Skip Nav

Buy Custom Essays Online

Customers who viewed this item also viewed

❶McKinlay, Sep 14, - Posted here:

PREFATORY NOTE

Personality Characteristics of Soldiers
Major Films by Pastor Anderson
A Comparison and Contrast of Freud and Erickson’s Developmental Theories

View important information about the education debt, earnings, and completion rates of students enrolled in certificate programs. All students are required to pay tuition for all courses in which they are enrolled. They may be changed, or other charges may be included, as a result of the Board of Regents decisions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this or any other university publication, the university reserves the right to make changes in tuition, fees and other charges at any time such changes are deemed necessary by the university and the USM Board of Regents.

The Board of Regents has authorized the university to charge a student's delinquent account for all collection costs incurred by the university. Requests for services for example, transcripts, diplomas, registration will be denied until all debts are paid. Please see the USM residency policy for specific details about residency requirements. Financial aid and tuition remission for University System of Maryland employees cannot be applied to noncredit courses. Golden ID benefits may not be applied to fees, noncredit courses, specialty graduate programs, or doctoral programs.

GI Bill is a registered trademark of the U. Department of Veterans Affairs. More information about education benefits offered by VA is available on the U. The UCSP requirement may be waived if you previously earned a graduate degree from a regionally accredited institution. For more information, contact your academic advisor. An interdisciplinary introduction to the role of technology in contemporary society.

The aim is to apply principles and concepts from a variety of social science disciplines e. Topics include how technology changes relationships, the cumulative advantages and disadvantages associated with technology, digital natives versus digital immigrants, the pace of technological change, changes to the nature of how people learn and think, and the meaning of technology in society. For students not majoring in a science. An introduction to the structure and function of living organisms.

The objective is to use knowledge about biological principles and scientific reasoning to make informed decisions about the natural world. Topics include the chemical foundations of life, cell biology, genetics, evolution, ecosystems, and the interdependence of living organisms. Discussion also covers the importance of the scientific method to biological inquiry and the impact of biological knowledge and technology on human societies. Students may receive credit for only one of the following courses: Fulfills the laboratory science requirement only with previous or concurrent credit for BIOL A hands-on study of the structure and function of living organisms.

The goal is to apply the scientific method and to use scientific and quantitative reasoning to make informed decisions about experimental results in the biological sciences. Laboratory exercises emphasize the scientific method and explore topics such as the chemical foundations of living organisms, cell structure and function, and the classification of organisms.

A hands-on study of current social networking applications and approaches to protect against cyber attacks and enhance personal cybersecurity.

The goal is to collaborate and interact through personal and professional social networking while developing and using computer security best practices. Discussion covers issues associated with the impact of social computing on individuals and society. Projects include creating and maintaining accounts on selected social networking sites. A survey of technological advancements in the field of digital media and their impact. The objective is to explain how digital media has transformed the communication of ideas in society and to make responsible choices in the creation and consumption of digital media based on awareness of global, social, ethical, and legal contexts.

Topics include social media, the visual display of information, ethics and privacy, participatory media, and the impact of digital media on culture. A survey of basic concepts and principles in micro- and macroeconomics and how the economy has been affected by technology.

The aim is to define and explain the key terms and concepts in economics and determine how technology has affected consumers, producers, and markets, as well as economic growth and policy. Topics include how innovation affects labor markets, the value of information, and the role of technological change in the economy. An introductory study of geology, encompassing the Earth, the materials that constitute its makeup, the structure of those materials, and the processes acting on them.

The goal is to understand geological principles and how humans affect geological processes. Topics include the rocks and minerals composing Earth, the movement within Earth, and its surface features and the agents that form them and our environment.

Discussion also covers energy and mineral resources. A focused survey of the intersection of technology and history and the evolutionary process that marks what we call progress.

The objective is to apply historical precedent to everyday responsibilities and relationships in order to advance the goals and ideals of contemporary society; compare and contrast historical eras; and describe how events influence our sense of time, space, and technology. Access to a standard office productivity package, i. An introduction to data and the range of technologies including hardware, software, databases, and networking and information systems that provide the foundation for the data-centric focus of modern organizations.

The objective is to apply knowledge of basic technical, ethical, and security considerations to select and use information technology and the data that arises from technology effectively in one's personal and professional lives. Discussion covers issues related to technology as a vehicle for collecting, storing, and sharing data and information, including privacy, ethics, security, and social impact.

Applied exercises focus on the manipulation, analysis, and visualization of data and effective data communication strategies. An introduction to the humanities through a review of some of the major developments in human culture. The goal is to analyze how societies express their ideas through art, literature, music, religion, and philosophy and to consider some of the underlying assumptions about the way societies are formed and run.

Focus is on developing the conceptual tools to understand cultural phenomena critically. A survey of the U. The objective is to evaluate situations and make recommendations for action based on an understanding of law, legal institutions, and court procedures.

Topics include the organization and powers of federal and state lawmaking institutions, court procedures, legal analysis, and careers in the legal environment. An introduction to common research methods used to locate primary and secondary authority relevant to given topics and issues.

The goal is to find valid, relevant, mandatory primary authority. Topics include the analysis, publication, and citation of judicial opinions and statutory law; the features and use of secondary sources; and various computer-assisted research tools to find and validate primary authority. An introduction to the principles of writing clearly and effectively in the legal environment.

The objective is to draft writings that synthesize law, analyze legal issues, and explain law and legal analysis to a nonlegal audience. Assignments include a legal synthesis memo, case law and statutory analysis memos, and a client letter. A survey of basic principles relating to the ethical practice of law. Our essay writers will offer papers with balanced arguments and evidence-based conclusions.

Qualified writers only Plagiarism free guarantee It'll take you just 2 minutes. Academic level Undergraduate Bachelor Professional. Deadline 3 hours 6 hours 12 hours 24 hours 2 days 3 days 6 days 10 days 14 days. Buy Custom Essays Online. Excellence values Formatting standards Revision Policy. Formatting standards Privacy Policy Terms and Conditions.

Get a bonus NOW for signing up Register and get bonuses now! Please enter a valid email address. As the house becomes larger and better the peace-taboo extends from the fireplace to the whole house and then to the yard or enclosure. This is the house-peace. If any group which possesses deposits of salt, flint-stone fit for implements, pipe-stone, water supply, or special foods should try to prevent others from having access to the same, all others would join in war against that one until an agreement was made and established by usage.

This agreement is either one of peaceful access to natural supplies or one of trade. Tribes also agree to take wives from each other. We often have reason to be astonished at the institution-making power of nature-men when disagreeable experience has forced them to find relief. The Tubu of the Sahara are warlike and distrustful even of each other to such an extent that they scarcely form a society; even in their villages they quarrel and fight.

It is a very noteworthy feature that these people have no notion of rights. It is the in-group as a peace-group which is the school of rights; as we have seen, there can be peace and order inside only by law using this term in its broadest sense ; but a law creates and enforces rights.

Now these Tubu have been forced to make a law that inside the village no weapons may be worn, 1 so that here already we find an institutional arrangement to limit warlikeness. When Nachti-gal, visiting the Tubu, complained of their ill usage of himself and threatened to go away, they pointed out to him that as soon as he had left their territory he would be at their mercy. The Beduin have the same notion. They are ruthless robbers and murderers, but a guest in the tent is perfectly safe and entitled to their best hospitality.

When he leaves it he is fair game, whether enemy, friend, or neighbor. The West-Australians have a usage that any man who has committed a wrong according to their code must submit to a flight of spears from all who think themselves aggrieved, or he must allow a spear to be thrust through his leg or arm.

There is a tariff of wounds as penalties for all common crimes. It is a common custom in Australia that a man who has stolen a wife from an out-group must submit to a flight of spears from her group-comrades; this is now only a ceremony, but it is a peace-institution which has set aside old warfare on account of stolen women.

As we have seen, the Australians live in very small groups, but they assemble from time to time in large kin-groups for purposes of festivals of a religious character.

The kin-groups are not peace-groups, 3 because they are loose and have no common life. At the assemblies all the sacred objects are brought into the ceremonial ground, but on account of the danger of quarrels, no display of arms is allowed anywhere near the sacred objects. After a quarrel there is a corroboree, to make and Edition: They are positive rules of an arbitrary character, depending upon agreement and usage, but are devised to satisfy expediency.

In Queensland no fighting at all is allowed at night in camp; those who want to fight must go outside, and after a fight the victor must show to his comrades that he had a real grievance.

If he does not convince them of this they force him to submit to the same mutilation from his victim that he has inflicted. The women fight with their yam-sticks, which are about four feet long. One woman allows the other to strike her on the head; the second must then submit to a blow; thus they go on until one does not want any more. The duel is a similar ease of a conventionalized fight in the midst of a peaceful civil order.

In all these cases we see that war is admitted inside of a peace-group when individuals are wronged or offended by comrades, but only in conventionalized and regulated form, so that it is a kind of lawful war.

We also find war between groups under some regulation and conventionalization when there is a bond of kinship or religion uniting the two groups. It appears that this is the origin of the rules of war by which its horrors are reduced.

On the island of Tanna in the New Hebrides the eight thousand inhabitants are divided into two groups, one at each end of the island, and each group is subdivided into villages. If two villages in the same division fight, as they often do, the fighting is not intense Edition: They answer that they have come to destroy the plantation of the man in the village who has injured a man of theirs.

The chief admits that this is just, but proposes to avoid violence; so he brings to them fruit from the plantation of the offender and, if the offense was great, he allows them to destroy a certain number of trees on it.

Generally an agreement is reached, but if not, long hostilities endure between two neighboring villages. The Christian states have always professed to moderate somewhat the horrors of war when they went to fighting with each other, and so we have laws of war which are good between the states agreeing to them, but not with outsiders.

This makes a limited peace-group of all the states which unite now to make international law. Let us follow these peace-institutions up into higher civilization. The Scandinavian people spread in small bodies over their territory, and these bodies often engaged in war with each other. They had a common sanctuary at Upsala at Edition: This religious bond kept up a certain sense of national unity, which, however, has never produced national sympathy.

At the festivals at Upsala peace was enforced for the time and place 1 ; disputes were settled and fairs held, and there were also feasts and conferences. The Swedes in the thirteenth century formed kin-groups which adopted rules of mutual succor and defense.

There was to be no fighting between Wednesday evening and Monday morning; later these limits were changed, 6 No such law was ever obeyed with any precision and it never became a custom, much less an institution, but it had some influence. As the kings gained real power and prestige in the feudal states they made the king's peace Edition: The king's peace was a name for a central civil authority which could put down all private war and violations of public order and establish a peace-group over a great extent of territory, within which rights, law, and civil authority should be secured by competent tribunals.

In the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation the public general peace of the empire was introduced in , but the emperors never had the means to enforce it, and it did not exist until We can see how the king's peace grew by the following case: Canute the Dane made a law in England that, if any unknown man was found dead, he should be assumed to be a Dane and a special tax, called murdrum , should be paid for him to the king.

Again, at the time of the Conquest all crimes committed on the roads which ran through a city Canterbury, for instance were crimes against the king's peace—which also extended one league, three perches, and three feet beyond the city gate. This means that the high roads which ran through a town were first brought under the king's peace, and this peace also extended beyond the royal burgh for an extent which Edition: What was a crime elsewhere was a greater crime there, and what was not a crime elsewhere might be a crime there.

King Edmund forbade blood revenge in his burgh 1 ; that is, he delimited an in-group in which there must be law and an administration of justice by his tribunal; Jews and merchants bought the protection of the king's peace throughout his realm. From this germ grew up the state as a peace-group and the king's peace as the law of the land; we Americans call it the peace of the people. One of the most remarkable examples of a peace-group which could be mentioned is the League of the Iroquois which was formed in the sixteenth century; it deserves to be classed here with the peace-institutions of civilized states.

This league was a confederation of five, afterwards six tribes of Indians, to maintain peace. By Indian usage blood revenge was a duty; but the Iroquois confederation put a stop to this, as between its members, by substituting laws and civil authority.

It was, for its stage, fully as marvelous a production of statesmanship as are these United States — themselves a great peace-confederation. Compared with Algonkins and Sioux the Iroquois were an industrial society. They tried to force others to join the confederacy — that is, to come into the peace-pact or to make an alliance with it; if they would do neither, war arose and the outside people was either exterminated or absorbed.

The duties inculcated were Edition: We have now found a peace of the house, of the sanctuary, of religion, of the market, of women, of the popular assembly, and of the king, all of which were legal and institutional checks upon wax and an introduction of rational and moral methods in the place of force. Let us see next what has been the relation between religion on the one side and peace or war on the other.

Those who perform the rites of worship towards the same ancestors or the same gods come into the same cult-group, but no religion has ever succeeded in making its cult-group into a peace-group, although they all try to do it.

Such a peace-group is only an ideal for all who profess the same religion; in most of the great religions down to the seventeenth century, dissenters or heretics were always treated with great severity, because it was thought that they would bring down the wrath of the ghost or the god not only on themselves but also on the whole community.

The New England Puritarm had this notion that the sins of some would bring down the wrath of God on the whole. Religion has always intensified ethnocentrism; the adherents of a religion always think themselves the chosen people or else they Edition: The Jews looked down upon all non-Jews as Gentiles; the Mohammedans despise all infidels — their attitude towards non-Mussulmans is one leading to aggression, plunder, and annihilation.

The Greeks looked doom on all non-Greeks as barbarians, but in their case the sentiment was only partly religious; they themselves were never united by their own religion. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, when Mohammedanism threatened to overwhelm Christendom, Latin Christians were inflamed with greater rage against Greek Christians than against Mohammedans.

Nicholas V in gave to Alfonso V of Portugal authority to subjugate any non-Christians, having in view especially people of the west coast of Africa, and to reduce them to servitude illorum personas in servitutem , which probably did not mean slavery, but subjection.

When the American colonies revolted, the English were amazed that the colonists could ally themselves with Frenchmen against the mother-country, although the French were Roman Catholics in religion, absolutists in the state, and of an alien nationality. Buddhism is characterized by a pervading peacefulness, but no religion has ever kept its adherents from fighting each other. The instances which have been cited suffice to show that religion has been quite as much a stimulus to war as to peace; and religious wars are proverbial for ruthlessness and ferocity.

Christianity has always contained an ideal of itself as a peace-group. The mediseval church tried to unite Edition: Churches, convents, and ecclesiastical persons were put under a peace-taboo.

The church, however, at the same time, entered into an alliance with the feudal nobles and adopted militant methods; heretics were dealt with as outside the fold. The modem state, as it began to take definite form, entered into a contest with the church for the control of society and for the guardianship of peace, because the church had failed to secure peace.

The United States presents us a case quite by itself. We have here a confederated state which is a grand peace-group. It occupies the heart of a continent; therefore there can be no question of balance of power here and no need of war preparations such as now impoverish Europe. The United States is a new country with a sparse population and no strong neighbors. If this state becomes militant, it will be because its people choose to become such; it will be because they think that war and warlikeness are desirable in themselves and are worth going after.

On their own continent they need never encounter war on their path of industrial and political development up to any standard which they choose to adopt. It is a very remarkable fact, and one which has had immense influence on the history of civilization, that the land of the globe is divided into two great sections, the mass of Europe, Asia, and Africa on the one side and these two Americas on the other, and that one of these worlds remained unknown to the other until only four hundred years ago.

We talk a great deal about progress and modem enlightenment and democracy and Edition: As to this matter of war which we are now considering, the fact that the new world is removed to such a distance from the old world made it possible for men to make a new start here.

It was possible to break old traditions, to revise institutions, and to think out a new philosophy to fit an infant society, at the same time that whatever there was in the inheritance from the old world which seemed good and available might be kept. It was a marvelous opportunity; to the student of history and human institutions it seems incredible that it ever could have been offered. The men who founded this republic recognized that opportunity and tried to use it.

It is we who are now here who have thrown it away; we have decided that instead of working out the advantages of it by peace, simplicity, domestic happiness, industry and thrift, we would rather do it in the old way by war and glory, alternate victory and calamity, adventurous enterprises, grand finance, powerful government, and great social contrasts of splendor and misery.

Future ages will look back to us with amazement and reproach that we should have made such a choice in the face of such an opportunity and should have entailed on them the consequences — for the opportunity will never come again. Some illustration of our subject has, however, been furnished by the internal history of our peace-group. The aborigines of this continent have never been taken into our peace-bond, and our law about them is, consequently, full of inconsistencies.

Sometimes they have been treated as comrades in the in-group; sometimes as an out-group with which our group was on a footing of Edition: Another question seems to be arising with respect to the negroes; we have been trying, since the Civil War, to absorb them into our peace-bond, but we have not succeeded. They are in it and not of it now, as much as, or more than, in the days of slavery, for the two races live more independently of each other now than they did in those former days.

The Southern States do not constitute true societies because they lack unity of interest and sentiment, on account of the race difference which divides them. This discord may prove worse and more fatal to the internal integrity of the peace-group than such old antagonisms of interest as disturb Ireland, the national antagonisms which agitate Austria-Hungary, or the religious antagonisms which distract Belgium.

In short, a state needs to be a true peace-group in which there is sufficient concord and sympathy to overcome the antagonisms of nationality, race, class, etc. Before even the great civilized states have reached this model, there is yet much to be done. If we look at these facts about peace-laws and institutions and the formation of peace-groups in connection with the facts previously presented about the causes of war and the taste for war, we see that militancy and peacefulness have existed side by side in human society from the beginning just as they exist now.

A peaceful society must be industrial because it must produce instead of plundering; it is for this reason that the industrial type of society is the opposite of the militant type. In any state on the continent of Europe to-day these two types of societal organization may be seen interwoven with each other and fighting each other.

Industrialism builds up; militancy wastes. If a railroad is built, trade and intercourse indicate a line on which it ought to run; military Edition: Then all the interests of trade and intercourse must be subjected to constant delay and expense because the line does not conform to them. Not a discovery or invention is made but the war and navy bureaus of all the great nations seize it to see what use can be made of it in war.

It is evident that men love war; when two hundred thousand men in the United States volunteer in a month for a war with Spain which appeals to no sense of wrong against their country, and to no other strong sentiment of human nature, when their lives are by no means monotonous or destitute of interest, and where life offers chances of wealth and prosperity, the pure love of adventure and war must be strong in our population.

Europeans who have to do military service have no such enthusiasm for war as war. The presence of such a sentiment in the midst of the most purely industrial state in the world is a wonderful phenomenon. At the same time the social philosophy of the modern civilized world is saturated with humanitarianism and flabby sentimentalism. Nothing could be more mistaken. We read of fist-law and constant war in the Middle Ages and think that life must have been full of conflicts and bloodshed then; but modern warfare bears down on the whole population with a frightful weight through all the years of peace.

Never, from the day of barbarism down to our own time, has every man in a society been a soldier until now; and the armaments of to-day are immensely more costly than ever before.

There is only one limit possible to the war preparations of a modern European state; that is, the Edition: What will come of the mixture of sentimental social philosophy and warlike policy? There is only one thing rationally to be expected, and that is a frightful effusion of blood in revolution and war during the century now opening. It is said that there are important offsets to all the burden and harm of this exaggerated militancy.

Institutions and customs in human society are never either all good or all bad. We cannot adopt either peacefulness or warlikeness as a sole true philosophy. Military discipline educates; military interest awakens all the powers of men, so that they are eager to win and their ingenuity is quickened to invent new and better weapons. In history the military inventions have led the way and have been afterwards applied to industry.

Chemical inventions were made in the attempt to produce combinations which would be destructive in war; we owe some of our most useful substances to discoveries which were made in this effort. The skill of artisans has been developed in making weapons, and then that skill has been available for industry.

The only big machines which the ancients ever made were battering-rams, catapults, and other engines of war. The construction of these things familiarized men with mechanical devices which were capable of universal application. Gunpowder was discovered in the attempt to rediscover Greek fire; it was a grand invention in military art but we should never have had our canals, railroads, and other great works without such explosives. Again, we are indebted to the chemical experiments in search of military agents for our friction matches.

War also develops societal organization; it produces political institutions and classes. In the past these institutions and classes have been attended by oppression Edition: The social exploitation is not essential to the organization, and it may be prevented by better provisions. In long periods of peace the whole societal structure becomes fixed in its adjustments and the functions all run into routine.

Vested interests get an established control; some classes secure privileges and establish precedents, while other classes form habits of acquiescence. Such was the case in France in the eighteenth century. By war new social powers break their way and create a new order. The studentis tempted to think that even a great social convulsion is worth all it costs.

What other force could break the bonds and open the way? But that is not the correct inference, because war and revolution never produee what is wanted, but only some mixture of the old evils with new ones; what is wanted is a peaceful and rational solution of problems and situations—but that requires great statesmanship and great popular sense and virtue.

In the past the work has been done by war and revolution, with haphazard results and great attendant evils. To take an example from our own history: It is impossible to see how else we could have overcome the vested interests and could have extricated ourselves from our position.

It was no purpose Edition: There is another effect of war which is less obvious but more important. During a period of peace, rest, and routine, powers are developed which are in reality societal variations, among which a certain societal selection should take place. Here comes in the immense benefit of real liberty, because, if there is real liberty, a natural selection results; but if there is social prejudice, monopoly, privilege, orthodoxy, tradition, popular delusion, or any other restraint on liberty, selection does not occur.

War operates a rude and imperfect selection. Our Civil War may serve as an example; think of the public men who were set aside by it and of the others who were brought forward by it, and compare them in character and ideas. Think of the doctrines which were set aside as false, and of the others which were established as true; also of the constitutional principles which were permanently stamped as heretical or orthodox.

As a simple example, compare the position and authority of the president of the United States as it was before and as it has been since the Civil War. The Germans tell of the ruthless and cruel acts of Napoleon in Germany, and all that they say is true; but he did greater services to Germany than any other man who can be mentioned. It took another war in to root out the traditional institutions and make way for the new ones. Of course the whole national life responded to this selection.

The Roman state was a selfish and pitiless subjugation of all the rest of mankind. It was built on slavery, it cost Edition: The Roman state gave discipline and organization and it devised institutions; the modern world has inherited societal elements from it which are invaluable. One of the silliest enthusiasms which ever got control of the minds of a great body of men was the Crusades, but the Crusades initiated a breaking up of the stagnation of the Dark Ages and an emancipation of the social forces of Europe.

They exerted a selective effect to destroy what was barbaric and deadening and to foster what had new hope in it by furnishing a stimulus to thought and knowledge. A society needs to have a ferment in it; sometimes an enthusiastic delusion or an adventurous folly answers the purpose. In the modern world the ferment is furnished by economic opportunity and hope of luxury. In other ages it has often been furnished by war. Therefore some social philosophers have maintained that the best course of human affairs is an alternation of peace and war.

It is not probable that aborigines will ever in the future be massacred in masses, as they have been in the past, but the case is even worse when, like our Indians for instance, they are set before a fatal dilemma. They cannot any longer live in their old way; they must learn to live by unskilled labor or by the mechanic arts. This, then, is the dilemma: If it had been possible for men to sit still in peace without civilization, they never would have achieved civilization; it is the iron spur of the nature-process which has forced them on, and one form of the nature-process has been the attack of some men upon others who were weaker than they.

We find, then, that in the past as a matter of fact war has played a great part in the irrational nature-process by which things have come to pass. But the nature-processes are frightful; they contain no allowance for the feelings and interests of individuals — for it is only individuals who have feelings and interests. The nature-elements never suffer and they never pity.

If we are terrified at the nature-processes there is only one way to escape them; it is the way by which men have always evaded them to some extent; it is by knowledge, by rational methods, and by the arts. The facts which have been presented about the functions of war in the past are not flattering to the human reason or conscience.

They seem to show that we are as much indebted for our welfare to base passion as to noble and intelligent endeavor. At the present moment things do not look much better. We talk of civilizing lower races, but we never have done it yet; we have exterminated them. Our devices for civilizing them have been as disastrous to them as our firearms.

At the beginning of the twentieth century the great civilized nations are making haste, in the utmost jealousy of each other, to seize upon all the outlying parts of the globe; they are vying with each other in the construction of navies by which each may defend its share against the others.

As they are preparing for war they certainly will have war, and their methods of colonization and exploitation will destroy the aborigines. In this way the human race Edition: No one has yet found any way in which two races, far apart in blood and culture, can be amalgamated into one society with satisfaction to both. Plainly, in this matter which lies in the immediate future, the only alternatives to force and bloodshed are more knowledge and more reason.

Shall any statesman, therefore, ever dare to say that it would be well, at a given moment, to have a war, lest the nation fall into the vices of industrialism and the evils of peace? The answer is plainly: War is never a handy remedy, which can be taken up and applied by routine rule.

No war which can be avoided is just to the people who have to carry it on, to say nothing of the enemy. War is Eke other evils; it must be met when it is unavoidable, and such gain as can be got from it must be won. In the forum of reason and deliberation war never can be anything but a makeshift, to be regretted; it is the task of the statesman to find rational means to the same end.

A statesman who proposes war as an instrumentality admits his incompetency; a politician who makes use of war as a counter in the game of parties is a criminal. Can peace be universal?

There is no reason to believe it. It is a fallacy to suppose that by widening the peace-group more and more it can at last embrace all mankind. What happens is that, as it grows bigger, differences, discords, antagonisms, and war begin inside of it on account of the divergence of interests. Since evil passions are a part of human nature and are in all societies all the time, a part of the energy of the society is constantly spent in repressing them. If all nations should resolve to have Edition: We could not dispense with our militia; we have too frequent need of it now.

But police defense is not war in the sense in which I have been discussing it. War, in the future will be the clash of policies of national vanity and selfishness when they cross each other's path. If you want war, nourish a doctrine. Doctrines are the most frightful tyrants to which men ever are subject, because doctrines get inside of a man's own reason and betray him against himself.

Civilized men have done their fiercest fighting for doctrines. What are they all? Nothing but rhetoric and phantasms. Doctrines are always vague; it would ruin a doctrine to define it, because then it could be analyzed, tested, criticised, and verified; but nothing ought to be tolerated which cannot be so tested. Somebody asks you with astonishment and horror whether you do not believe in the Monroe Doctrine. You do not know whether you do or not, because you do not know what it is; but you do not dare to say that you do not, because you understand that it is one of the things which every good American is bound to believe in.

Now when any doctrine arrives at that degree of authority, the name of it is a club which any demagogue may swing over you at any time and apropos of anything. In order to describe a doctrine we must have recourse to theological language. A doctrine is an article of faith. It is something which you are bound to believe, not because you have some rational grounds for believing it true, but Edition: Jesus Christ was put to death for the reason of state; Pilate said that he found no fault, in the accused, but he wanted to keep the Jews quiet and one man crucified more or less was of no consequence.

None of these metaphysics ought to be tolerated in a free state. A policy in a state we can understand; for instance it was the policy of the United States at the end of the eighteenth century to get the free navigation of the Mississippi to its mouth, even at the expense of war with Spain. That policy had reason and justice in it; it was founded in our interests; it had positive form and definite scope. A doctrine is an abstract principle; it is necessarily absolute, in its scope and abstruse in its terms; it is a metaphysical assertion.

It is never true, because it is absolute, and the affairs of men are all conditioned and relative. The physicists tell us now that there are phenomena which appear to present exceptions to gravitation which can be explained only by conceiving that gravitation requires time to get to work.

We are convinced that perpetual motion is absolutely impossible within the world of our experiences, but it now appears that our universe taken as a whole is a case of perpetual motion.

Now, to turn back to politics, just think what an abomination in statecraft an abstract doctrine must be. Any politician or editor can, at any moment, put a new extension on it. The people acquiesce in the doctrine and applaud it because they hear the politicians and editors repeat it, and the politicians and editors repeat it because they think it is popular.

This doctrine would have given us standing-ground for interference in that quarrel. That is what it was invented for. Of course it was absurd and ridiculous, and it fell dead unnoticed, but it well showed the danger of having a doctrine lying loose about the house, and one which carries with it big consequences It may mean anything or nothing, at any moment, and no one knows how it will be.

You accede to it now, within the vague limits of what you suppose it to be; therefore you will have to accede to it to-morrow when the same name is made to cover something which you never have heard or thought of.

If you allow a political catchword to go on and grow, you will awaken some day to find it standing over you, the arbiter of your destiny, against which you are powerless, as men are powerless against delusions. The process by which such catchwords grow is the old popular mythologizing. Your Monroe Doctrine becomes an entity, a being, a lesser kind of divinity, entitled to reverence and possessed of prestige, so that it allows of no discussion or deliberation.

The President of the United States talks about the Monroe Doctrine and he tells us solemnly that it is true and sacred, whatever it is. He even undertakes to give some definition of what he means by it; but the definition which he gives binds nobody, either now or in the future, any more than what Monroe and Adams meant by it binds anybody now not to mean anything else. He says that, on account of the doctrine, whatever it may be, we must have a big navy. In this, at least, he is plainly in Edition: The Monroe Doctrine is an exercise of authority by the United States over a controversy between two foreign states, if one of them is in America, combined with a refusal of the United States to accept any responsibility in connection with the controversy.

Therefore it is very true that we must expect to need a big navy if we adhere to the doctrine. What can be more contrary to sound statesmanship and common sense than to put forth an abstract assertion which has no definite relation to any interest of ours now at stake, but which has in it any number of possibilities of producing complications which we cannot foresee, but which are sure to be embarrassing when they arise!

There is no such thing nowadays as a state of readiness for war. It is a chimera, and the nations which pursue it are falling into an abyss of wasted energy and wealth. When the army is supplied with the latest and best rifles, someone invents a new field gun; then the artillery must be provided with that before we are ready. By the time we get the new gun, somebody has invented a new rifle and our rival nation is getting that; therefore we must have it, or one a little better.

It takes two or three years and Edition: In the meantime somebody proposes a more effective organization which must be introduced; signals, balloons, dogs, bicycles, and every other device and invention must be added, and men must be trained to use them all.

There is no state of readiness for war; the notion calls for never-ending sacrifices. It is a fallacy. It is evident that to pursue such a notion with any idea of realizing it would absorb all the resources and activity of the state; this the great European states are now proving by experiment.

A wiser rule would be to make up your mind soberly what you want, peace or war, and then to get ready for what you want; for what we prepare for is what we shall get. We also use marriage instead of wedding, nuptials, or matrimony.

Our Services

Main Topics

Privacy Policy

The best place to buy custom essays online, and how to order your own for colleges and universities.

Privacy FAQs

Online custom essays, term papers, research papers, reports, reviews and homework assignments. Professional custom writing service offers high quality and absolutely plagiarism free academic papers. Affordable prices and written from scratch by highly qualified academic writers.

About Our Ads

Critical legal studies (CLS) is a school of critical theory that first emerged as a movement in the United States during the s. Critical Legal Studies adherents claim that laws are used to maintain the status quo of society's power structures; it is also held that the law is a codified form of society's biases against marginalized paydayloanslexington.gqe wide variation in the opinions of critical. About the Legal Studies Bachelor's Degree. In your core legal studies degree courses, you'll examine the organization, function, and processes of the lawmaking institutions in the American legal system, as well as the role of the paralegal in the legal system and the governing rules of legal ethics.

Cookie Info

Ordering Essay Online: A Complete Guide. If you are new to the world of on-demand academic writing, ordering an essay online can be confusing. To help you we have created a complete guide to explain the whole process, make it easy and understandable. REAL WORLD ORDER WHO RULES THE WORLD? "NOT ALL CONSPIRACIES ARE THEORIES" There is a plan for the world - a New World Order - devised by a British/American/European financial elite of immense wealth and power, with centuries-old historical roots.