exactly that, and spends her nights sleep-walking and has ordered that light is to be with her all the time especially at night. How came she by that light? Why it stood by her. She has a light by her Continually, tis her command. Could this possibly mean that she needs light around her, or could we say, she needs goodness around her, to protect her possibly? When she is sleepwalking she goes to the bathroom to try and wash off a dammed spot of blood on her hand. This is another contrast of Lady Macbeth where at first she said, a little water cleans us of this deed. She is now in her own private hell full of blood, fog and filthy air. She is now pitiful, terrified or going to hell and yet realising there is no escape of going to hell so she can prepare for the arrival. She then takes herself back into time and makes references to the murders of Banquo and Lady Macduff. It is possible that if Macbeth has told her about these murders, she would have tried to stop the murders indefinitely. She may of tried to stop these, as these were not apart of her plan when they became king and queen. The thane of Fife had a wife; where is she now? What will these hands neer be clean? I tell you yet again Banquos buried; he Cannot come out ons grave. The doctor that is looking after her has now realised that Lady Macbeth does not need a doctor, but also that he cannot do anything for her, as she really needs someone much more powerful than him, a Priest, a phychiatrist. This is the last that we hear of Lady Macbeth but we do hear that she takes her own life. This would say to the audience that good will always overpower evil and there is a severe price to pay for taking the evil road. Macbeth hints to the audience and that he is ready for death and to go to hell. But he is determined not to go without a fight and until every piece of flesh has been gauchely teared off his raw bones. Shakespeare shows that he is ready to die by using imagery of withering leaves. I have lived long enough. My way of life Is fallen into the sear, the yellow leaf; Yet he still asks for his armour so to not die without a last fight. This brings us back to his attitude at the beginning. At the beginning he was loyal strong and was brave. You could say he was being brave here or is he just taking an early exit to death. Ill fight, till from my bones my flesh be hacked. Give me my armour. The final scenes reveal to the audience and Macbeth the equivocation that the witches used to give Macbeth an idea of his future. oftentimes, to win us to our hard, the instruments of darkness tell us truths, win us with honest trifles, to betrays in deepest consequence. Macbeth hears a shriek and says he as almost forgotten what it is to be afraid. He refers to the night of Duncans murder and that then even the slightest noise appalled him. He receives the news of his wifes death with apparent complete differences a huge contrast to the beginning. He suggests that almost his wifes death is almost a complete inconvenience to him that she has died when he is in the middle of a battle. She should have died hereafter; There would have been a time for such a word. He realises that life is only a shadow a fleeting thing that is meaningless like the sound and fury of an idiots tale. He decides that his life has been all for nothing. The final unravelling of the prophecies would be of great interest to the audience serving a whole moral purpose. The witches did not exactly lie to Macbeth, but maybe twisted them so he had to work the rest out himself and they may have done this to see what explanation Macbeth came up with. They didnt tell him the whole truth and didnt lie but made their predictions interpretable in different ways. The interpretation that Macbeth makes of these was the wrong ones. But his interpretation appealed to his ignorance, greed and wisdom. When one of his messengers tells him that Birham wood is coming to Dunsinane, he realises that he interpretated them wrong and the witches had tricked him, just like his good companion said they would in the first act. Good sir, why do you start, and seem to fear Things do sound di fair? I th name of truth Are ye fantastical, or that indeed Macbeth even though realising his fate still is determined to die like a soldier. Why should I play the Roman fool, and die On mine own sword? Whiles I see lives, the gashes Do better upon them. Macbeth then realises his castle is been attacked and defeated, he now realises that he is tied to the stake and cannot escape. Here though he still clings to the apparitions and to the fact that no man not born of a woman can hurt him. He is confronted by Macduff turn hell-bound but Macbeth hints that he does, somewhere, still have the remnants of a conscience my souls too much chargd with blood of thine already Macduff is desperate to avenge the deaths of all his family and tells Macbeth that if he is not to fight that he must surrender and they will then put him on show like a rare monster. Macbeth can not bear this torture and decides to fight. He then also tells Macduff that he might as well as give up as he owns a charmed life because he cannot be harmed by anyone born of a woman. Macduff respond with a quote that would shock the audience and horrify Macbeth. This is that he was born not of a woman but from his mothers womb untimely rippd This tells us that Macduff was not born naturally but tells us that he was born caesarean birth and that he was ripped earlier than a normal birth from his mothers womb. By now Macbeth has finally realised everything that the witches said and he is furious with them but really he should only be furious with himself because of his own interpretation of the apparitions. And be these juggling fiends no more believed, That palter with us in a double sense: That keep the word of promise in our ear, And break it to our hope. Ill not fight with thee. Macduff goes on to kill Macbeth and this also is true to what the apparition prophesised. Beware Macduff, beware the Thane of Fife By this Malcolm is rightfully restored to his rightful position, King of Scotland.

History of Nationalism in Israel

History of Nationalism in Israel Promised Land, Crusader State: The Rise, Fall and Return of the Covenant Nation A dissertation submitted by 58126 to the Department of Government, the London School of Economics and Political Science, in part completion of the requirements for the MSc in Comparative Politics (Conflict Studies) September 1st, 2008 Word Count: ABSTRACT Several prominent comparativists claim that Israel is an outlier case a unique case study that generally defies most conventional forms of categorization. Such an allegation naturally assumes Israel to be exceptional and its behavior inexplicable. The assumption of Israels uniqueness was born during the marked epistemological shift from behavioral crossnational inquiries to more contextually and historically-derived theories, and has undermined Israels place in comparative politics. This dissertation seeks to place Israel and its behavior squarely back into the mix and up against much of the same scrutiny faced by other nation-states. By shifting again from a contextually and historically-derived theory of nationalism towards a more cognitive and tradition-based approach, centered on the ethno-symbolic approach professed by Anthony D. Smith and John Hutchinson, elements of Israels nationalism and national identity are analyzed as contributing to its existence as a zone of conflict a nd to its violent behavior. An analysis of the Covenant Nation as a new comparative category that presupposes the idea of; (i) a chosen people, in (ii) a Promised Land, that uses (iii) blood sacrifice in order to fulfill a redemptive destiny and a commitment to worldly salvation, is highlighted. Limited comparisons to other covenant nations are drawn where applicable. Introduction: Since 1948, Israel has been regarded by some as an occupying force in the Middle East. That Israel, and Jews in general, could be a conquering and occupying people given their fate in the first half of the twentieth century as a nation without a home, victims of anti-Semitism and persecution is confusing to many. For reasons such as this, Israel has long been considered an outlier case by political scientists (Barnett 1996, ch.1). To the point of emphasis, it is argued that Israel defies most categorization, which has become the methodology employed by comparativists in order to understand states and state behavior. Categorizing usually requires classifying a case study under dichotic, or opposite, adjectives; Israel being neither East nor West, developed nor underdeveloped, capitalist nor socialist, Third World nor First World therefore, becomes difficult to study (Barnett 1996, 7). Furthermore, Israel has routinely been excluded from geographically specific studies or regional studies, since it is often considered an alien entity in the Middle East. However, despite Israels historical particularity, Israel is not an alien entity in the Middle East and its behavior is not inexplicable. While differences certainly exist categorically between Israel and other states, they both nevertheless share many of the same traits and concerns characteristics that might have similar origins. It will be argued that in order to understand Israel, both as a nation-state and as it behaves, one needs to understand Israeli nationalist sentiments. Nationalism in itself is a difficult thing to define. Where does it come from? What does it entail? How deeply is it entrenched? The answers to these questions, and many like them, could explain why a nation-state behaves in the way that it does. There are two major competing schools of thought when it comes to understanding nationalism, (a) the modernists, and (b) the primordialists. The modernists would date nationalism to industrialism, the development of capitalism, or to the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars. The primordialists, on the other hand, see nationalism as dating back much farther possibly to even before history was recorded. Under this train of thought, Israel might date its nationalism back to the Hebrew Bible. Essentially, it all depends on where in history one chooses to draw the line. This paper will primarily argue that in order to understand Israel as an inherently violent and conflict-laden nation-state it is necessary to move away from the established contextually-derived theories of nationalism and move to one that is more cognitively based. In so doing, this paper will show that Israel is in fact a state like all others. It is not an anomaly, nor methodologically suspect its behavior not inexplicable. Regardless of its ancient historic roots, and despite its recent induction as a state among the family of nations, Israels nationalism should not be analyzed according to the dates of its borders, citizens, infrastructure, or institutions. In a more cognitive approach, Israels nationalism should be understood by the borders, beliefs and people themselves. As such, it will be shown that Israel is the archetypical Covenant Nation a category that exists free from both time and space. Such a theory of nationalism can thus draw on elements from either modern or pr e-modern periods/approaches and need not be based on regional developments or similarities. Israel, like all covenant nations, is inherently conflict-laden. As will be laid out in much greater detail, covenant nations have a strategic culture born of three identifying features/beliefs that make them violent and militaristic in nature. Covenant nations are under a seemingly contractual obligation to defend and secure the idea of; (i) a chosen people, in (ii) a Promised Land, using (iii) blood sacrifice. When the covenant nation theory is highlighted as the root cause of violence, it becomes clear that a solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict becomes much more difficult to ascertain. Conflict becomes unrelated to geopolitical realities or existing/imagined security dilemmas, but to an embedded sense of national superiority, a contractual obligation to fulfill the prophecy of the covenant and, derivatively, a commitment to worldly salvation. Thus, while many scholars claim Israel is an outlier case like no other, they are wrong from the outset by trying to assign Israel to conventional and contextual comparativist categories. Israel and its behavior can and should be understood much the same as other states as reactive to its nationalist sentiments, wherever derived. As will be shown, Israel has always been a conquering and occupying nation. It was true of Israels ancient past, it is true of its present and unless a drastic change occurs deep within the embedded (and sacred) structure of Zionism, it will be true of its distant future. The Nation General Definitions and Theories Quest ce-quune nation? Renans question still echoes after more than a century. In recent decades throughout the historical milieu referred to as the post-colonial era a copious amount of interest and attention has been dedicated to the study of nationalism. While no singular definition is agreed on by scholars, for the purpose of this paper a nation will be defined generally as a group that defines itself or is defined by others as sharing common descent and culture [] that also has political consciousness, claiming collective political rights in a given territory (Mann 2005, 11). A nation-state can thus be defined as an entity wherein a nation has its own sovereign state, situated within enunciated and politically defined territorial borders be they universally recognized or not. Scholars of various disciplines have attempted to provide an explanation for the rise, meaning and development of nationalism in human history and societies. The phenomenon of the constitution of nations and national identities, the emergence of national sentiments, the construction of nationhood and nationalist ideologies, appear to all be interrelated constituents of a single phenomenon. Nevertheless, competing theories of nationalism exist the major schism existing between modernists and primordialists. Modernists, such as Gellner and Anderson, assume that the origins of nations and nationalism lie in the structural changes that affected economic and social systems during the industrial revolution at the end of the eighteenth century (Gellner 2006, 48-49), implicitly denying cultural factors. In the opinion of the modernists, the introduction of new means of production and the division of labor caused a restructuring of social relations and the polarization of class interests. Nationalism emerged as a means to promote and direct change through the creation of a popular solidarity as well as a means to protect and promote class interests (Anderson 1991, 113-114). The prevalence of one intention over another brings about the constitution of different political organizations depending on the nature the political system. So to speak, nationalism is identified by the modernists with the process of nation-building a nation being a mere artificial construction fuelled by class interests. The primordialist notion of nationalism contrasts with that proposed by the modernists. Scholars such as Hastings, Smith and Geertz, believe that nations are natural givens (Hastings 1997, 5). Consequently, it is possible to find traces of nationalism and nationhood in ancient times. The feeling of belonging, the acknowledgement among a group of people sharing common cultural, racial, linguistic traits, a common ancestry, history or religion, is a documented fact in history (Smith 1994, 40). Groups tended to bind together by these ties. The proclivity to coalesce around these shared traits, or focal points, brought about the rise of politically and socially organized nations claiming sovereignty over a territory. In fact, it is Anthony D. Smiths many contributions to the theory of ethnosymbolism in particular that figure most prominently in a discussion of Israeli nationalism, and upon which I have based my initial observations and thesis. Ethnosymbolism is founded on the historical origins of nations particularly to their roots in premodern times and focuses its attention on perceptions, beliefs, symbols, rituals, and shared myths and memories. Although the ethnosymbolic approach focuses on subjective cultural and symbolic rudiments, their long term patterning produces a structure of relations and processes [] which can provide a framework for the socialization of successive generations of ethnic and national members (Smith 1999, 14). In more basic terms, the origin and descent of the community are recollected and transmitted to new members of the group by memory as interpreted by earlier generations. This subjective version of a nations origins is understood through ethnohistory rather t han any official historians lens (Coughlan 2001, 160). Before turning to the difference between history and historical traditions on Israeli national identity and behavior in the following section, allow me to first part ways with Anthony D. Smith and highlight our major difference. In War and Ethnicity: the Role of Warfare in the Formation, Self-Images and Cohesion of Ethnic Identities, Smith argues in sum that war has been a powerful factor in shaping certain crucial aspects of ethnic communities and nationhood. He points to Georg Simmels cohesion thesis, which asserts that external armed conflict or the imminent threat thereof produces all internal group solidarity (Smith 1981, XX). In so doing, Smith turns war and its variations into an independent variable that moulds the ethnic community, and invariably the nation. Though I do agree that war and conflict certainly have the ability to accentuate and exacerbate group identity and cohesion, I contend to the contrary that group cohesion is the primary cause of war and conflict. As su ch, war is the dependent variable that finds its existence and explanation in the more common group aggression theory. Thus, it is not war that creates a sense of belonging and community, but a sense of community and belonging that leads to war and conflict and the sense of belonging and community within the Covenant Nation typifies that. The Rise of the Nation-State: Context vs. Cognition To suggest that Israel is in fact an inherently violent nation-state on account of the Covenant, it is necessary to first dispel the myth that all nation-states are violent, and to trace Israels legacy back beyond its establishment. A long-standing assumption among several prominent political theorists suggests that all nation-states are inherently violent because they are forged in warfare. Richard Bean, in War and the Nation State, argues that beginning in the fourteenth century changes in the art of war inextricably led to the rise of centralized states for the purpose of raising taxes (Bean 1973, 220). It is possible, however, that the nation-state by general concept, if not by definition predates medieval changes in the art of war, and certainly Westphalia. Greek city-states, like Sparta, can be seen as examples of very homogeneous societies with developed political structures, taxation, and mutual obligations between government and citizens. Regardless, ancient historical cas es such as these would likely only serve to highlight the linkage between warfare and the birth of the nation-state. On the other end of the spectrum, what can be said about nation-states that have emerged contemporarily? Taking Israel as an example, a state that came into being by means of a vote in the United Nations, it is easy to suggest that the Arab-Israeli wars following its establishment have played a prominent role in the shaping of modern-day Israel. However, shaping by definition is not synonymous with forging. In the first instance, it is my intention to show that nation-states are not forged explicitly in warfare, but on traditions of warfare wherever derived. The purpose is to rephrase the hypothesis that nation-states are forged in warfare into one more universally applicable. For this, it is necessary to first presume that the nation, with its sense of community and belonging, existed prior. It will be shown that; from (i) a nations strategic culture, come (ii) traditions of warfare, which (iii) lead to a greater sense of national identity, on which (iv) nation-states have been forged. In so doing, I move the discourse away from a contextually derived theory of nationalism to a more cognitive-based approach, in which Anthony D. Smiths contributions to ethnosymbolism (as outlined above) figure prominently. A nation-states strategic culture is the obvious place to look for evidence of a war-born society. Strategic culture is defined by Alistair Iain Johnston as an ideational milieu which limits behavior choices. This milieu consists of shared assumption and decision rules that impose a degree of order on individual and group conceptions of their relationship to their social, organizational or political environment (Johnston 1995, 34). Essentially, it all comes down to security. A strategic culture is shaped from a shared sense of self-perception and threat perception of a specific group of people. It is necessary to assume that if a national group has a strong historical sense of war, aggressiveness, victimization, and/or persecution, that these sentiments would play out in their strategic culture, and would limit behavior choice and influence decision-making. Once forged into nation-states these strategic cultures continue to exist, and therefore become good indicators of how groups vi ew warfare and how their states came into being. In order to analyze a nation-states strategic culture properly, it is important to consider that the study of strategic culture itself has two distinct epistemological approaches context and cognition. Those that believe a strategic culture is based in context would claim that the historical record of the nation, even before its conception as a nation-state, is important to study. Basically, the nation-state expresses its national identity based on its national character. Therefore, a states strategic culture is based on its past it is path dependent. On the other hand, cognitivists see strategic culture as an integrated system of symbols (Johnston 1995, 35). Included in this integrated system of symbols are structures, languages, analogies, myths, metaphors, etc. In this approach national identity, as related to strategic culture, is more easily discernable through the study of a nation-states wartime symbols than a nation states wartime history. Carolyn Marvin and David Ingle, in their book Blood Sacrifice and the Nation, also argue that symbols (like a flag) can be very telling indicators that lead one to uncover the nature of nationalism that exists within a state. In Fallen Soldiers, George Mosse looks to nation-states war memorials: cemeteries, songs, poems and commemorations, for clues. Essentially, a nations sentiments regarding warfare might differ from its experience; they might have been shaped or molded. When trying to find the link between the birth of a nation-state and warfare, symbols offer yet another variable to consider. Due to the fact that there are two different ways to approach the study of strategic culture, and by association an element of a nation-states national identity, a clear distinction can be made between proper warfare and traditions of warfare. Traditions, like symbols, need not be based on truth or historical accuracy. There is a tradition of Santa Clause bringing presents to nice children despite there being no assumption of truth behind such a practice and certainly no historical record to legitimize it. Traditions are sometimes developed more because they serve a purpose, than because they truly commemorate something. When considering nation-state formation it is important to properly choose which traditions are worth investigating. Relating to strategic culture, or any issue that shapes a nation-states identity, it is important that a tradition have; (i) solid national support, (ii) outlived the era that gave it birth, (iii) entered the permanent lexicon of national discourse, and (iv) continued to resonate with a portion of public opinion even at a time when it was not directly affecting public policy (McDougall, Ch.1). As will be shown with the case of Israel, traditions of warfare that have passed the scrutiny of the limitations listed above have played a role in developing national identity, and ultimately forging a nation-state. Modern day Israel is a good example of a nation-state forged on traditions of warfare, and not explicitly in warfare. As suggested above the first place to look for evidence of the link between warfare and state formation would be in a nation-states strategic culture. Israels strategic culture has long been dominated by the realist tradition (Dowty 1998, 84). The realist view of security has solid national support in Israel, it has outlived the era that gave it birth, it has entered the permanent lexicon of national discourse, and even during times of relative peace it continues to resonate with a portion of public opinion. Israels strategic culture is not only realist with regards to self-defense, but also in its offense. The leftist scholars who would date Zionism to Theodor Herzls avowedly socialist ideals of establishing a free, humanitarian and egalitarian state in the Jewish homeland to escape the increasing anti-Semitism of late-nineteenth century Europe (Avineri, 1981, 88-89) are shortsighted in their efforts. There is no such thing as nineteenth and twentieth century Zionism it is only Zionism in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The bleak and destructive history of the Jews in Europe plays little significance in Israeli mamlachtiyut, or statism. The traditions that have forged the Israeli nation-state and limit its behavior choices can and should be dated back to the Hebrew Bible. For example, one might choose to examine the myth of the Covenant Nation, and how that played out during the Hebrews first experiment with forging a state following Joshuas invasion of Canaan, as evidence. The invasion represents a realist tradition of conquering and occupying. Whether or not the Hebrew Bible represents an accurate historical rendition or whether it has any academic merit at all is outside the scope of discussion. After all, when providing an account for Israels strategic culture, the scriptures can be analyzed as being contextually historical or as a symbol of cognition. Either way fact or fiction they provide a tradition from which to inherit a strategic culture from, and on which to forge a nation-state. Thus, the argument that Richard Bean makes; that nation-states developed out of the need for a strong central authority to levy taxes due to changes in the art of war, is unconvincing. To the point of emphasis, most modern economic-dependent nationalist arguments are limited when one considers ancient examples of national groups coming together to forge polities within defined and enunciated borders. Cases such as these simply highlight the fact that the forging of a nation-state draws more on myths, sentiments and symbols of collective fear, threat, pride, angst, aspiration, victimization, xenophobia and so forth when grouping together to organize politically. The above sentiments combine to form a strategic culture, from which traditions, national identity and greater cohesiveness are born. The nation-state was born as a response to a need for security; the traditions that transmit that feeling be they contextually or cognitively derived are what inevitably forge nation-states an d determine how violently they will behave. Though it may be true that many nation-states are forged explicitly in warfare (and are established using means of warfare), it is not a universal truth. Instead, it should be argued that nation-states are forged on traditions of warfare traditions that once were prescriptive and later become predictive. Covenant Nations As mentioned above, a strategic culture is shaped from a shared sense of self-perception and threat perception of a specific group of people. It is my assertion (to the contrary of international relations theorists) that Israels strategic culture has nothing to do with threat perception; geopolitical realities and security dilemmas are but moot points. Israel has adopted and further developed a strategic culture based solely on a particular tradition of self-perception that of the Covenant Nation. Defining the term Covenant Nation is not as simple as it may appear; its definition is hard to come by because it involves describing a process more than an entity. Simply put, the covenant is a tradition of ethnic election. The process of ethnic election is a multi-staged process requiring; (i) a sense of being singled out or chosen for a special purpose, (ii) a divine promise whether absolute or conditional made to the chosen people, and (iii) a belief that fulfillment of the covenant leads to worldly salvation (Smith 2003, 48-49). In short, the covenant is a tradition of a contractual agreement between God and His people. Simply put, the Covenant Nation, therefore, is the nation that enters and embodies the covenant. As stated above, traditions need not be based on historical truth or reality; in the ethnosymbolic approach traditions, myths and metaphors offer much the same credence to a debate on nationalism and national identity and thus can serve as an explanation for how nation-states behave. Let me begin by acknowledging that although the term Covenant Nation is rife with religious connotation, I do not intentionally seek to obscure the already blurred lines between religion and nationalism. In fact, I seek to avoid entering the scholarly debate about their ambivalent relationship entirely; I steer clear from scholars like Mark Juergensmeyer, whose work albeit fascinating seeks to compare and contrast the two phenomena and chart their historical interplay (Juergensmeyer 2006, 182). Instead, I point to a recent trend in thinking that sees nationalism itself as a form of belief-system or as a new religion of the people (Smith 2003, 42). George Mosse, in Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars, discusses how during the interwar period in Europe a civic religion of nationalism was born based on the cult of the fallen soldier (Mosse 1990, 104). If in Germany, for example, a civic religion of nationalism was born based on the cult of the fallen soldier, it c an be said that for Israel a civic religion of nationalism is born based on the cult of the chosen people and the cult of the Promised Land. The Covenant has always been the cornerstone of Israels national identity dating back to primordial times. The Hebrew Bible first marks the covenant that God makes with Abram in Genesis 12:2: I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you. It is important to note that this verse not only represents the birth of the covenant, but at the same time the birth of the nation highlighting their interconnectedness. The nation and the covenant are thus co-determining and mutually implicating; the two entities are defined by their internal relationship, such that the two entities derive their meaning through their relationship and have no meaning or basis without the other. No reason is given as to why Abram (later Abraham) is selected to head the nation that will come to be known as the chosen people, but we are told that his progeny shall; (i) inherit the land of Canaan, and (ii) outnumber the dust of the earth (Gen. 12:7 and 13:6) outlining the divine promise. In return the covenant nation is obliged to circumcise their children (Gen. 17:7-10) and post-exodus to keep the laws and commandments that God gives unto his chosen people, the holy nation, at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19:4-6). Such are the terms of the covenantal contract; if the Chosen People follow Yahwehs rules, he will give them virtue, peace and prosperity [in the Promised Land]. If they are his holy servants, the scriptures say, he will bless them (Akenson 1992, 16). Furthermore, not only do Gods chosen people benefit from fulfillment of the covenant the whole world does. By fulfilling the covenant it is believed that Gods plan of salvation is advanced; so to speak, the salvation of all hinge[s] on the conduct of a special few (Smith 2003, 51). Therefore, it is to the conduct of the special few that we now shift our attention. If the renowned modernist scholar on nationalism Elie Kedourie is correct when he asserts that nationalism produces a kind of religious fanaticism that lends to conflict (Kedourie 1971, XX), the same must certainly hold true of covenantal nationalism and likely to an even greater degree. As stated earlier, covenant nations come under a seemingly contractual obligation to defend and secure the idea of; (i) a chosen people, in (ii) a Promised Land, using (iii) regular blood sacrifice. Furthermore, the fulfillment of the covenant sets the chosen people apart from other peoples both ethically and ritually: Ye shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am holy (Lev. 19:2). If fulfillment of the covenant that is following the laws and commandments within the Promised Land makes one holy and will lead to worldly salvation for all, than any/all efforts to attain that credo become morally indisputable. A self-r ighteous and realist strategic culture develops whereby any actions taken in fulfillment of the covenant become necessary, justified and self-vindicating. The strategic culture associated with the covenant has thus permeated throughout time in much the same way it was born manifested from a belief in choseness, holiness, and obligation. The Jewish nation has always found its grounding in the covenant whether in the times of Elijah or Hezekiah, Josiah or Nehemiah, the Maccabees or the Talmudic Sages [] all of these looked back to the founding charter of the covenant, not just as legitimation but as the grounding for their conception of the community of Israel and the unity of the Jewish people, which they sought to restore or deepen (Smith 2003, 63). It is on this sacred foundation that modern day Israel was also established. Nineteenth century political Zionism can be broken down into three competing schools of thought; (i) the Revisionist Zionists, (ii) the Labor Zionists, and (iii) the Religious Zionists. In many ways revisionist Zionism epitomizes what it means to be a covenant nation. Vladimir Zeev Jabotinsky, the founder of revisionist Zionism, believed that people are naturally born into nations and inherit its cultures and values. So to speak, individuals have very little choice regarding which nationalities they belong to. It was Jabotinskys belief that the Jews represent a particularly strong nation because despite the pressures of the Diaspora they always maintained their originality and distinctness(Dowty, 37). Furthermore, he insisted that the Jewish state be established in Palestine and trans-Jordan because it was the historical legacy of the Jews. On the other hand, Labor Zionism the most influential branch of Zionism at the time considered itself to be totally secular in nature. Aaron David Gordon, founder of Hapoel Hatzair, saw the Jewish life in the Diaspora as dependence and a lack of self-reliance. Building on German-Jewish philosopher Martin Bubers I and Thou, he sought to create a new covenant by reconnecting with the land using the religion of labor (Dowty, 39), and by replacing the old exiled Jew with a new self-reliant Jew. However, under the secular garb of Labor Zionism the language and intent of the original Abrahamic Covenant can be discerned (Smith 2003, 93). Ber Borochov, ideological founder of the Poalei Zion labor movement wrote that class struggles exist within national groups as well as between them, clearly acknowledging a difference between the Jewish nation and other peoples, and advocating an ethnic nationalism, rather than the more open and tolerant civic kind (Howe 2000, 236). For reasons such as th is he sought to establish a Jewish socialist state. It is important to note, however, that not any state would do for Labor Zionists the state was to be established in the Jewish homeland. To the point of emphasis, upon establishment of the state of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, the first Labor Prime Minister of Israel declared the uniqueness of the Hebrew people and the redemptive destiny of Israel on its own soil (Smith 2003, 92-93). In so doing he acknowledged Labor and Religious Zionism to be not only compatible, but complimentary. Religious Zionism was headed by Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook. While it is the usual view that Zionism is a sin and alien culture, a non-Jewish way of life, and that Jews should only return to the Promised Land after messianic redemption, Kook claimed that enhancing attachment to the land is an obligation (Dowty, 44). Essentially, Kook is advocating preparing the land for redemption and salvation and suggests that the secular Zionists are doing holy work by settling the Promised Land. Clearly in all three branches of Zionism the tradition of the covenant remains critical the four deep seated cultural resources that define the covenant nation, namely; community, territory, history and destiny, permeate all of their raisons dà ªtre. By 1948, the underlying dimensions of the covenant nation return to fruition and again form a unifying and legitimizing tradition like in times past. From this tradition a realist strategic culture was born that has; (i) solid national support, (ii) outlived the era that gave it birth, (iii) entered the permanent lexicon of national discourse, and (iv) continued to resonate with a portion of public opinion even during times of relative peace. Biblically, historically and contemporarily time and again the covenant h

SWOT-Analysis Essay -- essays research papers

Situation Analysis (SWOT Analysis) The following SWOT analysis captures the strengths and weakness within Dragon Biotech and the opportunities and threats that exist in our environment. This analysis highlights areas to be leveraged and points out where we must improve within the firm and within our industry and market. As we look at our SWOT analysis to follow, we are in a sustainable overall position, we have strengths to balance our weaknesses, and particularly our knowledge of where we are heading for and what our customers need. We also have some attractive opportunities. However, we have a weakness in competiting against price-oriented competition from both local and international brand names. Strengths: Dragon Biotech's strengths include: Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Strong business model embracing both generic and proprietary drug development. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Proven proprietary technology platform that outperforms competitors' methods. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Solid financial position with established cash flow. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Flagship product, EPO, achieved remarkable revenue growth in a US$4,8 billion market. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Unique marketing strategy to penetrate geographic areas with quick drug approvals. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Experienced well-connected management team and board of directors. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Captured 30% of EPO market share in china, endorsed by Chinese medical Ass...

Difference and Identity Essay example -- Identities Ethnicity Papers

While I am socially defined as "white," "male," "European," and so on, my theses are not formulated to affirm the social position(s) attached to these attributes but, rather, to indicate some of the limitations implicit in the concepts of identity and difference. Interestingly, two hundred years ago, the overcoming of oppression followed the concept of identity, whereas today the concept of difference is central. Why is this change not discussed in the present debates on difference? Preliminary Observations: (1) a) The following ten theses have as their context the present efforts to face racism and sexism, and another forms of repression towards social minorities or groups which have the position of minorities, without being. The right to selfdefence and to fight oppression cannot be denied to any oppressed social subject. However it is valid to make some critical observations on the forms portrayed in the eager pursuit of emancipation. The author, socially defined as "white", "male", "European" and so on, formulates these theses not to affirm the social position that he might perhaps have, due to these attributes, but rather to indicate some limitations that are implied by the use of concepts of identity and difference in the search for emancipation. b) Two hundred years ago, the concept of equality was utilised in the same way, that nowadays, the concept of difference is, that is to say the overcoming of oppression, or the pursuit of emancipation. The interesting thing is, that this change is practically not discussed at all in present debates on difference. What is the reason for this? c) There is a parable that counts of an old society in which it was taken as fact, that the world rests on the backs of four giga... ...ish version of this text is: Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno: Dialectic of enlightenment. Translated by John Cumming. [New ed.]. London : Verso, 1979. (Horkheimer and Adorno refer here to: Sigmund Freud, "Das Unheimliche", in: Sigmund Freud, Gesammelte Werke, Frankfurt am Main, 1968, vol. XII, pages 254 and 259 and others.) (3) Also see on the problem of the identity: Bolà ­var Echeverrà ­a, La identidad evanescente, in: Bolà ­var Echeverrà ­a, Las ilusiones de la modernidad, Mà ©xico, D.F. UNAM / El Equilibrista, 1995, pages 55-74. Echeverria makes in this text, starting off from the theory of Wilhelm von Humboldt, the proposal "to conceive the universality of the human in a concret way", with what it could be rescued, using our concepts, the equality and at the same time the difference ( page 58) ["concebir la universalidad de lo humano de manera concreta"].

Is Technology a Blessing or a Curse?

Is technology a blessing or a curse? Justify. Which inventions do you think were the most important ones in the history of humankind? At the beginning I would like try to define a technology. What the technology is? Technology is the making, usage, and knowledge of tools, machines, techniques, crafts, systems or methods of organization in order to solve a problem or perform a specific function. Technology is a measure of human development. Technology is part of the life of every human- We can live without a technology and technology can’t exist without us.So, of course- technology is blessing for us. Technology is a necessary to live and to prove conditions of our live. New technologies help in every field of our life. It is possible to invent a new medicines against dangerous diseases. It is possible travel by car of talking by phone. We can multiply a positive examples in different field of our life. Of course, technology has also a second, worst side. It can be used against people, for instance in act of terrorism. However, we shouldn’t scare about it.We have to use technology to prevention of violence and achieve higher objectives. In the my opinion the most important inventions are the simple and easy (in the modern world of course) tool which allow for further development. In the my opinion such a inventions can be a writing, basic tools for physical job circle, printing later. In the modern world as important invention we can describe an engine, phone or computer. Every of thing are needed and useful and helpful in everyday life.