Write a case study on a small group, community, or organization

Write a on a small group, community, or organization - Case Study Example The paper is a comprehensive explanation of the mode of interaction between the American Indians and the rest of Americans. The American Indians are the indigenous inhabitants in the United States of America. They are distinct from the rest of the Americans because they preserve their traditions and are not easily influenced by the modern technology. California in 2000 had the largest population of American Indians. The census report of that year indicated that there were 628,000 American Indians in total. The American Indians are composed of numerous distinct tribes and ethnic groups whose migration happened over thousands of years ago. It involved different groups which are usually referred to as Native Americans or the American Indian. These people crossed over from Asia through a frozen land bridge to the modern day Russia which was by then still part of northern America. They later migrated to Alaska as the ice began to decline thus making them move even further to the southern part. These migrants eventually settled in the modern days United States. Due to their conservative nature, American Indians are regarded as uncivilized by majority of the rest of Americans. But they value their practices since they attach them to identity and unity symbols. Just like all the other communities, they adhere to various social concepts and theories. This is because they have to interact with the rest of the Americans thus making them venerable to internal and external influences. The social concepts and theories apply in various levels and aspects of the American Indians’ lives just like in other social units. Amongst the theories affecting American Indians is the conflict theory. The theory argues that in any society, people do not coexist in pursuit of equilibrium where everybody receives an equal share of resources. It further states that people live competitively with everyone trying to outdo the other with the weakest

Cultural Conversations Essay Example for Free

Cultural Conversations Essay Nonviolence has been used as an instrument of peace throughout history and it has proven to be an effective tool in instigating change in the society. Spearheaded by Mohandas Gandhi’s moving principle of nonviolent action towards the unjustly rule of the British forces in India, change is indeed possible if done out of the context of truth in love. The precept in nonviolence operates under what Gandhi termed as satyagraha or soul force which sought to compel change by way of non-cooperation and self-sacrifice for the attainment of justice. Gandhi’s worldview revolutionized the path social movements followed and morally awakened its consciousness. It didn’t take long for the whole world to take notice of Gandhi’s efforts and aspire to understand the philosophy behind nonviolence as a means for social transformation. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the modern social reformists who adhered to the teachings of Gandhi’s nonviolent action in order eradicate racial segregation in America. Just like Gandhi, King had personal experiences of racial discrimination which had propelled him to act in defiance towards the injustices that prevailed in American society. His frustration on the black segregation system prompted him to find alternative solutions for the furtherance of black civil rights in a white-dominated America. Impressed by the impact of Gandhi’s satyagraha principle, King incorporated the concept with his strong Christian background and created an unstoppable force within the convictions that echoed the sentiments of the black people. While great minds do think alike, their ideas tend to diverge in different tangents and this holds true for Gandhi’s and King’s comprehension of nonviolent action/passive resistance. Both Gandhi and King believed that in order to free themselves from the fetters of racial prejudice, they had to resort to disclosing the social realities that undermined their civil rights in a way that did not induce a violent force, rather, a force that was directed towards love. This entailed self-sacrificial acts to incite a moral response from the oppressors such as enduring physical torture from the oppressors, submitting to the law if need be and protesting under dire circumstances. It was a feat that seemed too daunting to be carried out since it requires more from the oppressed individual (Dilks, Nonviolence: A Weapon for Peace). The precepts of non-violence engage the individual to be physically submissive but mentally and spiritually active and any individual who is willing to undergo through that must be prepared and committed to take it to the long haul. Both Gandhi and King took the principle to heart and lived it. They did not rest until everyone listened. They understood that freedom would only be granted to them if they demanded it. Gandhi had emphasized that in order to achieve outward freedom, one must be free from within and this could only be attained through self- sacrificial actions in the context of self-purification. He believes that by being a strong spiritual leader, he would not only set an example for the people of India which would garner their support, but also possess the power to change the course of their existence. King had operated on this concept of freedom but was more apt to focus on the attainment of outward freedom since he believed that it appealed more to the American society as it is a nation that revels in the intricacies of law technicalities (Dilks, Nonviolence: A Weapon for Peace). In the letter that Martin Luther King jr. had written in Birmingham jail, he had discussed the relevance on breaking the laws of man if it hindered to protect and enforce the rights of an individual. King had explained the concept of law by stating the ideas of St. Augustine on its two different types, the just law and the unjust law. According to St. Augustine, just laws were in accordance with the natural laws of man in proportion with moral codes. Unjust laws were simply corrupt laws made by man which debases humanity as a whole (Dilks, Nonviolence: A Weapon for Peace). King had expressed that laws which discriminate individuals are unjust laws since it encourages inhumane treatment to an individual. While Gandhi’s belief on the necessity of breaking laws is quite similar, in essence he observed it through simple demonstrations and the importance of spiritual well-being. It is crucial to note that cultural differences are at play here since India’s religion is much more rooted on its people than it is for most Americans, which explains why Gandhi’s approach was much more inclined to spiritual self-fulfilment. In King’s Letter in Birmingham jail, he also wrote that the pressure appended to passive resistance should rouse social tension that would render negotiations. Though Gandhi has emphasized the need for patience in executing satyagraha, King understood that waiting was not an option at this point for they were dealing with a different audience. King had realized that while self-purification should be the driving force in nonviolent actions, one should also consider the degree to which the method should be enforced so as to be heard (Dilks, Nonviolence: A Weapon for Peace). The way in which Gandhi and King had expressed their convictions should also be taken into account as it reveals the differences in their style techniques that conquered the hearts of the people. King’s execution of passive resistance seemed more forceful in nature due to his passionate orations compared to Gandhi’s spiritual mind frame and mellow tonality, still both of them had one thing in mind which was to voice out the injustices within their society. Both Gandhi and King had sought to depict the social inequalities in their society. Though this action did not go unopposed, their passive resistance to such conflict invigorated them to act in accordance with love for their oppressors. Gandhi had stated in his teachings that the intention of exposing such social injustices should not be focused on degrading the individuality of their oppressors as it were regarding the relationship between the Indians and the British, but to appeal to their sensibilities and the intrinsic understanding that as human beings, we are one, regardless of race and gender. Gandhi believed that if an individual’s motives are untainted, truths will inevitable come out and justice will prevail. King held these views to heart as well which is why he had urged his fellow Black Americans to not retaliate by violent means but by a diplomatic engagement of passive resistance (Dilks, Nonviolence: A Weapon for Peace). Gandhi and King were known to be great social reformists who popularized the use of nonviolence as a means for social change. Even though both men had maintained different focal points for the furtherance of their causes, their mission of employing nonviolent actions toward active opposing forces remained intact. The end result is a transformation in the existing relationship of the oppressed and the oppressor. Reference: Dilks, Stephen, et al. Nonviolence: A Weapon for Peace? Cultural Conversations: The Presence of the Past. Bedford/St. Martin: New York, 2001.

King Henry IV :: essays research papers

Henry IV was born in April 1367 and was the only son of John of Gaunt, the son of Edward III, and Blanche, the daughter of Henry Grismond, Duke of Lancaster. Known as Henry of Bolingbroke after his birthplace in Lincolnshire, he was made a knight of the Garter in 1377. In 1380, at the age of 13, he married Mary de Bohun, the youngest daughter and coheiress of Humphrey, the last Earl of Hereford. They had four sons and two daughters before her death at the age of 24, in 1394. As the Earl of Darby, Henry entered the House of Lords in 1385. In 1387 he supported his uncle Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, in his opposition to Richard II. (Gloucester was also Richard’s uncle, and Henry was the King’s First cousin.) While taking part in the "Merciless" Parliament of 1388, Henry regained the favor of the King and in 1390 departed on the Crusade to Lithuania and then to Jerusalem. Visiting the kings of Bohemia and Hungary and the Archduke of Austria and then Venice in 1392-1393, he went only as far as Rhodes and then returned to England as a popular hero. He soon entered the government; he served on the Council while Richard was absent in Ireland in 1395 and for his efforts was made Duke of Hereford in 1397. Henry soon quarreled with the Duke of Norfolk, each accusing the other of arranging the murder of the Duke of Gloucester and calling for a trial by battle. Both men were banished from the realm. Norfolk for life and Henry for 10 years with a proviso that he would be allowed to inherit from his father. But on the death of John of Gaunt in 1399, the Lancastrian estates were confiscated by the King, and Henry decided to return, seemingly to claim his promised inheritance. Taking advantage of the King’s absence in Ireland, Henry landed on July 4, 1399, at Ravenspur, near Bridington, where he was soon joined by the northern nobles who were unhappy with the policies of the monarchy. By the end of the month Henry and his followers had raised an army and marched to Bristol. When Richard returned in August, the royal army started to desert; Henry claimed the throne for himself, and on August 19 he captured Richard near Conway. He then went with his prisoner to London and there, on September 29, Richard abdicated the throne.

Wealthy vs. Poor (the True Definitions)

| Wealthy Vs. Poor| The True Definitions| | Sierra Lockett| ENG-101| Jim Andrzjewski | The definition of wealth is very versatile and affects the lives of people in many different ways. It is usually defined as pertaining to riches, luxurious possessions, and an abundance of things of value in general. But to some, it can also mean having a great amount of the things that are considered more important than materialistic assets such as family, friendships, wisdom, health, love, etc.What is the true definition of wealth and does it only relate to things that are great in cash value? Most of today’s official definitions of wealth in dictionaries, glossaries, and thesauruses define wealth as an abundance of valuable possessions or money. There are trillions of advertisements advising people how to obtain it in how-to books, videos, commercials, and step by step guides. Who’s to say that the one who doesn’t have all the materialistic possessions isn’t already w ealthy?People all over the world are striving day to day to have the finer things in life and live the common dream such as a white collar career, luxury vehicles, white picket fence, and the suburban home. The typical classifications of wealth are insufficient and have been misleading people for generations. As a result, people thrive, fight, steal, and kill just to have what is considered the better quality of things in life for their selves and their families. Society must understand that true fortune and prosperity does not come in the form of assets.It cannot be worn around one’s neck, a check cannot be written for it, nor can it be direct deposited. Valuable possessions are things that only bring happiness temporarily and it does not take long before a person becomes bored with it. The tainted and inadequate description of wealth not only misleads but causes one to be prejudice against people who are considered poor. A person is not poor because they lack things of sign ificant value or because their life does not revolve around money.The one who has everything their superficial heart can desire but no one to share it with is the one who is, in fact, poor. Poor just simply means a lacking and official definitions should not state of what the lacking is. Money is the least of what a person can be poor at because even a rich individual can be poor at something. Rich is the one who is plentiful in knowledge and wisdom. How dare someone be prejudice against people who have an inadequate supply of clean water, food, clothing, education, and healthcare?Rich is the person who is still bountiful in faith through strife. Financial income is not the only important factor of wealth or poverty. There are many definitions of being either poor or wealthy. The cash value of something is not what makes it beautiful. The best things in life are completely free such as falling in love, giving birth, and enjoying the beautiful green nature around us. Poor does not ne cessarily mean you cannot enjoy life to the fullest. There are so many individuals who have nothing materialistically but are still content with life because they have each other.True wealth is an abundance of what is important to someone such as what makes them happy. It is not always necessarily money, jewels, and cars. A person living in what is considered poverty can be rich spiritually and family-wise. There is no one definition as to what makes a person poor or wealthy. The definition of wealth is not just having plenty of money and the definition of being poor is not just having a lack of it. It only depends on having abundance or lack of what is important to someone as an individual and not based on what society thinks someone should have.

The Simple Gift and the Concept of Belonging

Belonging Essay plan 1. Simple Gift Relationships and places interconnect to provide an individual with a strong sense of belonging * Relationships and the concept of Belonging Old Bill and Billy * Genuine relationships anchor individuals in identity, worth and connection * Relationships enrich an individual’s sense of belonging * Billy and old Bill’s relationship helps bring about a positive change in both of them * Their bond brings positive change to the grief-stricken old Bill and provides Billy with a chance for a fresh start and a future in Bendarat.Old Bill provides Billy with advice, guidance and a home. * Billy helps old Bill limit his drinking and smoking addictions and provides him with breakfast in the mornings * Billy said to not walk past the pub, old Bill finds himself walking past Jessies old school the next day instead of going past the pub * â€Å"Hands/shaking/as I walked back to town,/careful not to go past a pub† * Herrick uses enjambment to emphasises how difficult this change is for Old Bill and his desire to keep moving forward rather than continuing to be overwhelmed by his grief Places and the concept of belonging * Throughout the free verse poems of the Simple Gift, there are a series of places that either enrich or destroy an individual’s sense of belonging Longlands Road * Longlands Road does not inspire Billy’s sense of belonging.Billy lived with his alcoholic and abusive father in Longlands road His father created an environment that did not support the feeling of belonging by giving Billy â€Å"hard backhanders† * Billy’s action of throwing rocks upon the roofs of the houses in longlands Road shows the strong negative attitude he has towards his street and all that it represents * â€Å"I throw one rock on the roof/of each deadbeat no hoper/ *hithole downtrodden house in Longlands road, Nowheresville† * Herrick uses descriptive language to emphasis the feeling of alienation that such a place arouses for BillyCarriage 1864 * Billy sets up home in an abandoned freight train carriage, it becomes an important place of belonging and security for Billy * As this carriage is shared with Billy’s friends Old Bill and Caitlin, it creates a positive emotion towards the carriage. * Without the company of Old Bill the carriage would have been very dull and lonely * â€Å"It was like a little cave, a warm, safe little cave†¦.Billy’s cave†, Herrick uses this simile to describe the carriage. * Through the relationship with Old Bill, Billy quickly feels a sense of place and comfort inside it by labelling it â€Å"my motel Bendarat†. * Billy further demonstrates his sense of belonging to the carriage when he gives Caitlin a â€Å"business card† with the carriage as his address. This is a symbolic gesture, which shows Caitlin that he feels this is home for now. 2. Pursuit of Happiness