Impact of Privatisation without Effective Regulation

Impact of Privatisation without Effective Regulation Discuss the view: Privatisation without effective regulation is unlikely to bring significant benefits to developing countries. Despite its abundance around the world, and the apparent high esteem that governments hold it in, regulation is no longer seen as the panacea it once was. Regulation must not be over used. Put simply, regulation provides benefits but also incurs costs. Regarding the benefits, Garg and Karba, quoted in Jacobs (2006: 5) have said that, â€Å"it is widely acknowledged that sound regulation is the key to good governance and increased regulatory effectiveness in turn means a better government.† At the same time, the European Parliament (2002) has drawn attention to, â€Å"The problems of over-regulation, the doubtful quality of the laws and the economic obstacles that arise in consequence are increasingly the subject of debate.† Whenever regulation is contemplated, it is necessary to assess whether the costs of such regulation are outweighed by the benefits they provide. This is achieved using Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA), which involves â€Å"a systematic process for assessing the significant impacts (positive and negative) of a regulatory measure† (Jacobs, 2006). This paper looks at the potential benefits and costs that result from regulation of privatised industries in developing countries and whether privatisation without regulation is capable of benefitting a developing economy. The costs of regulation are generally economic, with regulation creating compliance costs for companies, and enforcement costs and added layers of bureaucracy for governments. The benefits may be economic, such as increasing competition in a market, but may also be institutional, increasing a government’s institutional capacity, or social, raising an awareness of the regulated issues among policy makers or the general public which would not otherwise have been present. From a governance perspective, regulation may improve the efficiency and transparency of the government and increase its institutional capacity, but there is also a risk that the added bureaucracy might create new opportunities for corruption and rent seeking. This paper looks therefore, not o nly at the economic costs and benefits of regulation, but also from a governance and social perspective. Furthermore, Bayliss (2002) has pointed out that there has been a shift in emphasis when assessing the effectiveness of economic reforms in developing countries. As she points out, â€Å"Greater attention is now paid to the poverty impact of economic policies in developing countries. Whereas previously the focus was on macroeconomic reforms, effectiveness is now considered in terms of the impact of policies on the poorest.† This can be seen in the recent replacement by the World Bank of Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) with Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRSs), and similarly with the International Monetary Fund’s (IMFs’) change from offering Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facilities (ESAFs) to offering Poverty Reduction and Growth Facilities (PRGFs) in 1999 (Bayliss, 2002: 2). Therefore, when assessing the benefits of regulation of privatisation, this paper will do so from the perspective of poverty reduction where possible, as opposed to merely macroeconomic benefits. Finally, it must also be borne in mind that privatisation is a complicated and often disputed process. Therefore, when this paper will also examine many of the difficulties that privatisation can raise for the development of an economy and will look at the many instances in which privatisation will create challenges for the economy which regulation will not be able to assist with. Regulation: costs and benefits Looking first at regulation of privatisation, the OECD (2001) has pointed out that when conducted correctly, and with effective regulation, including the inclusion of effective RIA measures, â€Å"[regulation] will increase the understanding of the impact of government policies, help unite different interests and approaches to problems, improve public governance transparency and increase the responsibility in public resource management.† Regulatory best practice dictates that regulations should be drafted so as to minimise the burdens they place on the regulated sector while achieving the desired results. However, it has also been pointed out that regulations often have unintended side effects that impact on groups who were not intended to be the targets of the regulation (European Parliament, 2002). Garg and Kabra (2004) have identified four issues that must be considered if regulation is to be effective: firstly all the impacts of proposed regulation, including unintended impacts, must be considered; secondly, the policy objectives of the regulation should be carefully examined to ensure that they do not conflict and to ensure also that all objectives are adequately addressed by the proposed regulations; thirdly, development and implementation of the regulatory framework must be carried out in an inclusive, consultative and transparent manner; and fourthly, the government and the regulator must be accountable. If these four requirements are met, then according to Garg and Kabra (2004), the process of regulation also â€Å"has the potential to be a force for open and democratic government.† However, such regulation, according to Jacobs (2005), are not of benefit to all types of government. He states, â€Å"the prevailing wisdom is that benefits correspond to those of democracies or ‘good government’. [Regulation and RIA] support legal governments which observe the rule of law with proportionate and equitable law. An accountable government is promoted through assessing direct costs and benefits that citizens will incur and selecting policies on the basis of best value for money, taking into account redistribution effects.† Clearly, there are significant benefits to be gained if the right type of government goes about regulation in the correct manner. If the regulations are developed in a consultative manner then they will also help raise awareness of the relevant issues. Effective regulation of core industries, as well as open and accountable RIA procedures are also â€Å"considered as fostering processes conducive to democracies† (Jacobs, 2005). However, if an autocratic or corrupt government were to regulate the industry the same benefits would not be reaped. It is difficult to see how such governments would go about creating a consultative and transparent regulatory regime in any case. This means that they would find it difficult to create a regulatory regime that adequately addressed the myriad different objectives of the regime. It would also mean that there is a high risk that the regulations put in place would have side effects for other, supposedly non-regulated sectors, which would furt her increase the burden of regulation. It is suggested in this paper that regulatory frameworks implemented by immature or non-consultative governments are likely to lack the necessary degree of subtlety that is gained when proper consultative processes are in place, and therefore, the regulations put in place by such regimes may be damaging. To conclude, if regulation is to be of any benefit in the privatisation process, it must be carried out by a responsible and open government, using consultation and adopting regular Regulation Impact Assessments. Otherwise, regulation alone will be of no benefit and will merely add an extra layer of bureaucracy, cost and possibly corruption, into the equation. Also, if regulation is carried out correctly, it will have the side effect of increasing the institutional capacity and expertise of the government. The European Commission (2002), in assessing Slovakia’s regulatory measures stated, â€Å"despite the progress made over the past year, the major need now consists of building up adequate administrative structures and strengthening of administrative capacity to implement the acquis.† Clearly, in order to be of benefit, regulations require certain institutional elements to be put in place by the government. This includes proper oversight of regulators as well as procedures to assess the impact of regulations and the effect they are having on industry. Therefore, it is again suggested that regulations put in place by administrations which lack capacity for effective RIA may also prove damaging to a privatised industry. Even where the government is genuinely democratic and seeks only to improve the performance of the regulated industry for the good of citizens, if it does not have adequate institutional capacity it may find it difficult to pull this off without harming the economy. Privatisation: the challenges for alleviating poverty and the potential for regulation to assist Looking next at the process of privatisation, Bayliss (2002) has pointed out that privatisation has long been one of the favoured methods by which international financial institutions (IFIs) have sought to alleviate poverty in developing countries. However, she states that they were popular when macroeconomic considerations were the main concern of the IFIs and that they have continued into the present days of poverty reduction largely on an assumption that what is good for the macro economy is good for poverty reduction. She states, â€Å"the impact of privatisation on poverty has so far been neglected in World Bank analysis. The distributional impact of privatisation transactions will depend on the nature of the enterprise in question.† Privatisation is generally seen as a benefit both because it raises revenues for the government, while at the same time increasing competition in core and vital sectors of the economy, such as the provision of utilities and transportation. The degree to which a privatisation generates revenue for government depends on the price achieved for the company sold. However, as stated above, benefits today must be assessed according to the poverty alleviating affect, rather than their merely structural effects and from this perspective, the main benefit of a privatisation is far more likely to be the better service that citizens or customers get from the privatised industry. This of course will vary depending on the nature of the industry and the degree to which it is essential to poor people, and also the degree to which the industry has been monopolised by the national company. The privatisation of an essential industry such as water or electricity, previously supplied by a single company, is likely to have a larger impact on poverty reduction than the privatisation of a state owned steel mill for example, especially if there are already private steel mills operating in the sector. If the service offered by the industry to be privatised is actually used by the poor, then the potential benefits to the poor are naturally higher (Bayliss, 2002). Likewise, since much of the improvement in an industry post privatisation comes from increased competition, the market share of the national industry prior to privatisation is also highly relevant. It was the Berg report (Williams, 1981: 186) that first drew IFI attention to privatisation as a means of locking-in economic improvements in Africa. The World Bank had been pursuing a policy of public sector reform, with Africa’s public sector seen as both dominating the private sector and under-performing. However, when improvements in efficiency were made in the public sector, they often proved difficult to maintain as governments would go back on the difficult policies that had led to the improvements. It was concluded in the Berg report that privatising an underperforming public industry would be far more difficult for a government to ‘undo’, so to speak. According to Bayliss and Cramer (2001) â€Å"privatisation acquired its own momentum and became a panacea for all that was wrong with the economies of industrialised and developing countries.† Rebranded today as Private Sector Participation, the World Bank and the IMF still promote privatisation, have made it part of their conditionality arrangements with most states for the release of aid funds, and have increased the capacity of their own divisions dealing with the private sector (Grusky, 2001). Even privatisation of basic services has been made a requirement for IMF and World Bank programmes (Bayliss, 2001a). Privatisation is now a core part of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) with the Uganda PRSP stating for example, â€Å"In the long run privatisation will transfer the need for major investment expenditures on to the private sector† (IMF, 2000). The Burkina Faso PRSP states it will begin the, â€Å"privatisation of existing state interests in order to facilitate the entry of new firms, resources, and technology into various segments of the market† (World Bank, 2002). Privatisation strategies are also a requirement for countries to qualify under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) programme. One result of these conditionalties is that it incentivises governments of poor countries to privatise without taking into account adequately the economic benefits of doing so, especially the impact that privatisation might have on the poorest members of society. Privatisation deals will be pushed through in order to meet IMF and World Bank requirements regardless of the results of economic studies (Bayliss, 2002). One example of this was the hasty privatisation of Cameroon’s sole water utility when only one bidder had time to come forward. It is difficult to see how the best price could be achieved for the utility without proper bidding from multiple competing bidders. However, according to Reuters (2000), the utility was sold to the French MNC, Suez Lyonnaise in order to meet an IMF debt relief deadline regardless of the fact that the best price might not have been achieved. From an examination of statements by the World Bank and wider literature there appears to be five ways in which privatisation can bring significant benefits to developing countries from the point of view of poverty reduction. These five potential benefits will now be critically assessed, with special attention being paid to the degree to which regulation impact on such potential gains. The first general argument in favour of privatisation is that it contributes to economic growth. Economic growth is necessary to reduce poverty. However, Bayliss (2002) and Cook and Uchida (2001) have pointed out that the link between privatisation and economic growth in developing countries is an assumption based on experience in developed economies and has not been substantiated in the literature of the World Bank or the IMF. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that regulation would impact on the degree to which privatisation might impact on economic development. Bayliss (2002) and Cook and Uchida (2001) both reject that privatisation necessarily leads to economic growth. It is also suggested here that economic growth cannot be regulated for. For example, forcing private operators to increase production through regulation, without there being a demand would be unsustainable. Therefore, it must be concluded that the argument that economic growth generated from privatisation has a significant impact on poverty reduction is not shown, either from past experience or from empirical literature. And furthermore, regulation will not have an impact on this fact. Secondly, the World Bank (2001) and others (Adam et al 1992) have argued that privatisation leads to Private Sector Development (PSD) and thus helps in reducing poverty. While PSD has been shown to impact positively on poverty reduction, privatisation has not as yet been linked empirically to PSD (Bayliss, 2002). The World Bank and IMF â€Å"see the mission as being the need to harness the dynamism and efficiency of the private sector to make it operate for the social good† (Bayliss, 2002). It is true that in efficient and competitive markets firms must strive for efficiency and innovation in order to maximise profits and even survive. However, as argued by Bayliss (2000) â€Å"where there is any kind of market power exercised by a single or group of enterprises, the implications for the social good come into question.† The link between privatisation and private sector development made by the World Bank and IMF is an assumption that has not been substantiated and the re asoning of the World Bank here has been harshly criticised in the literature (Bayliss, 2001b). The World Bank claims that privatisation improves the public sector in two ways. Firstly, according to Kikeri et al (1994), privatisation will increase the number of stakeholders who have an interest in the success of the countries private sector. Secondly, Kikeri et al (1992) have pointed out that privatisation is a signal to investors that the government is committed to PSD and thus investment will be encouraged. However, Bayliss (2002) has pointed out that, according to past experience in developing countries, private actors have done more harm than good to the private sector when they are put into monopolistic positions. It is only when effective regulations are put in place and enforced that the private actors have shown any tendency to behave in a manner conducive to PSD. This has led Bayliss (2002) to conclude that â€Å"it is not privatisation that will develop the private sector; rather it is the government, through effective regulation.† She argues that such regulation will develop the private sector regardless of whether or not privatisation takes place, however, it is suggested here that if effective government regulation is in place and is enforced, then the arguments of Kikeri et al (1992) and Kikeri et al (1994) should hold true, and therefore, privatisation with effective regulation will greatly improve PSD. Ramamurti (1996) for example, has shown that privatisation in Latin America, coupled with effective regulation, has been accepted by the markets as a positive signal to investors. It should be noted however that the same benefits have not as yet been demonstrated in Africa. Bayliss (2002) has suggested that â€Å"arguably, government concessions and guarantees are a greater attraction for investors than a commitment to private sector led growth.† However, it is concluded here that a government commitment to PSD, coupled with effectiv e regulation to prevent private sector abuse, should be capable of showing the same benefits in Africa as it has in Latin America if it is sustained by governments. Therefore, in this second category, privatisation can be of benefit to a developing economy, however, this will be true only if proper regulation is established. The third way in which privatisation helps with poverty reduction is by raising government revenues through the sale of the asset. The sale will also free the government from the obligation to invest in the industry, thus providing further fiscal benefits (Campbell-White Bhatia, 1998). The World Bank (2001) state, â€Å"Urban power, water, sanitation and telecommunications require large investments, even if efficiency is improved. But much of this funding can come from the private sector – indeed, privatisation can be a source of revenue for cash-strapped governments.† The idea being that such savings can â€Å"enable [governments] to conserve limited public resources for other priorities, such as education and healthcare† (World Bank, 2000). However, Campbell-White and Bhatia (1998) have shown the very obvious fact that private firms only want to buy profitable enterprises. Their study of privatisations in Africa shows that on aggregate, the industries that had been privatised up until 1998 in Africa had not been a financial drain on governments. It is very difficult to see many cases in which private investors will be willing to purchase loss making enterprises and then make the investments necessary to improve public services for the poorest. This fundamental fact was demonstrated by Biwater President, Richard Fleming, when his company pulled out of a private water project in Zimbabwe which was designed to bring water to some of the country’s poor. It emerged that the water tariff that had been agreed with the Zimbabwean government , and which would have allowed the project to operate at a profit, was too high for the intended customers to afford. Whiting, in an honest and realistic press release to the Zimbabwe Independent of 10 December 1999, stated on behalf of Biwater, â€Å"Investors need to be convinced that they will get reasonable returns†¦ The issues we consider include who the end users are and whether they are able to afford the water tariffs†¦ From a social point of view, these kinds of projects are viable but unfortunately from a private sector point of view they are not.† It is inevitable that if the numbers simply do not add up, then the greatest will and best practices in the world will not enable the private sector to be involved in an industry. It is suggested here that sound regulation will not be able to alter this fact. The Zimbabwe Biwater case illustrates this point. The company and the government had carefully negotiated a project that was fair to everyone and would have been well regulated. Biwater was to build the infrastructure, and make a return by charging customers a tariff which had been agreed with the regulator. The problem was simple economic reality. The intended customers could not afford the tariff that the regulator had set and which the company needed to justify the investment. Government guarantees to investors, such as guaranteeing a certain profit margin, or promising to purchase the output of a project at a guaranteed price, it is suggested, return the financial risk to the government and remove any fiscal benefits that pr ivatisation might have been able to provide. Bayliss and Hall (2000) have identified a number of projects in which national or regional budgets have been crippled because of commitments to purchase products from privatised industries at fixed prices. Therefore, from the point of view of raising revenue for the government, privatisation may be of benefit. However, regardless of how much money a government gets for selling an asset, such gains will only be lasting if the project as a whole is feasible and the private company is able to operate at a profit. Therefore, in this third category of generating revenue for government, it is essential that the project is a success for the private company, the end user and the government, and the only way to ensure this is if effective and consultative regulation has been put into place prior to the initiation of the project. Fourthly, it is argued that privatisation will not only bring in revenue and investment, but also foreign expertise and management practices which will increase efficiency and performance. The argument that private sector management will be better than public sector management may be true in some situations but there are dozens of well known, multi-billion dollar privatisations in which the new management failed and the industry had to come back into public sector responsibility (Bayliss, 2002). For example, when Trinidad contracted out management of the island’s water supply to UK company, Severn Trent in 1996, the company promised, through better expertise and international management best practices, to make water supply on the island break even financially within three years. However, at the end of the three year term, Severn Trent had increased the budget deficit of the utility to $378.5 and handed the industry back to the government, at the end of their contract, in a sta te of financial emergency. Regulation may be of assistance here as it can ensure that private sector management is supervised and that any failings or poor practices by the private industry will be quickly caught by the regulator. This can help avoid situations such as referred to above in which the private company has allowed an industry to deteriorate to such an extent that the government has had to step in to remedy the situation. It is suggested here that if regulation is effective and well drafted, it should decrease the risks that private management will fail drastically in its task. However, if the good management practices of the newly privatised industry are coming from the government regulator rather than from the international expertise that have been imported during privatisation, then it is difficult to see how such private expertise are of any benefit to a country. However, there are numerous cases in which privatisations have improved an industry because of internatio nal private sector expertise and it is suggested here that regulation is simply a safeguard. While it is always hoped that privatisation will lead to the importing of new private management who will be able to improve performance because of their expertise, the risk that they will fail is also insured against by close and effective regulation. In this case therefore, regulation removes or reduces one of the risks of privatisation, that the private management will be incompetent. The fifth and final argument that privatisation helps a local economy is that it will cause a release of aid funds. As stated above, aid funds are often conditional upon privatisation. For example, when Guinea handed management of the capital’s water sector to the private sector it received an extra $67 million for investment in water infrastructure (Bayliss, 2002). Menard, Clarke and Zuluaga (2000) have shown that many privatisations have been pursued solely to receive extra aid and in economic impact assessments, the extra aid is often what tips the scale in favour of privatisation. Nickson (2001) has described how the privatisation of Cartagena’s water system by one mayor was only continued by the incoming mayor because of the aid funds that were tied to the deal. Without the tied in aid funds, the incoming mayor would have strongly opposed the privatisation on a number of economic and social grounds. However, it is pointed out here that the inflow of aid funds is no t an inherent benefit of privatisation and only ensures that privatisation appears to be good for the economy. In fact, tying aid to privatisation makes it very difficult to assess the economic benefits of privatisation at all. It is like trying to assess the economic contribution of an industry that receives large government subsidies. The subsidies mask the true performance of the industry and make it’s economic contribution difficult to ascertain. It is suggested here however that if aid is also conditional on privatisations being regulated, then clearly there is an economic benefit to regulation, simply because it will meet with donor approval and cause the release of further funds. Conclusion To conclude therefore, if regulation is to be of any benefit, it must be conducted by a democratic and transparent government who is willing to address the many costs and benefits of regulation. The government must also conduct RIA to ensure that the regulations themselves do not become a burden on the industry or distort the economics of the privatised sector. That said, in relation to the five ways in which privatisation is said to help an economy, regulation can only impact positively on some of them. With regard to the argument that privatisation contributes to economic growth, it has been shown that regulation is not a useful tool to ensure this occurs. With regard to the argument that privatisation contributes to Private Sector Development, it is concluded here that regulation is necessary and effective. Without such regulation there is a risk that privatised firms will behave in a monopolistic and abusive manner. Therefore for privatisation to improve the public sector, it must be properly regulated. With regard to the argument that privatisation has fiscal benefits for the government, this will only be the case if the privatised industry is carefully regulated so as not to create costs for the government in the event of bad management. However, in this regard, the terms of the privatisation agreement are more important than regulati on. With regard to the argument that privatisation brings in foreign expertise, this is true in many cases but again, in order to reduce the risk that the privatised firms perform poorly, regulation is again necessary. And finally, with regard to the argument that privatisation attracts aid, insofar as aid is conditional on privatisation being regulated, then regulation has a direct benefit of pleasing aid agencies. Therefore, while the benefits of privatisation are still being disputed, with regard to the World Bank’s five asserted benefits of privatisation, four of them are enhanced if effective regulation is in place. Therefore only way in which developing countries can benefit from privatisation is with effective regulation. Bibliography Adam, C., Cavendish, W., Mistry, P.S. (1992) Adjusting Privatisation: Case Bayliss, K Cramer, C (2001) Between the lab and the real world, Chap. 3, pp.52-79 Development Policy in the Twenty-First Century, Fine, Pincus and Lapavitsas (eds.) Routledge Bayliss, K. (2001a) Privatisation of electricity distribution: some economic, social and political perspectives, A PSIRU Report for PSI, April 2001, available online at www.psiru.org/reports/2001-04-E-Distrib.doc Bayliss, K. (2001b) Privatisation and the World Bank: A Flawed Development Tool, Global Focus vol. 13, June 2001 Bayliss, K. (2002) Privatisation and Poverty: The Distribution Impact of Utility Privatisation, Centre on Regulation and Competition, Working Paper 16, January 2002 Bayliss, K. Hall, D., (2000) Independent Power Producers: A Review of the Issues, A PSIRU Report for PSI, available online at http://www.psiru.org/reports/2000-11-E-IPPs.doc Brook Cowen, P.J. (1999) Lessons from Guinea Water Lease, Public Policy for the Private Sector Note No. 78 Campbell-White, O., Bhatia, A., (1998) Privatisation in Africa, IBRD, Washington DC Cook, P. Uchida, Y. (2001) Privatisation and Economic Growth in Developing Countries, Centre on Regulation and Competition, Working Paper No. 1, University of Manchester, October European Commission (2002) Communication from the Commission on Impact Assessment, Brussels, 5 June European Parliament, DG for Research (2002) Working Paper on Development and current practices in the EU member states, on the EU level and in selected third countries, Legal Affairs Series, Luxembourg Garg, A. Karba, M. (2004) Regulatory impact assessment: key to good governance, SAFIR Newsletter, pp. 8-13 Grusky, S (2001) Global Challenge Initiative ‘IMF Forces Water Privatization on Poor Countries, available online at www.wtowatch.org/library/index.cfm IMF, (2000) Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper: Uganda, available online at www.imf.org/external/NP/prsp/2000/Uga/o1/ Jacobs, C. P. (2006) Public Enterprise, Privatisation and Regulation, Regulatory Governance: Research Centre for Regulation and Competition, British Council Development Service, 2006 Kikeri, S., Nellis, J., Shirley, M. (1992) Privatisation: The Lessons of Experience, Washington DC, World Bank IBRD Kikeri, S., Nellis, J., Shirley, M. (1994) Privatisation: Lessons from Market Economics, The World Bank Research Observer, Vol. 9, No. 2, July 1994 Menard, C., Clarke, G., Zuluaga,

Shakespeare’s Othello is a Tragedy Essay -- Othel Literature Shakespea

Shakespeare’s Othello is a Tragedy A tragedy has many definitions, but the Merriam-Webster version defines it as: â€Å"a serious drama typically describing a conflict between the protagonist and a superior force (as destiny) and having a sorrowful or disastrous conclusion that excites pity or terror.† The latter part, about disastrous conclusion is true for Shakespeare’s tragedies, and Othello is no exception. Roderigo blindly follows Iago’s lead and while his contribution to the disaster is minimal at best, he still is able to feed Iago’s desire for revenge, as all the characters do. The only difference between Roderigo and the other characters is how he does it. Roderigo is madly in love with Desdemona and wants her for himself. The first sign of Roderigo’s desires comes from Barbantio when he speaks: â€Å"I have charged thee not to haunt my doors:/In honest plainness thou hast heard me say/My daughter is not for thee†¦Ã¢â‚¬ (I, i) Iago seduces Roderigo’s compliance in the disaster by dripping sweetened words of his attempts to sway Desdemona away from Othello. Roderigo, in his naà ¯ve and loving mind, give Iago the financial means to further his plot of disaster. Iago tells Roderigo that the money and jewels he spends go to Desdemona, but there is little evidence of this. And it seems unlikely that Iago needed large sums of money to exact his revenge on the Moor. He does it with words and a handkerchief, not rubies and emeralds. But Roderigo’s lust for Desdemona leads to his attempt to kill Cassio. After Iago has convinced Cassio to plea to Desdemona for his rank back, Iago is then able to convince Roderigo that the way to take Desdemona is to kill Cassio (IV, ii) because, according to Iago, Cassio and Desdemona are now sleeping together. It is ultimately his attempts to defile and kill Cassio that contribute the most to the tragedy. He causes Cassio to lose his rank (II, iii) and then attempts to kill him. The question Roderigo should’ve been asking himself is this: â€Å"If Desdemona is such a lovely, innocent creature, why does she jump from bed to bed? What makes me think that she’d stay in mine?† Emilia’s role in the tragedy seems very small at first. Iago mentions suspicions of unfaithfulness very early on (I, iii) but it is not these suspicions that Emilia contributes to her death and the death of others. Rather, it is the very simple action of... ... not a factor. So what drives Iago to commit all these acts? Jealousy is a major portion, but perhaps Iago views this all as a game as well. He prides himself on his wit and cunning and is appreciated for it by his peers. Perhaps it is ego that drives Iago to do all of this, a test of his skills to see if he can keep so many threads playing together and for his benefit. Almost all of his actions, plantings seeds of doubt (III, iii) or giving dangerous instructions (II, iii) lead to the tragic ending of the play. Even at the end, Iago refuses to explain his motives, by simply saying, â€Å"What you know, you know.† (V, ii). Perhaps this was Shakespeare’s way of saying not to look for a reason, but rather to appreciate what an amazing amount of cunning and patience this would’ve taken to pull off. In the end, Iago’s last words perhaps best suit the play. â€Å"What you know, you know.† Everything is presented for the entire world to see, with little hidden meanings to things and actions. Roderigo’s lust, Emilia’s fear and loyalty, Desdemona’s purity, Othello’s trust and insecurities, and Iago’s jealousy and ego contribute to the â€Å"disastrous conclusion that excites pity or terror.

USA Vs. Russia: Missile Defense :: essays research papers

National Missile Defense: USA Vs. Russia For the past several years, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and most congressional Republicans have wanted to set up a national missile defense system, designed to defend the United States against a small number of long-range missiles. The Clinton administration maintained that there was no current or potential missile threat to the United States that would justify the deployment of such a defense. At the same time the administration has pursued its "3+3" plan to spend three years developing a national missile defense -- by 2000 -- that could then be deployed in another three years -- by 2003, if a decision were made to deploy. George W. Bush, upon being elected, has given 6 months notice that the US is going to back out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty signed in 1972 (which clearly states that we cannot build a national missile defense), in order to establish our national missile defense system. The reason simply being the fear of attacks from countries with long range missiles as well as other nuclear weapons. Countries such as China, North Korea, and Iraq. Russia, among other countries, were angered by the US's decision to back out of the treaty, therefore adding to the conflict. Most people are not clear on what exactly the missile defense system is, or what it does. Basically it's, as Bush puts it, a system for intercepting other countries nuclear missiles aimed for us with a dummy non-explosive missile of our own. For example, if North Korea invaded South Korea and the US threatened to intervene, North Korea could threaten us back with a nuclear missile aimed for New York, Los Angeles, or any major city or landmark in our country. Bush would be willing to take the risk of the missile defense system intercepting the enemy missile, even though more than half the tests of the system have not worked correctly. Russia's view on the United State's construction of a missile defense system is naturally not a positive one. Peter Kilfoyle, a loudmouth critic of Russia's defense policies has been a persistent thorn in the side of the government on defense issues. He criticised the "unilateralism" of the US administration in pressing ahead with the missile defence plan, warning that the Russians had been left feeling "peeved and let down", while the Chinese were about to quadruple their stock of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Free Essays on Invisible Man: Plot/Character Analysis/Themes :: Invisible Man Essays

Invisible Man: Short Plot/Character Analysis/Themes Invisible Man, written in 1952 by Ralph Ellison, documents a young black man's struggle to find identity in an inequitable and manipulative society. During the course of this struggle, he learns many valuable lessons, both about society and himself, through his experiences. The story begins with the narrator recounting his memories of his grandfather. The most remarkable, and eventually the most haunting, of these is his memory of his grandfather's last words in which he claims to have been a traitor to his own people and urges his son to "overcome 'em with yeses, undermine 'em with grins, agree 'em to death and destruction, let 'em swoller you till they vomit or bust wide open." These words remain imprinted in the narrator's mind throughout the book, although he never fully understands their meaning. His grandfather's words eventually serve as catalyst for his subsequent disillusionments, the first of which occurs directly after he graduates from high school. At this time, the narrator is invited to give a speech at a gathering of the town's leading white citizens. The speech he is planning to give expresses the view that humility is the essence of progress. Subconsciously, the words of his grandfather prevent him from truly believing the thesis of his own speech, but he gives it anyway. Instead of being shown respect for his work, however, he is humiliated by being made to fight blind-folded against other young black men, and then being shocked by an electrified rug. He pretends not to be angered by these events, yet his true feelings escape him for a moment when, while he is reading his speech, he accidentally says "Social equality," instead of "Social responsibility." After he finishes his speech, he is awarded a new briefcase. Inside the briefcase is a scholarship to the state Negro College. That night he has a dream in which his grandfather tells him to open the briefcase and read what is in the envelope. He finds that it says "To Wh om It May Concern, Keep This Nigger-Boy Running." Unfortunately, he is still too disillusioned to grasp the meaning of his grandfather's warnings. During his Junior year at college, the narrator drives for Mr. Norton, one of the college founders that is visiting the campus. During the drive, Mr. Norton tells the narrator that he is his destiny.

Hum/130 Final

Buddhism HUM/130 January 13, 2013 Buddhism In this paper we will put to an end to the ongoing question if the Buddhists are bowing down to Idols or Gods and why they do what they do. This paper will go into detail about the temple that I went to and the different tours that I was able to go on and the interview I was able to hold. I will also go into great detail about what you experience during one of the services in the Main Shrine. The Hsi Lai Temple sits on 15 acres of land and has a floor area of 102,432 sq. ft. nd is located at 3456 Glenmark Drive, Hacienda Heights CA 91745. The architecture when you first drive up is mind blowing and beautiful. The architecture stays true to the traditional styles of buildings, gardens, and statuary of the ancient Chinese monasteries. They started the planning and building of the temple in 1978 and finished the building ten years later in 1988. Hsi Lai means â€Å"coming west† and signifies the dedication of the Fo Guang Shan Buddhist O rder to spreading the teachings of the Buddha. Fo Guang Shan is the largest monastery and covers over 370 acres.When you walk up the first set of steps you come to what they call the gate. On the top part of the sign it says Hsi Lai Temple which again means â€Å"coming west† and then on the four pillars it says the four universal vows, which are â€Å"to save all sentient beings, to eradicate all worries, to study the boundless Dharma, and to attain supreme Buddhahood. † After you walk up the steps from the lower parking lot where the gate is you walk up more steps to the upper parking lot and then from their you walk up more steps to what they call the Bodhisattva Hall.Bodhisattvas are enlightened beings that made a vow to selflessly serve others with loving-kindness and compassion and are committed to liberating all beings from suffering. It is said that each one of the bodhisattvas represents a virtuous quality essential to all Buddhists. When talking about the bod hisattvas they made a point to make sure that we understood that when we saw that people were bowing to them that they were not bowing to an idol, but rather a sign of showing respect and seeking their guidance to develop the virtuous qualities they represent. Bowing also shows our own humility and the curbing of our ego.There are five bodhisattvas are: Samantabhadra Bodhisattva which is symbolic of great practice, and helping us achieve more discipline in our daily life, Ksitigarbha Bodhisattva which was known for his great vow to help all beings in hell and would not stop till hell was emptied of all beings, Maitreya Bodhisattva is the future Buddha and is the symbol of great benevolence and is often referred to as Happy Buddah, Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva which symbolizes the perfection and loving-kindness, and Manjusri Bodhisattva which is known for great wisdom which empowers one to distinguish universal morality from wrongdoing.Underneath the five bodhisattva are engraved Chine se characters from the Diamond Sutra. Next to the Heart Sutra the Diamond Sutra is the most widely read of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, and is highly valued among sects in Chan Buddhism.While I was at the His Lai Temple I found that they have an information where you can go on two different types of tours of their temple: the first being a self-guided audio tour where they give you a cd player and it gives you valuable information about the temple and all its rooms and buildings as well as the gardens and information on the statues that are found throughout the temple, The second type of tour they offer is with a docent who is more than willing to answer any questions that may come up during the tour, while they inform you about everything within the temple.The two gardens I was able to see within the temple was: the first being the Arhat Garden where the eighteen arhats are seated. The Arhats have realized the truth of no-self and that all is a composite of the five aggregates dep endant on other phenomena originally empty and subject to impermanence. It is said that the eighteen Arharts were able to overcome the difilements of greed, anger, and ignorance.The eighteen Arhats are: Cudapanthaka which is the door watching arhat, Jivaka which is the heart exposing arhat, Vajraputra which is the persuading arhat, Subinda which is the pagoda holding arhat, Panthaka which is the arhat with stretched arms, Kalika which is the dust cleaning arhat, Bhadra which is the arhat that crossed the river, Pindola which is the arhat with long eyebrows, Nakula which is the silently seated arhat, Ajita which is the arhat riding the deer, Maitreya which is the tiger taming arhat, Angaja which is the arhat with a sack, Vananasim which is the arhat under the banana tree, Rahula which is the arhat in deep conversation, Manakassapa which the dragon subduing arhat, Kanakabharadavaja which is the arhat holding the alms bowl, Nagasena which is the ear cleaning arhat, and Kanakavatsa whic h is the jolly arhat. The second garden is the Avalokitesvara Garden. Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva is seated on a giant rock with both her attendants, Shanci and Longnu who are standing beside her.Surrounding the pond are the four Deva Kings: Virudhaka of the Southern Kingdom which is holding the sword, Virupaksa of the Western Kingdom which is holding the dragon, Dhanada of the Northern Kingdom which is holding the umbrella, and the Dhrtarastra of the Eastern Kingdom which is holding a sitar. The four Deva Kings are revered as guardians who protect devout sentient beings from being harmed by unwholesome elements. Standing around the four Deva Kings are the four Dragon Kings of the Four Seas. The flowing water in the garden is symbolic of the Dharma water flowing everywhere to purify people’s minds. Although the Buddhist love informing people of their religion and teaching you about their beliefs. They are really not very forth coming when it comes to helping someone who is the re for a school assignment.I was asked by the individual to leave his name out and was further informed that they do not normally do this kind of interview. When asked about the holidays and traditions he said the most important holiday is Wesak Day which comes in May on the day of the full moon. As for traditions he said that it all depends on the form of Buddhism tradition that you followed. When asked how has his life has been shaped by the Buddhism religion he said that it has made him a more understanding person to what he called the true nature of life. When asked what the biggest challenge is to the Buddhist religion he said that with all beliefs the biggest challenge is changing you.He has been practicing Buddhism since he was born and was taught by monks and other teachers about the Buddhist religion. When asked if there were any dietary restrictions, he did not come out and say that you had to be vegan but stated that it was more wholesome to be vegan. During our interview I found that it was real simple to become a Buddhist and that all you really have to do is follow the teachings. After that question he seemed to be in a real hurry to end the interview but I thanked him for his time and let him know that what I was able to get answered was very helpful. When it came to compairing this religion to another I chose Christianity, not because it was the easier to compare because I found them to have very obvious differences.In Christianity when you become a Christian you accept God into your heart as Lord and Savior and then are baptized as a symbol of the washing of your sins. When you become a Buddhist you just start following the teachings of the Buddha. The other difference that stood out to me was that Christians believe in a heaven and hell and Buddhist believe that hell is only in the mind. Christians believe that when you die you go to heaven to be with your Lord and Savior, Buddhist believe that when you are done with this life you are reincar nated in the next life. I found this religion to be incredibly interesting as well as beautiful. This religion is all about selflessness, which I found in this day and age to be comforting.In order to become a Buddhists you, you are told to give up all your worldly possessions. Today, everything is about worldly possessions from the cell phone that they have the designer clothes they own, to the car that they drive. When the subject of material possessions is brought up it starts making you think about what is really important in your life and how much thought you actually put into material possessions. I have found that people say that their family and friends are important, but if someone were to ask them to give up these possessions what do you think they would say? These people would tell you that you were out of your mind and then proceed to give you every excuse under the sun on why they could not do this.I believe that it takes an amazing person to be able to put someone else ’s life before their own and to truly be devoted unconditionally. As I watched the monks interact with people throughout the times I was there it seemed like they were truly at peace and seemed like they had it all figured out when it came to life. When I first started the assignment I thought that it was going to be stuffy and that I would have to deal with someone who did not want to truly be in the place of having to help someone with a school paper. I found that to be completely false and actually found that not only the monks were willing to answer questions, but all the staff members were happy to answer whatever questions that anybody came up with.At the end of this assignment I found that Buddhism not only left you with such a serine feeling not only while you were in the temple but when you left it made you feel like you could accomplish anything if you just believed. They believe that the only way to truly achieve happiness is by giving up yourself and start paying more attention to others. References: An Introduction to Buddhism. (2000). Retrieved from http://webspace. ship. edu/cgboer/buddhaintro. html Religious Tolerance. (2011). Retrieved from http://www. religioustolerance. org/buddhism. htm buddhanet. (2013). Retrieved from https://ecampus. phoenix. edu/secure/aapd/cwe/citation_generator/web_01_01. asp

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn Final Essay Essay

Many people sensible horizon point of reference as the most serious thing in a man. Others overmuch emotional state past this and see their affectionate or economic status as deciding who they atomic number 18. They think these things are what localize a per news. In reality it is things equal ingenuity, quit go out, and morality that propose a great man. In contrast much(prenominal) qualitys the like hypocrisy, greed, and cruelty are what contri unspoiled nowe someone d take. Through his unfermented The Adventures of huckleberry Finn, notice couplet demonstrates the characteristics of a man he admires, and those he is haughty of by means of the actions of his characters. 1 admirable characteristic both conveys is Ingenuity. same(p) most positive qualities in the romance this is manoeuvern by with(predicate) the main character huck. He debunks great ingenuity when he is being held by his father in the confine. world able to escape showed much of thi s quality, totally if huckaback took it one step further. He knew his father would be able to spoil him truly easily if he just left and ran off into the woods. By fetching an axe to the front door and bed covering the pigs blood about made it seem as if huck had been murdered. He also took many items from the cabin to fake a robbery as well.Up to this point in the adjudge Huck is shown as being very child-like, and immature. After this incident though, the readers become alive(predicate) of his resourcefulness and ingenuity. Another example of this characteristic is shown through Jim. This is another character that straddle wants his readers to identify with as being admirable. He shows ingenuity by suggesting to Huck he should dress as a young-bearing(prenominal) to gain information in the town. Although Huck fails to convince the women he meets for then immaculate judgment of conviction, it is because of his own slip up, and he console gets the information he need s.Free impart is something Twain does not take for apt(p) in every person. In the raw he shows discipline from the beginning how much promiscuous will a character like Huck can abide. On the prime(prenominal) page of the book he says The Widow Douglas she took me for her son, and allowed she would sivilize me but it was rough animated in the house all the beat, considering how unforgiving regular and decent the widow was in all her ways and so when I couldnt stand it no semipermanent I lit out Although it seems like a normal thing for a thirteen year old male child to say we soon realize that Huck has made this decision based on some rather mature observations.Although he eventually goes back to the Widow, it isnt large before he is on the circle and the island, escaping the sivilized world. Twains views here are obviously that this sort of exonerate will is what makes people individuals. Another characteristic in the novel is morality. The main display of this is sh own through Huck at the end of the novel when he has a big decision on his hands. I was a-trembling, because Id got to decide, forever, betwixt two things, and I knowed it.I studied a minute, sort of retentiveness my breath, and then says to myself All right then, Ill go to hell? and tore it up He forced to choose betwixt tearing up his letter to dominate Watson and freeing the slave Jim, and sending the letter, notification her of his whereabouts. This choice wasnt about getting caught or not, it was about morals. At the snip it was considered morally wrong to help free a slave. Huck realized this, but also thought about the time he spent with Jim, and the friendship they had acquired.Twain clearly shows us through the actions of Jim in the whole novel that he feels thrall is wrong. So in choosing to help free his black friend, and go to hell if that be the consequence, Huck shows us his high morality. As well as admirable traits, Twain also uses The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn to display traits he is contemptuous of. It is clear which of these traits were thought of as beneficial and bad by looking at which character displays them. In the case of Huck and Jim only characteristics in which Twain was affable of are shown.In contrast the characters who show the opposite traits are those of the antagonist type. The first of these is antagonist traits is hypocrisy. It is shown in the form of the robbers on the river boat. Obviously these characters do not display any virtuous traits, and are quite hypocritical when they say See? Hell be drownded, and wont involve nobody to blame for it but his own self. I reckon thats a considerable sight bettern killin of him. Im unfavorable to killin a man as long as you can git aroun it it aint unplayful sense, it aint good morals.Aint I right? We do not have to look to deep into this to find that they simply assay to justify their actions, when really all they have accomplished is condemning them. Another trai t Twain finds equally disreputable is greed. This is shown mainly through the King and Duke who will stop at nothing to sap money from the unknowingness people. The Last quality is Cruelty. This is shown through the batter of the characters, Pap. He ruthlessly beats his son Huck and goes on drunken rages end-to-end the whole book.In a time of much hate and racism bell ringer Twain used his novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn to show what characteristics make a virtuous person, and which ones make the opposite. He showed traits such as ingenuity, free will, and morality through his protagonists, and hypocrisy, greed, and cruelty through his antagonists. This way the reader not only identifies with the character they are fond or not fond of, but the traits that that they display as well. Twain proves that it is not what a man has that defines him, but who he is.

The People

Angela Franklin Professor Ginfrida ENC1101 22 April 2013 Neat Vs. Sloppy In Suzanne Britts â€Å"Neat People Vs. Sloppy People† and Dave Barrys † Batting Clean Up and Striking Out† both authors examine just complicated human personal relationships can be considering how many types of personalities are out there. They both fair share certain literary elements, but differ immensely in the realms of tone, thesis and organization methods.Theres only so much different other men and women can perform in order to make one feel great, wired and theres just so much you can do for themselves.They both use these literary elements to create humor in their essays. Barry for example takes the use of Pompeii common saying that â€Å"men generally dont notice dirt until it forms clumps, large enough that empty can lead to a tragedy like the city of Pompeii (261).Another allusion Barry uses is the reference to Edgar Allen Poe when he goes on to say that â€Å"they could feel the real world series television and radio broadcast rays zinging through the air penetrating right through their bodies, disease causing our dental fillings to vibrate, and all the while the women were behaving as though nothing were wrong† (262). how This enhances his story with suspense.Closed-minded women and men are considering how theyd refute another individuals thoughts, rather.

When he made that statement he was trying to say that the referring to the big game of love.In the same manner Britt went on to say that â€Å"sloppy people live in what some may call â€Å"Never Never Land† (255). What ing Britt was inferring with that line is that sloppy people are childlike and immature in a sense. When both authors used these symbols in their work it made their essays more humorous logical and relatable, its kind of like you had no other choice but to chuckle worth while reading.Have the person that youre training repeat back what youve clarified.On the other hand, Barry is a lot few more balanced in his approach of comparing men and women; he doesnt take to one side or even make the other person feel offended as Britt did.He just states the different different priorities of men and women, Barry went on to say that â€Å"the opposite side of the dirt coin, of course is sports† (262). Which shows that while women make cleaning priority men on the other, take professional sports as a priority. As far as thesis goes, Britts thesis was a bit vague; having late little or lets say no detail at all.We The People Hemp is simple to purchase.

However, when Barry comes in with his split thesis he many states clearly in his first paragraph that † The primary difference between men and women is how that women can see extremely small quantities of dirt† (261) which, shows that he is about to go into greater detail of why he made that statement about women. Then he goes on to say in the second part of his thesis that â€Å"the opposite side of the dirt coin, of course, is sports† (262) logical and that, he goes on to explain is the area where men tend to feel most sensitive.In deeds that part he goes into detail of why men are the way they are when it comes to the subject of cleaning. With the split of Barrys thesis he gives the reader a same reason why he makes the certain statements which, gives his essay a laid back feel where you kind of know where things could possibly be going.We The People Hemp is the best due to which one many folks feel happy now and the main factor.Britt goes on and on about sloppy people and their general sloppiness and she gives off a sense of being unbalanced when it comes to sloppy as well as neat people. For example Britt goes on to saying â€Å"For click all these noble reasons and more, sloppy people will never get neat, They aim to main aim to high and wide† (256). Leaving it at that only to go into more male bashing of sloppy people. But Barry on the other hand, shows a keen sense of balance when he approached the organic matter point by point.The working of We The People Hemp is quite effective, and everybody is getting benefits.

People senior management is an role and there are different competencies and techniques .There are an assortment of hot food items you can buy.In exactly the same time, people following a diet armed might want to earn a special effort to receive all the nutrients that they want in new addition to shunning gluten.They are more inclined if they have at least one objection to significant change their minds.

Defence mechanisms will be subsequently utilized by the brain .Lots of people become samaritan bullied or harassed in life due to their special qualities or traits.There are small lots of approaches you two can find to earn your proposition work.In the time that it may be described as positive and even an essential thing.