attila the hun essays

attila the hun essays Attila the Hun is known as one of the most ferocious leaders of ancient times. He was given the nickname Scourge God because of his ferocity. During the twentieth century, Hun was one of the worst name you could call a person, due to Attila. The Huns were a barbaric and savage group of people, and Attila, their leader, was no exception. He was the stereotypical sacker of cities and killer of babies. The Huns lasted long after their disappearance in mythology and folklore, as the bad guy. Generally, they were not fun people to be around. Priscus saw Attila the Hun at a banquet in 448. Priscus described him as being a short, squat man with a large head and deep-set eyes. He also had a flat nose and a thin beard. Historians say that his general personality was irritable, blustering, and truculent. He was said to be a persistent negotiator, and not at al pitiless. While Priscus was at the banquet in 448, he observed a few other details about Attila. All of Attilas chief lieutenants were served dainties on silver platters, but he was served only meat on wooden plates. No other real qualities of Attila as a general really survived through time, but he is thought to have been an outstanding commander from his accomplishments as a barbarian. Huns themselves were mysterious and feared people. They first appeared in the Fourth Century around the Roman Empire. They rode their warhorses around and cause the Germanic barbarians and Romans alike to fear them. Yet, it was said that they were very uncivilized. It was said that they made no use of fire, and just ate the roots of plants they found in fields. They were also said to have eaten the almost raw meat of animals. The only reason the meat was almost raw was because they were said to have cooked it by placing it between their thighs and the backs of their horses to give it warmth. The Huns sometimes engaged in regular battle. The...

Psycholosy essays

Psycholosy essays The tools that Covey says that we all have are Self-Awareness the ability to stand apart from myself and observe my thoughts and actions Conscience I can listen to my inner voice to understand right from wrong Imagination the ability to envision new possibilities and Will Power the ability for us to The choose. The first three habits that are spoken about through Covey in dealing with private victory are the ability to be proactive, the notion of beginning with the end in mind and Put first things first. The way that these tools can be captured into all of these is many but here are a few ideas about how it can be done from my perspective. As human beings we all have the will power to choose many things that we want to do in life. This has a big thing to do with all the habits that have been read. In dealing with the first habit will power gives us the ability not to be get offended at what other people may be saying about us. It also allows us to make certain choices with reactions that we may have when someone may do something that we may not agree with or to us. Being humans though also give us a conscience which is that little voice inside our heads that may tell us not to do something like talk about someone who has been talking about us because it is a bad thing to do. Working together with our self-awareness tool they help us understand how we felt when we heard someone was speaking us and that we shouldnt do it and we are a better person if we dont. We can also use our ima gination to think of ways that maybe we can turn this unfortunate experience and think of a way to make it a little better. Maybe even though we have heard bad news we can do something for someone else that may be having a bad day and in turn help ourselves to have a good day knowing that we did a good deed for someone. In dealing with the end in mind or we control our won destiny we can use the tools n many ways. By ima...

Government's Involvement or Role in the Marketplace - Managerial Essay

Government's Involvement or Role in the Marketplace - Managerial Economics - Essay Example Economists often assume that markets are perfectly competitive and that all information necessary to make rational decisions is available. . But this is not always true. Sometimes the market is far from being competitive, there is lack of adequate information for participants, and a single buyer or seller, or a small group of buyers and sellers, may be able to control market prices. This power exercised by monopolists and oligopolists is called market power. Market power can cause markets to be inefficient, keeping price and quantity away from the supply-and-demand equilibrium (Mankiw, 1998; Samuelson and Marks, 1995). There are instances when society as a whole is not well served; therefore, it is incumbent on the government to intervene, usually for two reasons: to promote efficiency (enlarging the economic pie), and to promote equity (ensuring a better division of the pie). To make their analysis simple, economists often assume that market outcomes matter only to the buyers and sellers, but in real life decisions by market participants sometimes affect people who had nothing to do with the market at all. Such side effects, called externalities, cause welfare to hinge on more than just values and costs when buyers and sellers decide how much to consume and produce, thus the market equilibrium can become inefficient from the viewpoint of society as a whole. Market power and externalities are what constitute market failure – which means that the market, unregulated and left on its own, fails to allocate resources efficiently. When markets fail, public policy may be able to provide a remedy to the problem situation and perhaps increase economic efficiency. The government intervenes in the hope of improving market outcomes. However, it is by no means certain that government intervention can improve the state of

Microeconomices Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Microeconomices - Term Paper Example f individuals, firms, and industries in terms of producing and consuming of economic goods and services, the concept of cost is relevant as it affects microeconomic activities of the units concerned. For consumers and individuals who are not familiar with the concepts of costs, one might have the tendency to discard this as irrelevant and immaterial. However, close examination of these underlying theories would enlighten consumers on their effects on prices and quantities of goods which are normally offered to the public. It is therefore the objective of this essay to present relevant concepts, theories and applications concerning costs in microeconomics. The costs to be discussed range from opportunity cost, production costs, marginal cost, cost of externalities, the law of diminishing returns and economies of scale. It is interesting to note that in economics, all costs are considered opportunity costs. As rationalized by Petroff (par. 2), â€Å"anytime a resource is used for any purpose, it implies that some other good cannot be produced with that quantity of the resource, that some other resource is not used for the given production instead, and that revenues from other production are foregone. Thus, costs are either explicit cost for the resource used or implicit costs from alternative use of the resource.† To use a practical application, for a consumer who decided to buy a television set, the opportunity cost could be the value of a trip to a nearby beach resort which was not taken due to the purchase. Productions costs are normally related to firms or business enterprises engaged in manufacturing or producing goods for sale to the public. The concept of productions costs are not only discussed in microeconomics but more so in accounting or finance. Production managers are tasked with monitoring the costs of raw materials as well as labor and overhead costs to maximize profits. These costs could be classified as fixed, variable and total costs. Petroff

How Far Kim Is An Indian English Literature Essay

How Far Kim Is An Indian English Literature Essay Kim is a fine artistic creation written by Rudyard Kipling. It has a strong impact on the readers mind that gives a strong sense of spirit for adventurous journey, whereby the two main characters are on the way for searching their respective goals. Kim wants to find his fortune where as Tahsoo Lama wants to discover a certain river of arrow. All the characters in the novel, are part of Great Game. For Mahbub Ali, Hari Babu, Creighton Sahib it means a spy game, a political one i.e. a part of British imperial system. For Tashoo Lama it is a wheel of life, wheel of things in its spiritual and philosophical meanings. For Kim it is a fulfillment of his personal curious desire and nature. Throughout the novel Kim faces a problem of his identity. The problem arises due to his identification with different identities, cultures and ideologies. We are informed that he is a white born orphan who wears some charmings in his neck which are his only heritage to prove him British. His indigenious characteristics place him with Indians. He is brought up in Lahore by a poor half-caste Hindu woman. Our point of study here is to see to what extent he is an Indian? Kipling is determined him to be a white, a British. In the very first page of the novel he says : Though he was burned black as any native; though he spoke the vernacular by preference and his mother tongue in a clipped uncertain sing-song, though he consorted on terms of perfect equality with the small boys of the bazaar; Kim was white a poor white of the very poorest.[Chap.-1] Thus in this way he has denounced absolutely all the cultural and social elements which make a man and give him identity. To prove him British, is to isolate him. The birth and the parents do not create the identity only. It is designed by society and culture, and his interactions in it. Most necessarily Kipling introduces Kim with Indianness, Indian objects, Indian ideas, and thinking. He is grown up in the society of Lahore city. He lives the wild life of Arabian Nights and he is able to see the beauty of it. He discards English style of remaining alienated from commonness. It is his nativity which separates him from his ancestors. Kims society includes Abdullah, Mahbub Ali, the Muslims; Chote Lal, the Hindu; the fakirs; the small boy of bazaar; the native policeman; water carrier; Jawahir Singh the carpenter. He is not different from all these members of Lahore city society. He is looked after by a half-caste Hindu woman who wished that he should wear the European garments but Kim found it easier to slip into Hindu or Mohammedan garb[Chap.-1] In company of his native friends he is at ease. He knows their language and all castes. It is his society in which he grows up learning the very native knowledge of it. Often natives are defined with their characteristics like simplicity, down to earth, knowledge which comes out of every day practical life, curiosity, excitement, innocence. Kim has all these qualities. He is very curious to know about the new things. He behaves in native manner and the wisdom he shows is more Indian. He quotes the proverbs which maintains deep understanding, knowledge and life long experience. If we consider Kim a monolithic character he is less Indian than British. But he is not a universal white man because he hates missionaries, he prefers vernacular and he is always able to attain sympathy from others. He hates going school where the classrooms are gloomy for him. He lives his life among street boys begging for food, which he can surely attain accepting the white society. He wants to live a free life as do the Indians, so he remains away from missionaries or any white person who can take possession over him, in order not to indulge in unadventurous life of routine and seriousness. He is born white Christian and he is well conscious of it but it bothers him to enter again in white society. He entertains his life with Indians without any limitation. He is happy in living with them and treats them equal to him though his nature is to take over anybody is only due to his highly experienced and open-minded out spoken personality. Contrary to it,the Britishers know nothing of India. He has adventures there and every secret activity attracts him. So he is shown always interested in moving in streets in dark, climbing high on the roof of houses to explore somewhat of his interest. The darkness and his colour black both are associated with the Indians by the Britishers in context of India.He knows Indian sensibility because he has lived with them.His alliance with Mahbub Ali started only with his need of food and his curious nature leads him to new experiences. He has nothing to do with Britishers and with their game. He is appears as a secular personality. He says to Mahbub Ali that he is neither Muslim nor he is Hindu even he does not say that he is chrisitan. He may criticize a Lama or a Hindu but he never claims his views about religion. When he is introduced to Catholicism he sees it a new set of Gods and Godlings [Chap.-7].Even the idea of being a Sahib or a White vexes him.He says to Lama-Thou hast said there is neither black nor white.Why plague me with this talk?'[Chap.-15]. He is alien to a British and has framed himself in Indian style. Indianness has ripen in him and if we want too see Britishness in him we can see only reflections of it. He gives the characters but more the readers to feel at home in their native environment. His wisdom is common with the priests in village who take possession of the minds of all villagers. He is confined to India. If he would have another identity or from another place this could not have happened. There would be some connections from outside. He is responding to both Indians as well as English in a way which may suit them but he takes no responsibility of it. Typically he belongs to the class of people in India who had firm faith in appropriateness of British rule over India, whose ideas are inspired by west but actions limited to their own cultural environment The relationship between Lama and Kim is also a typical Indian relation between Guru and Shishya.He is a chela, not a disciple of Lama. Kim insists on his being chela. He says to Lama I am your chela. Am I not?Am I not your chela? Kiplings use of words contextualize him in certain periphery. The symbolicism also suggests the Indianness in Kim. How can a man follow the way or the great game when he is so always pestered by women?, he says. The way or the great game symbolize the sacred path to reach the ultimate truth. The words cannot be taken only for spy game. Kipling says that Kim thought in the vernacular on this occasion.And this is possible only by his relation with Lama and his Indian roots, which made him able to think spiritually. He loves the country. Mahbub asks him And who are thy people friend of all the world? Kim replies This great and beautiful land. The orality of characters and speeches connects the story, the character and even the author to the land upon which it does perform itself. The proverbs must come out from that specific place to which the user belong and its user must have also the wide sense and understanding for using it. It is not a days work and he who knows it and uses is more of that place than other. Kim uses the proverbs and language splendidly. The significant thing is that the proverbs, have their particular tone and sense that they are not found in another languages. They are more Indian than any other things in the novel can be. The colloquial speeches also gives it an Indian colour. Orality and meaning of dialogue both are performative and context bound, and moves away from European styles and influences. These are situated outside the European or English perfiery. It has its own Indian social space. Language which is given to Kim by Kipling is Indian in meaning and context. The language of English priests, Lurgan Sahib and Creighton sahib is different from that of Kim. Kims language is hybridization of English, Hindi and Urdu. There we can clearly see the dominance of pure English over the English mixed with vernacular hence two different levels are created and Kim is attributed lower one i.e. more identified with Indians, specially at that time. The language teaches about ones status and identity. English priests sends him for learning English means that so far he is not an English. He has learned and accepted Indian culture and values. His acception of guru-chela relationship with Lama and his treatment of a sick boy at Banaras are the best example of it. He thinks in Hindi (Hindustani), in the tongue he knows best as the writer says[Chap.6]. It means that primarily he is Hindustani than it does not matter what other language he speaks.His use of Urdu and Hindi language maintains Indianness in him. He is a local legend. If Kim can use aurhoritative language then it does not mean that he is Britisher because it can be practiced by any other Indian also. Being a part of Great Game also does not identify him with Creighton or Lurgam Sahib. If it is the case then what you will say about Hari Babu who is a part of Great Game and speaks English Kim has split consciousness of being both an Indian and a British. His frequent desire for companionship of Lama and the road, his disinterestedness in being a Sahib, and going to school are the strong example of his re-assertion of native cultural identity. His identity can be constructed only in according to his socio-political economic binaries under in which he lived. Kims blackness is first point which separates him from Britishers. Socially he is a part of Indian world. Kim in his early childhood is given to a full grown manliness. Perhaps it will not be wrong to say that he seems to be character of authors imagination, not from the real world. But, what the reality is, that he is offspring of Indian soil. He is moulded in Indian form. He is formed by Indian society and culture not by English. He inherited his body from white parents but it is laid upon circumstances what will happen to his body in future. He enjoys his position well in his society but he is also a person who looks for future. His father had prophesized for his future and he sets himself to go for the search of his future. He is a native hero who is on his mission for making a better life. So he, joins the Madrissah though it is not of his test. There he will be a Sahib but to be a Sahib is not his dream. He thinks that after his schooling he will be more able to play his adventures. Being left by Hari at Rani Sahibas house he feels that he is out of game, the game of adventure. He cant bear it and leaves the house. He knows his birth and in playing games he uses this white racial birth in a political use. It is only a impression on native Indians but he presents himself in his native garbs so to not differentiate with them. His continuous search to find an answer of who is Kim? at last results in humanistic approach that he is only a Kim not a Sahib or a English imperialist one. He is self-centered Indian in his pursuit of joy and adventurous life. Creighton, Burton and Bennett are the part of White world. They cannot part themselves from it. Only after confirmation of Kims white origin they are ready to adopt him. The evidences of this white origin are only his fathers clearance certificate and a note.If Kim had not these proofs he had to remain only an ordinary Indian. Then his colour black, vernacular tongue, his habits, his outward presentation would construct his identity. Thus, language and culture supersedes over race and ethnicity. From Lama he learns myths of Buddha and makes it own objective to search for river. -Oah it was made by our lord Buddha à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. I am his disciple and we must find that riverà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ it is so veree valuable to us.[Chap-5] His joys are the broad land and fields he felt,were a cog-wheel unconnected with any machinery.But I shall argue that he is not an absolute Indian.He knows his British origin but frequently he neglects to be a British.He is conscious of his high birth and goes with Lama only for his own search for red bull. He shows his European egoism, tries to take over everybody. To his native friends, also to Britishers he is a White and superior to all other Indians. Kim hates them Bennett thinks that once a Sahib is always a Sahib; but he avoids Sahibs and Madrissah. To him, for a moment, he may be Sahib but no longer he wants to remain a Sahib. He has crossed all the whites who want war, rule etc. and thinks them fools and wants to see new things. Lama says But no white man knows the land and the customs of the land as thou knowest. Writer seems to make him an Indian without loosing any Whiteness / Britishness in him. There is a White boy by the barracks waiting under a tree who is not a White boyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. He is not like other boys'[Chap-6]. It is the Madrissah where his one identity replaces another. By teaching and learning identities are created. It is Madrissah where a second type of learning starts. Kim says In Madrissah I will learn. In Madrissah I will be a Sahib. In Madrissah for the rest of the day Kim found himself an object of distinguished consideration among a few hundred white men.[Chap-6] Madrissaha becomes the distinguishing point. Mahbub and Creighton Sahib fears that being long in madrissah he can loose his original personality. It is madrissah where the process of making him a Sahib starts. After his discovery of red bull and confrontation with officers he still, is not ready to accept himself a Sahib. He writes to Mahbub Ali By means of charm about my neck. It was established that I was the son of some Sahib in regiment.[Chap-6] A priest gave me a new name and clothed meà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Later he says to himself à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ and I am a Sahib. No I am Kim. This is great world and I am only Kim. Who is Kim?[Chap-6] Here Kim seems to establish his identity beyond the Sahib/White world. He knows the world is great. He asserts himself Kim of any place. He is the man of all the world who does not create distances and differences. After all he can not be said as a whole (full) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.Indian nor he can be a English because his parents were Irish and author gives stress upon his Irishness when he says his mother has been Irish too. He is a great synthesis of the East and the West. British and India.He comes out from madrissah in form of British agent. He can no longer remain an Indian. He becomes a hybrid of heterogenigenious elements, Indian and English, high and low. The hybridity and heterogentiy glitters but further it can produce nothing. Kim also leaves us in state of puzzlement. He does not give any idea to whither he moves. He himself can not solve himself that who is Kim? He leaves Rani Sahibas house in meditation. The words struck to his ear I am Kim. I am Kim. But what is Kim? He cant find answer. Kipling also tries for a solution but he fails with his words Roads were meant to be walked upon, houses to be lived in, cattles to be driven fields to be tilled and men and women to be talked.[Chap-15]

Residential Schools Essay -- Canadian Education, Canadian Government

Case Study: Residential Schools Examining the residential school system in Canada between the 1870s and 1996 exposes numerous human rights and civil liberties violations of individuals by the government. This case study involves both de jure discrimination and de facto discrimination experienced by Aboriginals based on their culture. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms specifically protects Aboriginal rights under section 25 and section 15 declares that, â€Å"Every individual is equal before and under the law† (Sharpe & Roach, 2009, p. 307). Human rights and civil liberties of Aboriginal children and parents were ignored and violated by residential schools which were fuelled by government policy, agendas of church organizations, and a public desire to assimilate the native population into Canadian society. Government Policy Assimilating the aboriginal population into Canadian society was seen as the best solution to eliminating the costs associated with this segment of society receiving funds for being wards of the state. Once the process of shaping students into ideal citizens has been completed, they would be granted full citizenship and automatically enfranchises them. The removal treaty rights and tribe affiliation would mean that the federal government is no longer faced with the financial burden associated with caring for these peoples (Akhtar, 2010, p. 113). Since children have the potential to easily adapt to situations, they are perfect candidates for socialization programs which ease them into society. When the policy of aggressive civilization was supported by the Canadian government, public funding became available for the residential school project which involved stripping aboriginal children of their cultur... ...ess to the issue and recognizing the problems with this policy will help prevent further violations of rights and liberties. Conclusion The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is in place to ensure the citizens of Canada are protected from unreasonable violations by the government. When the assimilation policy was adopted there was no way to determine the far reaching effects that it would have on aboriginal children and their families. Over time societal views change and the policies are directly affected so this kind of human rights violation would be less acceptable. Challenging the status quo can bring about change and bring awareness to a topic that was often overlooked. In a nation which prides it’s self on being a multicultural mosaic, residential schools fuelled by policy, religious organizations and the public should be stricken down permanently.

Egypt and Mesopotamia Essay

Egypt and Mesopotamia have both similarities and differences, throughout both of these civilizations from back to 3,500 B.C. The political and social structures in these civilizations were different and the same in their own way. The political differences between Egypt and Mesopotamia included hierarchy power, land control, and centralized government. The similarities between both civilizations are social class, male patriarchy, and kings. Egypt and Mesopotamia both had differences of their political and social structures. Egypt had more of authorial government, where one head person was in charge which in this case was the pharaoh, which was the head on Egypt social class, as well as leader of his society. The Pharaoh was basically a king ruling for his people, while Mesopotamia, had city states, which was controlled by priest kings. Another difference is that in Egypt the Pharaoh had complete control over the land, while in Mesopotamia the kings were not so powerful, and the land was split with others such as priest kings. Lastly, Egypt had a centralized government, while Mesopotamia did not have this. Egypt was ruled under one leader and was together as a unity. Egypt had an overall leader such as the Pharaoh, which helped Egypt stay united as one government and civilization. Key similarities would be that they both had poly gods and many of their gods were very brutal. Both the lands were birthed in war and had much cultural strife for land. Mesopotamia had an all mighty ruler of gods and Egyptians really didn’t. Many people say Ra was the almighty sun god of Egyptian culture but really all of Egypt’s gods were about equal. The idea of what is beautiful and what is considered â€Å"manly† is still held upon Egyptian beliefs, not Mesopotamian beliefs. Very different cultures Egypt developed in relative isolation from the rest of the ancient Near East. Thus, cultural evolution resulted in a totally unique civilization, without influence from the outside. Mesopotamia was a multicultural society, with Sumer and Akkad, Elam and Babylon, Assyria, Mitanni, and others all vying for supremacy. Mesopotamia and Egypt were both in flood basins of major rivers. Mesopotamia was characterized by turmoil and tension and in contrast Egypt was characterized by stability and serenity. The Mesopotamian climate was harsh and since the Tigris and the Euphrates flooded irregularly, nature was not viewed as life enhancing but rather considered to be a threat. Mesopotamia was located on an open plain without protection from foreign intrusions; therefore they  were continually on alert. Differences between the religions is the idea of death and resurrection for all people, including common people, was possible in ancient Egypt, but not generally so in Mesopotamian religions. Early on in Egyptian history, only the king, or pharaoh, could resurrect from the dead and live forever. That is why the Egyptians mummified their dead. Later, even the common man wanted his body to be preserved as a home for the spirit, who would live on in the afterlife. This was not possible for the average Mesopotamian. Egyptian religion was less likely to be influenced by the outside world. Mesopotamia is at the crossroads of many different peoples and cultures. Changes in the Mesopotamian religions was much more likely, and more common, than in Egypt. Egypt and Mesopotamia have both similarities and differences, throughout both of these civilizations from back to 3,500 B.C. The political and social structures in these civilizations were different and the same in their own way. The political differences between Egypt and Mesopotamia included hierarchy power, land control, and centralized government. The similarities between both civilizations are social class, male patriarchy, and kings. Egypt and Mesopotamia both had differences of their political and social structures. Egypt and Mesopotamia believed in polytheistic, but the Mesopotamia they believed in many rulers such as ur-nammu and sargon ant ect but they Egyptians believed in the pharaoh he was the only person in charge over everything.