Protestor arrest over slim on Mandelson
The woman who threw green custard on Lord Peter Mandelson last week has been arrested it has been said by the Scottish Yard. Leila Dean who is 29 and is a protestor for climate change was angry when Lord Mandelson announced plans to lower carbon strategy resolution. It is believed that she was angry as she felt that it was only to benefit him and that he was a liar. She threw green custard over him, which it is believed caused skin irritation. She shouted, "the only thing green about you is the blood running in your veins".
While it may seem to some that he got exactly what he deserved, as he not what you would call the most popular of men, it would show that the security is not really stronger enough that she was able to get through in the first place.
The attack is quite similar to what happened to John Prescott when he was attacked by a general election campaigner named Craig Evans who threw an egg at him. He resulted in turning around and starting a fight with him. I would say that it is too right for someone to want to defend himself. In truth it could have been absolutely anything that was thrown at him. It is only human instinct to react to these things.
The reports have stated that the police thought it was funny that Mandelson was attacked which makes me feel slightly bad that the security and police around him where so unprofessional. It must be days like these that makes Peter Mandelson wish he had stayed away from politics after resigning twice already.
Monday, 9 March 2009
Boris Johnson: immigration amnesty
Boris Johnson: immigration amnesty
Well it seems that London Mayor Boris Johnson is considering allowing Illegal Immigrants to be able to live inside the UK. Boris Johnson states "that if they can make a contribution to society then they should be allowed the chance to live inside the UK". This would be rather unimportant when looking at the number of unemployment of UK citizens, who are trying to compete for jobs as it is. Then the question must be asked why bring in more people to the country to make even more problems for current citizens.
Just like the United States who are also suffering heavily with over 4.4 million people who have been made unemployed this year alone and think should it not be first priority to make sure you can settle this problem first before worrying about people coming from abroad to find work. Boris Johnson has already allowed full British citizenship to immigrants and also considering given it to illegal immigrants as well. It seems that by doing this it will be showing just how lapse we are at allowing anyone to come and live in the UK illegally. This idea by the Mayor of London has not been backed by both current government and the Conservative Party. Yet 93 party members have backed this idea as being worthwhile.
Johnson claims that he is making sure that those who are coming into this country are legitimate. He declared that he would make sure they have no criminal record or for wrong reasons and that if this becomes and increasing problems then they would have to look at the public policy and tighten the boarder of allowing people to make it into the country illegally. It is reported that there are over 725,000 immigrants in the UK at the moment who are living illegally.
It would be fair to say it is more of the fact that he is under pressure to perform many major benefits for London. This would include helping to allow more senior woman become part of top businesses, to crack down on people losing jobs and also trying to help more developments within the city.
Well it seems that London Mayor Boris Johnson is considering allowing Illegal Immigrants to be able to live inside the UK. Boris Johnson states "that if they can make a contribution to society then they should be allowed the chance to live inside the UK". This would be rather unimportant when looking at the number of unemployment of UK citizens, who are trying to compete for jobs as it is. Then the question must be asked why bring in more people to the country to make even more problems for current citizens.
Just like the United States who are also suffering heavily with over 4.4 million people who have been made unemployed this year alone and think should it not be first priority to make sure you can settle this problem first before worrying about people coming from abroad to find work. Boris Johnson has already allowed full British citizenship to immigrants and also considering given it to illegal immigrants as well. It seems that by doing this it will be showing just how lapse we are at allowing anyone to come and live in the UK illegally. This idea by the Mayor of London has not been backed by both current government and the Conservative Party. Yet 93 party members have backed this idea as being worthwhile.
Johnson claims that he is making sure that those who are coming into this country are legitimate. He declared that he would make sure they have no criminal record or for wrong reasons and that if this becomes and increasing problems then they would have to look at the public policy and tighten the boarder of allowing people to make it into the country illegally. It is reported that there are over 725,000 immigrants in the UK at the moment who are living illegally.
It would be fair to say it is more of the fact that he is under pressure to perform many major benefits for London. This would include helping to allow more senior woman become part of top businesses, to crack down on people losing jobs and also trying to help more developments within the city.
EMPIRICISM
EMPIRICISM
Haven’t already studied economics in Politics for A-Level I believed that I would have had some idea beforehand of what the term implies. The idea is that people do not believe things unless they see it. It is this that makes people believe in newspapers and everything that is printed. It is the sense that if in a pub a man tells you there was a shoot out across the street you tend to think ‘Yeah sure there is’ it is this sort of scepticism, that makes you think to yourself well they are probably making it up. Although despite this you will still go to check anyway.
It is believed that the theory of Empiricism is not involved for religious reasons or moral rights but on the natural order. You do not reject something because you are being ignorant you reject something because you want to be able to know yourself personally. It is Empiricism that leads the human instinct to go and explore. It is no wonder why we have men going off to space to find new planets or archaeologists who go off digging to find buried ancient treasures or fossils. People feel the need to make sure that they can see these things first hands. It is all right to simply say someone has found dinosaur remains in a digging expedition in France for example. Most people would want to be able to see how it was found in the first place.
There are many comedians who reject the ideas that have been told to us throughout early life like the use of religion and the meaning of life. Ricky Gervais used the bible to describe how he thought much of the opening chapter was rather unbelievable. It is simply the fact that in this day and time we are starting to doubt what we have been told or have learnt and are starting to find different theories to prove against it. Which shows we simply want to be the ones who can prove theories rather than accept those that has been given to us.
The father of Empiricism John Locke (Not to get confused with the ‘Lost’ character) believed that if we had innate ideas, we would be conscious of having them. But it is an undeniable fact that children, savages, the unlearned, are not conscious of having innate ideas; they acquire knowledge during the course of a lifetime. It is impossible that anyone should have knowledge of something of which he is not conscious. (John Locke book of understanding Human Nature). He states that we need to have something to consider when looking at everything before us and so there is proof that there is a higher powerful being.
In conclusion, Locke's theory of knowledge, isolated from "being" and limited to whatever happens inside the mind itself, cannot break through the ring of phenomenalism in which it is enclosed and reach metaphysical data.
Haven’t already studied economics in Politics for A-Level I believed that I would have had some idea beforehand of what the term implies. The idea is that people do not believe things unless they see it. It is this that makes people believe in newspapers and everything that is printed. It is the sense that if in a pub a man tells you there was a shoot out across the street you tend to think ‘Yeah sure there is’ it is this sort of scepticism, that makes you think to yourself well they are probably making it up. Although despite this you will still go to check anyway.
It is believed that the theory of Empiricism is not involved for religious reasons or moral rights but on the natural order. You do not reject something because you are being ignorant you reject something because you want to be able to know yourself personally. It is Empiricism that leads the human instinct to go and explore. It is no wonder why we have men going off to space to find new planets or archaeologists who go off digging to find buried ancient treasures or fossils. People feel the need to make sure that they can see these things first hands. It is all right to simply say someone has found dinosaur remains in a digging expedition in France for example. Most people would want to be able to see how it was found in the first place.
There are many comedians who reject the ideas that have been told to us throughout early life like the use of religion and the meaning of life. Ricky Gervais used the bible to describe how he thought much of the opening chapter was rather unbelievable. It is simply the fact that in this day and time we are starting to doubt what we have been told or have learnt and are starting to find different theories to prove against it. Which shows we simply want to be the ones who can prove theories rather than accept those that has been given to us.
The father of Empiricism John Locke (Not to get confused with the ‘Lost’ character) believed that if we had innate ideas, we would be conscious of having them. But it is an undeniable fact that children, savages, the unlearned, are not conscious of having innate ideas; they acquire knowledge during the course of a lifetime. It is impossible that anyone should have knowledge of something of which he is not conscious. (John Locke book of understanding Human Nature). He states that we need to have something to consider when looking at everything before us and so there is proof that there is a higher powerful being.
In conclusion, Locke's theory of knowledge, isolated from "being" and limited to whatever happens inside the mind itself, cannot break through the ring of phenomenalism in which it is enclosed and reach metaphysical data.
Sunday, 8 March 2009
Political Concepts
Political Concepts
When it comes to Politics, many people tend to think it only covers the ground of the government. This is not entirely true as politics can cover the whole area of land of state that we all live within. Politics is in the Laws we obeyed by. So the question can be asked why do we obey the laws they set out?
This can be answered very simply in that we need laws and rules otherwise we would all be free to do whatever we want. This may seem like a good thing to some, but it also allows us to be controlled which stops us from being wild. When you look at nature that is not controlled by rules it would be by looking at animals. They are allowed to be free and so they will hunt for food, nurture their children and the only interference is from us who feel the need to once again control what these animals are allowed to do i.e. Zoo’s. Yes, it may be protecting them from hunters or diseases. But is it not yet another way of being able to show that we can control all forms of nature to show we are most dominant.
The UK has been defending its state for a long time. Although it can be seen that current decisions by the Government has ignored the main functions that the state intended upon by allowing the early release of those who have committed crimes, due to the over crowding of prisons. This has meant that it no longer seems quite as important to the way the country is ruled.
The first function of the state is to defend its independence and seek to allow independence of its citizens. The second function is to make sure that justice is served not just in a sense that you will be punished for your crimes in the judiciary sense. It also implies fairness in economical, educational and cultural equality that the state is trying to keep in place.
The states has been able to control the citizens by simply using methods such as Police, judges and soldiers who have a job of defending and protecting our interests. The use of religion is another factor that is put in place in order for us to have an understanding of why we go through certain things in life. The use of religion was there in order to help reduce the level of crime. It is place to go to in order to seek solitude and be at peace with ones self when you may be struggling at the certain point in your life.
It may be hard to be able to state who should run the state or even how the state should be ran, as leaving it in the hand of the everyday citizen would ruin and contradict the way the state could work and very soon the state would slowly crumble. This means there is a right reason why there are institutions like the Government and Monarchy to put these laws into practice and ensure that we can all still prosper.
It is clear that Thomas Hobbes cynical view on the National State is that religious authority is not the only way to gain order. He believed that order could be obtained through other mediums. He believed that order is everything. That it is better to be a slave or subject than a ‘slave of nature’.
Rousseau would argue the case also that while "we may be born free, but everywhere else is in chains" This is true in the sense that you are only held by law once you are born. You would not of been ruled by the laws beforehand as you had not existed in the State. He also believes that a reason for the inequality of the state is due to Property. It is here that people can show just how different their lives are than others. Someone with a huge mansion is clearly going to have much more money and likely to be rich businessman or celebrity. This shows the inequality compared to someone who may be earning not as much but putting in more hours maybe than the richer people. It is believed that due to this there is an increase in people feeling alienated.
It is clear that the political and economic success of Western liberalism is helping to increase the already alarming gap between rich and poor throughout the world. The World Bank and other national financial institutions are helping in order to help this problem in the way that was addressed by Marx on his theory of capitalism.
In conclusion it is very hard to say that people should have the rights to decide on equal democratic rights, as there will always be an argument between the classes. Most people will feel that we are right to keep the governed state the way it is at the moment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)