What Is the Democratic Peace Theory

The Democratic Peace Theory states that countries with liberal democratic forms of government are less likely to go to war with one another than those with other forms of government. Proponents of the theory draw on the writings of German philosopher Immanuel Kant and, more recently, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, who in his 1917 World War I message to Congress stated that â€Å"The world must be made safe for democracy.† Critics argue that the simple quality of being democratic in nature may not be the main reason for the historic tendency of peace between democracies. Key Takeaways The Democratic Peace Theory holds that democratic countries are less likely to go to war with one another than non-democratic countries.The theory evolved from the writings of German philosopher Immanuel Kant and the adoption of the 1832 Monroe Doctrine by the United States.The theory is based on the fact that declaring war in democratic countries requires citizen support and legislative approval. Critics of the theory argue that merely being democratic may not be the primary reason for peace between democracies. Democratic Peace Theory Definition Dependent on the ideologies of liberalism, such as civil liberties and political freedom, the Democratic Peace Theory holds that democracies are hesitant to go to war with other democratic countries. Proponents cite several reasons for the tendency of democratic states to maintain peace, including: The citizens of democracies usually have some say over legislative decisions to declare war.In democracies, the voting public holds their elected leaders responsible for human and financial war losses.When held publicly accountable, government leaders are likely to create diplomatic institutions for resolving international tensions.Democracies rarely view countries with similar policies and form of government as hostile.Usually possessing more wealth that other states, democracies avoid war to preserve their resources. The Democratic Peace Theory was first articulated by German philosopher Immanuel Kant in his 1795 essay entitled â€Å"Perpetual Peace.† In this work, Kant argues that nations with constitutional republic governments are less likely to go to war because doing so requires the consent of the people—who would actually be fighting the war. While the kings and queens of monarchies can unilaterally declare war with little regard for their subjects’ safety, governments chosen by the people take the decision more seriously. The United States first promoted the concepts of the Democratic Peace Theory in 1832 by adopting the Monroe Doctrine. In this historic piece of international policy, the U.S. affirmed that it would not tolerate any attempt by European monarchies to colonize any democratic nation in North or South America. Democracies and War in the 1900s Perhaps the strongest evidence supporting the Democratic Peace Theory is the fact that there were no wars between democracies during the 20th century. As the century began, the recently ended Spanish-American War had seen the United States defeat the monarchy of Spain in a struggle for control of the Spanish colony of Cuba. In World War I, the U.S. allied with the democratic European empires to defeat the authoritarian and fascist empires of Germany, Austro-Hungary, Turkey, and their allies. This led to World War II and eventually the Cold War of the 1970s, during which the U.S. led a coalition of democratic nations in resisting the spread of authoritarian Soviet communism. Most recently, in the Gulf War (1990-91), the Iraq War (2003-2011), and the ongoing war in Afghanistan, the United States, along with various democratic nations fought to counter international terrorism by radical jihadist factions of authoritarian Islamist governments. Indeed, after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, the George W. Bush administration based its use military force to topple Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship in Iraq on the belief that it would bring democracy—thus peace—to the Middle East. Criticism While the claim that democracies rarely fight each other has been widely accepted, there is less agreement on why this so-called democratic peace exists. Some critics have argued that it was actually the Industrial Revolution that led to peace during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The resulting prosperity and economic stability made all of the newly modernized countries—democratic and nondemocratic—much less belligerent toward each other than in preindustrial times. Several factors arising from modernization may have generated a greater aversion to war among industrialized nations than democracy alone. Such factors included higher standards of living, less poverty, full employment, more leisure time, and the spread of consumerism. Modernized countries simply no longer felt the need to dominate each other in order to survive. Democratic Peace Theory has also been criticized for failing to prove a cause-and-effect relationship between wars and types of government and the ease with which definitions of â€Å"democracy† and â€Å"war† can be manipulated to prove a non-existent trend. While its authors included very small, even bloodless wars between new and questionable democracies, one 2002 study contends that as many wars have been fought between democracies as might be statistically expected between non-democracies. Other critics argue that throughout history, it has been the evolution of power, more than democracy or its absence that has determined peace or war. Specifically, they suggest that the effect called â€Å"liberal democratic peace† is really due to â€Å"realist† factors including military and economic alliances between democratic governments. Sources and Further Reference Owen, J. M.  Ã¢â‚¬Å"How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace.† International Security (1994).Schwartz, Thomas and Skinner, Kiron K. (2002) â€Å"The Myth of the Democratic Peace.† Foreign Policy Research Institute.Gat, Azar (2006). â€Å"The Democratic Peace Theory Reframed: The Impact of Modernity.† Cambridge University Press.Pollard, Sidney (1981). â€Å"Peaceful Conquest: The Industrialization of Europe, 1760–1970.† Oxford University Press.

Censorship of Music Limiting One’s Rights Essay - 1072 Words

Music has been under scrutiny on behalf of censorship for decades. Censorship is defined as an authorization to examine material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable. Lyrics are essential to nearly everything in music; its poems, ballads, monologues, etc. They may take the form of actual spoken or sung sounds or of written words, as literature does. Without the musical component, you’re left with literature and words; this leaves the heated debate as to whether music should be censored or not. Music should be used as an expression of freedom and should not be overtly scrutinized as to what is appropriate because it is simply futile and a violation of freedom of speech†¦show more content†¦This is an example of the government being overbearing and limiting musical freedoms. The question of what constitutes as suitable language and obscenity has been greatly forced upon the music industry. The current labeling of parental advisory warnings consists of a black and white logo fixed on the cover of an album on the bottom right hand corner. For all the controversy these stickers stir up, do they really serve a practical purpose for protecting the young people of this nation? And, is this another example of the government mandating our lives rather than â€Å"protecting† us from indecency? The censorship of music can have much more negative effects than positive ones for songs can be extremely taken out of context. Music is almost always construed and misinterpreted with the true gist of a song to fit a person’s accusations. The problem with this is that the individuals (usually parents and politicians) who have an outcry over lyrics are frequently the same group tries to use music to fault the problems of society’s actions upon. Most of us have all heard the stories about the anguished parents of a child who unfortunately has taken their own life, and then in the after effects the parents or their lawyers would attack a band or musician who wrote a song about suicide or killing someone else. This is also the case for people using music as the template for society becoming more violent. For example, in the aftermathShow MoreRelatedStudies in Contemporary Literature: Free Speech1622 Words   |  7 Pages Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined as determined by the government, media outlet, or other controlling bodies (Wikipedia, 1). This can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship which is the act of censoring or classifying one’s own work like blog, books, films, or other means of expression, out of theRead MoreThe Constitutionality of Hate Speech Essay3494 Words   |  14 Pagesshould restrict hate speech on all college campuses. This is due to a variety of reasons. Under the first point of analysis, one can observe that hate speech codes have a tendency to foster a more tolerant environment by teaching a difference between right and wrong (Sommers 1). Often times, college students do not realize the impact that their words may have on others (2). The problem is rarely identified in primary and secondary schools, and it worsens as the students approach the college level (1)Read MoreGp Essay Mainpoints24643 Words   |  99 PagesNew: narcissistic? c. Government Censorship d. Profit-driven Media e. Advertising f. Private life of public figures g. Celebrity as a role model h. Blame media for our problems i. Power + Responsibility of Media j. Media ethics k. New Media and Democracy 2. Science/Tech a. Science and Ethics b. Government and scientist role in science c. Rely too much on technology? d. Nuclear technology e. Genetic modification f. Right tech for wrong reasons 3. Arts/CultureRead MoreImpacts of Information Technology on Individuals, Organizations and Societies21097 Words   |  85 Pagesto share pirated music, movie producers felt reasonably immune to this trend. After all, it would take more than a week to download a 5-gigabyte DVD-quality movie using a 56-kilobits-per-second modem. Some individuals argue that piracy does not hurt film studios but, rather, makes movies available to those people who would not be able to enjoy them otherwise. Information technology that enables movie piracy raises a number of significant issues, such as intellectual property rights, fair use, and theRead MoreMonsanto: Better Living Through Genetic Engineering96204 Words   |  385 PagesFaucet: Global entrepreneurship in an emerging market C A S E T W O DaimlerChrysler: Corporate governance dynamics in a global company C A S E T H R E E Gunns and the greens: Governance issues in Tasmania C A S E F O U R Succeeding in the Sydney indie music industry C A S E F I V E Nucor in 2005 C A S E S I X News Corp in 2005: Consolidating the DirecTV acquisition C A S E S E V E N Shanghai Volkswagen: Implementing project management in the electrical engineering division C A S E E I G H T TelevisionRead MoreOne Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.163893 Words   |  656 PagesMichael Adas for the American Historical Association TEMPLE UNIVERSITY PRESS PHILADELPHIA Temple University Press 1601 North Broad Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122 www.temple.edu/tempress Copyright  © 2010 by Temple University All rights reserved Published 2010 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Essays on twentieth century history / edited by Michael Peter Adas for the American Historical Association. p. cm.—(Critical perspectives on the past) Includes bibliographicalRead MoreDeveloping Management Skills404131 Words   |  1617 Pagesand reproduced, with permission, in this textbook appear on appropriate page within text. Copyright  © 2011, 2007, 2005, 2002, 1998 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice Hall, One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458. All rights reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. This publication is protected by Copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any formRead MoreLibrary Management204752 Words   |  820 PagesStates. 2. Information services— United States—Management. I. Moran, Barbara B. II. Title. Z678.S799 2007 025.1—dc22 2007007922 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available. Copyright  © 2007 by Robert D. Stueart and Barbara B. Moran All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2007007922 ISBN: 978–1–59158–408–7 978 –1–59158–406–3 (pbk.) First publishedRead MoreManaging Information Technology (7th Edition)239873 Words   |  960 PagesAssistant: Jason Calcano Director of Marketing: Patrice Lumumba Jones Senior Marketing Manager: Anne Fahlgren Production Manager: Debbie Ryan Art Director: Jayne Conte Cover Designer: Bruce Kenselaar Photo Researcher: Karen Sanatar Manager, Rights and Permissions: Hessa Albader Cover Art: Fotolia Media Editor: Denise Vaughn Media Project Manager: Lisa Rinaldi Full-Service Project Management: Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd. Printer/Binder: Edwards Brothers Cover Printer: Leghigh-Phoenex

Moral and Philosophical history of Vegetarianism Essay Example For Students

Moral and Philosophical history of Vegetarianism Essay Vegetarianism is the theory or practice of living solely on vegetables, fruits, grains and nuts. It is practiced for moral, ascetic or nutritional reasons In Western society today meat in many different forms is readily and economically available, yet the current trend shows a growing number of voluntary vegetarians around the world. In the United States, roughly 3 to 4 percent of the total populations are considered vegetarian. The origins of modern day Vegetarian philosophy and its influences can be traced back nearly three thousand years. . Most vegetarians are people who have understood that to contribute towards a more peaceful society we must first solve the problem of violence in our own hearts. So its not surprising that thousands of people from all walks of life have, in their search for truth, become vegetarian. Many well known influential philosophers have both preached as well as practiced its inherent advantages. The earliest archeological data we have that suggest a voluntary partial vegetarian diet is the Old kingdom of Egypt. There are hieroglyphic inscriptions, which suggest the avoidance of eating some animals. The priests avoided eating pig for its lack of cleanliness, and cow for their belief that it was sacred mainly did this. This is believed to been practiced as early as 3000 BC. There are few historical sources on the practice of abstaining from meat in ancient Egypt, but we do know it directly influenced the beliefs held across the Mediterranean in Greece. Pythagoras was born off the coast of Turkey on the Island of Samos in the 6th century BC. He is most famous for his well-known proposition about right angle triangles, known as the Pythagorean theorem. Having spent time in Egypt and Babylon, much of his main philosophical teachings are a combination of ideas expressed in the places he traveled to. Pythagoras preached the soul as being abstract and immortal. A soul is within all living creatures, and therefore all creatures, man or beast deserve to be treated compassionately. The soul was said to pass between lives into different living creatures. Therefore in eating the flesh of an animal, one could be eating the flesh of a deceased cousin. This was somewhat revolutionary for a world in which religious ritual was centered on animal sacrifice. He also believed in the concept that an eternal world which was revealed to the intellect through continuous ascetic routines rather then the senses. For two hundred years following Pythagoras death a religion made up of followers of his teachings persisted. As a religious practice of it dissipated, but the teachings were responsible for influencing the likes of Plato and Socrates. Plato frequently makes reference to the migration of souls across species lines. This is in no way a proof that he himself was a Vegetarian, but it does show that one of western philosophies premier philosophers had a regard for animals with certain sensitivity. In Platos Republic, there is a documented dialogue between Socrates and his student Glaucon. Socrates points out that the eating of animals causes one state to go to war with the other. Cattle were considered great wealth, and states would fight with each other to obtain cattle. Meat was valued as such a luxury that men were willing to die for it. Socrates suggested that the consumption of cattle is somewhat gluttonous rather then of necessity. He suggests refraining from meat would lead to a world with less conflict and greater opportunity for peace. Another great Greek philosopher was Theophrastus. A contemporary of Aristotle, his writings clearly state that if plants and vegetables are abundant there is no need to eat meat. Theophrastus speculates that people only began to eat meat when crops were destroyed in war. harriet tubman EssayIn the modern philosophical era, Leo Tolstoy an influential Russian writer and philosopher was an advocate of vegetarianism. ? By killing man suppresses in himself, unnecessarily, the highest spiritual capacity-that of sympathy and pity towards living creatures like himself, and by violating his own feeling becomes so cruel.? (Letter to Mrs. C.P. Farrell)?A man can live and be healthy without killing animals for food; therefore, if he eats meat, he participates in taking animal life merely for the sake of his appetite. And to act so is immoral.? On Civil Disobedience Tolstoy has mentioned a new linguistic twist on to an ancient Eastern philosophy. Cruelty has been introduced. Many contemporary vegetarians today, will not eat meat because of its inherent cruelty and immorality. This is not as controversial as abortion or mercy killing yet, but it has become a moral issue on randomly selected issues. Tuna fish cans all over America are stamped with a ? Dolphin Safe? emblem. At first the consumer is comforted in thinking he has only sponsored the killing of a Tuna fish, but not the murder of a friendly littl e dolphin. This is an absurd statement. Why not save the Tuna? Why is the average consumer concerned with the life of a dolphin and not a Tuna- fish? I believe the case of the dolphins, is a first step towards a higher awareness of the immoral practice of carnivorous eating by humans. It took centuries for Democracy to develop, and it will take years for modern society as a whole to recognize the inherent cruelty in unnecessarily killing animals for food. Steps have been taken to make sure animals are stunned before slaughtered, but this is in no way a justification for killing them. ?I do not regard flesh-food as necessary for us at any stage and under any clime in which it is possible for human beings ordinarily to live. I hold flesh-food to be unsuited to our species. We err in copying the lower animal world if we are superior to it.? ? (Mahatma Gandhi, his Mission and Message)Gandhi, the first man to fight a large-scale war with non-violence was the worlds moral voice in the fi rst half of the twentieth century. He repeatedly spoke out against eating meat, maintaining that human beings have a greater moral standard then the rest of the animal kingdom and should act accordingly. I share the conviction with many earlier philosophers both ancient and modern, Eastern and Western that in the future the human race will reflect upon its meat eating practice remorsefully, and claim overcoming it as another step in the development of a humane species. . BibliographySources1) Spencer, Colin The Heretics Feast, A History of Vegetarianism. London: University Press of New England2) Dombrowski, Daniel A. The Philosophy of Vegetarianism. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. 3) Hill, John Lawrence The Case for Vegetarianism. Lanham, Maryland : Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc. Philosophy

Oedipus the King Essays (1099 words) - Greek Mythology, Literature

Oedipus the King A plague has stricken Thebes. The citizens gather outside the palace of their king, Oedipus, asking him to take action. Oedipus replies that he already sent his brother-in-law, Creon, to the oracle at Delphi to learn how to help the city. Creon returns with a message from the oracle: the plague will end when the murderer of Laius, former king of Thebes, is caught and expelled; the murderer is within the city. Oedipus questions Creon about the murder of Laius, who was killed by thieves on his way to consult an oracle. Only one of his fellow travelers escaped alive. Oedipus promises to solve the mystery of Laius's death, vowing to curse and drive out the murderer. Oedipus sends for Tiresias, the blind prophet, and asks him what he knows about the murder. Tiresias responds cryptically, lamenting his ability to see the truth when the truth brings nothing but pain. At first he refuses to tell Oedipus what he knows. Oedipus curses and insults the old man, going so far as to accuse him of the murder. These taunts provoke Tiresias into revealing that Oedipus himself is the murderer. Oedipus naturally refuses to believe Tiresias's accusation . He accuses Creon and Tiresias of conspiring against his life, and charges Tiresias with insanity. He asks why Tiresias did nothing when Thebes suffered under a plague once before. At that time, a Sphinx held the city captive and refused to leave until someone answered her riddle. Oedipus brags that he alone was able to solve the puzzle. Tiresias defends his skills as a prophet, noting that Oedipus's parents found him trustworthy. At this mention of his parents, Oedipus, who grew up in the distant city of Corinth, asks how Tiresias knew his parents. But Tiresias answers enigmatically. Then, before leaving the stage, Tiresias puts forth one last riddle, saying that the murderer of Laius will turn out to be both father and brother to his own children, and the son of his own wife. After Tiresias leaves, Oedipus threatens Creon with death or exile for conspiring with the prophet. Oedipus's wife, Jocasta (also the widow of King Laius), enters and asks why the men shout at one another. Oedipus explains to Jocasta that the prophet has charged him with Laius's murder, and Jocasta replies that all prophecies are false. As proof, she notes that the Delphic oracle once told Laius he would be murdered by his son, when in fact his son was cast out of Thebes as a baby, and Laius was murdered by a band of thieves. Her description of Laius's murder, however, sounds familiar to Oedipus, and he asks further questions. Jocasta tells him that Laius was killed at a three-way crossroads, just before Oedipus arrived in Thebes. Oedipus, stunned, tells his wife that he may be the one who murdered Laius. He tells Jocasta that, long ago, when he was the prince of Corinth, he overheard someone mention at a banquet that he was not really the son of the king and queen. He therefore traveled to the oracle of Delphi, who did not answer him but did tell him he would murder his father and sleep with his mother. Hearing this, Oedipus fled his home, never to return. It was then, on the journey that would take him to Thebes, that Oedipus was confronted and harassed by a group of travelers, whom he killed in self-defense. This skirmish occurred at the very crossroads where Laius was killed. Oedipus sends for the man who survived the attack, a shepherd, in the hope that he will not be identified as the murderer. Outside the palace, a messenger approaches Jocasta and tells her that he has come from Corinth to inform Oedipus that his father, Polybus , is dead, and that Corinth has asked Oedipus to come and rule there in his place. Jocasta rejoices, convinced that Polybus's death from natural causes has disproved the prophecy that Oedipus would murder his father. At Jocasta's summons, Oedipus comes outside, hears the news, and rejoices with her. He now feels much more inclined to agree with the queen in deeming prophecies worthless and viewing chance as the principle governing the