“Babel” is a movie of Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu’s that tells stories from Morocco, America, Mexico and Japan, all connected by the thoughtless act of a child, and demonstrates how each culture works against each other to compound the repercussions. Realism is a school of thought that explains international relations in terms of power. The exercise of power by states toward each other is sometimes called realpolitik, or just power politics. And it is also related to the selfishness of the people and the states by the same time. In Babel there is a lot of exercise of power of one culture to another. The first example is when the child shoots the American tourist in the bus by accident because he wants to test the weapon in order to see if …show more content…
The rural peasant gets kicked in the chest for no reason, the American tourist can bully local authority with impunity. The reason doesn 't even require an explanation to an American audience: one doesn 't mean anything, he 's a powerless old peasant, a broken man on the edge of the desert; the other is an American tourist with legal rights, one of a bus load of swinish Euro-tourists with dollars to spend, and the power of empires behind them, the kind of power that can bring retaliation to the impolitic. The mere mention in the media that the US Government suggested the bus shooting had terrorist link, is enough to shut down the air space in the area and, incidentally, delay the arrival of a medical helicopter to help the injured woman. Meanwhile in Tokyo, two detectives respectfully approach the businessman, who legally owns the gun used in the "terrorist" shooting, in the luxury of his apartment complex concierge. "We are very sorry to disturb you, " They begin quietly. "If this is bad time, we can come back tomorrow." The cultural contrast delineates the cruel, primitive culture of the rural suppressed poor, against respect for the accomplished and wealthy individual in a highly developed urban
After discussing the abhorrent conditions of the tenements, Riis adds that the “steady working up” of tenants gives reason to believe “that the world is, after all, growing better, not worse,” albeit not fast enough because of the cruel tenement conditions (Riis 24). Riis then offers several specific examples of role models who epitomize this “steady working up” (Riis 24). For instance, Riis describes an Italian who grew up in the tenements as a mere scavenger, but now controls the “corner fruit stands” while his son “monopolizes the bootblacking industry” (Riis 25). Thus, even residents with initially undesirable jobs can arise from poverty and build better lives for themselves. To the contrary, public housing policy “dismantled the frail, but vital, structure of opportunity” instrumental to the very “survival of families” in destitute slums (Bauman et.
Pathos dominates the article when Ehrenreich allows her nephews mother in law, grandchildren, and daughter to move into her house. The situation focuses on pathos because in Ehrenreich’s personal story she includes that “Peg, was, like several million other Americans, about to lose her home to foreclosure” (338). She is effective in her writing by appealing to the readers’ emotions through visual concepts and personal experiences. When I read the article, I felt emotional because the working poor are not fortunate to know if they will have a house or food the next day. I agree with Ehrenreich in which the poor are as important as the wealthy group who get more recognition.
The impoverished worked for extremely low wages mainly because of major issues, such as a language barrier, that hindered their ability to find decent work in the United States. These individuals were being charged unrealistically high rent by the same people who paid them extremely low wages (Riis, Ch. 12). Riis’ is portraying poverty as being a tool that enables people to take advantage of others. Riis tell a story of a man who was blacksmith in is home land but do to his inability to speak English stops him from being able to practice his trade. He and his wife had no other choice but to work a cigar makers with his wife and son.
On page 107, Oscar Lewis mentions how the culture-of-poverty is one which arises from existing situations and becomes a “design for living”.
The poor are lazy and have nothing to offer: this seems to be the mindset for most of society and media. As bell hooks (1994), a prolific writer, wrote Seeing and Making Culture: Representing the Poor, (an excerpt from “Outlaw Culture: Resisting Representations”, published in 1994) , she argued that the representation of the poor portrayed by society and the media is far from actuality.
Oregon governor Kate Brown once said, “No individual, regardless of where they live or whom they love, should suffer discrimination”. Discrimination is very common in societies everywhere and is unanimously agreed on as a major problem .The most critical issue across cultures today is discrimination because it causes segregation and lack of acceptance of one's culture . One main effect of discrimination is segregation of different cultures.
1978 Montevideo, Uruguay Juan Touya, the former head of nuclear medicine in Uruguay had just finished test results on a new study. All he needs to get is the results from one of his fellow doctors, so that he can get a paycheck for his team. He goes down to see him thinking all is good, but comes scared and afraid for his family 's life. A couple days ago another co-worker goes to down to see him. He is the second commander in the Guerilla movement in Uruguay.
The theory unleashes such dynamic forces that from the time of its inception up till now it has governed the international system of the world however things one day itself fall apart. The Realists mark the State as the locus of different international circles and these sovereign states have vested interests which are always selfish. Realism is a heartless theory, man is not supposed to be selfish in the way exaggerated by the Realist thinker however [he] is a seeker of knowledge and what so ever he stumbles upon, he keeps
that takes place in the story of Don Quixote. When the narrator talks about how Don Quixote is going to ask his neighbor, Sancho Panza, to become his quire he says that, “..Don Quixote approached a farmer who was a neighbor of his, a good man—if that title can be given to someone who is poor..” (Cervantes, 69). Cervantes is saying this shows readers that during this particular era in time society was organized into different levels and that people already had preconceived notions of others based off of their social
People commonly conceive of power as an influence from the political or economic authority that enforces subordinates to behave in certain ways. However, when Edward Said discusses Orientalism, he identifies this concept differently by focusing on the cultural and ideological aspect of power. If people continue to neglect such cultural power structure of Orientalism, and only focus on economic or political relations between the East and the West, they will fail to recognize the stereotypes that have been infused by this dominant viewpoint and distort the reality of the Orient. Therefore, this paper aims to illustrate on how the dominant Orientalist interpretation leads people to common misconception and will assist readers to have better understanding
The current work is meant to explain the differences and similarities between the most dominant theories in international relations, Realism and Liberalism, both theories have some similarities and differences but much more important and interesting is to discuss and explain what differs and makes similar both theories. Conflicts and wars, Similarities and differences between Realism and Liberalism: Both Liberalism and Realism believes that there is no world government that can prevent countries to go to war on one another. For both theories military power is important and both Realism and Liberalism can understand that countries can use military power to get what they need or want. Also, both theories are conscious that without military
This essay will focus on one of the key theory of international relations; Neorealism or structural realism. By examining this theory and the principles that notable theorist Kenneth Waltz in his 1979 book “Theory of International Politics” has outlined. The three main perspectives that will be discussed include the notion of an anarchic system, the international security dilemma and the struggle for international state power and hegemony.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK It involves using theories to explain the existing problem in various situations. Realism theory and the dependency theory will be used to explain the existing conflict between Israel and Palestine. It will also be able to justify the use of force by the Israeli government when dealing with Palestinian Hamas. Realism theory in the Israeli and Palestine conflict Realism theory explains how states are selfish, struggle to gain power and succeed in acquiring its national interests in the international system. Realists identify world politics as a trans-historical and trans-geographical struggle for power, and that in this context Thucydides’ dictum that, “the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept” (where strength and weakness are calculated by military capabilities) is the stark and universal truth (Schmidt, 2007; Thucydides, 1972, p. 402).
Classical realism and structural realism are both theories of International Relations, therefore huge differences are noticed in between those two. The main difference lies in the motivation to power, which is seen differently by both theories. Classical realism is concentrated in the desire of power- influence, control and dominance as basic to human nature. Whereas, structural realism is focused on the international system anarchic structure and how the great powers behave. Classical realists believe that power is related to human nature, thus their analysis of individuals and states is similar.
The international relations schools of thought known as Realism and Idealism identify specific and similar characteristics of actors in the conceptual development of their theories. While many of these characteristics can be generalized as being synonymous with the two theories, both theories make a separate distinction in what specifically constitutes an actor. In Realism, the term “actor” refers directly and solely to the state: a combination of government, leaders, decision-makers, etc, that act as a unitary entity to promote the interests of the state. Idealists, however, expand on what constitutes an actor to include both the state and people. Not only do the principles of Idealism assert that the state and people should be considered actors, in fact, both they must be viewed as actors.