Max weber was strongly influenced my Marx’s ideas, but rejected the possibility of communism, arguing that it would require an even greater level of social control and bureaucratization (tendency to manage an organization by adding more controls) than capitalist society. Weber also critized the presumption of proteriat revolution, believing it to be unlikely. Weber defined social classes as clusters of occupations with similar life chances and patterns of mobility, meaning peoples opportunities are able to move up or down the occupational ladder. Weber divided society into four different social classes. Firstly, those privileged through property or education.
Explain the Argument on Federation The debate on federation was lengthy and included various arguments both in favour and against the uniting of colonies under one central (federal) government. Arguments in favour included Better Communications, Stronger Defence and a more divers Trade System. Fears of the small colonies, farmers and employers and the labour movement were topics that worked against the idea of a federal government. Communications in the 1880’s was a telegraph link between all capital cities and a telephone line linked Sydney and Melbourne. The Railway lines in some states were different to others but were used along with steamships to make transport quicker and to make the colonies feel less isolated.
This essay by Ungar advocates a liberal arts college edification for all despite the current economic hardship that many Americans face. He lists seven mundane misconceptions about liberal arts inculcation and then proceeds to expound why they are not so. The first misconception that he sets straight is that vocational training is a more preponderant alternative to liberal arts in today’s economic times. He verbalizes that albeit focused vocation training may be an expeditious fine-tune, students may not always be able to find work in that one categorical field, and it is more preponderant for them to gain a broad range of cognizance. He then argues that albeit people may cerebrate that college graduates with liberal arts degrees are having a more arduous time finding good jobs, that is not the case.
This is amplified by the fact that the larger pressure groups can leave many smaller ones in their shadow. For example, the British Stammering Association is a small pressure group with a good cause but one that many people will not have heard of due to its lack of funds and support. Many say that pressure groups holding the government to account and challenging authority is a sign of a healthy democracy. After all, a democracy is a system of government where decisions are arrived at by majoritarian principles. If a certain group of people do not feel that they are being represented then a democracy has to be able to recognise them for anything to change.
This essay is going to use examples from the media to support the claim that middle class is represented as normative. “The working class have a long history of being represented by excess whilst the middle-class are represented by their distance from it”. (Skeggs, 2004: 99). Here, Skeggs briefly touches on one of the critical reasons why these representations have been constructed and cemented in today’s society. Many television shows involuntary support the claim that middle class cultures are represented as normative.
Others such as the Arab league take a social approach in order to unite countries for a common cause. However, they all aim to bring benefits to their members (the countries and their populations), but sometimes the benefits are limited. Increased trade between countries should benefit both or all the countries and the people with them, however in the majority of cases one country tends to benefit more. Much of the proceeds from the increased trade are only gained by the big companies and the majority of the population do not see the benefits. For example the trade union between Canada, USA and Mexico (NAFTA) aimed to ‘eliminate barriers to trade and investment’ between the countries.
Another problem was that even though there are anti-discrimination policies, a slight differential treatment towards minorities is still present. Employers expect and demand more input from minority groups and that is why people are hesitant to leave their workplace to cast a vote (Rivers, 2012). An outside source looks at voting from a different perspective. An interestingly opposing statistic is that minority groups with higher education and social status take the time to participate, as voting is very important to them. They want to take part in the choice of their government because it took so long and so much effort for them to receive the equal rights and abilities to enjoy democracy (Speel, 2010).
Even though they may have a good price for the quality and quantity the monies is not helping our economy grow. Once again we are sending money out helping other countries grow while we as a whole are here in the U.S. struggling. I can understand the need to buy steal, iron or any other manufactory goods cheaper if they can be found on foreign land, even though it make take away plenty of money. However, the use of these materials may be used to build new stuff that will help the grow economy and cause more jobs. I believe with using the foreign countries we as the United States need to make sure the steel, manufacture goods and anything else is of good material and we will not put out more money than needed because “we” decided to trust them.
I believe that while Singer develops his argument by claiming that while people in rich states can survive without luxuries; those in poorer ones where most are manufactured could not survive, as their economic base would fall apart. With some adjustment of his analogy to make it a more accurate representation of the global economy, Singer would find his argument overcoming its central inherent weakness. In my own opinion I believe, Singer’s view of our obligation to help relieve the suffering of people in distant nations are mostly right because, if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do
Reich believes that not only is the widening inequality gap—the absence of the middle class, that is––a threat to the economy, it is what is undermining the very core of American democracy. Reich’s intended audience is the so-called “fence-sitters” of the American public; the people who, in his mind, are not completely convinced that inequality is such a problem. He makes his argument convincing by providing examples of support for his