Free will V.S. determism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Free will V.S. determism - Essay Example However, this can have repercussions as individuals following their own free will do not tend to listen to others around them and do as they please. This does not always work out cordially within a society full of different kinds of people because of varying needs that each person has from the other. Most people are under the impression that every individual has their own personal free will according to which they make choices and decisions. However, people often forget to understand that sometimes these choices come from the values and morals that have been imposed upon them as they grow up. In that case, these beliefs are not mapped by their own free will, but are determined in the manner that they are raised. My take on freewill is based upon an individual’s own disposition of which is derived from their possessions, such as possessions of social environment, religion and of family’s general views of life. We all come from families with views on religion or at least of life itself, through these possessions we develop subconscious bias opinions or tendencies, which are the foundation of an individual’s decision making. However, as we get older we become aware of other views or perspectives of life, and can choose to implement them in a way that is conducive to what we want to become. You cannot determine where or how you are born, as that is determined for you, nor can you determine who raises you and what bias views they pass on to you. Nonetheless, as a person gets older they can choose to retain all of the previous convictions passed down to them or can chose to see things in a different manner - though, it will still be from the same mind that has possession of influences that are particular to his or her life, even if they may be subtle. Every man is born under certain circumstances and conditions which remain constant at his birth. He does not have the power to change that certain thing about his life and he has to take whatever co mes his way with regard to that aspect of his life. However, once a person starts to grow up, things start to change for him. He sees different things and experiences different aspects of his life and starts to perceive them according to his will. The will starts to develop at the age of 8-9 and continues till the death of human beings. The will of a human being is developed throughout his life. Once a man is able to see the world from his own eyes, he starts to analyse his life with respect to his personal beliefs rather than the beliefs of other people being imposed on him. Most people are raised believing that their religion is the best one and that they should be happy they do not belong to any other. When a child is born, he is made to undergo certain rituals and rites according to the religion that his family is in. Throughout the course of his life, he is told things and led to believe that his religion is the sole guiding principle that will help him achieve whatever he want s in life. However, very few parents and families provide leverage to the child by making him aware of all the different religions in the world and letting him choose his own faith. In some families, children turn rebellious and begin to adopt a new way of life, by accepting the rites and rituals of a different religion as per their own free will. Every time a person adopts something within him, according to his own beliefs and faith in things, he is taking to free will rather than having his life being determined by

Over-Population Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Over-Population - Term Paper Example Majority of this population is in Asian countries. The concept of overpopulation is broader than merely population densities. It includes the ability of the environment to sustain a growing population. The increasing human population exerts lot of pressure on the available resources to extent that the carrying capacity may be surpassed. The effects on the environment may be coupled with other effects such global warming and overall climate change. Overpopulation would occur when the human population will exceed the earth’s resources. With the current reductions in child mortality rates, better medical care and good life present in some parts of the world chances of the earth becoming overpopulated are high. However, the problems of overpopulation are more common in the developing world compared to developed nations due to fertility rates. It is the responsibility and role of everyone in the world to help reduce population growth. There are different opinions explaining the trends and effects of global human population growth. Malthus population growth theory was based on the concept of carrying capacity. The prediction was that the human population was growing at a high rate in relation to the available resources to sustain the population. The result of such population growth was that there will times when the resources will not be able to sustain the human population which, will eventually crash. Such school of thought and other opinions by new-Malthusian believe that there are still chances of a population crash triggered by various environmental factors such as climate change. The â€Å"Malthusian† theory is one of the well known and most criticized theories explaining the relationship between human population growth and the environment. The theory emphasizes on the fact that as the population grows people will utilize all the resources to the extent that there will be hunger, famine and environmental degradation. However, many

Cultural and Intellectual Developments Annotated Bibliography

Cultural and Intellectual Developments - Annotated Bibliography Example From the source it is evident that the 1950s saw China adopt a strategy of collectivization of agriculture based on the model that was being applied by the Soviet Union. Yun expressed hope that the industrialization of the country based on the five year plan would guarantee the country economic independence and freedon to avoid relying on imperialists. This source is important to the research as it provides good ground for understanding the course China, under Mao Tse-Tung, took toward achieving economic development. Tse-Tung, Mao. â€Å"Let Us Unite And Clearly Distinguish Between Ourselves And The Enemy†. Speech delivered at the thirty-eighth meeting of the Standing Committee of the First National Committee of the Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Conference August 4, 1952. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-5/mswv5_22.htm This source is a speech by Mao Tse-Tung, the leader of China at the time the speech was being made. In the source Tse-Tung traces the situations that China has gone through over the years. He emphasizes that China needed to increase its production and apply strict economy for its gowth. The leader noted that the three evils and the five evils movements had been successful and that the country was getting more economically stable. Among other things, the Korean war, resistance against U.S. aggression, corruption, waste and bureaucracy were noted by Tse-tung to be major hurdles to the economic growth of the nation. This source is significant for the study since it gives an insight into the progress that China made under Mao and the political upheavals that led to its slow growth. Richard Bush was a one time acting director of the American Institute in Taiwan and is currently a director of Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies (CNAPS) affiliated with the Brookings Institution. A political

Love Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 4

Love - Essay Example People don’t exist in seclusion, but co-exist and interact with one another. This is the social nature of people and they tend to have profound feelings of affection towards others; majorly family members and friends. People in a relationship cherish and care for one another dearly. This is evident in close love relationships like sexual love and family ties. The former is associated with deep intimacy and a pleasant feeling of sexual attraction coupled with joy while later is manifested in very close family fondness cemented by blood ties. In the physical sphere, one can be in love with or have a deep liking of the physical things in the environment; they could be money, mountains, food, pets or cars. People have a great craving for whatever they cherish and like, and so they can never be happy in their absence. For instance, some people cannot do without pets due to their emotional attachment to them. Finally, religious people have a great sense of liking of their deity. S uch people are obsessed with their deities and they worship and show great reverence to them. They truly value and care for them to the extent that some can endanger their lives for their sake. This affection is deeply rooted and can be evidenced by people’s religious commitments. The definition of love is a complex subject matter that cannot be exhausted in these few paragraphs but the paper has briefly presented the social, religious and physical manifests of love. Irrespective of the category, love is a deep psychological feeling of affection towards somebody, something or a deity. It comes about with strong and profound psychological bonds that are not easy to

Authorship of the book of Ruth Essay Example for Free

Authorship of the book of Ruth Essay The book of Ruth has been historically claimed to be written by the prophet Samuel. It dates back to the 1011 and 931 B. C. It was a message of the love of God directly to the Israelites. With the main theme of sacrifice, it was essential for them at that time to hear such words of love. In the heathen land of Moab, located North of the Dead Sea, Ruth is resides for a period of time and them moves further into the town of Bethlehem, during the era of the judges which occurred directly after the Pentateuch books which are the first five biblical books. Ruth was the daughter-in-law of Naomi and Elimelech, who were an Israelite couple with two sons. Mahlon and Chilion were their names and both married Ruth and Orpah. Sadly, all three men in the family died, firstly Elimelech and then later on his two sons, leaving three widowed women. The actual period is not actually stated. However, most scholars have attributed its authorship to the pre-exilic era; the period after the enslaved Israelites were freed and permitted to return back to their homeland of Israel. As a historical book of the Bible and an excellent piece of literature, it has challenged the conception of the era and the norms of the periods as recording the attitudes and conducts between people. It demonstrated tremendous practicality and dealt with serious relational issues and we can learn a lot from it today. Its authorship is unknown. It clearly begins by alluding to the period of the judges and it is perceived by some to have been written around that time. The prophet Samuel has been given the credit for its authorship by many scholars. In recent times however, there have been speculations as to the real author of this book. It has been recognised as having been written by a female author. According to an ancient Beraithato the Talmudic treatise it stated that the prophet Samuel did write the book of Ruth. As it is does not provide strong evidence concerning the authorship, several authors in recent times have refuted the prophet Samuel as the actual author of this phenomenal book. Does it really matter whether it was written by a male or female author? This has been a question in the minds of many because in its entirety, the content of the book is very positive and has a lot of moral, social and legal coverage, which has provided a lot of insight into the way the Israelites interacted amongst themselves as well as among foreign nations, like the Moabites. In this essay, various perspectives of scholars will be addressed and references to the actual text will also be made to support and refute arguments which have been put forth by various intellectual minds. In a recent book entitled the Widow’s plea, a group of authors cited a number of key points about the book of Ruth. Central to their arguments were factors that provided an insight to the gender identity of the author. Firstly, they referred to a deliberate attempt by the author to strengthen the plight of widowed women in this book, by the avoidance of dealing with the Leveriate marriage, a popular custom that existed during that period. Lawson Younger in made inference to this point by referring to the book ‘Three Shekels’ by H Shanks: The inscription is puzzling. According to the law of levirate marriage, a man must marry his brother’s widow if his brother died childless (see Deuteronomy 25:5–6). Why wasn’t the husband’s brother, who had already received the wheat ? eld in Nacamah, required to do his duty by marrying his brother’s widow? Alas, the ostracon does not tell us(p 32) The laws relating to marriage and redemption were strongly intertwined and since it was not completely applicable in this case because Ruth did not marry her direct next of kin, these scholars have speculated that it might have been authored by a female. Furthermore, H Avolos backed this argument by purporting the deliberate exclusion in this case. (Avolos 616) In an attempt to further prove this point Young referred to various Hebrew texts and phrases used to give a better view point. For instance, the use of the words ‘Amah’ and ‘siphah were used at different times, suggestive of various points regarding the nocturnal influence of Ruth in Chapter 3:9. This is what he noted: Amah seems to be used to emphasize a slave’s feminine qualities (need for protect weakness, sexual attractiveness, etc. ), while siphah seems to be used when the female is viewed as a possession and a laborer. 41 Both terms can be used as self-designations. When it is used this way, amah appears to suggest a female petitioner’s weakness and need for help or protection when presenting a request before a more powerful male, never before another female. When siphah is used as a self-designation of obeisance, it seems to signify the woman’s subservience and readiness to serve or obey instructions. (p127) With the usage of the term amah, despite the fact that she was a labourer or indirectly in servitude, she was still able to realize her feminity even in hardship. It was suggestive of her need for protection and dependency on the one who is stronger than herself, especially when requesting a favour from an influential male figure. This point alludes to the kind of writing by a male author, realizing the need of the woman for protection and a bulwark. The usage of the term siphah suggested the readiness of the woman to adhere to instructions from the male and obey and to do is bidding. In both cases, there is a strong suggestion of a male authorship based on this viewpoint. Further Hebrew terms used indicate more usage of feminine forms of verbs. For instance, the word hyrja, meaning ‘them’ was used to refer to bodies of individuals. Its frequent usage indicated that the author made reference to a wide range of people who were female. Perhaps this could have been suggestive of a male author appreciating the role of the women or in actual fact, a woman who sought to enhance the role of the female in that era? The Feminist Companion of the Bible addressed several points that alluded to an obvious female authorship. (pg 34) It was argued that this book presented various points which gave credence to the importance of women in the Holy Bible. For instance, several women were identified who played excellent roles in biblical event, including Deborah, Dorcas, Esther and Miriam just to mention a few. It was also admitted that there were also major indications to the book of Ruth being authored by a male because of its superscription, just as the case was in other books like the book of Ecclesiastes. An interesting point to note was that there was a chance that although it may not have been written by a woman, the male author certainly had a profound respect for women and valued their contribution to the society. Interestingly, this book under the ‘Unconventional Life Partnership, Women Do Go Unconventional Ways’ heading also referred to the instruction by Naomi to Ruth, to use her natural female charm to win the heart of Boaz. (Athalya 29). This could very well have been a masculine viewpoint, in the sense that Naomi did recognize that Ruth needed a man in her life and hence was giving her advise on how to make Boaz notice her. During that period, it was generally expected that the women realized that they were being prepared for marriage at some stage and it would have been the role of an experienced woman like Naomi to share this with Ruth. This is a very feminine disposition which could have been expressed by the author. In the second chapter of the book of Ruth, she was portrayed as a hardworking lady who went to ‘glean with the reapers’. In Hebrew, the word ‘reapers’ refers to masculinity. Hence, irrespective of this fact, she was able to go and work with the men, gathering enough food supply for herself and for Naomi. As a matter of fact, it was emphasized that she worked through to the period of harvest. By so doing, she was able to gather more than sufficient rations to tend to the needs of a whole family. This was a progressive woman who knew that it was essential that she managed the home front successfully. In other words, she was a traditional homemaker – the major role of the woman. A female author would not have put this point any better. In his comparative study of the book of Ruth, Younger suggested that to a large extent, it seemed that a woman’s economic well-being was directly related to her link with some male. (p 129) From a feminine perspective it could be argued that this exhibited self-reliance and independence of the woman. On the contrary, there is also the aspect of the masculinity portrayed. The head of the reaper, when approached by Boaz who had not yet met Ruth at the time to ask about who she was, the reaper made excuses on her behalf, as she was a foreigner ( a Moabite girl) who did not the customs and modest requirements of the women of Israel. This impled that she was gleaning with the wrong set of people, in other words, the men. Hence, when Boaz eventually spoke to her, he advised her to glean with the girls or young ladies (Chapter 2:8). This was indicative of the male dominance and belief in the distinct and separate roles of the woman and the man. The geneological account in Chapter Four included women in it and this has made people suggest its female authorship. It was uncommon to have women included in the genelogical chronology. Especially in this instant, this geneology led all the way down to David, from whom the expected lineage of the Messiah was from. The character of Boaz was one of a generous and extremely loving individual. He saw the needs of Ruth and Naomi and took the necessary steps to ensure their happiness. By so doing, he tremendously brought a lot of benefits to himself. Eventually, he got married to Ruth. His numerous character traits are worthy of further study. Ruth was described as a virtuous woman. From the beginning of the book, she displayed loyalty and love, even to its end. When Naomi was bereaved of three members of her family including her husband and sons, Ruth did not seek out her own gain but decided to remain with Naomi, always. It took superhuman power to make such a profound statement in Chapter 1:16, entreating Naomi to let her (Ruth) remain with her. There was nothing that Naomi had to offer her. Both her sons were now dead, including the husband of Ruth. As was pointed out by Naomi, she had nothing to offer Ruth. Notwithstanding, Ruth made a selfless commitment to stand by Ruth, through times of sorrow and happiness. Naomi was a wise lady whose experience was of great benefit to Boaz and Ruth. In essence, she took the practical steps to facilitate their union. In all three characters, excellent themes of relational interactions have been displayed. Humility, sacrificial love, generousity and empathy just to mention a few, are required in everyday dealings with people. Regardless of the authorship, these character traits spread across boundaries and are pertinent in dealing with practical real-life matters. Especially today, these attitudes are still required and go along way in boosting human interactions. Works Cited Brenner, A. The feminist companion to the Bible (Second Series) Sheffield Academic Press Avalos, H. Legal and Social Institutions, 616 Malick, D. An Argument of the Book of Ruth from http://www. bible. org/page. php? page_id=952 Shanks, H. (1997). Three Shekels pg 32. Younger, K. L. (1998). Two Comparative Notes on the Book of Ruth. Trinity International University

Nt Was There Consensus In Post War British Politics Politics Essay

Nt Was There Consensus In Post War British Politics Politics Essay In the context of politics, the term consensus can be defined as a broad agreement exists between parties on important areas of policy  [1]  . Despite first being used as early as the 1950s, the word consensus came to prominence in 1975 when Paul Addison used it to describe the perceived similarities in the goals and policies of the alternating Labour and Conservative governments in the post-war period. The end of World War II was arguably a catalyst for the implementation of ideas  [2]  which had been building for decades prior to the outbreak of war. However, the supposed consensus which existed began to disintegrate in the late 1970s. Commentators, including Brian Harrison, have pinned its demise to 1975 and the appointment of Margaret Thatcher as Conservative party leader due to her struggle (against) those who pursued consensus  [3]  . Crucially, the notion of consensus has not been met with universal acceptance; historians, including Pimlott, have suggested it was a myth, proposing that consensus is a mirage; an illusion that rapidly fades the closer one gets to it  [4]  . In spite of this however, it will be argued that there was indeed agreement between the major parties on fundamental issues. However, the parties often differed in terms of attitude and approach, thus suggesting that consensus is too strong a word to describe this period. Concurring with Hennessy that post-war settlement  [5]  is perhaps a more appropriate description, this essay will take a thematic approach, assessing the degree of consensus in regard to three key areas: economic policy; social policy; and finally foreign and defence policy. Perhaps the most significant area in which to measure the extent of political consensus is through the assessment of economic policy in the post-war period. Public ownership is an area in which, ideologically at least, Labour and the Conservatives should have had divergent views. However, during the late 1940s, coal, gas, electricity, iron and steel were all nationalised and, by the early 1950s, 20 per cent of industry and commerce was state-controlled  [6]  . Crucially, it was a Labour government responsible for the nationalisation statues in the 1940s while the Conservatives remained opposed to such measures, pledging to reverse the statutes and return industry to the private sector. Whilst such plans were never realised, it would be too simplistic to make the assumption that this meant a consensus had been reached. Rather, a convincing case can be made to suggest that a compromise, as opposed to agreement, was reached, with the Conservatives accepting public ownership unwillin gly  [7]  because they sought to avoid causing further disruption. However unwilling the Conservatives may have been, it is clear that, at least until the early 1970s, public ownership remained a point of consensus between the two main parties; the only significant change in this field occurred in 1964 with the renationalisation of iron and steel by Wilsons Labour government. Moreover, strategy towards employment is arguably another key aspect of post-war economic policy which initially points towards a consensus between the two main parties. Following the mass unemployment which characterised the inter-war period, the Second World War virtually eradicated this problem. Understandably, both Labour and the Conservatives sought to maintain this at the end of the war, as outlined in the White Paper on Employment in 1944 which stated that the maintenance of a high and stable level of employment  [8]  would be a key priority for post-war governments. The belief in Keynesianism and commitment to full employment was maintained for three decades, with unemployment averaging less than 3 per cent between 1945 and 1970  [9]  . Whilst at first this appears to be a clear indicator of consensus, a strong case can be made to suggest that both parties were motivated by pragmatism, believing that full employment was good politics  [10]  as it kept morale high and people in work, thus increasing their likelihood of re-election. Furthermore, it is clear that the Conservatives were arguably reluctant partners in the commitment to full employment. Whilst Labour declared its support for introducing measures in the private sector to help achieve full employment, the Conservatives showed a greater degree of reticence. Throughout the 1950s, the Conservatives pledged only to maintain  [11]  present policy, with Kavanagh suggesting this was merely an attempt to live down their reputation as the party of unemployment in the 1930s  [12]  . Subtly, this suggests that the only real source of consensus was in the rhetoric of both parties who both claimed to be advocates of Keynesian economics despite, however, speaking it with different accents and differing emphasis  [13]  . What is more, a third significant aspect of economic policy which, on the surface, suggests a strong degree of consensus in the post-war period concerns trade unions. Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, trade unions retained their important role in politics for another thirty years after the Labour defeat in 1951 because, as Peter Dorey asserts, both parties accepted the desirability of working with, rather than against  [14]  trade unions. Demonstrating the extent of the consensus, in the late 1940s, the Conservative party asserted its acceptance of, and commitment to  [15]  trade unionism. A convincing case can be made to suggest that both parties had converging views on trade unions because they appreciated the symbiotic relationship between government and the unions. The avoidance of the 1953 railway strike is a prime example of this; the strike was prevented following close negotiations between the government and National Union of Railwaymen, demonstrating what could be achie ved by close co-operation between the two  [16]  . However, it is important to assess the nature of the perceived consensus. Significantly, trade unions have been described by the likes of the historian Matthias Matthijs as Labours paymasters  [17]  due to the large proportion of party funding they provided. In contrast, the Conservatives were independent from the trade unions and were, thus, more critical of trade unionism, seeking to reform the way in which unions functioned. Therefore, it is clear that, despite sharing the same fundamental belief in the importance of trade unions, both parties had differing attitudes and approaches as a result of their conflicting interests. A further key area, which is essential to discuss in order to assess the extent to which there was a consensus in post-war British politics, is social policy, with particular reference to the National Health Service, welfare, and education. A strong argument can be made to support the assertion that there was indeed a great deal of consensus between the two main parties regarding the welfare state. By the fall of the Labour government in 1951, the foundations were arguably complete but, crucially, if the newly-elected Conservative government had reversed Labours plans, the NHS and welfare state would not have come into existence. The very fact that the Conservatives chose to continue with Labours plans implies a mutual appreciation and acceptance of the key principles  [18]  which underpinned welfare provision. In fact, every government, regardless of party, committed to maintaining and improving  [19]  the welfare state, except for the Heath government between 1970 and 1972. Moreover, following the publication of the Beveridge Report in 1942, it is plausible to suggest that the NHS and welfare state represented more than simply a consensus on policy; instead, the report arguably profoundly influenced both parties and subtly suggests a consensus in their beliefs and principles. This assertion is supported by the likes of Rodney Lowe, who argues that there was now an understanding that government could assume a positive  [20]  role in improving the lives of its citizens. However, despite evidence of a strong, universal commitment to the welfare state between 1945 and 1974, there is evidence of greater divergence between the two parties over time, particularly with regards to the provision of social services and education. Crucially, in the 1960s, elements within the Conservative party began to doubt  [21]  the concept of universal welfare provision, believing instead that selectivity would both reduce welfare spending whilst also targetting those who needed help most. These divisions continued to grow throughout the 1960s and early 1970s as right-wing Conservatives began claim(ing) that high levels of welfare spending were (à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦) undermining the economy  [22]  . Similarly, with regard to education, on the surface at least, this appeared to be a source of consensus; the Education Act of 1944 was conceived by the Conservatives but enacted by Labour, suggesting a common vision for secondary education in Britain. However, as noted by N ick Ellison, there was conflict between the two parties regarding comprehensive and private education. The division on this issue highlights the fundamental ideological differences which existed between Labour and the Conservatives; Labours egalitarian perspective contrasted markedly with Conservative education policy  [23]  . Significantly, this illustrates the limitations of consensus, suggesting that party ideology was not compromised in the name of consensus. Finally, a third broad area which requires discussion in order to determine the extent to which there was a consensus in post-war British politics is foreign and defence policy, with particular reference to Europe, decolonisation and the British Commonwealth. The debate surrounding European integration can be seen, on the surface at least, as evidence of consensus in the post-war period. Throughout the 1950s, both parties remained opposed  [24]  to various ventures, including the formation of the Coal and Steel community in 1950 and, later in 1954, the establishment of a European Defence Community. However, by the 1960s, both parties simultaneously came to accept that joining the European Economic Community was the best way to protect British interests  [25]  . Crucially, the issue of European integration highlights an important feature of the consensus; whilst governments of both parties shared the same views on European integration, this was not necessarily representative o f the opinions of party members, thus stressing the elitist nature of consensus politics and its divorce from party opinion  [26]  . Furthermore, the policy of decolonisation, achieved through the granting of independence to colonies and the subsequent transition to a Commonwealth, marked a clear departure from the policies pursued by Britain prior to the Second World War. Despite the drastic change in direction, both parties appear, in rhetoric at least, to have shared a common vision for the British Empire in the post-war era. This is highlighted in their 1950 election manifestos in which both Labour and the Conservatives outlined their commitment to the Commonwealth and decolonisation. The similarity in the language used is striking; Labour outlined its desire to strengthen  [27]  the association between nations while the Conservatives pledged to and promote and support  [28]  the Commonwealth. On the one hand, this can be perceived as highlighting the true extent to which both parties shared a united vision for post-war foreign policy. However, manifesto rhetoric does not always truly represent the vie ws of the party. Anthony Seldon concurs with this, claiming that Labour was enthusiastic  [29]  while the Conservatives were more reluctant  [30]  about the prospect of decolonisation. However, there are several aspects where there is generally less debate regarding the extent of consensus between the main parties. For instance, both Labour and the Conservatives recognised the value of maintaining a nuclear deterrent and were also of the same view regarding the importance of both Britains membership to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the maintenance of close links with the USA  [31]  . Thus, it is clear that, whilst there were key elements of consensus in post-war foreign and domestic policy, there are also several examples of disagreement. Overall, in assessing economic, social and foreign policy between 1945 and 1974, this essay has highlighted numerous points upon which Labour and the Conservative party have shared a common vision for post-war Britain. However, there are also many examples of disagreement and divergence between the main parties. Fundamentally, it is clear that both parties shared broadly similar goals and policies but differed in terms of their attitude and approach to achieving their shared vision. The key issue is one of semantics, however. Historians have differing definitions of consensus, making it all the more difficult to assess the extent to which there was a consensus in this period. If Addisons definition of consensus as a historically unusual degree of agreement over a wide range of economic and social policies  [32]  is accepted, then it is impossible to deny the strength of consensus in the post-war period. Crucially, as Seldon notes, the use of the word consensus can be unhelpful as it is ambiguous, with some historians referring to a consensus over policy  [33]  while others advocate the existence of a deeper, more profound commitment to a set of common beliefs and values  [34]  . However, despite the ambiguity of the word, the extent to which the two main parties agreed on fundamental issues during this thirty year period was arguably unparalleled. In spite of the disagreements which occurred, there were no major shifts in policy and the existence of a broad consensus, amongst the governing elite at least, is undeniable.

Tibet on the Verge of Annihilation :: Economy Government Papers

Tibet on the Verge of Annihilation China’s foreign policy towards Tibet must be changed if the Tibetan people are to live happily. Since the early 1950s China has taken over and occupied Tibet. At first China made it seem as if they were just trying to modernize Tibet, and help it assimilate into society, but in fact, all China wanted to do was to take control over Tibet, and its people while exploiting the land for its natural resources. China’s original agreement was to not interfere with the Tibetan’s religion, and their general way of life, but slowly, similar to the way the Nazis took control of the Jewish population in Europe, China began implementing laws and making rules which went against their original agreements. People tried to protest peacefully at first, until they were stopped violently. People were arrested, tortured, and killed. Eventually chaos broke out, and martial law was established in Lhasa, the capital of Tibet. The Chinese have been accused of genocide against the Tibe tan people and their culture. Tibet’s early history is one that is centered on isolationism mainly because they feared the Western world would corrupt their Buddhist way of life. Starting in the early twentieth century, only three non-Tibetans entered Tibet; they were Younghusband in 1904 and Heinrich Harrer and Peter Aufschnaiter in the mid 1940’s. Younghusband was the leader of a British expedition that entered Tibet from India. The British wanted to gain some control over Tibet for fear that Russia would gain an influence their by helping China, thereby, setting its sights on India, Britain’s crown jewel. Britain wanted to start negotiations with Tibet to begin trading there. They sent the Dalai Lama a series of letters which were later sent back to the British unopened. The Chinese would have been displeased with Tibet if they were to correspond with the British. The viceroy in India convinced Britain to send an â€Å"expedition† to Tibet. This expedition, which was led by Youn ghusband was to enter Tibet and start negotiations. Tibet refused to allow this expedition to continue, therefore the British sent troops and ordered the expedition deeper into Tibet to force communications. Battles between British forces and the Tibetan army ensued, but the Tibetan armies were soon crushed. The expedition entered and took over Lhasa, the capital of Tibet. China wanted the thirteenth Dalai Lama to negotiate with the British while all this was going on, but when the British got close to Lhasa, he escaped to Mongolia in hopes of getting the support of the Russians. Tibet on the Verge of Annihilation :: Economy Government Papers Tibet on the Verge of Annihilation China’s foreign policy towards Tibet must be changed if the Tibetan people are to live happily. Since the early 1950s China has taken over and occupied Tibet. At first China made it seem as if they were just trying to modernize Tibet, and help it assimilate into society, but in fact, all China wanted to do was to take control over Tibet, and its people while exploiting the land for its natural resources. China’s original agreement was to not interfere with the Tibetan’s religion, and their general way of life, but slowly, similar to the way the Nazis took control of the Jewish population in Europe, China began implementing laws and making rules which went against their original agreements. People tried to protest peacefully at first, until they were stopped violently. People were arrested, tortured, and killed. Eventually chaos broke out, and martial law was established in Lhasa, the capital of Tibet. The Chinese have been accused of genocide against the Tibe tan people and their culture. Tibet’s early history is one that is centered on isolationism mainly because they feared the Western world would corrupt their Buddhist way of life. Starting in the early twentieth century, only three non-Tibetans entered Tibet; they were Younghusband in 1904 and Heinrich Harrer and Peter Aufschnaiter in the mid 1940’s. Younghusband was the leader of a British expedition that entered Tibet from India. The British wanted to gain some control over Tibet for fear that Russia would gain an influence their by helping China, thereby, setting its sights on India, Britain’s crown jewel. Britain wanted to start negotiations with Tibet to begin trading there. They sent the Dalai Lama a series of letters which were later sent back to the British unopened. The Chinese would have been displeased with Tibet if they were to correspond with the British. The viceroy in India convinced Britain to send an â€Å"expedition† to Tibet. This expedition, which was led by Youn ghusband was to enter Tibet and start negotiations. Tibet refused to allow this expedition to continue, therefore the British sent troops and ordered the expedition deeper into Tibet to force communications. Battles between British forces and the Tibetan army ensued, but the Tibetan armies were soon crushed. The expedition entered and took over Lhasa, the capital of Tibet. China wanted the thirteenth Dalai Lama to negotiate with the British while all this was going on, but when the British got close to Lhasa, he escaped to Mongolia in hopes of getting the support of the Russians.