They also want to keep peace unlike the Vereal union who believes in revenge and thinks that physical power is the most important thing. The societies respective laws reflect this very clearly. The laws on Old Earth focuses on keeping peace and maintaining the consensus, by requiring morality and condemning mistrust. The laws of the Vereal union aren’t as clear in the book, however it’s clear that they follow some kind of military structure. Their society is very hierarchical and the decisions are made only in the top of the hierarchy, unlike Old Earth where a consensus committee consisting of representatives from the locials and regions makes the decisions.
However, there were also many who believed that Judicial Review would lead to Justice-created policy. Cases such as Barron v Baltimore settled much of this debate, declaring the United States Bill of Rights did not have power over state governments. This ruling echoed the sentiment of the people over judicial power rather than sentiment towards state power. The judicial independence of the Justices worried those who believed that judicial rulings would reflect the moral and political views of the Court, rather than of the Constitution. This led to controversies over what exactly this commitment looks like in practice, as well as citizens questioning the legitimacy and authority of the rulings.
But in fact, they can keep their valuable traditions and add to them some new from us and in return we can learn from them new habits that are ethical as well as acceptable for us. Imagine yourself, as an Egyptian citizen who is very connected to your culture, being forced to loose your cultural pride and traditions just because you moved to another culture. Would not that be seen as unfair? A wise person said, “You cannot
These cultures were important because of the power and influence they had on western advancements and the world today. Egypt and Mesopotamia demonstrated cultural achievements through government, religious beliefs, and society through shared similar ideas, but maintained their unique identity. In terms of government, Egypt and Mesopotamia employed theocracies, meaning that they were overseen by a ruler considered both a human and a god. Although the king was above his human subjects and communicated with other gods, he was not immune to death. However, the gods were relatively opposites, with the Egyptian gods having equality with the king and Mesopotamian gods exercising authority over their king.
Oedipus does not show this. In Conclusion, Creon and Oedipus can differ and be alike in their leadership qualities. Creon and Oedipus both follow the objective of doing the right thing by doing what's best for their people and their lands. Oedipus has integrity in his actions and choices but no commitment to his work where Creon has commitment and Oedipus does not. In simplest terms, both characters possess vital traits that make them alike and different and enable them to be successfully known rulers of Thebes.
Arguably, the rise of the Islamic fundamentalism in these countries represents a desire to anoint a more representative slate of political leaders, given that previously these groups have had little say in the governance given the dictatorial style of leadership. Therefore, this more representative form of governance, which emanates from an innate desire for a fairer system, is a step in the
Past leaders such as Andrew Jackson, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, and Marc Antony are evidence that society does not reward morality and good character in leadership. Society is drawn to leaders that have good rhetoric, propaganda, and charismatic personalities, and society supports them despite their immorality. Society is concerned about stability more than the morality of their leaders and will support immoral leaders in times of crisis to provide stability. In history there have been multiple leaders that have used rhetoric, propaganda and charismatic personalities to gain power, despite their morals. Leaders such as Andrew Jackson, Adolf Hitler, and Marc Antony.
Chloe I found your paragraph on hegemony and the achievement ideology really interesting. While I find your point on the achievement ideology fascinating, according to the class article by Lull (1995), in order to conform to these “norms” people must believe they’ve agreed to them and that these actions are in their best interest. According to Lull, even if these rule and ideas aren’t their own, people still willing agree to them because they think conforming to these practices will bring them success (Lull, 1997). That is why hegemonic power works so well. People believe by following these rules that are shared by a community, they can still attain their own form of achievement.
Early Republicans and Democrats ideas differ from the modern ideas we know today. A twenty-first century Republican is “undoubtedly proud of the early party’s stand against slavery, but is likely to cringe at its support of protectionist tariffs rather than free trade.” (Eddins, 2012). Today most Republicans believe that government should tax people less, maintain a strong military, and intervene in people’s lives as little as possible. On the other hand Democrats support government programs that help those in need, as well as protection of public education, civil rights, and environmental issues. Although the Democratic-Republican party over powered the Federalists, we wouldn’t be where we are today without either of these political
Now I do not think that we just find our identity from family heritage, but also from going through life practicing certain values and solidifying that as something we want to be known as. The story I believe has an essential purpose to show us that a family can have true power over the descendents, and make them want to be identified as the