Capital Punishment Essay Example

Capital Punishment Essay The existence of the death penalty in any society raises one underlying question: have we established our justice systems out of a desire for rehabilitation, or out of a desire for retribution? 1. Capital punishment is a practice in which prisoners are executed in accordance with judicial practice when they are convicted of committing what is known as a â€Å"capital crime. † Capital crimes are crimes deemed so heinous that they should be punishable by death. People may also use the term â€Å"death penalty† to refer to capital punishment. Worldwide, this practice is extremely controversial, with a variety of concerns ranging from human rights to economic efficiency being raised in discussions about capital punishment. Suggest Edits The practice of executing people for certain crimes is very old; in fact, the term itself dates to a Latin root, capitalis, which means â€Å"of the head,† a reference to a common execution method used in Roman times. At various points in history, a wide range of crimes have been punishable by death, including rape, murder, treason, mutiny, and theft. In the military, death sentences for â€Å"cowardice† were used as recently as the First World War, when soldiers were shot by firing squads assembled from the men who served with them, providing both a punishment and a warning. As early as the 1800s, some members of society were pushing for abolition of the death penalty, arguing that it was an inhumane method of punishment. Many abolitionists were also involved with animal welfare organizations and antislavery organizations. We will write a custom essay sample on Capital Punishment specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Capital Punishment specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Capital Punishment specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Their efforts were at least partially successful; by the beginning of the 21st century, only 58 nations were practicing the death penalty, and several of these nations had very restrictive terms which had to be met in order for capital punishment to be an option. China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United States lead the world in executions annually. Suggest Edits Arguments for capital punishment include the suggestion that it acts as a deterrent, by reminding criminals that they can pay the ultimate price for some claims. It is also touted in some regions as a safety measure which effectively removes people who have committed horrific crimes from the street without having to worry about their release on parole in the future. Some supporters also argue that capital punishment provides closure to family members of victims. Furthermore, supporters argue, it is possible to administer the death penalty justly and humanely. Suggest Edits People who oppose the death penalty argue that it is unevenly applied, creating the potential for erroneous executions of innocent people. Opponents are also perturbed by differing standards in judicial practice; for example, some nations allow capital punishment for crimes such as drug trafficking, and in some nations where homosexuality remains criminalized, it is punishable by death. Opponents also argue that administering capital punishment justly and fairly is tremendously expensive, and it is more cost effective to focus on incarceration. 2. Capital punishment or the death penalty is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. The judicial decree that someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence, while the actual process of killing the person is an execution. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as capital crimes or capital offences. The term capital originates from the Latin capitalis, literally regarding the head (referring to execution by beheading). 3. Capital punishment is the practice of executing someone as punishment for a specific crime after a proper legal trial. It can only be used by a state, so when non-state organisations speak of having executed a person they have actually committed a murder. It is usually only used as a punishment for particularly serious types of murder, but in some countries treason, types of fraud, adultery and rape are capital crimes. The phrase capital punishment comes from the Latin word for the head. A corporal punishment, such as flogging, takes its name from the Latin word for the body. Capital punishment is used in many countries around the world. According to Amnesty International as at May 2012, 141 countries have abolished the death penalty either in law on in practice. ARGUEMENTS AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT Everyone thinks human life is valuable. Some of those against capital punishment believe that human life is so valuable that even the worst murderers should not be deprived of the value of their lives. They believe that the value of the offenders life cannot be destroyed by the offenders bad conduct even if they have killed someone. Some abolitionists dont go that far. They say that life should be preserved unless there is a very good reason not to, and that those who are in favour of capital punishment are the ones who have to justify their position. The most common and most cogent argument against capital punishment is that sooner or later, innocent people will get killed, because of mistakes or flaws in the justice system. Witnesses, (where they are part of the process), prosecutors and jurors can all make mistakes. When this is coupled with flaws in the system it is inevitable that innocent people will be convicted of crimes. Where capital punishment is used such mistakes cannot be put right. 1. You cant take it back The death penalty is irreversible. Absolute judgments may lead to people paying for crimes they did not commit. Texas man Cameron Todd Willingham, for example, was found innocent after his 2004 execution. 2. It doesnt deter criminals In fact, evidence startlingly reveals the opposite! Twenty seven years after abolishing the death penalty, Canada saw a 44 per cent drop in murders across the country. And it wasnt alone. 3. Theres no humane way to kill The 2006 execution of Angel Nieves Diaz, by a so-called humane lethal injection, took 34 minutes and required two doses. Other methods of execution used around the world include hanging, shooting and beheading. The nature of these deaths only continues to perpetuate the cycle of violence and does not alleviate the pain already suffered by the victims’ family. 4. It makes a public spectacle of an individuals death Executions are often undertaken in an extremely public manner, with public hangings in Iran or live broadcasts of lethal injections in the US. 5. The death penalty is disappearing Out of 198 countries around the world only 21 continue to use capital unishment. And while countries that carried out executions in 2011 did so at an alarming rate, those employing capital punishment have decreased by more than a third in the last decade. With this clear downward trend, public pressure may help persuade the worlds biggest executors China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the USA to stop. There are countless arguments for and against the death penalty. In an imperfect world where we can never be su re we have ever got the worst of the worst is it ever justified to take a life? Capital Punishment Essay Example Capital Punishment Essay Capital Punishment is described as corporal punishment in its most severe form; it is the legal infliction of the death penalty, meaning in acute circumstances, a man or woman can be put to death for the crime they have committed. It is both commended and criticised with an on-going argument as to whether it is right or wrong. Though Capital Punishment was stopped in Britain in the 1960s, it is still a standard procedure in many nations throughout the world. Some example nations are America (38 of the 50 states have the killing punishment), Iran, China, and Saudia Arabia though there are many more who still retain the death penalty for crimes they feel serious enough. Methods of execution can vary; it has been inflicted in many ways in the past, today however the main processes used are hanging, electrocution, gas chamber, firing squad, beheading, or lethal injection. So what kinds of people deserve such a brutal, barbaric ending? And is their crime really so ruthless that death is t he only punishment seen sufficient? There are many pros and cons of the death penalty; its extremely hard to come up with a satisfying conclusion as to whether it should continue being an optional punishment, or if lifetime imprisonment is a sufficient enough punishment for the offence the person has committed, even for something as profound as murder. One of the main objections to the death penalty is the risk of executing the innocent. There is no way to reimburse life, once the person has been put to death, its over, innocent or guilty they have received the harshest sentence. Had the person been sentenced to lifetime imprisonment however, and then later found to be innocent, they could gain compensation and even more rewarding, another chance in life. However cases like this that have been established are very rare, much evidence and a unanimous vote is needed to convict this punishment upon anyone, and only serious deserving crimes obtain the punishment of death. Therefore it is unusual and infrequent for the wrong person to be executed, and in many cases those who are sentenced to death can be left waiting for years to receive their punishment, in which case, if you are innocent, by then you will have hopefully gathered enough evidence to prove so. It is common for several appeals to be applied before the sentence is carried out, hopefully in which you will win your freedom. We will write a custom essay sample on Capital Punishment specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Capital Punishment specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Capital Punishment specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Of course its never just the perpetrator who suffers for their felony, relatives and friends also have to suffer the pain of losing a loved one, the person who has to perform the execution may have to face remorse and regret, and also the issuing judge has to go through the guilt complex of knowing that they have just taken away another persons life. A vicious circle forms as it becomes clear of how many people are forced to face the mixed feelings and weight of one mans sin. Though it is the judge who issues the sentence, its someone else who has to perform the death sentence. Its then someone else who has to bury the person, the relatives who have to attend the funeral and go through all the grief and anguish at losing a loved one. It has been known for the friends or relatives to cure their depression by taking revenge, and sadly, they feel that their anguish could only be fulfilled by killing the person to blame. Then the picture is back in court where once again their lives are to be fortuned by a man they have never met before, and so the circle continues. It must be hard for the person who has to perform the sentence; its scarring their name, emotions and lifestyle forever. The unpleasant feelings of sorrow and guilt as they perform the execution must be incredibly immense, its hard to truly understand and sympathise with these people. Bad feelings may also be felt by the judge because he may feel he concluded wrongly, but is forced to continue normally, knowing that again because of him a human life was destroyed. Imagine the outlook if it was later discovered that the now deceased individual was innocent all along, but though he had sworn his innocence, it had fallen on deaf ears as the conclusion had been the death penalty. Perhaps the outcome isnt always so extreme, but so many people have to suffer for one persons crime and another mans decision, is it really worth it? But of course, if it was evident that the being on trial was guilty, and they were killed for it, the feelings of knowing that you took another mans life away could be contented with the thought that by ridding the world of such an evil person you are encouraging the longed for peace, and possibly saving endangered innocent lives. The execution has ensured that had the person been freed from prison they wouldnt commit the same crime again and make yet more people, relatives, friends suffer for one individuals transgression. Also, if that person had committed the crime due to a mental illness, then you could argue that by stubbing them out you are preventing it from being passed on genetically to their children, and their childrens children and so on. Consequently you are preventing a whole line of these particular mentally deformed people who perform such devastating and distressing actions on innocuous, unknowing folks. But who decides what crimes fulfil the requirements to die, and what crimes can be justified by imprisonment? Who has the right to make the decision of taking a human life away, whatever the reason? Is it justice to take life to make up for another lost one? Where do you draw the line, what age is the satisfactory age to receive the death penalty? Take the Jamie Buldger incident for instance, two ten-year-old boys tortured and killed an unknowing two-year-old boy for amusement, did they also deserve to die or were they too young to truly know what they were doing? In my opinion when a ten-year-old boy viciously kills a two-year-old child, they really cant be right in the head and I feel they really can be described as evil, but still, they blame their hard upbringings, so is this a good enough excuse? Another reason against capital punishment is that by executing those at fault, they are not given the chance for that person to reform their character for the good. People killed for deeds like smuggling drugs arent necessary bad people, they may just have been in a situation where by smuggling and hopefully selling the drugs they could have made something better of themselves. Also, even murderers may have a story behind them. Others may have forced them into it or it may have been an act of self-defence, perhaps they were just trying to threaten or scare their victim but never meant for it to go any further, so therefore not necessarily their fault. However if these people are really good at heart then they may believe they deserve it from guilt or from disgusted feelings about themselves. It might even be better for these people to be killed as it saves them from having to face up to the remorse and dwell in self-pity, also from abuse of outsiders or even those in the prison with them. But if they arent so gold hearted then perhaps the guilt is a good thing as its an extra internal punishment, and sometimes can be far worse than anything any human could inflict. A question that is aroused about capital punishment is if by killing the person at fault, are they being punished enough for the deeds they have done? Do they suffer efficiently and truly regret their actions? By being killed, they no longer have to live with the bad feelings, the regret, guilt, remorse, and possibly fear of others around them. They will be free of prison and all the regulations, labour and intensity that come with it. Some may have strong beliefs of a better life after death, in which case they have nothing to fear, only something to look forward to. Especially those sentenced to lethal injection, as the pain is minute, its just like a long, peaceful sleep. It this really a brutal enough sentence for (for instance) a man who kidnapped, raped, tortured and killed young girls for pleasure? But not everyone sees it like this. Some of the people may be petrified of dying, and feel that they will end up in a worse place after death because of their inhumane actions. Also executions like hanging or electrocution are excruciating ways to die, so the punishment is great. But is it too great? Perhaps not for a crime like murder, but people are still hung for rape or even from dealing or smuggling drugs, so is this right? Do these people really deserve to die in such an extreme way? Wouldnt lifetime imprisonment be more adequate? It isnt as severe on those less deserving, but can still be a cruel experience. Hopefully a lesson would be taught after encountering the hard, violent, restricting and discriminating environment of prison. However, now days you cant even count on the prisons to be harsh enough. From documentaries shown on television on the insight of British prisons, we can see that they really arent that big a punishment. They provide warmth, shelter, regular meals, luxuries such as television, and pool tables, recurrent visiting sessions to see friends and family, and can provide companionship with other people in the same position as you. If you were homeless, constantly hungry, cold and owned nothing, then your going to want to go to prison, as you can almost be guaranteed a better life! Though prisons abroad seem to have a stricter routine, if you have nothing, then what have you got to lose? Also reports have shown that some people find love in p rison, is it really a punishment to be enclosed with your lover, the only person you would want to be enclosed with? Its hardly a huge penalty. Having the fear of the death penalty gives your conscience a reason to argue with your actions, it makes you think twice before continuing, and teaches others that the crime will not simply be overlooked and the seriousness of it. It also proves how strong and strict the law can and will be for justified crimes, teaching younger people not to do them through fear of what the consequence could be. The cost of running a prison furthermore is very expensive, good money is being spent on the well being of criminals oppose to it being spent on education, hospitals, environmental issues and the promotional aspect of reaching and stopping the younger generation from also ending up in prison. Though it may sound immoral, the truth is its cheaper for a person to be executed than to be kept in prison. By executing all the people who performed a crime like murder, you are lowering the prison numbers, and so reducing the cost, therefore there is more money to spend on the areas that need and deserve it most. But surely by putting bad people in prison for a prolonged time, you are helping the world become a better place. By not killing the people and imprisoning them instead, you are still teaching them a lesson and yet by not killing them, you are not sinking to their level as well, and contradicting the law. It hopefully still brings the message across to the younger generation on what and what not to do, but just in a much more humane way. Also, with the sentence lighter, it will hopefully encourage people to come forward with information or even to confess to the crime. Nevertheless, if the death sentence is carried out, are you not still helping to make the world a better place by ridding it of all these unruly people forever, allowing those innocent to feel safe again? It lets those involved sleep easily once more, and live a happier, more relaxed life and generally have peace of mind. The message still gets across to the younger generation, but this time in a much more threatening and effective way. Also, by exterminating those on the wrong side of the law you are ensuring that had they ever been released or even escaped, more innocent lives wouldnt be affected or even destroyed. Of course, a good reason for capital punishment is simply that they deserve it. If a bloodthirsty killer for no provoked, reasonable motive murders innocent, undeserving people, then why should they live? They are heartless and cruel, and need to be punished. It is proper suffering for their atrocious offence, especially if they are put onto death row for a few years, then they will suitably suffer. Though it is said that surely by killing a murderer you are just as bad as them, is this really so? What is worse? Someone killing a person who neither knows them nor has done anything to offend them for pleasure or because something inside them tells them to, or, someone executing that guilty, malevolent person? They are hardly the same. As stated in Genesis 9:6, whosoever sheds mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed, it is letting the punishment fit the crime, and therefore isnt as wicked and terrible as the initial murderers crime. But a wrong doesnt make a right, you are always going to be criticised for killing a murderer, however right it may have seemed at the time. While researching on the Internet I came across a site containing the letters of a man who was on death row in America, awaiting his death, though unprovoked he had killed three men. His name was Richard, the letters were addressed to a friend he had met through the pen-pal organisations with prisoners, and the two had become close. The friend worked as a teacher, and kept in touch with Richard the whole three years he was on death row. While reading through the letters there was one I found most interesting, which I feel is a significant view from a victim of Capital Punishment. He wrote; Your class of the 19th sounded very exciting with all the debating and questions going on. You have your work cut out for you where a couple of kids are concerned. Would they pull the switch? I find it interesting, I sit here on death row for killing 3 men, and yet I couldnt pull the switch on anyone. Maybe people need to think beyond the person who committed the crime and think of the people who will be hurt most by it. Do the kids in your class say why they support such an evil? Do they think death is worse then spending a lifetime in prison? If they do, tell them to go and sit in their bathroom for a couple of hours and think of a lifetime of that. If one believes in the death penalty, then they dont really think murder is wrong, just getting caught is. What about the people who have committed worse acts of murder then most of the guys on death row but got life? Whats worse, two guys who rape and murders a 12 year old girl, stabs her, put sand in the mouth and nose to suffocate he r and come back the next day to burn her body (When they snatched her, she was on her way to the store for her mother), or 4 guys who robbed and killed three drug dealers? Ask the kids who should have gotten the death penalty if they can only choose one. The murderers were the same age. One had money and the other didnt. One wore a suit to court the other didnt. You know the ending. My eyes hurt, and your class has given me a headache. It brings up the issue of prejudice, not always in respect of colour, but also on the wealth and prosperity of the person convicted. It is an obvious issue that if you do have the money to pay for the right look, lawyers and legal aid then you are going to come off better, whatever your crime. There can be big racial prejudice in the court, and sadly, though not always, it is more against poorer black people who havent got the money or means to support their case. It shows the law to be unjust when one coloured person goes down harshly for the same crime committed by a different coloured person, whereas the second coloured person gets a much lighter sentence. Is this really righteousness? Also, surely if, for instance, a white person sees other white people getting off with their crime will they not continue to do it? Children will start growing up thinking that because they are of a certain colour they cannot get into trouble, which in some respects appears to be true. If you live i n what is considered as poorer housing, it can affect the outcome of your trial, though it shouldnt, because you come from a bad part of town you are automatically going to be considered bad. Gender plays a big part in court, male judges tend to give much harsher sentences than female, making it deeply unfair to those generally convicted by males. Religion can also be important in the decision, if the person has the opposing religion to the judge or jury than it unfortunately can and has made a difference in the judges final verdict. It really is so hard and yet so unfair in this world of give and take. In conclusion to the question of whether capital punishment should be an option or not, I find myself with mixed feelings. There are points I strongly agree with on both sides of the argument, and some I find a weak line of relevance to my assumption. Much consideration and debate went into my last viewpoint on the whole discussion and I have expressed my true feelings on the subject. I comprehend the difficulty of making a decision on what cases are appalling enough to deserve the ultimate punishment. Who does have the right to call death, life is precious, no one should devaluate it and no one in reality should have the right to take it away from someone else. But is it really that wrong if it helps to improve the world and brings peace of mind to many people? I personally dont think it is always that bad if the decision is coming from a judge about a sick -minded murderer, do you? I agree with capital punishment in some cases. I think it is required as a punishment to not only teach both that person and other likely candidates of the same crime a firm lesson, but also because I feel its justice, justice to the victim, justice to the friends and family of the victim, and justice to the world from a safer, more formidable and optimistic view. The main case I feel that execution is needed is murder, and only then in particular cases. I do not agree with the killing of people for smuggling or dealing drugs, rape, treason, and burglary as I feel it is inadequate, overdramatic and too severe to be considered humane. With murder I believe that the recognised capital crime should be that of a person who viciously planned the murder of their victim. It should be even more compulsory if the murdered victim was a child, an older, elderly person, or even someone like a policeman on duty who was only doing their instructed job. The attack must be from a cold, calculating p erson who did it out of spite rather than, for instance, euthanasia. I particularly pointed out the elderly and children as a strong cause because they are generally defenceless and innocent, which these malicious people pick up on and use to their advantage in a cruel, heartless way. I disagree that people should be killed if the murder was performed in the heat of the moment e.g. in a fit of rage, jealousy or passion. This doesnt necessary mean that they are evil people, we all make mistakes when at the peaks of our emotions. Though they still killed someone so unless it can be proven as self-defence, they should still get a long sentence. The other crime which I feel is justified with the punishment of the death sentence is the kidnapping and torturing of another human being until they are barely alive. This is the work of monsters, not sane human beings; these people dont deserve to live. I think that if capital punishment was brought back to England then despite the obvious reason, I do believe it would save lives. People would be much more cautious about there actions, and wouldnt get themselves so frequently into positions where death could occur. For instance, it is general knowledge that when you perform a robbery you carry a gun. This is because if you do have to shoot and kill someone whats to worry about? So you may get a few more years but theres appeal, so whats the big deal about killing someone who gets in your way? If Capital Punishment was reinstated then I feel it would act as a deterrent to these kinds of people, and prove to save many more innocent ones. I think that five years on death row should be obligatory because if the convicted is truly guiltless, it gives them the time to reinstate themselves and their innocence, whereas if they are guilty, it still gives them the endearing prison sentence. I really dont believe that by killing these people we are bringing ourselves down to that level because no one could get that low. There a good vindicated reason for the death of these people, whereas their victims suffered for a bit of fun.

buy custom The Three Strikes Law essay

buy custom The Three Strikes Law essay The justification for this law is the fact that recurrent law breakers seem to be the hardest criminals to manage. They seem to be impassive to internment for behavior change which leaves the three strikes law as the only fair option to deal with such criminals. First, lets start from examining the different motives of law offenders, assuming the fact that these are serious violations. If the law hunts them down and they still manage to repeat violations after serving their terms, then the three strikes law comes out as very fair. The law simply sums up all the possible sentences. This is because the first sentence did not work, the second one failed to correct the offenders, leaving the three strikes law as the only option that could protect society from danger. Continuous law breaking through committing serious felonies should deny the criminals some if not absolute degree of freedom. The Three Strikes Law and Constitutionality The constitutionality of the three strikes law may be challenged because of the level of disproportion in the sentences. According to Chemerinsky (2004), the punishment may seem cruel, unusual and in violation of the eighth amendment to the United States constitution. This is in regard to the state of California where the state department of corrections does not need third offence to be that serious to apply the law. According to Packel (2002), courts give life sentences to violations as petty as mere shop lifting. The law may seem unfair in this case, though it is not for the reason being that subsequent offenders need it because they do not seem to learn from previous corrections. The possibility of subsequent law breakers reforming seems to be null. The reason is that they continuously break the law starting with serious violations. If the third offence is not that serious, it is not a surety that the fourth one may not also be serious, it could be a murder. For one to commit seri ous violations more than twice without rehabilitation after conviction leaves room for the thought that the person may never change. The three strike law simply aims at repeat offenders who refuse to change from their criminal behavior which makes the law very fair. The law simply leaves no room for regrets, and reduces the frequency of crime in the states considerably. The fact that the law does not give judges the discretion on the term of incarceration to impose on criminals eliminates favoritism. This is one of the reasons why the law is fair and should be implemented fully. The frequency, persistence and depth of felonies should remain as the ones dictating the length of imprisonment. The administration of law to defendants does not rely only on the last offence, but also on the detainees previous crime history. Furthermore, the law acts as a physical incapacitation measure to habitual offenders (Helland Tabarrok, 2007). The effectiveness of this law in incapacitation is that it enhances crime reduction as it keeps habitual offenders off the streets, and deters repeat offenders from committing crimes, which would otherwise earn them long jail terms including life imprisonment. Passing of three strikes laws proves that the states have been tough on crime. The law has significantly reduced the level of crime in United States of America since implementation. This is a fair law because it has led to reduction of prison population as it serves as a deterrent to potential repeat criminals. This is more psychological as the criminals decide to think twice before involving themselves in crime. The point is that the law is fair as it makes potential repeat criminals to think twice and, in essence, it checks prison population. The main idea is fear of crime, which will make repeat offenders to reform. It has definite differentiations as to which crime is seious and violent, and which one is violent and not serious. Helland Tabarrok (2007) argue that a violent offence includes physical injury. In California, one is applied the three strike law, if the first two crimes are serious or violent violations. The third need not be necessarily serious, it can be a felony. F airness in this application is that the law has a broader definition of serious and violent violations. This makes it very effective in crime reduction and eradication. Although one can question cost effectiveness of the law regarding the source of money to enforce it and the cost of the law versus effects on crime, it does not affect and touch fairness or unfairness of the law. It simply targets high rate offenders in the state, making them have a seriously modest impact on crime. The society needs to be crime free and this is what this law strives for. For this reason, the law is ethically fair and effective. Given the fact that some criminal violations like shoplifting in California earn offenders longer imprisonments because of prior criminal records, it makes three strikes law look harsher (Caulkins, 2001), considering the fact that the criminals fail to learn and go on committing violations even after having faced jail terms, and makes the laws effective in dealing with hard core criminals, regardless of the depth of crime they commit. In California, though all violations are strikes, three of them earn one long sentence. Let us consider a case involving a California resident, Santos Reyes (Erin, 2005). He committed a burglary in his young ages, then committed a robbery which was nonviolent. He later cheated in a drivers test. This led to application of three strikes law and convicting him to 26 years of imprisonment. The fairness of the application of three strikes law could be questioned here. However, it can be justified because of the fact that Reyes had become a habitual offender. The fact that he began when he was still a juvenile makes him very dangerous, because no one knows what offence he would have committed next. While agreeing with Helland Tabarroks (2007) argument that administration of the law does not help in deterrence, it also does not make punishment cruel and unusual. However, the continuous committing of the violations remains cruel and unusual. The eighth amendment was not violated in this case and ruling was not cruel and unusual. Criticism of the three strikes sentencing is high based on the possibility of a multiple third strikes in a single charge, where a defendant gets two separate sentences running concurrently. This can extrapolate the sentence to 50 and more years or life imprisonment. Organizations representing human rights criticize the law seeking reverse on some of its sections. They mostly base their arguments on the ethical implications for families of the defendants. While critically analyzing their basis, it is a hypocritical take because the fact that the defendants commit violations makes them unethical. To make things worse, they do it repeatedly. The only remedy could be application of the three strikes law which will bar them from committing more violations, whether minor, serious or violent ones. Considering a case example involving Leandro Andrade who stole video tapes in an Ontario store and two weeks later went on to steal others in a mart in Montclair. Horn (2004) writes that the man had previously been convicted of other crimes like petty theft, burglary, drug transportation and prison escape. This means that he was a habitual offender. For the fact that this man was not willing to give up crime even after several imprisonments and jail terms, he earned the three strikes law application. The reason for that is the fact that he would not change and even after release, he got himself into another crime. Therefore, the three strikee law is fair and is the only way through which the society can get rid itself of crime. If anyone was to argue that punishment that courts impose on the habitual law breakers is cruel and unusual, then they would be simply endorsing continuous criminalization. They would be siding with criminals to tell them that they should go on with crime as others including human rights activists, who come in and argue on their behalf that the sentences are unusual. The essence is that crimes characterized by their repetitive nature are unusual. The three strikes law considers age factor but still bears in mind the societal safety. Minors under juvenile court receive care, treatment and guidance consistent with their best interests holding them accountable for their behavior and appropriate for their circumstances. This means that no matter how harsh the law may sound, it is still fair and considerate. The most important factor in this case, is public safety. The longer the habitual crime offenders stay in prison, the safer the public. Civil rights campaigns advocating against three strikes law should put public safety first. This is because the law only applies to habitual offenders who endanger the society. They should bear in mind that it is not easy to predict the nature and time of a particular crime. With this, there is room for shielding the society against crime that could be predictive because offenders are kept behind bars. This strengthens the fact that the law is fair to the society at large. The basis of my affirmative argument is that serious and violent felony offenders with continuity to commit the same crimes should be incapacitated. This could be through imposition of the three strikes law to them. In California, a juvenile burglary of a resident counts only if adjudicated in combination with another felony like armed robbery (Helland Tabarrok, 2007).This makes the law fair as it gives the law breakers a second chance, which they break again. By putting aside this law simply because it does not consider the civil rights of defendants, one ignores safety of the public, which also has rights to be protected against danger from potential criminals. Owing to the fact that three strikes law gets underway after the defendant has committed three violations, it means the offender has totally refused other ways of rehabilitation and redemption (Packel, 2002). Leaving such a defendant to go on living in the society leaves room for another offence which will still take them back to court and subsequently to prison. It will end up being a cycle and the only way of cutting it is through application of the three strike law to offenders. Conclusion The three strike law is the most effective and fair way of protecting the society from danger. Kieso (2003) writes that the law ensures that people committing serious and violent violations the third time get 25 and more years imprisonment without the possibility of bail. It is fair because the shorter periods of previous prison confinement did not change them, thus their absence from the society will ensure social safety and comfort. Generally, it is better to exclude a few individuals from the society and save the rest by ensuring that habitual criminals stay behind bars for the longest time possible. According to Bazelon (2010), implementation of law ensures a great percentage reduction of serious felonies committed by adults. This law has the ability to eliminate or reduce serious and violent crimes from the society like rape, murder and other assaults in the society. The law is very fair in terms of safety of the society but considerably harsh to the criminals. One has to bear in mind that criminals have to be dealt with harshly in order to protect the society, because they commit crimes knowing their consequences. Buy custom The Three Strikes Law essay

The Albatrosses and a Killer Whale Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

The Albatrosses and a Killer Whale - Essay Example Changes caused to the marine environment due to natural as well as human reasons, as stated by Safina, have made the albatrosses vulnerable (qtd. in Sakamoto et al. 1). As mentioned by Croxall and Brooke, in recent times, studies have been carried out about the diet and foraging habits of these birds. However, little is known about how albatrosses actually locate their prey in the open ocean (qtd. in Sakamoto et al. 1). Previous studies found it difficult to follow individual birds, and thus could not find out all about the foraging activities employed by them. This particular study is mainly aimed at examining how albatrosses find their prey, as well as how they deal with and respond to their environment while on their foraging trips in the Southern Ocean (Sakamoto et al. 1). Four black-browed albatrosses were captured at their nest sites in Bird Island, Southern Georgia for the purpose of this study, and still cameras were attached to their backs. Three of the four birds were recaptured and the instruments retrieved. The fourth bird could not be recaptured. The camera was equipped with depth and temperature sensors. After the recovery of the instruments, the data captured, which included image, depth and temperature, were downloaded to a PC. The environment around the study birds was studied. Other animals or birds which appeared in the images were also scrutinized. Depth data were analyzed with a behavior analysis program.

Impacts of the recent mortgage crisis on the money supply in the Research Paper

Impacts of the recent mortgage crisis on the money supply in the United States and the actions of Federal Reserve take in response to the mortgage crisis - Research Paper Example One of the major reasons of the recent financial crisis in United Sates was the mortgage crisis. Mortgage crisis refers to a situation in which the money borrowers fail to repay the money they lent from financial institutions. American financial institutions miscalculated that American economy is strong enough to overcome any kind of crisis situation and it is not necessary to bother much about the repaying capacities of the people who approach them for loans and other financial aids. Greedy public exploited the opportunities very well and they approached American banks for financial aids to purchase lavish apartments, real estate properties, vehicles etc. American banks imposed no restrictions in mortgage sanctioning and dispersed huge amount of money for maximising their profits. In most of the other countries, mortgages are sanctioned only after the assessment of the financial abilities of the customer. But in America, banks have shown fewer interests in assessing the abilities of the customers. The unexpected mortgage crisis impacted heavily on the money supply in America and Federal Reserve forced to take strong measures to counter the mortgage crisis. Impacts of the recent mortgage crisis on the money supply in the United States The major impact of the recent mortgage crisis on money supply in America was the change in behaviours of the investors.... driven some analysts to argue that should the monetary policy response fail to restore confidence among investors, the outcome would be the worst crisis seen since the Great Depression† (The United States Subprime Mortgage Crisis And Its Implications For The Caribbean, 2008, p.1). Real estate sector was the worst affected industry as a result of the recent mortgage crisis and subsequent money supply problems. Majority of the real estate business groups rely heavily on mortgages from financial institutions for the completion of their projects. As a result of the reluctance of the investors in investing in banks, Banks started to find money shortages to assist the real estate sector. Banks started to impose strict norms for sanctioning mortgages to real estate people. Moreover, people who approached banks for financial aids for purchasing properties were told that no more mortgages were possible without adequate proof about their financial abilities. Thus, both the real estate bu siness groups and the people who liked to purchase some properties suffered heavily and as a result of that real estate business started collapse. The impacts of mortgage crisis have not been limited to the financial sector alone. In fact, it has spilled into the real economy also and as result of that American economic growth has been reduced considerably over the last four years period. Economic activities in America have been reduced considerably because of the shortage of money in the hands of the public. Moreover, Americans started realise the importance of saving money for future crisis situations as they learned a lesson from the recent crisis. Thus, Americans started to cut down their lavish spending habits because of the mortgage crisis and subsequent recession problems. According to

Paper Two Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Paper Two - Essay Example There are available tenets and beliefs that the church is only concerned in teaching people and aid them to achieve salvation via the grace given by God. Thus can be taken to be the principal reason of existence for the church but there are other reasons for its existence. A church is a place where people in the community meet a few times in a week in order to be taught morals and tactics of living peacefully with each other. The church exists in all communities and there is nowhere in the 160 sovereign nations existing today that does not have one. Each and every community honouring the basic human rights retains a big role for the church. For instance, in countries where it is marred with racism, then the church plays a key role in ensuring that the people live together in peace and harmony. If there are any disagreements, then the church ensure that it solves the issue and come up with a long lasting solution. Mostly the clergy are notified of the issue and they call them for consultation (MRM, n.pag). Therefore the church plays a major role of uniting people and ensuring that the community has peace. The clergy men act like Jesus when he took the human flesh and came to live among us. Another major role played by the church in the community is provision of refuge for the less privileged people in the community. There are many people in the society that cannot afford the basic needs and therefore, the church has makes sure that these people have their needs taken care of (MRM, n.pag). For instance, there are some people in the society that are homeless. Therefore, the churches have organized safe houses where they can spend their nights as well as get access to other amenities. In this case the church plays the role of making people in the community feel appreciated and dignified which is a major breakthrough in the society. Another example is provision of children’s homes for orphans. Many

The Last of the Mohicans and Hope Leslie Comparison

The Last of the Mohicans and Hope Leslie Comparison Introduction Racial issues occupy the principal place in American Literature due to the prolonged racial relations between Native Americans and European colonizers. The aim of this dissertation is to compare and contrast the issue of miscegenation through the principal characters of James Fenimore Coopers The Last of the Mohicans and Catharine Maria Sedgwicks Hope Leslie. The word miscegenation, which consists of two parts miscere and genus and means a sexual racial mixture, appeared only at the end of the nineteenth century; however, this word is usually utilised in the analysis of earlier literary works. Applying to a profound and realistic portrayal of gender and racial relations between Native Americans and white people in the period of Indian and French Wars, Cooper and Sedgwick introduce their own vision of Indians, implicitly maintaining the idea that miscegenation should be prohibited. In this regard, these writers reflect the existing political and social issues that shaped the attitude of white people towards Native Americans. In particular, at the end of the seventeenth century some American states passed specific laws that were aimed at forbidding miscegenation and depriving people of different races, except white population, of their political rights, violating the principles of equality. On the one hand, miscegenation might decrease the differences between two races, but, on the other hand, it was thought to aggravate these dissimilarities by removing people from their usual background and by preventing them to integrate into the new environment. According to Robert Clark (1984), Americas â€Å"vision of itself was in large measure the projection of an ideal and about-to-be-realized condition, rather than an appropriation of the past in the name of reason† (p.46). As a result, America became involved in complex racial tensions and conflicts that were especially negative for Native Americans. This was the main reason for Coopers and Sedgwicks rejection of miscegenation. But in the process of colonization Europeans continued to interact with Native Americans, and these interactions usually resulted in race mixtures that were further reflected in American literature. Some people made attempts to support miscegenation by pointing at the fact that such interracial relations could provide both races with necessary freedom and would allow white females to reveal their sexual desires towards males of different races. However, the existing racial prejudices and social stereotypes against miscegenation not only prevented the spread of such vision among the majority of American population, but also greatly influenced the representation of Native Americans in the nineteenth-century fiction. Being closely connected with political and social ideologies, this fiction was divided into two parts: some novels tried to maintain the status quo, as is just the case with the narrations of Sedgwick and Cooper, while other literary works pointed at the necessity of social changes. Gender relations and miscegenation in the novels America is the country that has united people of different races since the period of colonization. However, in the process of interaction colonizers made constant attempts to destroy cultural and religious beliefs of Native Americans. According to Arthur M. Schlesinger (1992), â€Å"when people of different ethnic origins, speaking different languages and professing different religions, settle in the same geographic locality†¦ tribal hostilities will drive them apart† (p.10). The indigenous population of the country wanted to preserve their cultural identity and opposed to the ideals of white people. Such refusal resulted in many racial conflicts and had a great impact on the attitude of White Americans towards the issue of miscegenation. In patriarchal America any relations between a white woman and a Native American were strongly prohibited, and, as Martin Barker (1993) states, â€Å"it is this running concern about miscegenation with its connected fears about interracial sexual attraction that leads to death† (p.27). In those times it was thought that if a person was engaged in sexual relations with a person of a different race, then both people should be killed in order to prevent the spread of miscegenation. Such complex racial relations and rejection of miscegenation are especially reflected in the novels of James Fenimore Cooper The Last of the Mohicans and Catharine Maria Sedgwick Hope Leslie. As Stephanie Wardrop (1997) puts it, Coopers The Last of the Mohicans â€Å"presents a world in which the mixing of races is morally repugnant and anathema to the American project of nation building† (p.61). Throughout the narration Fenimore Cooper contrasts people with mixed and unmixed blood, as if wishing to reveal the differences between the characters of various races. Despite the fact that Hawkeye is culturally connected with both white people and Indians, he is presented as a person â€Å"without a cross† (Cooper, 1984 p.4). The same regards Alice Munro who is â€Å"surprisingly fair† (Cooper, 1984 p.378) and Chingachgook who is an unmixed Mohican. Contrary to these characters, Cora, the elder sister of Alice, is of mixed race, and it is she who protects her sister at the cost of her life. Belonging to the race of West Indians, Cora comes from â€Å"that unfortunate class who are so basely enslaved to administer to the wants of a luxurious people† (Cooper, 1984 p.310), and thus, she is prohibited to marry a person from the South. In this regard, miscegenation was treated as blameworthy in those times, and when Magua proposes Cora to marry him, she claims that â€Å"the thought itself is worse than a thousand deaths† (Cooper, 1984 p.124). These words prove that only Uncas and Chingachgook are presented as noble people, while all other Native Americans are regarded as cruel savages. Thats why miscegenation between a white person and an Indian was widely restricted. Although Catharine Sedgwicks Hope Leslie also reveals this restriction, she points at the possibility of miscegenation between some secondary characters. Contrary to Cooper, the writer provides a rather humane vision of Native Americans. Faith, the sister of Leslie Hope, manages to marry Oneco, the brother of a Pequoud princess Magawisca. According to Leland Person (1985), Sedgwick belongs to those American female authors who in their novels reflect how an â€Å"Indian male, reverential and loving rather than possessive and authoritarian, offers a romantic contrast to the arbitrary authority of Puritan society† (p.683). This can be also true in regard to Coopers narration, where the writer introduces such Indian character as Uncas with noble features and attractiveness. However, similar to Magawisca who is not able to become a wife of Everell and instead she has to regard him â€Å"as her brother† (Sedgwick, 1987 p.30), Uncas is also prohibited to marry Cora. Due to serious racial prejudices, Magawisca is an inappropriate match to Everell, while Hope Leslie suits for the position of Everells wife. By the end of the narration the writer shows that any marriage should be based on love, as Magawisca claims, â€Å"Ye need not the lesson, ye will each be to the other a full stream of happiness. May it be fed from the fountain of love, and grow broader and deeper through all the passage of life† (Sedgwick, 1987 p.333). Thus, the writer proves that some Native Americans possess wisdom and nobility; however, they are not able to unite with European Americans. Magawisca is rejected by both societies, as Wardrop (1997) claims, â€Å"from the white for her association by blood with savages and from the Pequod for her association with the whites that leads her to rescue Everell† (p.64). Magawisca saves the person she loves at the cost of her own rejection and isolation, but she is not able to marry him. Similar to Sedgwicks women, female characters of Cooper are divided into â€Å"those who can be married and those who cannot† (Baym, 1992 p.20). In this regard, racial and cultural differences are aggravated by gender stereotypes that put women in subordinate positions and make them act in accordance with the existing social and moral norms. On the example of their female characters Sedgwick and Cooper reveal that women are prohibited any freedom and equality, especially concerning their choice of marital partners. Those women, who prefer to ignore racial prejudices and assigned roles, are either rejected by society or die. This is especially true in regard to Magawisca and Cora who try to act, according to their moral values, but their attempts result in negative consequences for both women. But, above all, these women are appreciated for their racial characteristics. Alices racial purity is explained by her pure unmixed blood, while Cora, being a daughter of a Creole woman and a British soldier, is regarded as sinful. Implicitly opposing to miscegenation, Cooper prefers to kill Uncas, Cora and Magua in order to prevent an unsuitable marriage. As Terence Martin (1992) states, Fenimore Cooper â€Å"cannot conceive of a marriage between the daughter of Major Munro, no matter her background, and an Indian, no matter how noble† (p.63). The writer eliminates these relations, thus revealing his support for pure, unmixed marriages. As a child of miscegenation, Cora is unsuitable for both white and Indian worlds. According to Wardrop (1997), â€Å"Earlier Indian romances seem to present the hero more often as half-blood, perhaps mitigating the taboo of miscegenation somewhat by presenting a hero who is at least half white† (p.73). But it is the character with unmixed blood that becomes popular in further romantic literature. Although Maria Sedgwick points at the possibility of miscegenation, she still considers it inappropriate in the majority of cases. Similar to Cora, Sedgwicks character Magawisca appears to be banished from both societies, but the writer presents â€Å"a more sympathetic view of both Native Americans and women†¦ concentrate[ing] more on the domestic and interpersonal than the martial [issues]† (Wardrop, 1997 p.63). Cora and Magawisca are powerful and unusual women with many virtues; however, they suffer as a result of their parents miscegenation. According to John McWilliams (1995), â€Å"Cora is one of those characters who show us both the limitations of societys racial and gender boundaries and the dangers of stepping over them† (p.74). Cooper considers that Coras marriage to Uncas would be a threat to the existence of both societies, therefore the writer â€Å"appears to have believed in the purity of the races† (Barker Sabin, 1995, p.21). Their deaths are presented by Cooper as the only possible outcome, because it is better for them to die than to be rejected by their own societies. As Barker (1993) reveals, in this novel â€Å"the twin deaths of Uncas and Cora prevent the reality of interracial sex with the disappearance of the Mohicans† (p.27). Applying to these characters, Cooper points at the fact that miscegenation between White Americans and Native Americans is impossible, until the indigenous population adheres to the cultural and social norms of the colonizers and destroys their culture. On the other hand, the writer suggests that Cora and Uncas will be connected with each other after death, while Hawkeye opposes to this view by claiming that â€Å"the spirit of the paleface has no need of food or raiment – their gifts being according to the heaven of their colour† (Cooper, 1984 p.346). Contrary to some other characters, Hawkeye rises against miscegenation and considers that there is â€Å"no ideal bond of union† (Cooper, 1984 p.348) that would result in mutual cooperation between different races. The marriage of Alice and Duncan, persons with pure blood, symbolises the subsequent spread of unmixed marriages, while the death of Uncas, the last of the Mohicans, reveals the gradual disappearance of Native Americans and the power of civilised society. As sagamore Tamenund claims at the end of the narration, â€Å"The pale-faces are masters of the earth, and the time of the red-men has not yet come again† (Cooper, 1984 p.350). The inability of Cora and Uncas to marry because of racial prejudices points at moral disintegration of American population. Their deaths reveal that miscegenation is considered wrong by both white people and Indians, resulting in the impossibility to achieve peace and mutual support. However, love between Uncas and Cora shows that racial prejudices are able to separate people, but they are unable to eliminate powerful feelings. The same regards Everell and Magawisca who experience certain attraction to each other, but who realise that their desires should be eliminated because of cultural and racial differences. Therefore, Sedgwick reveals that cultures control peoples lives, depriving them of the possibility to follow their own paths, because culture is connected with both private and public spheres. As a result, both Cooper and Sedgwick discuss miscegenation through political and social contexts, pointing at the fact that the relations between two races are considerably complicated by the occurred events and the established standards. As a result, such character as Hawkeye opposes to both races, claiming that â€Å"to me every native, who speaks a foreign tongue, is accounted an enemy, though he may pretend to serve the king!† (Cooper, 1984 p.50). He doesnt belong to either society and he doesnt believe in the possibility of miscegenation. To some extent, such viewpoint can be explained by the fact that when a person of one race integrates with a person of another race, he/she takes part in either assimilation or acculturation. However, in many cases miscegenation is mainly based on sexual mixture between people of different races, but not on cultural mixture. As a result, people are rejected by their own society and are not accepted by another society. This is just the case with Cora and Magawisca who are not allowed to be engaged in sexual relations with males of different races, because their cultures prevent them from the mixture with each other. Both Sedgwick and Cooper demonstrate that the existing stereotypes reflect the ideas of cultural purity that are closely connected with racial purity. Such vision is rather paradoxical, because even the purest race is certainly a mixture race, but White Americans prefer to ignore this particular fact, making constant attempts to achieve dominance over Native Americans. In this regard, it is easier to understand Sedgwicks and Coopers attitude towards miscegenation. Cora, as a child of two races, is considered less pure in comparison with Alice, because Cora is an embodiment of two bloods and two cultures, and it is this particular mixture that White Americans tried to prevent. They did not want to be assimilated with another culture, because in that case they would lose their dominant position over the indigenous population. In addition, such attitude was considerable shaped by political ideologies of those times; opposing to miscegenation, American rulers tried to prohibit any social changes within the country and simultaneously they utilized racial tensions and conflicts for their own benefits. It is obvious that miscegenation was a threat to the existence of white supremacy, because it eliminated specifically inspired differences between two races. The attitude towards miscegenation was also aggravated by the fact that it provided people of mixing blood with those features that were prohibited by American society. Cora greatly differs from her half-sister Alice; Cora is more powerful and independent than Alice. The same concerns Magawisca, a rather strong and wise female who takes her own decisions, which are consistent with her moral values. In this regard, women began to occupy an equal position with men or were even superior to them, and such changes couldnt be easily accepted in the patriarchal world. Miscegenation allowed women to reveal their sexual desires towards males of another race and become more independent; however, natural instincts were a norm only for men, while women were not considered to experience powerful sexual desires. It was thought unnatural for a white woman to feel compassion or love towards an Indian or a black person, and vice versa. Despite the fact that Cora is a half-Indian, she is brought up among people of white culture, thus she is prohibited to marry an Indian Uncas. Magawisca is also deprived of the opportunity to marry Everell, as Sedgwick points out that love relations between Magawisca and Everall are impossible and unnatural because of their cultural and racial differences, while the relations between Hope Leslie and Everall are natural. Miscegenation reflects the mixture of two races, of two cultures, one of which is the culture of the colonizer and another is the culture of the indigene. Thus, miscegenation was especially connected with female sexuality that was widely controlled by the state to prevent undesirable inheritance. However, women who couldnt achieve equal positions with men in political and social spheres began to readily support miscegenation. But in their novels Cooper and Sedgwick reveal that their attempts are vain; almost all female characters that interact with people of different races lose at the end. Many females understood people of other races, because their positions were similar; women, like Indians and black people, were regarded as inferior to men and they usually experienced suppression and humiliation. For women, miscegenation was the way to destroy subjugation and overcome social stereotypes. Although Magawisca is prohibited to marry Everall, her attraction towards him helps Magawisca to understand many important things and save this character at the cost of her own reputation. Cora prefers to die rather than marry a person whom she abhors. But despite such courage and independence, these female characters continue to experience social and cultural pressure that deprives them of the opportunity to choose their own path. However, the situation is different in regard to Alice, who not only survives at the end of the narration, but she is also going to marry Duncan and create another family with pure blood. The same regards Everall and Hope Leslie who finally unite with each other. Although initially Hope finds it difficult to accept a marriage of her sister Faith with a person of a different race, because she doesnt believe that Faith loves Oneco, she soon realises her mistake and agrees with her sisters choice of a marriage partner. In fact, Hope Leslie is a female character who rejects the existing social, cultural and religious norms and who is constantly blamed for her lack of â€Å"passiveness, that, next to godliness, is a womans best virtue† (Sedgwick, 1987 p.153). People with whom Hope Leslie interacts are not able to understand her independence, including Everell. As one female character tells Hope, â€Å"you do allow yourself too much liberty of thought and word: you certainly know that we owe implicit deference to our elders and superiors; we ought to be guided by their advice, and governed by their authority† (Sedgwick, 1987 p.180). However, Hope proves to be the best Christian who is able to follow her heart, even if she has to reject some religious principles to save her family and friends. Destroying certain social norms, Magawisca and Hope simultaneously ignore oversimplified assumptions in regard to people of different race. As McWilliams (1995) puts it, white culture was regarded as civilized in those times, while the culture of Native Americans was considered as savage (52-53). Thus, according to this particular viewpoint, two cultures could hardly successfully interact with each other. However, Sedgwick rises against this stereotypic vision. Close relations between Magawisca and Hope, women of different races and cultures, point at the possibility of one culture to exist with another culture. Despite the fact that Magawiscas race and religious faith differ from her own beliefs and culture, Hope is unaffected by the existing stereotypes of the seventeenth century and is able to overcome them, if she has to do so for the sake of her family. But the writer reveals that Hope still finds it difficult to interact with other Indians. The situation is different with Hopes sister Faith who is captured by indigenous people and is brought up with them. As a result, she marries an Indian Oneco and becomes greatly involved in the Indian culture. In this regard, miscegenation of these secondary characters is rather successful, because Faith changes her white culture and Christian religion into Indian culture and Catholic religion. She rejects her people and decides to live with Indians. However, other characters of the novel refuse to accept another culture and strongly oppose to miscegenation. Mrs. Grafton represents a stereotypic female who acts precisely, according to the established social norms, and who avoids any interactions with different races. For her, miscegenation is unnatural and wrong. Esther Downing is obsessed with her religion and is very subordinate to males, but she rightfully considers that â€Å"marriage is not essential to the contentment, the dignity, or the happiness of a woman† (Sedgwick, 1987 p.371). Similar to Mrs. Grafton, Esther avoids any contacts with people of different races and she meets Magawisca only when she attempts to convert this Indian female into Christianity. Esther opposes to any race mixture and doesnt believe that two different cultures can exist together. Opposite to these docile female characters, Magawisca is presented as a woman that rises against any cultural and racial prejudices of the seventeenth century. She possesses many virtues and tries to achieve equal position with males. Although Magawisca realises that miscegenation and racial relations are rejected by white people, she reveals devotion to some members of white culture. Nelema is another female character who, despite her anger towards the Puritans, provides help to Cradock at the cost of her life. Unlike other characters, Everell manages to maintain good relations with both Indians and his own people, but he is especially devoted to Magawisca. Though they belong to different cultures, they are very close to each other, because they ignore their racial differences. Unfortunately, miscegenation between these characters is still impossible because of the social pressure and the existing stereotypes that prevail in their societies. In Sedgwicks Hope Leslie miscegenation appears to be a powerful obstacle for the characters. Throughout the narration Everell interacts with three women – Hope Leslie, Magawisca and Esther. Two of them are white, and the third woman is an Indian princess. Although Hope and Magawisca are similar in their views and values, although Magawisca saves Everell and is admired by this white male, Everell chooses Hope Leslie as his wife, being unable to perceive Magawisca as an appropriate marriage partner. Everells nature rejects her; despite admiration and desires, he is not able to establish close relations with a woman of a different race. As he claims, â€Å"I might have loved her – might have forgotten that nature had put barriers between us† (Sedgwick, 1987 p.214). However, Everell is not able to overcome his own prejudices towards a person of another culture; these prejudices are too powerful and they continue to implicitly create barriers between Everell and Magawisca. Thus, racial mixture in Sedgwicks narration greatly depends on the possibility or impossibility of people to destroy the natural barriers. According to Person (1985), for a person who is brought up in a civilized society, it is rather difficult, even impossible, to get accustomed to the uncivilized culture of Indians, and vice versa (pp.680-682). In this regard, biological differences are not as important as cultural differences. Although Cora is half-Indian and Uncas is Indian, they are brought in different cultural environments and they are not able to marry because of these differences. Despite the fact that Hope and Faith are sisters and belong to one race, they appear to be separated by various conditions of their upbringing. The same concerns Magawisca and Everell who understand that their marriage is impossible. The marriage between Everell and Hope or Alice and Duncan is considered normal, because in these relations the characters are equal to each other. However, there is a great difference between the relations of these two pairs of white people. In the case of Alice and Duncan, the characters adhere to the traditional representation of a family, where a wife is inferior to her husband, while in the case of Hope and Everell, their union is based on the principles of equality and freedom. On the other hand, both pairs are culturally identical to each other, while miscegenation was considered as a sexual mixture of two people with different cultures. It was thought that it was impossible to create a strong family only on sexual relations; in those times cultural and religious similarities were regarded more crucial for a normal family than sex. As Calloway (1987) claims, any mixed relations were exposed to the threat of becoming â€Å"degenerated† (p.117). And children who appeared as a result of such relations couldnt live in the world of white people. However, if a person of different race agreed to convert to Christianity, a marriage between a white person and an Indian could be accepted by American society. Under these complex conditions, such characters as Magawisca and Everell, Cora and Uncas understand that their relations with each other will fail as soon as they interact with the rest of the world. Conclusion Analysing the issue of miscegenation through the characters of James Fenimore Coopers The Last of the Mohicans and Catharine Maria Sedgwicks Hope Leslie, the dissertation compares and contrasts the representation of racial relations between Native Americans and European Americans. Although both writers oppose to miscegenation in their novels and maintain the idea of racial purity, Sedgwick mentions the possibility of relations between white people and Indians on the example of her secondary characters. Such rejection of miscegenation responds to the existing social and cultural standards that inspired inequality between the indigenous population and European colonizers, depriving both races of freedom. Dividing their characters on mixed and unmixed people, Cooper and Sedgwick reveal that persons with pure blood were more easily accepted by American society, and thus had more possibilities to survive. However, persons with mixed blood couldnt find their places either in the world of white people or in the world of Native Americans. Such attitude can be explained by the wish of White Americans to control people of other races and prevent any social changes, while miscegenation erased any differences between two races, taking away their power and superiority. As racial relations were closely connected with gender issues in those times, miscegenation could provide females with freedom that they were deprived of. As White Americans wanted the indigenous population to conform to their own culture and religion, they were not allowed white females to be involved in sexual relations with the Native Americans, applying to different measures to prevent miscegenation. Bibliography Barker, M. (1993) First and Last Mohicans. Sight and Sound 3.8, 26-29. Barker, M. and Sabin, R. (1995) The Lasting of the Mohicans: History of an American Myth. Jackson, University Press of Mississippi. Baym, N. (1992) Feminism and American Literary History. New Brunswick, Rutgers University Press. Calloway, C. G. (1987) Crown and Calumet: British Indian Relations, 1783-1815. Norman, University of Oklahoma Press. Clark, R. (1984) History and Myth in American Fiction, 1823-52. New York, St. Martins Press. Cooper, J. F. (1984) The Last of the Mohicans. 1826. New York, Lightyear. Martin, T. (1992) From Atrocity to Requiem: History in The Last of the Mohicans. In: H. Daniel Peck (ed.) New dissertations on The Last of the Mohicans. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp.60-67. McWilliams, J. (1995) The Last of the Mohicans: Civil Savagery and Savage Civility. New York, Twayne. Person, L. S. (1985) The American Eve: Miscegenation and a Feminist Frontier Fiction. American Quarterly 37.5, Winter, 668-685. Schlesinger, A. M. (1992) The Disuniting of America. New York, Norton. Sedgwick, C. M. (1987) Hope Leslie, or Early Times in the Massachusetts Colony. 1827. New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press. Wardrop, S. (1997) Last of the Red Hot Mohicans: Miscegenation in the Popular American Romance. MELUS 22.2 Popular Literature and Film, Summer, 61-74.

Michèle Roberts’s The Looking Glass Essay -- Michele Roberts Looking G

Michà ¨le Roberts’s The Looking Glass The understanding of history as a linear and unproblematic narrative, dominated by kings and queens, warriors and heroes, has long been denied by women writers. As Linda Anderson argues, these events ‘take on a different meaning, a different configuration when we begin to see through them – in both senses – to women’s concealed existence in the private sphere of family and home’ (Anderson, p.130). Women have little place in traditional linear history and have come to deny its authority and question its dominance. Frieda Johles Forman, in her introduction to a 1989 collection of essays on women’s temporality, argues that women suffer from a lack of history, an unrecorded past, and that this ‘absence strikes at odd, unsuspecting moments’ (Forman, p.8). But this absence of history is changing, as women begin to write their own stories and their own conceptions of the past. Women’s time and the political implications for femini sm of feminist historiography have spawned a wealth of writing in recent years. Even in the academic world of history, reliance upon major events as the narrative of history has been undermined by the possibility of a narrative of everyday lives, of everyday events and occurrences.1 However, this re-recording and re-making of history is fraught with danger, as Anderson warns: The ‘reclaiming of history’, the discovery of how our foremothers preceded and even anticipated us, can help to assure us that, despite the evidence, we do in fact exist in the world; yet if we ignore how that existence is textually mediated we end up simply reconstituting ‘reality’ as it is. (p.134) Anderson argues that, despite the development of a critique of history’s claim to objectivity a... ... and Sowton, Caoran, eds., Taking Our Time: Feminist Perspectives on Temporality (Oxford: Pergamon, 1989) Heath, Stephen, Flaubert: Madame Bovary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) Irigaray, Luce, Sexes and Genealogies, trans. Gill, Gillian C. (New York: Cornell University Press, 1993) Michaud, Guy, Mallarmà ©, trans. Collins, Marie and Humez, Bertha (London: Peter Owen, 1966) Millan, Gordon, Mallarmà ©: A Throw of the Dice (London: Secker and Warburg, 1994) Oliver, Hermia, Flaubert and an English Governess (Oxford: Clarendon, 1980) Pearson, Roger, Unfolding Mallarmà ©: The Development of a Poetic Art (Oxford: Clarendon, 1996) Roberts, Michà ¨le, The Looking Glass (London: Little Brown, 2000) Spencer, Philip, Flaubert: A Biography (London: Faber and Faber, 1951) Steegmuller, Francis, Flaubert and Madame Bovary (London: Constable, 1993.

La Noche Boca Arriba Translation

L A NOCHE BOCA ARRIBA Halfway down the long hotel vestibule, he thought that probably hewas going to be late, and hurried on into the street to get out hismotorcycle from the corner where the next-door superintendent let himkeep it. On the jewelry store at the corner he read that it was ten to nine;he had time to spare. The sun filtered through the tall downtown buildings,and he–because for himself, for just going along thinking, he did not havea name-he swung onto the machine, savoring the idea of the ride. Themotor whirred between his legs, and a cool wind whipped his pantslegs.He let the ministries zip past (the pink, the white), and a series of stores on the main street, their windows flash ing. Now he was beginning the most pleasant part of the run, the real ride: a long street bordered withtrees, very little traffic, with spacious villas whose gardens rambled all theway down to the sidewalks, which were barely indi cated by low hedges. Abit inattentive perhaps, but tooli ng along on the right side of the street, heallowed himself to be carried away by the freshness, by the weightlesscontraction of this hardly begun day. This involuntary relaxa tion, possibly,kept him from preventing the accident.When he saw that the womanstanding on the corner had rushed into the crosswalk while he still had thegreen light, it was already somewhat too late for a simple solu tion. Hebraked hard with foot and hand, wrenching him self to the left; he heard thewoman scream, and at the collision his vision went. It was like falling asleep all at once. He came to abruptly. Four or five young men were get ting him out from under the cycle. He felt the taste of salt and blood, oneknee hurt, and when they hoisted him up he yelped, he couldn't bear the presssure on his right arm.Voices which did not seem to belong to thefaces hanging above him encouraged him cheerfully with jokes and assurances. His single solace was to hear someone else confirm that thelights indeed had been in his favor. He asked about the woman, trying tokeep down the nausea which was edging up into his throat. While they carried him face up to a nearby pharmacy, he learned that the cause of theaccident had gotten only a few scrapes on the legs. â€Å"Nah, you barely got her at all, but when ya hit, the impact made the machine jump and flop on its side . . . Opinions, recollections of other smashups, take it easy, work him in shoulders first, there, that's fine, and someone in a dust coat giving him a swallow of something soothing in the shadowy interior of the small local pharmacy. Within five minutes the police ambulance arrived, and they lifted himonto a cushioned stretcher. It was a relief for him to be able to lie out flat. Completely lucid, but real izing that he was suffering the effects of aterrible shock, he gave his information to the officer riding in the ambulance with him. The arm almost didn't hurt; blood dripped down from acut over the eyebrow all over his face.He lic ked his lips once or twice todrink it. He felt pretty good, it had been an accident, tough luck; stay quiet a few weeks, nothing worse. The guard said that the motorcycle didn't seem badly racked up. â€Å"Why should it,† he replied. â€Å"It all landed on top of me. † They both laughed, and when they got to the hospital, the guard shook his hand and wished him luck. Now the nausea was coming back little by little; meanwhile they were pushing him on a wheeled stretcher toward a pavilion further back, rolling along under trees full of birds, heshut his eyes and wished he were asleep or chloroformed.But they kept him for a good while in a room with that hospital smell, filling out a form,getting his clothes off, and dressing him in a stiff, greyish smock. They moved his arm carefully, it didn't hurt him. The nurses were constantly making wise cracks, and if it hadn't been for the stomach contractions hewould have felt fine, almost happy. They got him over to X-ray, and t wenty minutes later, with the still-damp negative lying on his chest like a black tombstone, they pushed himinto surgery. Someone tall and thin in white came over and began to look at the X rays.A woman's hands were arranging his head, he felt that they were moving him from one stretcher to another. The man in white cameover to him again, smiling, some thing gleamed in his right hand. He patted his cheek and made a sign to someone stationed behind. It was unusual as a dream because it was full of smells, and henever dreamt smells. First a marshy smell, there to the left of the trail theswamps began already, the quaking bogs from which no one ever returned. But the reek lifted, and instead there came a dark, freshcomposite fragrance, like the night under which he moved, in flight fromthe Aztecs.And it was all so natural, he had to run from the Aztecs who had set out on their manhunt, and his sole chance was to find a place tohide in the deepest part of the forest, taking care not to lose the narrow trail which only they, the Motecas, knew. What tormented him the most was the odor, as though,notwithstanding the absolute acceptance of the dream, there wassomething which resisted that which was not habitual, which until that point had not participated in the game. â€Å"It smells of war,† he thought, his hand going instinctively to the stone knife which was tucked at an angle into hisgirdle of woven wool.An unexpected sound made him crouch suddenly stock-still and shaking. To be afraid was nothing strange, there was plenty of fear in his dreams. He waited, covered by the branches of a shrub and the starless night. Far off, probably on the other side of the big lake, they'd be lighting the bivouac fires; that part of the sky had a reddish glare. Thesound was not repeated. It had been like a broken limb. Maybe an animal that, like himself, was escaping from the smell of war. He stood erect slowly, sniffing the air.Not a sound could be heard, but the fear was still following, as was the smell, that cloying incense of the war of the blossom. He had to press forward, to stay out of the bogs and get to the heart of theforest. Groping uncertainly through the dark, stoop ing every other moment to touch the packed earth of the trail, he took a few steps. He would haveliked to have broken into a run, but the gurgling fens lapped on either sideof him. On the path and in darkness, he took his bear ings. Then he caught a horrible blast of that foul smell he was most afraid of, and leaped forward desperately. You're going to fall off the bed,† said the patient next to him. â€Å"Stopbouncing around, old buddy. † He opened his eyes and it was afternoon,the sun al ready low in the oversized windows of the long ward. Whiletrying to smile at his neighbor, he detached himself almost physically fromthe final scene of the nightmare. His arm, in a plaster cast, hung suspended from an appa ratus with weights and pulleys. He felt thirsty, asthou gh he'd been running for miles, but they didn't want to give him muchwater, barely enough to moisten his lips and make a mouthful.The fever was winning slowly and he would have been able to sleep again, but hewas enjoying the pleasure of keeping awake, eyes half-closed, listening tothe other patients' conversation, answering a question from time to time. He saw a little white pushcart come up beside the bed, a blond nurserubbed the front of his thigh with alcohol and stuck him with a fat needleconnected to a tube which ran up to a bottle filled with a milky, opales cent liquid. A young intern arrived with some metal and leather apparatus whichhe adjusted to fit onto the good arm to check something or other.Night fell,and the fever went along dragging him down softly to a state in whichthings seemed embossed as through opera glasses, they were real and soft and, at the same time, vaguely distaste ful; like sitting in a boring movie and thinking that, well, still, it'd be worse out in the street, and staying. A cup of a marvelous golden broth came, smelling of leeks, celery and parsley. A small hunk of bread, more precious than a whole banquet,found itself crumbling lit tle by little. His arm hardly hurt him at all, and only in the eyebrow where they'd taken stitches a quick, hot pain siz zled occasionally.When the big windows across the way turned to smudges of dark blue, he thought it would not be difficult for him to sleep. Still on hisback so a little un comfortable, running his tongue out over his hot, too-dry lips, he tasted the broth still, and with a sigh of bliss, he let himself drift off. First there was a confusion, as of one drawing all his sensations, for that moment blunted or muddled, into himself. He realized that he wasrunning in pitch dark ness, although, above, the sky criss-crossed withtreetops was less black than the rest. The trail,† he thought, â€Å"I've gotten off the trail. † His feet sank into a bed of leaves and mud, and then he couldn't take a step that the branches of shrubs did not whiplash against his ribsand legs. Out of breath, knowing despite the darkness and silence that hewas surrounded, he crouched down to listen. Maybe the trail was very near, with the first daylight he would be able to see it again. Nothing now could help him to find it. The hand that had unconsciously gripped the haft of the dagger climbed like a fen scorpion up to his neck where the protecting amulet hung.Barely moving his lips, he mumbled thesupplication of the corn which brings about the beneficent moons, and the prayer to Her Very High ness, to the distributor of all Motecan possessions. At the same time he felt his ankles sinking deeper into the mud, and thewaiting in the darkness of the obscure grove of live oak grew intolerable tohim. The war of the blossom had started at the beginning of the moon and had been going on for three days and three nights now. If he man aged tohide in the depths of the forest, getting off the trail further up past the marsh country, perhaps the warriors wouldn't follow his track.He thought of the many prison ers they'd already taken. But the number didn't count,only the consecrated period. The hunt would continue until the priests gave the sign to return. Everything had its number and its limit, and it was within the sacred period, and he on the other side from the hunters. He heard the cries and leaped up, knife in hand. As if the sky wereaflame on the horizon, he saw torches mov ing among the branches, very near him. The smell of war was unbearable, and when the first enemy jumped him, leaped at his throat, he felt an almost-pleasure in sinking thestone blade flat to the haft into his chest.The lights were already around him, the happy cries. He managed to cut the air once or twice, then a ropesnared him from behind. â€Å"It's the fever,† the man in the next bed said. â€Å"The same thing happened to me when they operated on my duode num. Take some wa ter,you'll see, you'll sleep all right. † Laid next to the night from which he came back, the tepid shadow of the ward seemed delicious to him. A vio let lamp kept watch high on the far wall like a guardian eye. You could hear coughing, deep breathing, once ina while a conversation in whispers.Everything was pleas ant and secure,without the chase, no . . . But he didn't want to go on thinking about thenightmare. There were lots of things to amuse himself with. He began tolook at the cast on his arm, and the pulleys that held it so com fortably inthe air. They'd left a bottle of mineral water on the night table beside him. He put the neck of the bottle to his mouth and drank it like a preciousliqueur. He could now make out the different shapes in the ward, the thirty beds, the closets with glass doors. He guessed that his fever was down,his face felt cool.The cut over the eye brow barely hurt at all, like arecollection. He saw himself leaving the hotel again, wheeling out thecy cle. Who'd have thought that it would end like this? He tried to fix themoment of the accident exactly, and it got him very angry to notice that there was a void there, an emptiness he could not manage to fill. Betweenthe impact and the mo ment that they picked him up off the pavement, the pass ing out or what went on, there was nothing he could see. And at thesame time he had the feeling that this void, this nothingness, had lasted aneternity.No, not even time, more as if, in this void, he had passed acrosssome thing, or had run back immense distances. The shock, the brutal dashing against the pavement. Anyway, he had felt an immense relief incoming out of the black pit while the people were lifting him off the ground. With pain in the broken arm, blood from the split eyebrow, contusion on theknee; with all that, a relief in returning to daylight, to the day, and to feel sustained and attended. That was weird. Someday he'd ask the doctor at the office about that.Now sleep began to take over again, to pull himslowly down. The pillow was so soft, and the coolness of the mineral water in his fevered throat. The violet light of the lamp up there was beginning toget dimmer and dim mer. As he was sleeping on his back, the position in which he came to did not surprise him, but on the other hand the damp smell, the smell of oozing rock, blocked his throat and forced him to understand. Open the eyes and look in all directions, hopeless. He was surrounded by an absolutedarkness. Tried to get up and felt ropes pinning his wrists and ankles.Hewas staked to the ground on a floor of dank, icy stone slabs. The cold bit into his naked back, his legs. Dully, he tried to touch the amulet with hischin and found they had stripped him of it. Now he was lost, no prayer could save him from the final . . . From afar off, as though filtering throughthe rock of the dungeon, he heard the great kettledrums of the feast. They had carried him to the temple, he was in the underground cells of Teo calli itself, awaiting his turn. He heard a yell, a hoarse yell that rocked off the walls. Another yell,ending in a moan.It was he who was screaming in the darkness, he wasscreaming because he was alive, his whole body with that cry fended off what was coming, the inevitable end. He thought of his friends filling up theother dungeons, and of those already walk ing up the stairs of the sacrifice. He uttered another choked cry, he could barely open his mouth, his jawswere twisted back as if with a rope and a stick, and once in a while they would open slowly with an endless exertion, as if they were made of rubber. The creaking of the wooden latches jolted him like a whip. Rent,writhing, he fought to rid himself of the cords sinking into his flesh.His right arm, the strongest, strained until the pain became unbear able and he had to give up. He watched the double door open, and the smell of the torchesreached him before the light did. Barely girdled by the ceremonial loincloths , the priests' acolytes moved in his direction, looking at him withcontempt. Lights reflected off the sweaty torsos and off the black hair dressed with feathers. The cords went slack, and in their place thegrappling of hot hands, hard as bronze; he felt himself lifted, still face up,and jerked along by the four acolytes who carried him down the passageway.The torchbearers went ahead, indistinctly light ing up the corridor with its dripping walls and a ceiling so low that the acolytes had to duck their heads. Now they were taking him out, taking him out, it was the end. Face up, under a mile of living rock which, for a succession of moments,was lit up by a glimmer of torchlight. When the stars came out up thereinstead of the roof and the great terraced steps rose before him, on firewith cries and dances, it would be the end.The passage was never going to end, but now it was beginning to end, he would see sud denly the opensky full of stars, but not yet, they trundled him along endles sly in thereddish shadow, hauling him roughly along and he did not want that, but how to stop it if they had torn off the amulet, his real heart, the life center. In a single jump he came out into the hospital night, to the high,gentle, bare ceiling, to the soft shadow wrapping him round. He thought hemust have cried out, but his neighbors were peacefully snoring.The water in the bottle on the night table was somewhat bubbly, a translucent shapeagainst the dark azure shadow of the windows. He panted, looking for some relief for his lungs, oblivion for those images still glued to his eyelids. Each time he shut his eyes he saw them take shape instantly, and he sat up, completely wrung out, but savoring at the same time the surety that now he was awake, that the night nurse would answer if he rang, that soonit would be daybreak, with the good, deep sleep he usually had at that hour, no im ages, no nothing . . . It was difficult to keep his eyes open, thedrowsiness was more powerful tha n he.He made one last effort, hesketched a gesture toward the bottle of water with his good hand and did not manage to reach it, his fingers closed again on a black emptiness, and the passageway went on endlessly, rock after rock, with momentary ruddy flares, and face up he choked out a dull moan because the roof was about to end, it rose, was opening like a mouth of shadow, and the acolytesstraightened up, and from on high a waning moon fell on a face whoseeyes wanted not to see it, were closing and opening desperately, trying to pass to the other side, to find again the bare, protecting ceiling of the ward.And every time they opened, it was night and the moon, while they climbed the great terraced steps, his head hanging down backward now, and up at he top were the bonfires, red columns of perfumed smoke, and suddenly he saw the red stone, shiny with the blood dripping off it, and the spinning arcs cut by the feet of the victim whom they pulled off to throw him rolling down the no rth steps.With a last hope he shut his lids tightly, moaning towake up. For a second he thought he had gotten there, because oncemore he was immobile in the bed, except that his head was hanging downoff it, swinging. But he smelled death, and when he opened his eyes hesaw the blood-soaked fig ure of the executioner-priest coming toward himwith the stone knife in his hand.He managed to close his eyelids again,although he knew now he was not going to wake up, that he was awake,that the marvelous dream had been the other, absurd as all dreams are-adream in which he was going through the strange avenues of anastonishing city, with green and red lights that burned without fire or smoke, on an enormous metal insect that whirred away between his legs. In the infinite he of the dream, they had also picked him up off the ground,some one had approached him also with a knife in his hand, approached him who was lying face up, face up with his eyes closed between thebonfires on the steps.

Free Essays on Thomas Mores Utopia

Introduction The following work is intended to examine a classic piece of renaissance of literature titled â€Å"Utopia†. Sir Thomas More who was a key exponent of the renaissance humanist movement wrote the work utopia in the 16th century. The approach More used to develop this work was a fictuous approach. It was a brilliant method of getting his views on the political structure of Europe during the 16th century across. You see, because More’s social views were so radical for that period of time, had he came out with simply a non-fiction thesis on the issues at hand he would have been scrutinized. So what Sir Thomas More did in using a fictional approach was combined his inner struggle into two characters; Raphael Hythloday who was brought into the story as a philosopher who had traveled to an island named Utopia and a character with the same name as himself. When meeting the character of More, Hythloday told him about his adventures to this island and his encounters with the peo ple there. This island of Utopia was used in the story to contrast Sir Thomas Mores views on what would make an ideal society. The work â€Å"Utopia† compares More’s views with the state of England during the 16th century. Part 1 Utopia is seen as one of the greatest ideological writings in the history of politics. Sir Thomas More used this work to state his views on the make-up of an ideal society and at the same time examine the problems with European society at the time he was present there. Some of the important issues More discusses as being problems with European society include the use of capital punishment in reference to the crime of theft, â€Å"the enclosure movement†, poor political practices and the corruption of European society from Christian values. In 16th century England to my great surprise the crime of theft was treated as equal to the crime of murder. To imagine stealing a loaf of bread being equal to a homicide is a concept that... Free Essays on Thomas More's Utopia Free Essays on Thomas More's Utopia Introduction The following work is intended to examine a classic piece of renaissance of literature titled â€Å"Utopia†. Sir Thomas More who was a key exponent of the renaissance humanist movement wrote the work utopia in the 16th century. The approach More used to develop this work was a fictuous approach. It was a brilliant method of getting his views on the political structure of Europe during the 16th century across. You see, because More’s social views were so radical for that period of time, had he came out with simply a non-fiction thesis on the issues at hand he would have been scrutinized. So what Sir Thomas More did in using a fictional approach was combined his inner struggle into two characters; Raphael Hythloday who was brought into the story as a philosopher who had traveled to an island named Utopia and a character with the same name as himself. When meeting the character of More, Hythloday told him about his adventures to this island and his encounters with the peo ple there. This island of Utopia was used in the story to contrast Sir Thomas Mores views on what would make an ideal society. The work â€Å"Utopia† compares More’s views with the state of England during the 16th century. Part 1 Utopia is seen as one of the greatest ideological writings in the history of politics. Sir Thomas More used this work to state his views on the make-up of an ideal society and at the same time examine the problems with European society at the time he was present there. Some of the important issues More discusses as being problems with European society include the use of capital punishment in reference to the crime of theft, â€Å"the enclosure movement†, poor political practices and the corruption of European society from Christian values. In 16th century England to my great surprise the crime of theft was treated as equal to the crime of murder. To imagine stealing a loaf of bread being equal to a homicide is a concept that...