Gathering Information in Marketing Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Gathering Information in Marketing - Term Paper Example The macro trend analysis involves an understanding of the market environment in six areas and these include the demographic environment, socio-cultural, technological, natural, economic and regulatory. Information from this analysis will show the big picture of the market and what to expect when moving in such a market (BPP, 2010, p. 55). After a careful analysis of the market it is important to consider the industry in which the organization is located and this is important in order to know its attractiveness. Porters five forces model is one of the most used models in examining an industry attractiveness. It begins with an analysis of rivalry among the present competitors, and then examines the threat of new entrants, the bargaining power of suppliers, the bargaining power of buyers and the threat of substitute products. All this provide relevant information concerning the industry an organization is thinking of venturing into. After understanding the market and the industry it is important to estimate the market demand and market growth (BPP, 2010, pp. 55-60). Market demand therefore represents what all of the buyers within a market are willing and able to buy at alternative prices during a given time period, holding all demand determinants constant. This is affected by many factors which include: individual preferences and tastes, buyer expectations, income, complementary goods and substitute goods (Mullins & Walker, 2010, p.70). Three techniques have been put forward for estimating market demand and these include consumer surveys, consumer focus groups and market experiments. Market growth on the other hand can be estimated by examining historical records and extrapolating the results into the future (McGuigan, Moyer, & Harris, 2011). Memorandum Sanitex has continued with its presence in west London commanding a big proportion of the market. With its continued presence in the market it is continuing to expand and may just cover the whole of London. The est imated market size of Sanitex can be seen as small because of the limited number of potential customers that use pest control products. The diversification of the company’s product portfolio into other areas such as carpet cleaning and distribution of sanitary products should increase the market size. It is difficult to estimate the size of the company’s market but the following sources could be used by Sanitex to find out the approximate size of its market. These sources include: customer surveys, government data such as census data and trade associations. The current demand for Sanitex products is still low and this is because of the following reasons: first is because Sanitex is still not known and therefore the existence of strong competitors reduces the demand of Sanitex products. Secondly is the one product that has been on their portfolio. The company has tried to publicise itself making it known to the greater London and therefore the demand of their products i s likely to increase because of the increased market size. The improved product portfolio will also work to their advantage as it will increase demand because of the uniqueness of their services. Customer Satisfaction Organizations find it difficult to manage customer’s satisfaction efficiently. There are many tools that are employed in measuring customer satisfaction and each method has to be defined appropriately in order to meet desired norms. There are two primary ways of measuring custome

The Great Leap Forward launched by Mao in 1958 Essay Example for Free

The Great Leap Forward launched by Mao in 1958 Essay When the Communist party came to power in 1949 after a brutal war against the Nationalists, China was in a devastated state. War against Japan had resulted in the destruction of many of its cities including Beijing. Chinas people were left scared with the horrific memories of the Japanese armys horrendous acts. Rescuing China from the gutter was to prove to be a difficult task for Mao Zedong and his communist comrades. In order to understand the fundamental problems with the Great Leap Forward, previous reforms must be considered in order to fully assess the reasons for the its failures. One of Chinas most notorious problems was land ownership. Most of Chinas land was owned by cruel landlords. Peasants were being exploited and were forced to work long hours for poor pay and terrible living conditions. Mao used this in order to take a fundamental step in assuring that he had total control over the people. He introduced the policy of land reform. Mao re-distributed 40% of Chinas land and gave it to the peasants. This proved to be a truly brilliant political decision as he swept the hearts of the peasants on his side. He realised that as 90% of Chinas population were peasants, he needed to appeal to the masses. This policy was considered a success as an estimated 60% of the entire population benefited form the reform. However, this was to be a sign of Maos disregard for human life as this policy resulted in the death of 2 million landlords, by means of public execution during struggle meetings. Mao also started an early form of collectivisation, by 1952, 40% of peasants were collectivised. The next step was the encouragement of cooperatives, these favoured central management of land under private ownership, and by 1956 80% of peasants were part of cooperatives. The important factor of the land reform policy is that Mao was able to gain support from the peasants, the same peasants he would later use to conduct the Great Leap forward. Despite claiming to be a Marxist, Mao considered rural peasants to be the seeds of agricultural success but thought that industrial peasants were the backbone of the economy. The Great Leap Forward was to be the second economic reform Mao was to launch in China. Inspiring himself from Stalins economic model, in 1953 Mao launched the first 5 year plan. This plan was to be extraordinarily successful. The first of his 5 year plans set high production targets in oil, steel, pig iron and chemical fertiliser. Most of these targets were achieved, notably steel production quadrupled. Mao was able to cut inflation down from 1000% to only 15% by introducing a new currency the Yuan. Maos reforms were all interlinked. He used his social reforms to back up his economic reforms. Mao made revolutionary changes to womens lives in modern China. New sets of laws were introduced giving women the right to work, education and custody rights over their children. This was a significant improvement from the harsh days of foot binding. Mao also deemed it important to educate the Chinese population, another success was his improvement of literacy, and by his death 90% of China was literate. Not only did Mao revolutionise Chinese social life, but he put an end to corruption the government. However, these changes were to contribute to the launch of the great leap forward in a crucial way, by giving women the right to work Mao had significantly enlarged his work force which was important considering his beliefs in mass mobilisation. By the time the he announced the launch of the great leap forward 70% of women were employed. The success of the first 5 year plan can be explained by several factors. The targets set were plausible and most importantly Mao had the help of Russian economic and agricultural experts. However Mao deeply mistrusted experts. Some may argue that this was one of the main reasons for launching the hundred flowers campaign. In order to lure out intellectuals and opposition Mao gave a speech in 1957. During this speech Mao encouraged the intelligentsia to constructively criticize the communist party. At first the movement was slow to take of but once Mao forced the media to get behind it, people started speaking their minds about Maos regime. Communist party members were being heavily criticized and the Chinese people demanded reform. Mao, not uncharacteristically decided to reverse the policy in May 1957. This was to result in a crackdown on the intelligentsia known as the anti rightist campaign. Over 300,000 people were sent to labour camps. The hundred flowers was not simply a way at removing the intelligentsia, it was a way of removing Maos opponents, and this was to make the launch of the Great leap forward less difficult and certainly less questioned for the few experts that remained would be too terrified of speaking against the communist party chairman. The scene is now set for the introduction of the Great Leap Forward. Mao dreamed of transforming China into one of the worlds leading economic powers. Maos dream was to become Chinas nightmare with the launch of the great leap forward in 1958. Maos goal was to transform China into an economic superpower overnight. Many peasants knew little of what the Great Leap forward was for, most thought it was simply a plan to overtake major capitalist countries. However, to serve a higher purpose, Mao saw nuclear power as an essential element to become a superpower. However Maos secrete ambition was expensive. In order to mobilise labour, Mao had to further collectivise cooperatives in the rural parts of China. Mao believed that industry and agriculture were equally important, hence the slogan walking on two legs. However, the first 5 year plan had been beneficial to industry but agriculture had stagnated. One of Maos main concerns was Chinas population was outgrowing food production. In 1957 food production had grown 1% whilst the population had grown by 2%. Mao was distraught by the fact that the countrysides production was being used up in by the rural population. This posed a real economic problem for China. It meant that industry was not going to be sufficiently supported by agriculture and thus meant that Maos ambitions could not be realised. Maos answer to this problem was to decentralise control and enable enlarged agricultural units produce food and industrial products. These new super collectives would be known as Peoples Communes. These communes were under the control of local cadres whos main order were to extract as much labour as possible from the peasants. These cadres forced peasants were forced to hand over their property, thus reversing his policy of Land reform. The first of people communes was created in Henan in April 1958. It was composted of 27 collectives with over 9369 households joined together, by December 1958, 740,000 cooperatives had been turned into 26,000 communes. Mao had successfully militarised Chinas society, militia units squads were formed and were composed of everyone between 15 to 20 years of age. Living conditions in the communes were nothing short of appalling. Peasants eat, slept and washed together. All privacy was swept away from them, Mao even considered getting rid of peoples names and replacing them with numbers. According to Jung Chang and Jon Halliday Mao aim was to dehumanise Chinas 550 million peasants and turn them into the human equivalent of draft animals Mao had betrayed the peasants and was going to trade the peasants life for economic growth. Mao expected far too much from these communes. This may explain why the harvest predictions were astronomically high. Mao would have done well to examine the previous harvesting results. The normal yield was a ton per acre. The previous harvest of 1957 yielded a poor 195 million tons of grain. In 1958 Mao announced that the harvest figures for that year had been 430 million tons, western experts place this figure around 200 million tons. This demonstrates how much the production figures were exaggerated. Mao s political secretary Chen Boda told Mao that China was accomplishing in a day what it took capitalist states 20 years to accomplish. Production actually decreased during the Great Leap Forward by significant amounts, the harvest of 1959 was yielded a disappointing 170 million tons the CCP reported it at 282 million tons. This figure was to get even lower in 1960 when it fell to 143 million tons. This can be attributed to poor agricultural techniques. Close planting and deep ploughing were considered to be at the hear t of agricultural success. During these years Mao was asked how he intended to pay for his newly ordered soviet heavy machinery. Mao answered by claiming that China has unlimited food supplies. Consequently China increased its food exports towards Russia.

The morality of toture: Suspected Criminals And Terrorists

The morality of toture: Suspected Criminals And Terrorists The principle of torture has been brought back into the forefront of philosophical debate following the September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks in New York bringing about the War on Terror. So much so, that torture has been considered as a way of combating problems with suspected criminals and terrorists. The matter of torture has been the centre of legal discussion, often being juxtaposed against the human rights issue. Cases such as Abu Ghraib, the prison in Iraq and the detainees held at Guantà ¡namo Bay, have increased the publics awareness of issues surrounding torture, and have fuelled debates concerning the true liberalness of democratic countries; which countries like the US are supposed to encapsulate. What is more, should these democracies be condemning morally wrong topics like torture, or should their prime concern be the safety and security of its citizens? Furthermore, how can these two ideas be reconciled, and what implications will this have for the law? Why Is Torture Morally Wrong? It is fundamental to the understanding of this debate to recognise why torture is seen as inherently wrong with strong moral objections, and why it is regarded as a violation of rights. Only then, can we unravel its significance when posed with questions of terrorist threats and its repercussions on the legal system. If we are unable to dispel what it is about torture that we find morally inconceivable then it is hard to assess under what circumstances it can be practiced or even legitimised. Cesare Beccaria, wrote in his paper, Moral Protest, the impression made by pain may grow to such an extent that having filled the whole of the sensory field, it leaves the torture victim no freedom to do anything but choose the quickest route to relieving himself of the immediate pain. Thus, torture can be seen as posing two areas of concern, not only does it involve the application of extreme amounts of pain and suffering; it also infringes on a persons right to a fair trial. These both amount to why torture is morally wrong in its means of interrogating suspects. Within Western democracies, a key concept is the principle of human autonomy. Therefore, torture aims to completely disregard one of the essential foundations upon which democracy was built. It reduces a human to such a degree that they destroy all traces of individuality so that they are unable to make decisions. A tortured being is only capable of comprehending one thing; that being the urgency to be released from pain. It is this power that allows the torturer to gain the information or confession he wishes. In The moral wrongness of torture, Fatima Kola describes this state as an attempt to annihilate agency. Torture can annihilate agency because it seeks to lower the person to a standard in which they cannot make rational choices, being subject to physical or psychological torment. Hence, it is understandable why torture is considered morally wrong, and how anyone who accepts this as a means of interrogation must be able to justify the degradation of personal autonomy and human rights. We must also consider why it would be so morally repulsive to be tortured. Henry Shue believes that one of the main reasons for this is that it constitutes as an attack on the defenceless. This idea is furthered by Sussman who has a unique argument as to why torture is so repugnant. He states in, Whats Wrong with Torture? So construed, torture turns out to be not just an extreme form of cruelty, but the pre-eminent just an extreme form of cruelty, but the pre-eminent instance of a kind of forced self-betrayal. Thus torture is a distinctive kind of wrongness not often found in other acts. As what is embedded in the core of torture is the form of self-betrayal that it harbours. The victim if forced into a state of defencelessness and powerlessness. They are broken down until they lack all personal autonomy and rationality. Whats more, Sussmen believes that the victim is lowered to such a degree that their own body becomes their main attacker, leaving them to feel debased. Such a view t hen naturally finds the physical and emotional strains of torture as abhorrent, rendering it morally wrong in all circumstances. Alternative Arguments That Justify Torture Perhaps it is because society is no longer as shocked at images of torture that is has become more accepted within legal discussions. Exposure to scenes of pain and brutality in culture has allowed for people to be more open minded about the debate of torture. Yet, amongst this, two distinct arguments exist. There are those that believe torture can be morally justified where it prevents a greater devastation from occurring, that it is the lesser of two evils. Arguments from this standpoint are utilitarian, which allow the torturing of one life to save many innocent lives. The main focus for utilitarians is the end goal and the idea that torture can be justified according to the circumstances at the time. This is particularly important in terrorist cases, where utilitarians argue that a terrorist has lost his claim to a normal standard of human rights by endangering the lives of innocents, and therefore cannot expect to have the same amount of protection as an ordinary citizen. Henry Shue, gives a further explanation to justify acts of torture in that, since killing is worse than torture, killing is sometimes permitted, especially in war, we ought sometimes to permit torture. However this argument is flawed as there are other more important factors that need to be considered rather than just the degree of harm done. If we are to compare the acts of killing that take place in war to the torture of a suspected terrorist, then the most obvious difference is that in warfare, both parties have equal opportunities to kill or be killed. Whereas a terrorist or criminal who is being tortured is subject to the whim of the torturer. Thus, I do not believe this creates a valid argument to justify torture. On the other hand, there are those who believe torture should be absolutely prohibited, and that under no circumstance can it be morally justified. These arguments are based on a deontological view. Utilitarians claim this view is morally self-indulgent and sometimes it is acceptable to sacrifice your morality for the greater good. However, deontologists are criticised for their lack to reconcile with what is known as the ticking bomb scenario. One should consider the hypothetical example of where a man is aware of the location of a bomb that has been planted in a large shopping centre. He knows it will be detonated within the next few hours and the police have him detained. In this situation is it morally wrong to torture one person to find out the location of the bomb, in order to save the lives of many? In this most extreme situation, even the strictest deontologists cannot deny that torture may be justifiable to such a threat, despite it been inherently wrong. In this context the re are two conflicts at play. There is the moral consequence that exists in torturing someone; however this has to be balanced against the moral consequence of the death of many people, (it seems to be a simple matter of numbers.) Thus it is vital to consider this moral dilemma as a whole and as not individual parts. In this way, deontological morality is not completely lost by rendering utilitarian views as applicable. Moral deliberation can thus be settled by balancing the deontological objections of torture with the justification given by utilitarians, as Sussman argues, torture constitutes a moral wrong that requires more justification than killing. Thus, by focussing on the morality of the act, we are allowed to mediate between absolute prohibition and utilitarian ideas. However each circumstance gives rise to different issues on morality and torture, as not all situations will follow the ticking bomb scenario. At which point can you draw the line between appreciating the opposing demands and upholding moral integrity? As stated earlier, it is vital to look at the situation as a whole, made up of constituents, in order to weigh up where the morality lies. Only then is it possible to make credible conclusions and allow us to make a morally right decision. Implications For The Law For the law to include a provision for torture would be very brave, and require an act of moral courage. In Torture and Positive Law: Jurisprudence for The White House, Waldron argues that legalising torture will have negative ramifications on our legal system, leading to eventual malfunction. The basis of negating torture into law finds it origins in morality. The morally wrong nature of torture is reflected and reinforced by the law. The laws represent its regard for the superiority of human rights and its belief in personal autonomy. It embodies the concept that human life is sacred and must be shown respect. Therefore by including torture within the law it gives the impression that it is not disapproved in the same way and the moral integrity of the legal system becomes undermined. Promoting respect amongst your fellow citizens becomes a hypocritical concept, as torture is one of the worst offences against a person. This gives a tainted message to society as the law no longer pro hibits torture as a method of interrogation. Legalising torture will also have further international repercussions, especially for countries like the US and UK. These countries have a firm approach in not tolerating torture in other countries that do not give enough weight on the importance of human rights. By legitimising torture, these countries will be sending the wrong message to the rest of the world, implying that they encourage the State to use torture as a means to a way. R. Dworkin, in Laws Empire, believes that legalising torture could affect public morality. The law is a mechanism which guides citizens through their everyday lives, telling them the correct way to behave and what is acceptable conduct in society. In this way, prohibiting torture from the law mirrors the message of mutual respect and harmony that we wish to permeate through society. This could be compromised with the inclusion of torture within the legal system, lowering peoples standards of morality. The recognition of torture could have further affects on society through its interpretation; that people may find it suitable to be violent to those who they feel deserve it, thus generally increasing levels of crime. There is a risk that torture may not encompass a sense of inherent wrongness and taboo as it does now. As people become more open to its implications and practice, being confronted by its affects on a daily basis, so torture will become part of what is accepted. Therefore, the strength of the law will be severely undermined with the prohibition of torture no longer upheld to symbolise actions that can be regarded as morally wrong. As torture is claimed to be one of the most appalling acts that can be committed, its justification will lead to questions such as why other wrongs, which are considered as a lesser wrong than torture are not also legalised. Waldron concisely summarises this concept as the unravelling of the surrounding law. Sangeeta Mandhir, in Basing arguments for legalising torture on moral justifications, describes this as having a domino-type effect. In that once the prohibition of torture is challenged, it will be harder to justify why other acts such as battery, which is considered less offensive than torture, is not also made legal by law. Furthermore, if torture becomes legitimised, than the supposed guilt felt by the torturer is weakened. Since the act is no longer illegal it will justify his actions and so reduces the level of guilt, and in turn this is converse affects for what is seen as moral. If no guilt is felt then one cannot feel he has committed an immoral act. Indeed what makes torture worse for society is the justification in that it serves to benefit the community. This implies that society gives torture a mandate in which it can be implemented by allowing it into the legal system. As the torture is being carried out in the name of societys security and safety, citizens can be said to hold a shared responsibility for the shocking acts performed upon the victims of torture. Therefore, the State has multiple factors that are intrinsic when considering the legalising of torture. Consisting of not only of the end result, that being security for the nation; but also the upholding of liberal democratic values upon which society is based, so not to compromise principles such as liberty, integrity and human rights. Conclusion It is clear that for a debate on torture it is impossible not to consider morality, as the two concepts are inextricably linked. Torture, by definition in this essay is regarded as morally wrong and inherently abhorrent. Yet there seems to be circumstances for which people believe it could be the only course of action. Thus, if there are situations in which torture can be justified, should the State consider reversing the absolutist prohibition stance on torture within the legal system that exists today? In my opinion, the answer is no. Torture is fundamentally abusive to our morals and ethics. Its existence in society risks undermining the humanitarian principles that also exist. Despite the utilitarian views concerning the welfare of the greater good, what needs to be remembered is that the short term benefits for legalising torture for situations such as the ticking bomb scenario have to be measured against the long term consequences of legalising such a morally detested act, for its effects on society. I believe these two polar concepts can be reconciled through reasonable deontology. This approach allows for torture to occur in a situation that poses a serious threat to society, yet it does not justify the act and still remains firm on the view that torture should be legally prohibited in the law. As Jens David Ohlin in The Bounds of Necessity, believes, legalising torture opens a Pandoras Box of unsavoury consequences, especially for society. Society should not be allowed to excuse torture as a morally right way of interrogating criminals or suspected terrorists, for if this is allowed we stand to lose the fundamental principles that the law is supposed to uphold, thus changing the nature of societys moral commitments.

Ronald Regan :: essays research papers

Ronald Reagan At the end of his two terms in office, Ronald Reagan viewed with satisfaction the achievements of his innovative program known as the Reagan Revolution, which aimed to reinvigorate the American people and reduce their reliance upon Government. He felt he had fulfilled his campaign pledge of 1980 to restore "the great, confident roar of American progress and growth and optimism." On February 6, 1911, Ronald Wilson Reagan was born to Nelle and John Reagan in Tampico, Illinois. He attended high school in nearby Dixon and then worked his way through Eureka College. There, he studied economics and sociology, played on the football team, and acted in school plays. Upon graduation, he became a radio sports announcer. A screen test in 1937 won him a contract in Hollywood. During the next two decades he appeared in 53 films. From his first marriage to actress Jane Wyman, he had two children, Maureen and Michael. Maureen passed away in 2001. In 1952 he married Nancy Davis, who was also an actress, and they had two children, Patricia Ann and Ronald Prescott. As president of the Screen Actors Guild, Reagan became embroiled in disputes over the issue of Communism in the film industry; his political views shifted from liberal to conservative. He toured the country as a television host, becoming a spokesman for conservatism. In 1966 he was elected Governor of California by a margin of a million votes; he was re-elected in 1970. Ronald Reagan won the Republican Presidential nomination in 1980 and chose as his running mate former Texas Congressman and United Nations Ambassador George Bush. Voters troubled by inflation and by the year-long confinement of Americans in Iran swept the Republican ticket into office. Reagan won 489 electoral votes to 49 for President Jimmy Carter. On January 20, 1981, Reagan took office. Only 69 days later he was shot by a would-be assassin, but quickly recovered and returned to duty. His grace and wit during the dangerous incident caused his popularity to soar. Dealing skillfully with Congress, Reagan obtained legislation to stimulate economic growth, curb inflation, increase employment, and strengthen national defense. He embarked upon a course of cutting taxes and Government expenditures, refusing to deviate from it when the strengthening of defense forces led to a large deficit. A renewal of national self-confidence by 1984 helped Reagan and Bush win a second term with an unprecedented number of electoral votes.

The Role of Corruption and Virtue in “A Man for All Seasons”

â€Å"A Man for All Seasons† is a play written by Robert Bolt. It is inspired by true events and revolves around Saint Sir Thomas More, the Chancellor of England during the 16th century.King Henry VIII’s wife, Catherine of Aragon (of Spain), is unable to bear a child and provide an heir for the throne. Owing to this reason, he wishes to divorce her and marry Anne Boleyn, the sister of his former mistress.However, Saint Sir Thomas More is against this idea and refuses to approve of the King’s desire. The Pope too is against this notion as he had previously disregarded a biblical law in order to allow Henry VIII to marry his wife. What follows is the test of a man’s ability to abstain from falling prey to the temptation of bribery and corruption, even if it means having to give up wealth, luxury and power.Thesis: A major theme in â€Å"A Man for All Seasons† is the delineation between virtue and corruption in all its aspects, political, mental, moral and spiritual, depicted primarily through the leading characters.Robert Bolt, through the medium of the main characters in the play, has elucidates the differences between the corrupt and the conscience-driven; the immoral and the principled. The play itself is a depiction of society and its many facets.Sir Thomas More characterizes morality. He is â€Å"a hero of selfhood†, meaning that he will not compromise on his â€Å"self† or his values simply in order to please or gratify someone. He is the antithesis of the corrupt.The Common Man represents common individuals and society in general. He performs various roles to portray conventional characters that one would encounter in everyday life. Ultimately he begins to forfeit his moral standards and concedes to the audience that in life, a man must do what is required in order to subsist.The character of Richard Rich is symbolic of greed and avarice. He is a man that willingly sacrifices his ethics and principles for wea lth and position. He is the epitome of corruption and depravity. Through this representation of morality and its antithesis, the writer has aptly described to the audience the elements of corruption, in all its forms.Thomas More is the kind of man that would rather sacrifice his life than his ethics. Not only the audience but the other characters too view More as a man of morals. It is due to this fact that the King wishes to attain More’s acceptance before divorcing his wife and marrying another woman.More’s acquiescence would endow the King’s decision with morality and people would approve of it more readily. The various characters attempt to sway More’s resolution of disapproval of the King’s marriage to Anne Boleyn. His steadfastness in resisting bribes demonstrates the strength of his principles.For instance, when the Duke of Norfolk tries to convince More to sign an oath of allegiance, trying to reform England and the Church, More responds by stating, â€Å"†And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Heaven for doing according to your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing according to mine, will you come along with me—for fellowship?†The audience will notice that there exists not an ounce of corruption in the character of Thomas More. He is the representative of a noble and virtuous human being. He is beheaded because of lie told by Richard Rich and till the very end More remains a man of conscience who will not submit to bribery even if his life were to depend on it, literally. He remains a man â€Å"anchored to his principles† (36).The Common Man illustrates a middle path between the virtuous and the unscrupulous. He depicts the base nature of an average man. The choices of an average man are governed primarily by his need to survive, whether by hook or crook, and that is exactly what the Common Man portrays through his various images.His declaration â€Å"Better a live rat than a dead lion† in Act II Scene vii, is a perfect example of this attitude of his. Here he is playing the jailer and affirms that he’d rather live by taking bribes or resorting to corruption, than die as an honorable man who will not give up upon his morals. His actions are not guided by his conscience but by his will to live, no matter what the price.Richard Rich is a superficial and insincere individual who epitomizes the height of corruption. He, along with other characters that include Thomas Cromwell, Wolsey and Chapuys has been used by the author to embody the corruption existing in society. Rich is willing to sacrifice anything to advance himself politically.He yearns for position and affluence at any cost. The opening scene itself gives us a glimpse into Rich’s personality when he tells More that he should be a teacher and disregards More’s advice saying that he should not be chasing after wealth and power and must surrender his corrupt ways.In Act I Scene viii it is insinuated that Rich has sold his soul to the devil when he divulges information about the gilded cup to Cromwell in exchange for a job. The decisive illustration of his corrupt nature is when he lies, under oath in court, and gets his friend, More beheaded for his own selfish needs.

Slaver and Politics essays

Slaver and Politics essays The extent to which the debate over slavery was not really about black people but about whites can be seen politically, socially, religiously and economically. Slavery affecting politics is demonstrated politically in the Lincoln-Douglas debates. The real arguments were over which side, the north or the south, would gain more power from slavery by making it either a slave state or a free state. Douglas argued that slaves were not equal to whites in any fashion and they should not be free, which would give them a chance to be equal. Douglas states, I believe this government was made on the white basis. He further states, I believe it was made by white men, for the benefit of white men and their prosperity for ever, and I am in favor for continuing citizenship to white men, men out of European birth and decent, instead of conferring it upon Negros, Indians and other inferior races. He attempts to degrade the blacks by deciphering the constitution in his own opinion. He feels the signers of the declaration of independents never dreamed of the Negro when they were writing that document. (1). He goes on to say, Do you believe that ever yone who signed the declaration of independents declared the Negro his equal and then was hypocrite enough to hold him as a slave, in violation of what he believed to be the divine law? Lincoln agreed that blacks were inferior yet insisted that this in no way should stand in the way of their natural rights (2). He does not feel that they are worthy of being coworkers with whites but feels they should not be slaves. Lincoln states, I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negros, nor of qualifying them to hold office, not to intermarry with white people, and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forbid the two races living together on...