Questions and Answers on Intermolecular Forces Essay Example for Free

Questions and Answers on Intermolecular Forces Essay Intermolecular forces written response Hexane and Water do not mix. When the two substances are combined they separate into layers in the same manner oil and water do. Explain why this is? Well to begin with this, these two things are very dissimilar. Water is considered polar and secondly hexane is considered non-polar. Polar and non-polar cannot mix together they are to different substances. Polar solutes will dissolve in polar solvents and non-polar solutes will dissolve in non-polar solvents, this is where the expression ‘like dissolves like’ comes from. When theses two substances are combined they form different layers and this is because hexane is denser then water. Another very important reason to remember is that water is only soluble with nitrogen, fluorine, and oxygen. These two liquids are said to be immiscible. Water and oil will not mix for the same reason water is polar and oil is non-polar and for the same exact reason they are not mixable in a solution. Methane, ammonia and water are chemically similar. Yet the three substances have very different boiling points. Explain why this is true? This is due to the bonding between the molecules. The stronger they are the hotter you must make the liquid to cause it to boil. Intermolecular forces are the forces between the molecules of a substance. If a substance has very strong intermolecular forces, it is likely to be a solid, and if it has very weak intermolecular forces it is more likely to be a gas, and this is because there would be less attraction among the molecules (strong intermolecular force=more attraction between molecules). As you know, when you boil something, you are changing it from a liquid to a gas which means you would want to decrease the attraction among the molecules of the substance by adding energy. If a substance has intermolecular forces that are stronger, you would need more energy to overcome the forces which means it would have a higher boiling point (higher boiling point=higher temperature=more heat=more energy). The opposite is also true. If a substance has weaker intermolecular forces, less energy is required to decrease the attraction among the molecules and therefore it would have a lower boiling point. Ammonia and water have higher boiling points due to hydrogen bonding. Methane has a low boiling point because it belongs to the weakest London dispersion forces.

Managing Change In The Workplace Management Essay

Managing Change In The Workplace Management Essay High performance workplaces are by nature vibrant. Organisations that want to survive as well as to flourish are innovative, plus effective change management is a requisite skill across all workplaces. Novel technology, novel systems, company mergers in addition to the impact of global trade mean that workplace change is a feature of all of our work lives. Winning employees commitment to innovation and change in the workplace is the key challenge for contemporary management. (Mullins, 2006) Workplace changes are introduced for many reasons. A number of these reasons will be obvious to everyone in the workplace as well as some less so. Cost saving, quality improvement, increased management control, increased employee empowerment, introduction of novel technology, service expansion and improvements to health in addition to safety are some of the goals that may be sought through workplace change. The impact of any change depends a great deal on how it is implemented. (Mullins, 2006) Change processes usually include four phases planning, consultation, implementation and monitoring/evaluation. Each phase takes time, as well as while it is important to reach the outcome, not putting the maximum effort into any of these phases may result in problems impacting on the outcome for a very long time. (Mullins, 2006) An understanding of culture in organisations can offer insights into individual and group behaviour, in addition to leadership. It can help to explain not just what happens in an organisation, however why it happens. (Mullins, 2006) However, many people are concerned not just by means of understanding culture, as well as hence organisational life. They see culture as something to be influenced to achieve organisational goals of productivity, profitability, and success in core business. They want to manage culture. (OConnor, 1997) High performance organisations are successful for the reason that they adapt and move by means of the changing times. They know that the most important thing in preparing for change and in implementing novel arrangements is ensuring they involve their key resource their employees. Effectively involving employees through consultation as well as participation at the outset in any change management process is vital to ongoing workplace productivity in addition to efficiency. (OConnor, 1997) Can culture be managed? Optimists believe culture can be managed; pessimists deny that it can be, according to (Mullins, 2006). They claim that optimists are often business oriented people, who optimistically see the culture of an organisation as being unified and unitary. On the other hand, pessimists are often academically or theoretically oriented, as well as more interested in explanations than practical utility. (Mullins, 2006) Realists, however, can see both sides of the debate. They are frequently interested in exploring culture change and are ready to admit some sway à ´Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã†â€™ if not control à ´Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã†â€™ of culture. Can culture be changed? One of the major ways that managers believe they can manage culture is by changing it. They can use one of the guides that are available, that suggest how to form, transmit or change culture, such as that by (Mullins, 2006). However, just for the reason that peoples behaviours have changed in a number of measurable way, it does not mean the organisational culture has changed à ´Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã†â€™ although behaviour change may be all that managers are interested in. (Mullins, 2006) Difficulties in managing culture Management of culture is hard if there is no agreement on what culture is in addition to culture can be viewed in an enormous variety of ways. The complexity of culture can lead organisations to attempt „quick fixes ° that are superficial. Value-laden judgements on what is the right culture for organisations, devoid of taking into account the unique environments in which they exist, can also make success hard for managers. What are the ethics of trying to manage culture? (Proctor, 2002) poses organisations by means of ethical questions they could ask before attempting to manage à ´Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã†â€™ or change à ´Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã†â€™ culture to influence organisational capability: What are the moral and ethical implications of trying to alter such things as feelings, beliefs, values as well as attitudes? Is culture the prerogative of management furthermore does management having the right to try to control or change it? What does culture change do to the quality of life for people in organisations? What costs to individuality result as of encouraging people to devote themselves to the values and products of the organisation, and then asking them to assess their own worth in these terms? (Proctor, 2002) What tools can one use to manage culture? Tools for managing culture comprise: 1. Management systems 2. Organisation models 3. Strategies. A number of these have been influential for a time, and have then been replaced or extended by novel ideas. They can frequently be seen as trends as well as fashions à ´Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã†â€™ a number of enduring in addition to some not. (Proctor, 2002) 1. Management systems A number of management systems used by managers attempting to manage organisational culture include: Organisational growth (OD): This is a management system of slow, planned change. It is slackly shaped around organisational culture, emphasising how participation, teamwork in addition to problem solving can assist an organisation survives environmental challenges. It is still being used; however its effectiveness is being challenged. (Proctor, 2002) Total Quality Management (TQM): This is a management system used to increase an organisations productivity and quality by focusing on people making continuous incremental development inside existing cultures. A number of see it, however, simply as a control system which produces as well as enforces uniformity, devoid of an understanding of existing organisational culture and the possibility of sub-cultures. (Proctor, 2002) Business Process Re-engineering (BPR): This is a management system of forced, speedy culture change. Where TQM builds a culture that supports improvement, BPR is a result of frustration over the time it takes to do this. Organisation models: A number of organisation models used by managers attempting to manage organisational culture include: Sustainable organisations: The sustainable organisation demands a radical change in thinking regarding culture, transforming the organisation as of being part of the problem to being part of the solution. It is concerned by means of increasing productivity in the long-term in order to survive. Its managers aim to build human capabilities that create continuing innovation as well as high performance. It challenges the dominant economic paradigm and involves broader interests than just shareholders, such as the community in general, the biosphere in addition to future generations (Senge, 1994). Innovative enterprises: This model is similar to that of the sustainable organisation; however its managers attempt to institutionalise innovation to give the market edge. They aim to make innovation ordinary and frequent good practice. This model is useful for those who want to build an organisational culture in which innovation flows naturally as of how the organisation faces its environment, structures its bureaucracy, leads itself, and manages its internal management system. (Senge, 1994) Learning organisations: This is not a one-size-fits-all model. The learning organisation continually expands its abilities to shape its own future, influenced by specific elements of organisational culture, which determine, for example, whether the organisation learns as of mistakes or ignores them, sees opportunities or threats, as well as is pro-active or reactive in its strategies. Such organisations try to make a working reality of such attributes as flexibility, team work, continuous learning in addition to employee participation and growth. (Rosenhead, 1989) High performing organisations: In this British model, managers focus on people and their learning, and the growth of trust, personal responsibility as well as leadership. Supporting elements such as structure, strategy, systems, procedures in addition to resources are seen as useful only in empowering people and enabling them to achieve the full measure of their abilities. (Senge, 1990) Strategies: Strategies used to manage culture include: Strategic alliances: These are cooperative efforts on specific ventures and joint projects, which demand an understanding of each partners culture. Knowledge management: This is a strategy of transmitting culture by making use of novel technology in information systems, as well as by reinforcing the value of people in addition to their contributions to organisations. Knowledge management can encourage organisations to be learning organisations which are open to change. (Proctor, 2002) Flexible learning, which includes e-learning, is regarding the learner deciding what, where, when and how they learned. Flexible learning therefore offers a client-centred and workplace-centred focus for an organisation. Flexible learning practices have had a wide impact on many determinants of organisational culture: learners; teachers, their job designs, work, safety in addition to professional growth; human resources practices; organisational management; as well as technological resources. (Pedler, 1992)

Amendments of Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PMA)

Amendments of Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PMA) To whom it may concern, As a dutiful Singaporean citizen who is deeply concerned with the tidings of our local arts industry, I am writing in to exhort the Media Development Authority (MDA) to review the proposed amendments of the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PEMA) that was released on May 12th 2014. I also refer to Ms. Corrie Tan’s article titled, â€Å"Art of Censorship in Singapore† (The Straits Times, 7 June 2014). I understand that the aforementioned proposition seeks to establish a â€Å"co-regulatory partnership† with local art practitioners by â€Å"empowering arts entertainment event organisers to classify their own performances whilst adhering to community standards and expectations† (MDA, 2014a). Consequently, a new Arts Term Licensing Scheme which mandates the obligatory training of individual artists from local art companies by the MDA as qualified â€Å"content assessors† for â€Å"self-classification† has been edict. Whilst the general outlook of the said proposal may be well meaning in nature as it confers a window peek to MDA’s progressive shift toward the relegation of some of its authority over content classification to its relevant communities (The Straits Times, 10 June 2014), in this case, the arts to local art practitioners, a closer examination upon the various stratums underlying the scheme has left me exceedingly troubled as many fundamental assumptions rooted in its conception, albeit seemingly benign on paper, remains deeply problematic in both practice as well as in spirit. Accordingly, I note that the concepts of â€Å"self-classification†, â€Å"co-regulation†, and â€Å"empowerment† of the local arts industry as posited in the new scheme, falls on a highly erroneous continuum of prevarication as they have not been veritably demonstrated. The notion of â€Å"self-classification† suggests that local art practitioners are granted with an autonomous, free-willed, and imperative role of contribution in the development and undertaking of the classification guidelines. Yet, such has been reflected otherwise in practice as the â€Å"classification† of art works remain subjugated to the prescribed criterions solely ordained by the MDA, without assembling any prior consultations or discussions with art practitioners (Arts Engage, 2014a). In addition, â€Å"self-classification† implies the absence of censorship wherein art works merely follow a catalogue of classification ratings and are never subjected to prohibition. However, the â€Å"Not Allowed for Ratings† category (MDA, 2014c) – in other words, a euphemism for censorship – runs contradictory to the idea of â€Å"self-classification†. It seems that this new scheme by MDA is but a reinstatement of the same old perilous template of censorship in Singapore where authorities are conceived as the unequivocal â€Å"arbiters of tastes† (McGuigan, 1996), rather than trusting artists to be ethically, morally, or socially responsible, and that of my fellow Singaporeans’ capacity to judge an art work critically. Under the principles of classification published in the 2010 report by the Censorship Review Committee (CRC Report, 2010), it was stated that â€Å"classification boundaries must be set according to community standards determined via an engagement process involving the regulator, community, and the industry.† This suggests the presence of an open, transparent, and inclusive process of engagement amongst artists, authorities, and members of the public to determine the perimeters of classification – as in tandem with MDA’s ideals of â€Å"consultation† and working closely with â€Å"expertise and perspectives of a wide spectrum of society† (MDA, 2014b) and the purported notion of â€Å"co-regulation†. However, this is not reflected in truth as the new Arts Term Licensing Scheme which edicts artists to be trained by the MDA as â€Å"qualified content assessors† is but a guise of the state policing the arts by proxy as these â€Å"content assessors† are strictly tethered to executing MDA’s rules. Instead of creating an ingenuous engagement between art practitioners and the MDA where genuine partnership and shared responsibilities may be fostered, artists are merely subjugated as extensions of MDA’s censorships. This, I believe is not â€Å"co-regulation†, but a faà §ade for self-censorship. More notably, such a move resembles that of a â€Å"panopticon† surveillance (Foucault, 1977) with MDA’s pervasiveness at â€Å"disciplining† and â€Å"normalizing† artistic expression on both a macro and micro level by implanting seemingly innocuous â€Å"content assessors† within the heart of art companies – so that whilst MDA’s presence appears to be incognito on the surface, their regulations still remain executed with stringency. Not only is this highly inimical to one’s artistic innovation and creativity (Arts Engage, 2014b), I believe that the fear of non-conformance would fester like an insidious wound that ultimately undermines the development of our arts industry, and on a grandeur scale, the growth of our society as a harmonious whole – as it would not be instilled within my fellow Singaporeans recognize and acknowledge the varying nuances when it comes to the interpretation of art (Chee Meng, 2014). With such an intolerant perspective that fails to conceive art as an outset for constructive discourse, how then can our nation truly blossom into a â€Å"Global City of the Arts† as our leaders have envisioned? Furthermore, it was acknowledged in the 2003 report of Censorship Review Committee that a â€Å"one-size-fits-all† paradigm of censorship is increasingly non-viable given the heterogeneous and ever-changing society of Singapore (CRC Report, 2003). Thus, it seems that this â€Å"new† approach by MDA is not only paradoxical, but terribly regressive. Additionally, whilst the MDA has stressed that the Arts Term Licensing Scheme is â€Å"optional† suggesting that artists have a â€Å"choice† in the matter, it appears that this is but a shrewd attempt by the authorities at veiling a false dichotomy to our art practitioners as they are essentially caught in between continuing the present regime where MDA issues all classifications and advisories, or that of a seemingly â€Å"different† system that is inherently the same as the former since â€Å"content assessors† are specially trained to heed MDA’s specifications. As such, I question MDAâ₠¬â„¢s sincerity at â€Å"co-regulation† and all of its supposed â€Å"ideals† of openness, engagement, inclusiveness, and transparency. In line with the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore which delineates that every Singaporean citizen possess the rights of freedom of speech (Attorney General’s Chambers, 2010) – in this case, the â€Å"speech† is expressed via the modus of art – MDA’s new scheme appears to be a flagrant violation of that democracy and with it, the concept of a â€Å"public sphere† (Habermas, 1964) where there an open space that allows for the exploration of ideas free from overbearing restrictions. If our nation is truly a democratic society, why then is the MDA imposing such harsh regulations of self-censorship upon our artists who simply yearns for art as a medium of expression, and that of mine, and my fellow Singaporean’s freedom of choice in enjoying art in all its various forms? By limiting the creations of artists, allowing audiences to be only be granted access to what is deemed as â€Å"appropriate content†, and creating a rift of division between â€Å"content assessors† and their colleagues all in the name of â€Å"public good†, is the MDA genuinely â€Å"protecting† social harmony, or is this simply a circumvented attempt at regulating a power relationship between us citizens and the state (McGuigan, 1996). In a similar vein, MDA’s espoused notion of â€Å"empowering† art practitioners by according them the prerogative in deciding the classification of their art works remains highly contentious as in practice, artists are subjugated to the strict adherence of MDA’s policing mechanisms by proxy and consequently, are renounced of any leeway to exercise their personal liberties. How then are our art practitioners â€Å"empowered† by the new scheme? Not only is this positioning of the Arts Term Licensing Scheme prevaricating to artists, it also misleads the general public into believing that the new scheme should be embraced unequivocally as it seemingly liberates our artists. As such, it seems that this assertion of â€Å"empowerment† is naught but a surreptitious attempt by the MDA at egregiously eluding all of the said problems underlying self-censorship as the scheme constructs a delusory appearance – resembling that of a â€Å"pseudo-publicâ⠂¬  sphere as postulated by Habermas (1964) – where decisions seem to be â€Å"personally† dictated by artists (i.e. public) and are seemingly â€Å"independent† of MDA’s (i.e. authority’s) intrusiveness. It is thus, disappointing to note that whilst the MDA advocates values of integrity (MDA, 2014b), such has been demonstrated otherwise in this case. More eminently, the scheme’s postulated idea that artists are to face harsh punishments including a $5,000 penalty for â€Å"non-compliance† to MDA’s regulations simply nullifies any notions of â€Å"co-regulatory partnership†, â€Å"empowerment†, whilst invoking an undercurrent of fear that only aggrandizes self-censorship. This, I believe is tantamount to regulative censorship of punitive state sanction taking on the faà §ade of constitutive censorship (Jansen, 1991) where it appears that our artists are merely â€Å"self-regulating†. With the encroachment of hefty penalties associated with â€Å"misclassification†, and MDA’s lack of clarity upon the assessment and appeal processes, what then is of MDA’s assistant chief executive, Mr. Christopher Ng’s claim that authorities would be â€Å"reasonable and fair† (Chee Meng, 2014) in the evaluation such a situation? Consequently, it also seems that this new s cheme has evinced upon an underlying distrusts of art practitioners within our society – as if artists are subversive individuals to be blot away. This, in turn, has perpetuated a fabricated sense of dichotomy of â€Å"artists versus community†, where in truth, our artists and art practitioners are also fellow citizens, parents, â€Å"heart landers†, and are very much part of Singapore and our community at large (Arts Engage, 2014a) . Instead of creating an unnecessary chasm between artists, the general public, and the authorities, as reflected in the present paradigm where the MDA is seen to be the â€Å"mediator† between disgruntled members of the public and a group of seemingly seditious artists that warrants to be â€Å"subdued†, it would be that much more purposeful for the growth of our nation, communities, and our people if we could see ourselves as a collective whole and reconcile our differences through an open, shared discourse, as opposed to mere coercion by proxy. Whilst I understand the imperativeness of MDA’s advisories in aiding audiences to make better informed choices, it is equally important to underscore that such classifications should really be meant as a general â€Å"caution†, and that delving beyond that into micro-managing the entirety of an art work only serves to backfire as not only does it impugn upon artistic integrity and the true spirit of artistic endeav our (Arts Engage, 2014a), it ultimately renders our artistic practices bleak and sterile. Rather than imposing such stringent aseptic rules, we ought to be encouraging a greater degree of sophistication and open-minded appreciation of the arts amongst the public such that it is imbued within our society the capacity to recognize that there is always more than a single â€Å"right† way in which the arts may relate to us (Chee Meng, 2014). If we could devote our efforts into nurturing a greater pool of art critics – be it in terms of adept professionals or greenhorn amateurs – in lieu of â€Å"content assessors†, we would then be able to engage in a much more active and meaningful discourse on the merits of our artistic output which I believe, would assist in establishing that much needed breadth of an open, receptive, and constructive dialogue between our artists and the MDA authorities, consequently forging an improved relationship of trust and respect that would be beneficent to all. Perhaps, a system of regulation that entails an open, consistent, and transparent process, in which discussions may be laid bare for public critique, whose jurisdiction are composed of knowledgeable, publicly-informed, and impartial members principled upon an arms-length approach from any political interests, and whose decision-making processes are periodically subjected to review by an independent body, would better serve to inspire confidence not only from our artists, but within that of my fellow Singaporeans to both the MDA authorities and our local arts industry, as well as across governments (Arts Engage, 2014b). This, I strongly assert is one of the many fundamental steps that we must take together if the MDA genuinely seeks to foster a â€Å"co-regulatory† partnership that â€Å"empowers† our art practitioners and audiences alike. Indeed, the arts should be appreciated in all of its variegated diversity, fluidity, and sublime nuances – that it is an inherent part and parcel of one’s intellectual and emotional growth that cannot be merely subjugated or predetermined by those contending privileged tastes or moral claims. Once again, I sincerely implore the relevant MDA authorities reconsider the proposed amendments of PEMA 2014, and to engage with representative citizen bodies as well as artists in another round of consultations before officially implementing the new scheme. I look forward to hearing from you, Thank you. Yours sincerely, Karen Lim.

The Charismatic Age: First-Century Galilee Essays -- Research Papers C

The Charismatic Age: First-Century Galilee The long-awaited death in 4 BCE of Herod, the ruthless architect of an oppressive Judean police state, sparked a series of spontaneous revolts by the Jewish peasantry. Once these rebellions were subdued, the Jews continued to chafe under a series of tyrannical Roman governors until the massive revolt of 66-70. This period was marked by "widespread discontent and periodic turbulence." Direct Roman rule, along with the burdensome tribute that accompanied it, was highly offensive to the Jews, who considered themselves subjects only to God. Many, in fact, considered their conditions tantamount to slavery (Horsley and Hanson 34-5). This highly-charged atmosphere reached a fever pitch in Galilee, which produced a host of eccentric figures – many of whom amassed sizable followings. As the peasantry anticipated the arrival of the promised Messiah to deliver them from Roman oppression, a number of social bandits were inspired to pretend to this mantle of "king of the Jews." Others assumed the role of prophet, attempting to recreate the miracles of Joshua or predicting an impending judgment. Also circulating in the area were various Jewish holy men revered as miracle-workers, allegedly capable of influencing natural phenomena. It is in this milieu that the figure of Jesus Christ emerged. Prophetic Movements Among Jewish peasantry at the time of Jesus were two distinct types of prophets: the action prophets, who "led sizable movements of peasants from the villages of Judea in anticipation of God's new, eschatological act of liberation," and the oracular prophets, who delivered oracles of either judgment or deliverance (185). The former, as illustrated by the case of Theudas, appea... ... Hanina disobeyed the rabbinic code of conduct by walking alone at night; he also owned goats despite a Mishnaic prohibition against doing so in Palestine, and even went so far as to carry the unclean carcass of a snake. Another Hasid was found ignorant of the existence of a biblical law concerning ritual uncleanness, while still another scoffed at a rule forbidding the use of liquids kept in an uncovered vessel at night (Vermes 77-8). Jesus of Nazareth, presumably, would have been extremely comfortable in such company! Works Cited The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Edition. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1952. Horsley, Richard and Hanson, John. Bandits, Prophets and Messiahs: Popular Movements in the Time of Jesus. Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1985. Vermes, Geza. Jesus the Jew: A Historian's Reading of the Gospels. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1973.

The Death of the Net Generation has Been Greatly Exaggerated :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

The Death of the Net Generation has Been Greatly Exaggerated America's youngest generation, the "Net Generation", is not destined to become the sex-addicted, morally bankrupt, heroin-overdosing generation that many media types have forecasted it will be. As a member of this "Net Generation", or an N-Gener, I know first hand what the values of my generation are, and I know what the future may hold. It is in this respect that I agree with the author of Growing Up Digital, Don Tapscott. Despite the vast array of negative uses for the Internet, there is an equal upside to this form of communication that gives me great hope and confidence in the Net Generation. Tapscott describes the changing ways that N-Geners think, and he sums them up in three points. N-Geners have a greater acceptance for diversity, are a curious generation, and have great self-reliance and assertiveness. If this is truly the way minds are changing, I'm happy to be a part of it. Since there is no way to tell who people are when they're online, people have to be accepted for who they are. As the author said, "You may be [something] else...like an inanimate object. The fact that you're communicating with a toaster is not important--it's what the toaster has to say" (Tapscott, p. 86). N-Geners learn to think about what a person says oftentimes without knowing who said it, thus eliminating any possible bias. N-Geners' being a curious generation is perhaps easier to understand. The Internet is a completely new and ever-changing world, creating endless possibilities for exploration. This vast world of information has proven inviting to kids, making the new generation a curious one. Self-reliance and assertiveness are other important qualities gained from the Net. There are web sites for all sorts of purposes, from fantasy football to free speech. The latter gives an interesting example of how methods of assertiveness have evolved. These web sites are "the digital equivalent of the 1960s petition" (Tapscott, p. 87). In other words, the ideals haven't changed drastically from 1960 to Y2K, just the methods of expression (and on another level, the ease of expression). Internet-based self-reliance comes from the independent nature of the computer. It is a single console designed for use by a single person. When on the Internet, people decide where to go and what to do entirely on their own, and that idea has been firmly engrained in the minds of N-Geners.

Decolonization and Influence of the Cold War Essay

The decades following World War II were all centered on the concept of decolonization, the dismantlement of Imperial empires established prior to World War I throughout Africa and Asia. Due to the aftermath of World War II, countries around the world experienced massive independent movements whose objective was to eliminate colonization and form new independent nations. The process of decolonization was separated by three different approaches: civil war, negotiated independence through foreign pressure, and violent incomplete decolonization. China, for example, had its internal struggles with Nationalistic and Communist parties conflicting that caused a civil war between the two ideologies. Countries including India and South Africa attempted decolonization through non-violent independence movements as well as peaceful negotiations for independence. Though some countries independently sought for decolonization, it was inevitable that decolonization became intertwined with the politics and interventions of the Cold War. After World War II, the world was divided into two blocs, one dominated by the United States and one by the Soviet Union. Because the United States and the Soviet Union couldn’t confront with one another directly in Europe, the two nations were strongly tempted to influence the process of decolonization through proxy nations in all parts of the world. Ultimately, the conflict between United States and Soviet Union disputed over decolonization of nations throughout the world including Korea, Cuba, and Indo-China (Vietnam). Though the Cold War did not imply a great loss of life or substantial bloodshed, it is best described as a severe ideological conflict revolving around territorial expansion efforts. Capitalism, which governed the United States economy and democracy, was the center of the United States government. On the opposite end, the Soviet Union adopted Communism, a predominant economic system that demanded extensive government control. The Cold War conflicts took effect as an indirect competition; a race to see which ideology would, in a sense, dominate the world. The East, represented by the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies, advocated the destruction of capitalism and the establishment of Communism throughout the world. Opposing them were the United States and its North American Treaty Organization  (NATO) allies that attempted to contain Communist expansion efforts, defending its actions through the Truman Doctrine and the Domino Theory. The Domino theory stated that if one nation fell to Communism, the neighboring nations would be affected and falls to Communism, eventually resulting in the inevitable spread of Communism throughout the world. One of the first nations that the United States and Soviet Union sought to establish control was in Korea. After 1949, when Chinese communist leader Mao Zedong proclaimed the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, the spread of communism began to target the country of Korea. Following the end of World War II, Korea was divided along the 38th parallel into â€Å"Soviet† North Korean and â€Å"American† South Korea occupation zones. Heavily armed with artillery and tanks, North Korean troops crossed and invaded South Korea on June 25th, 1950. Abiding to the containment of the Domino theory, United States immediately responded to the unprovoked attack. Under the leadership of the supreme commander of the United Nations coalition forces, General Douglas MacArthur, the South Korean forces managed to push back the Communist forces back behind the 38th parallel. The duration of the Korean War lasted three years and an armistice agreement was signed on July 27th, 1953. The Korean War was an extremely costly war, both in causalities and in financial areas. Though the United States did halt the advancement of Communist takeover, the decolonization conflict in Korea was one of the most flagrant confrontations of the Cold War that intensified the brutal effect of opposing ideologies. Another Cold War incident occurred not far from the United States soil. Up until the mid-20th century, Latin America had always kept good political relations with the United States. However, internal turmoil in Cuba and the rise of Fidel Castro resulted in the unorthodox alliance with the Soviet Union. In an attempt to terminate the Soviet Union influence in Cuba, President John F. Kennedy sent a team of 1,500 CIA-trained Cuban exiles but was quickly defeated by Castro’s army. The â€Å"Bay of Pigs† incident was not the only confrontation between Cuba and United States; the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 22, 1962was the peak of nuclear arms war of the Cold War era. Prior to a CIA spy plane discovering missile sites on Cuba, the Soviet Union was secretly supplying building material and missiles to Cuban  military bases. With the options of a full scale invasion of Cuba, a massive air strike, or a naval blockade, the Kennedy administration had to quickly decide on what course of action to take. Eight days passed and the catastrophe was averted when President Kennedy instituted a naval blockade to prevent Soviet ships to reach Cuba. President Kennedy and Soviet Union’s Nikita Khrushchev reached in agreement as the Soviet Union removed their missiles from Cuba and the United States agreed not to attack Cuba. The conflict in Cuba not only characterizes the alarming intensity of the Soviet Union and the United States but also solidifies the importance of the influence the countries had in the matters of decolonization. One of the final and longest conflicts of decolonization was in Vietnam. The struggle for Vietnam between Communists and Western nations lasted from 1945 to 1975. In the previous century, Vietnam had been colonized by France. With encouragement and support from Stalin and Mao Zedong, Vietnamese Communists successfully rose against the French. At the start of what was known as the First Indochina War, the French government asked the United States for support against the Vietnamese Communists but the United States government did not initially grant support to the French to avoid heightened discrepancies with the Soviet Union. The Geneva Conference peace terms between France and delegates from Vietnam agreed to a partition, separating Vietnam at the 17th parallel (much like the boundary parameters set in Korea). Believing that the Geneva treaty granted too much authority to the Vietnamese Communists, the United States supported the creation of a counter-communist alternative south of th e 17th parallel. The establishment of the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) brought about a United States supported government in South Vietnam. In an attempt to reunify Vietnam under Communist rule, the Communists created a unified front to help mobilize southerners in opposition of Ngo Ding Diem, leader of South Vietnamese government. It was known as the National Liberation Front but became known by the Americans as the â€Å"Viet Cong.† The Viet Cong operated as a guerilla force and eventually overthrew Diem’s government and had him assassinated. In effort to regain Saigon, capital of Vietnam, and halt the complete takeover of Communism in Vietnam, President Lyndon Johnson escalated war efforts by utilizing more manpower and firepower. Despite the  heavy losses on the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces, the war was tiring on both sides and was dragging out. President Nixon managed to end hostilities between the United States and North Vietnam with the Paris Peace Agreement in January 23rd 1975. Although the peace terms were final, the South Vietnamese government continued to battle the Communist forces. With the support of Soviet Union, the Communist forces managed to take Saigon in April 30th 1975. The effects of the Vietnam War were devastating on both parties. The end of the Vietnam War realized the consequences of a confrontation between the East and the West. The Soviet Union managed to exert their Communist influence in the end but the end result of the war manages to signal the end of Cold War influences on decolonization. The era following the end result of World War II ushered in a time of decolonization throughout the world. Through peaceful negotiations or violent civil wars, independent nations became to form by breaking away from their respective Imperialist countries. However, at the same time, the decades also promoted the conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States. The conflicting ideologies of Capitalism and Communism served as a major role in the Cold War. With disputes over countries such as Korea, Cuba, and Vietnam, it became apparent that the politics of the Cold War contributed to the decolonization process across the globe.

Critical Analysis Worksheet Essay

Perform a critical analysis of each reading using critical thinking techniques from this week’s readings. Respond to the following based on your critical thinking analysis of the â€Å"Common Core† and â€Å"The Battle Against Common Core Standards† readings. 1) Define the term conclusion. Aside from being the obvious result or closing, a conclusion is also â€Å"a proposition concluded or inferred from the premises of an argument† as defined by dictionary.com. This means, the conclusion is a final logically reasoned deduction. 2) What is the conclusion of each article? The conclusion from the â€Å"Common Core† perspective is that students will learn the essentials for success in college and business prior to graduating high school. The conclusion for those that are in â€Å"The Battle Against Common Core Standards† is that implementing these standards is politically motivated and not in the best interest of students. See more: how to write an analysis 3) Define the term premises. The premise is the basis of support for a given conclusion. 4) What premises support the conclusions in each article? Those working against common core implementation cite government control due to the funding provided to school districts and lack of proof that the system works as basic reasons for their conclusions. Those in favor of common core cite better prepared graduating students, a more educated workforce, and standardization amongst students. The article indicated that if districts had to define their own educational standards, they would start  by seeking out â€Å"common core standards.† 5) How convincing is the conclusion of each article? Explain your answer. I was more convinced by the arguments in favor of implementing common core standards. I noticed more bias in Smith’s article against common core implementation. I was more convinced by Sell’s article because of the objectivity. 6) Define the term biases. A bias is â€Å"a particular dendency or inclination, especially one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a quesiton; prejudice† according to dictionary.com. Anything that prevents someone from objectively drawing a conclusion is a bias. 7) What biases did you observe in each article? Why do you think they are biases? While the â€Å"Common Core† article objectively defined common core and explained its function all of the sources cited were supportive of implementing common core standards. The article would state the opposition and then Sell would quote someone in favor of common core. Smith’s title alone lets you know that this is an opposing argument. The article is politically motivated. Throughout the article, Smith discusses democratic initiatives and state’s â€Å"relinquishing their right to control.† 8) What might be the sources of the biases in each article? Personal expertise is the initial bias. Perhaps they have a child that has fallen below common core standards. Living in a state that has already implemented common core values, I have dealt with standardized tests as both a student and parent. While I was able to pass them with ease, I have witnessed students taken them multiple times to no avail. Those politically motivated are driven by funding and votes. It’s hard to determine if their focus is genuine or if ulterior motives are present. I recognize my personal bias with regard to choosing or opposing common core. References Bias. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved November 14, 2014, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bias Conclusion. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved November 14, 2014, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conclusion Premise. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved November 14, 2014, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/premise Sell, M. (2013). Common core. McClatchy – Tribune Business News [Washington]. Smith, H.K. (2013, March). The battle against common core standards. FreedomWorks, Retrieved from www.freedomworks.org Link to the article: http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/rousseau/the-battle-against-common-core-standards