From the Concert of Europe to the Cause of the First World War Essay Example for Free

From the Concert of Europe to the Cause of the First World War Essay After the fall of Napoleon there was a need to create a balance of power that would preserve the peace between European monarchies. Also to redraw the map of Europe and to restore the countries in crisis after their defeat of Napoleon. The main goal of the Concert was to contain France and prevent another ascend of authority such as Napoleon Bonaparte. The origins of The Concert of Europe begin from the international conference called by the victorious allied nations in Vienna – The Congress of Vienna. It took place in September 1814 to June 1815 and is mostly considered as the precursor to today’s United Nations. The Congress was highly successful in achieving its goal, as there were no wars between European countries for almost 40 years. One could say that the Concert of Europe is still continuous, but with different players, goals and name. Thus The Concert of Vienna was first of its kind and in addition Europe had not seen such cooperation between major powers before, it nonetheless made numerous decisions that shaped Europe to its historic course. For instance France was deprived from lands Napoleon had conquered. Britain got several strategic colonial territories, also gaining control of the seas. France and Spain were restored under rightful bloodlines. However the numerous decisions and outcomes were pompous, concentrating on the needs and wants of four main powers Austria, Russia, Prussia, and Great Britain. The Concerts main accomplishment was the securing of independence for Greece (ironic) by sending fleets to fight against invading Ottoman-Egyptian armies. Thanks to three great powers, Russia, The United Kingdom and France, Greece was finally recognized as an independent nation that it is today. In Belgian revolution the Great Powers recognized Belgium as an independent state. After that the signs of collapse of the alliance started to appear. The goal of the Concert of Europe was to keep a balance of power between leading countries in Europe, but if the balance starts to change to someone’s favour then the conflicts begin to arise. The sudden development of Egypt and their successful war against Ottomans brought about fear in European powers. A collapse of Ottoman Empire could have had a destabilizing effect to every country especially to the United Kingdom. England was not only worried for loosing economic benefits and militarily strong state in Mediterranean, but also about Egypt’s close ties to France. Britain preferred a weakened but intact Ottoman Empire that would give it the strategic and commercial advantages it needed to maintain its influence in the region. This all lead to what was called the Oriental Crisis of 1840 where United Kingdom, Austrian Empire, The Kingdom of Prussia and the Russian Empire backed Ottoman Empire against Egypt. France did not accept with the terms The Concert of Europe offered to Egypt, not siding with any of the rivals, but stayed ‘neutral’. Eventually after numerous military conflicts Egypt accepted the terms and Ottoman Empire got back all its lost fleets and territories. The significant downfall of The Concert of Europe was Crimean War in 1853 when Russian Empire started its expansion, which was against the main idea of the Congress of Vienna. It was all powered by the weakening Ottoman Empire and religious disputes till Russia made its move on Constantinople which was owned by the Turks. Afterwards European powers joined in to prevent Russia from growing too powerful. Followed three years of hostilities on five theatres till Russian Empire was eventually stopped. Being the first major armed conflict in Europe after the settlement at the Congress of Vienna, Crimean War signified the downfall of the Concert of Europe. At the Treaty of Paris, signed on March 30, 1856, the real looser was Austria. Having chosen to defy the Russians in the Balkans, Austria lost main ally, and over the next few years it appeared that Britain and France were not interesting in cooperation. Moreover, the Crimean War was the collapse of the Vienna Settlement, the system that had enabled Austria, Britain, France, Prussia and Russia to cooperate and maintain peace for three decades. The Crimean War placed the basis for two powerful new nation states Italy and Germany. The new six-power European system demonstrated to be less stable than its forefather, while the expectation that political and diplomatic aims could be satisfied by war led these states to adopt ever closer alliances. The Crimean War was a turning point in European history, marking the end of the Vienna settlement, and the beginning of a new system. In spite of all, the Great Powers finally returned to war in 1914, almost hundred years after the Congress of Vienna. Alliances and common pacts all end in the course of time, lead by human needs and personal gains, sooner or later. (And the outcome is war ofc) The First World War begun with a simple murder of Austrian-Hungarian royalty, at least that is the simplified reason. In reality it only triggered the war; the actual roots of the war are much deeper and more complicated than a simple bullet in the Archdukes neck. Rise of nationalism and its movements in Europe created such secret societies that used terrorist methods to promote their views. Slavic people in Bosnia and Herzegovina wanted no longer to be a part of Austria-Hungary, but instead be to be a part of Serbia. Viewing it in this way, it could be said that nationalism led Slavic people to rebel against their occupiers that ended with the First World War Increased military and naval rivalry led not only to the belief that war was close and increase in military control of the civilian government also there was an increased cooperation between allied countries. For example United Kingdom, France and Russia held secret military talks. The British and the French naval authorities agreed that the French navy should be concentrated in the Mediterranean and the British in the North Sea. Germany and Austria also had military agreements. When the First World War began, it was to be fought by all powers because they were locked into the conflict from the beginning by contracts and alliances. European powers had formed themselves into two rival groups called the Triple Entente versus the Triple Alliance and the interests of these groups clashed in many parts of the world before 1914. Whenever a clash arose, the two groups seemed to be on the edge of war. Believably, on some level, it eventually led to hatred of each other. Contributing fact was that after 1870, the European nations began to acquire colonies in Asia, Africa and the Pacific. Their imperialistic activities led to another clash of interests. It could be said that the underlying causes for war are the same as for everything else in life. One decision affects the other to ad nauseam. It was possible that politicians knew that war was at their doorstep, but I am sure they did not know that over 15 million people will have to pay for it with their lives. Could the First World War be avoided is doubtful, because of the tense relations, rivalry and complicated alliance systems. It was a small scale war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia that transformed into world war. The same could easily happen today when China or USA supports North or South Korea over the conflict. History repeats itself and we need to learn from it. Poking your nose into other people’s business is not the smartest plan when both sides have powerful ‘’brothers’’ positioned farther back.

A Rose For Emily: Fallen From Grace :: essays research papers fc

A Rose for Emily: Fallen from Grace A comparative essay on the use of symbolism in William Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily." Authors traditionally use symbolism as a way to represent the sometimes intangible qualities of the characters, places, and events in their works. In his short story "A Rose for Emily," William Faulkner uses symbolism to compare the Grierson house with Emily Grierson's physical deterioration, her shift in social standing, and her reluctancy to accept change. When compared chronologically, the Grierson house is used to symbolize Miss Emily's physical attributes. In its prime, the Grierson house is described as "white, decorated with cupolas and spires and scrolled balconies in the heavily lightsome style of the seventies" (Faulkner 69). This description suggests that the house was built not only for function, but also to impress and engage the attention of the other townspeople. Similarly, the wealthy women of the era, Emily Grierson not withstanding, were dressed in a conspicuous manner. This, for the most part, is because their appearance was perceived as a direct reflection on their husbands and/or fathers. This display of extravagance was egotistically designed by men to give an impression of wealth to onlookers. Emily was regarded by her father as property. Her significance to him was strongly ornamental, just as their overly lavish home was. As the plot progresses, the reader is clearly made aware of the physical decline of both the house and Miss Emily. Just as the house is described as "smelling of dust and disuse," evidence of Emily's own aging is given when her voice in similarly said to be "harsh, and rusty, as if from disuse" (70-74). Ultimately, at the time of Emily's death, the house is seen by the townspeople as "an eyesore among eyesores," and Miss Emily is regarded as a "fallen monument" (69). Both are empty, and lifeless. Neither are even remotely representative of their former splendor. Just as their physical characteristics, Faulkner uses the Grierson house as a symbol for Miss Emily's change in social status. In its prime, the house was "big," and "squarish," and located on Jefferson's "most select street" (69). This description gives the reader the impression that the residence was not only extremely solid, but also larger than life, almost gothic in nature, and seemingly impervious to the petty problems of the common people. The members of the Grierson family, especially Emily, were also considered to be strong and powerful. The townspeople regarded them as regal. And Emily, as the last living Grierson, came to symbolize her family's, and possibly the entire south's, rich past. The townspeople's reveration of Emily soon decayed, however, once it

Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Inc. Essay

1. Stakeholders 1.1. The five-year girl and the injured: – as because of this incident a five year girl lost her life and nothing is more precious that life. 1.2. Customers: – because people were resting their futures in the hands of this number fever promotion campaign. 1.3. Victoria Angelo, her family and families like hers: – these people who didn’t have enough money to eat were buying Pepsi in the hope of changing their whole life. The rich company Pepsi was making money by making these people believe that they might win a lot of money. Instead of using their scarce resources for something more real, these people spent it on Pepsi building up dreams of getting rich and leading a good life. 1.4. Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Inc.:- as the campaign was launched by Pepsi-cola, it is responsible for the outcomes like deaths, lawsuits, injured etc. 1.5. Pepsi-Cola International: – as Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Inc. is a part of the multinational firm with branches all over the world, this incident might negatively effect the sales in other countries. 1.6. PepsiCo Inc.:- as it owns 19% of the company. 1.7. Insurance companies: – The insurance companies are affected by this incident as a lot of the Pepsi-cola cars, trucks and wagons were destroyed by the angry public and these companies might have to pay for it. 1.8. Competitors especially Coca-Cola:- as a result of this incident coca-cola might be able to snatch away a huge chunk of the market from Pepsi. 1.9. Government: – It has to make sure that companies follow the laws and  they have to protect the innocent consumers. The government has to make sure illegal and unethical activities do not happen. It has to make sure that the laws are implemented without any exceptions. 1.10. Judicial system in Philippines: – as it is responsible for making sure that no violations of laws and regulations happen and people who do it are dealt with in the proper manner. 1.11. Company Employees: – they might lose their jobs as a result of the riots and losses that Pepsi had to face. 1.12. People who ran the computer or made the computer program:- as they have a significant role to play in the misprinting of the numbers. 1.13. Banks and financial institutions: – although not very clear from the case Pepsi-cola might haven taken loans form other banks. 1.14. Share and Stockholders: – although not very clear from the case, the value of the shares and stock of Pepsi-cola Company might have fallen. 2. Ethical Issues 2.1. Trust: – A climate of trust provides improved communication, greater predictability, dependability and confidence among the customer’s, employees and the company. The people trusted Pepsi to pay them the money if they would win. But Pepsi dining do that hence breaking customer trust, something once broken is very difficult to regain. 2.2. Egoism: – the company was just thinking about its own interests when it launched the campaign. It didn’t consider the poor people who might be lured by this number fever and spend the little money they had on Pepsi-cola instead of saving it and using for food, medicines, education etc, hence harming the innocent customers. 2.3. Deception: – With the winning numbers pre-selected by computer and only  ten 1-million-peso prizes available, the chance of anyone becoming a peso millionaire was one in 28.8 million. But Pepsi drinkers didn’t know that. The few winners got saturation media coverage, and entire families spent inordinate time and effort collecting bottle caps. 2.4. Theft: – these people who didn’t have enough money to eat were buying Pepsi in the hope of changing their whole life. The rich company Pepsi was making money by making these people believe that they might win a lot of money. Instead of using their scarce resources for something more real, these people spent it on Pepsi building up dreams of getting rich and leading a good life. When Pepsi refused to pay the rightful winners their rightful money, the company robbed these people of their dreams, hopes and financial resources. 3. The shaping of Public happiness a. There was maybe a little collaboration of private welfare and public good. The company was giving out prises valuing up to 1 million to people. Although the company intended to gain more market share through this action, it also helped people get more money and live a better life. On the other hand it was also private welfare as only a handful people really profited from this action. Only these few were able to lead a better life and the majority was left out b. Yes I think it is an appropriate good as one cannot always do stuff for the public good. It is not always possible to do good for all on a large scale. You need a lot of resources, power to carry out actions on such a large scale. Instead it would be better to help groups, families and individual. This is relatively easier to do and consequently a lot of people will benefit from such actions. c. What should have been differently i. Truth: – the company should have told the truth in the advertisements, that the chance to win the game is extremely small. This would help  especially the poor people in making the more sensible and invert their money in things what they really need. ii. Trust: – the company should have tried to regain trust of the people by explaining to them that the mistake was not on purpose and that they never intended to hurt people’s feelings. iii. Consequences: – The Company should have also tried to explain to the people that if Pepsi would pay the $18 billion to the people, then the company would go broke and would have to close. This would result in thousands of people loosing their jobs. iv. Government: – it should make sure that people understand such campaigns and don’t get seduced by such empty promises through better control over what the companies exactly advertise and what they do. d. Yes Pepsi was justified in not paying the full 1 million pesos: Doing that would mean that Pepsi would have to pay a total of more than $18 billion, a sum that would definitely lead to the company getting bankrupt. As a result of this thousands of people would lose their jobs not only in Philippines but also in other parts of the world where Pepsi operates as the Whole Pepsi organisation would be affected by this huge loss. The share and stock holder might lose a lot of money as a result of this loss at Pepsi. Thus it is a very complicated and damaging chain reaction that would be set of into action if Pepsi paid the money. Pepsi made a mistake in printing the numbers, something it did not intend to do. It kept its promise of giving out the 1 million to people who had the numbers but now you can’t expect the company to pay $18 billion because of an honest mistake. Everyone makes mistakes. e. Europe: – The response would have been different as the people in Europe are not that poor and live a good life. They are not that desperate. They are also well educated and understand such campaigns. South America and Africa: – the response might have been similar to that in  Philippines as the people are poor and are desperate to have money. Most of the people are not well educated and hence don’t really understand such campaigns. Asia: – the response here might be not that aggressive as in Philippine as the people are well educated and although also being poor they live in highly developing countries for example India ,China etc, that are constantly attractive huge investments from around the world. Multinational companies are building huge factories here and are outsourcing their functions in these countries. As such the people are not that desperate. f. The firms offer was OK, it could have offered some more money, but whatever it might have offered it would have never been enough for the people. The company had to think about all its shareholders and paying the full amount would have damaged lot of them for example Insurance companies, Company Employees, Banks and financial institutions, Share and Stockholders etc. It was in the best interest of everyone for the company to pay 500 pesos and not the full 1 million. 4. What would I do? Likely the ethical principles violated have to do with trust that they would keep their word, (pay for winners) even if it weren’t profitable. I don’t think the ads said anything about conditions of payment are only if they ‘choose the correct, low probability number to ensure low payoff’. It seems also that they need their customers, particularly since Coke customers will not be affected by Pepsi-Philippines decision not to pay off. I would make sure that the advertisements would mention the risks and possibilities of winning. The people would be aware of the fact that it is very difficult to win. This would help a person not to invest all his hopes and resources in something that is itself a dream. I would also try to explain to the people that if Pepsi would pay the $18 billion to the people, then the company would go broke and would have to close. This would result in thousands of people loosing their jobs. I would try to maintain the good will of the customers. The projected $ loss from loss in reputation may be worse than paying the prizes. Simply from a business and ethical perspective, I would have done something very quickly to maintain the good will of the customers once I knew of the mistake. I would have tried to regain trust of the people by explaining to them that the mistake was not on purpose and that the company never intended to hurt people’s feelings. Maybe in Hong Kong the results would have been less radical or violent. However that wouldn’t mean that the company wasn’t just as wrong for their short-sightedness and carelessness. Their carelessness led to violence and death. Something should have been done differently. Yes. 5. Application of to case 5.1. Personal Traits:- Business decisions are made by individuals or by committees, thus the ethics of business in reality is the ethics of the individuals making up the business. A series of factors influence a persons ethics: personal values, stage of moral development and moral approbation. The extent to which a decision maker’s behaviour reflects personal values depends to some extent on the decision maker’s ego strength, field dependence and locus of control. There the Pepsi-cola company is a big player with a lot of power which can lead to high ego strength and locus of control. This might cause the company to go its own way and set wrong standards and use questionable methods. Stages of development depict the type of rationale used to select options. Moral approbation characterizes the internal need for approval something that is scarcely present in big companies. Each of these traits either supports ethical or unethical behaviour. 5.2. Stakeholders :- A stakeholder is someone who has a stake in an organization or a program. Stakeholders either affect the organization/program or are affected by it. Stakeholders include people who staff a program (e.g., management, staff); people who are affected by a program (e.g., clients, their families, and the  community); people who contribute to a program in other ways (e.g., contributors, funding agencies and foundations, volunteers, partner organizations, board members, etc.); and people with a vested interest in the program (e.g., politicians, neighbors, etc.), competitors, suppliers etc. The company did not take into consideration the effects of this campaign on particularly its consumers. The Stakeholders influence decisions in both ethical and unethical directions. 5.3. Organizational Culture and Traits It might be referred to as the common set of assumptions, beliefs and values that has developed within the organisation to cope with the external and internal environment and that is passed on to new members to guide their actions within these environments. It provides a sense of identity among members and promotes a commitment of the members to something larger than self. It also provides for stability of the organisational social system and rationale and direction for behaviour. While organisational culture serves as the overall glue of the organisation specific aspects of its culture are influenced by the organisational traits for e.g. organisational climate and organisational goals etc. 3.4. Dimensions of Decision Making The Decision Processes help to explain the types of ethical decision making behaviour that occur in business. Managers indicate there are specific actions that they will not countenance – thus, the minimum performance rule. Once a set of decision alternatives has been established, each one is evaluated on the bases of the Decision dimensions like economic, political, technological, social and ethical issues. These issues are responsible at the end about the ethical nature of the decision. 3.5. Moral Intensity The degree of moral intensity influences the decision maker’s decisions. A person with a high moral intensity is tend to consider moral and ethical  issues more deeply than a person who’s moral intensity lies very low. 3.6. Minimum Performance Level/ Total Benefit Test The decision maker applies a minimum performance rule to each of the decisions that specifies the minimum acceptable performance level for each of the decision dimensions. Any alternative that creates a conflict of interest will be dropped from consideration. The minimum performance level might be less than the desired level and when considered by itself would lead to rejection of the alternative. Decisions Alternatives that survive the Minimum Performance Level rule test may then be subjected to the second phase, total benefit yielding the overall value of each alternative. After the benefit for each decision variable has being considered has been derived, one would expect that the decision maker would select the alternative with the highest benefit. 6. Lessons Critical for organizations that are striving to gain or maintain a competitive advantage and that are in the process of re-structuring for the new century. Decision-making is an important factor for growing organizational memory with newly created knowledge and a broader base of perspectives to use in subsequent decision-making situations. Given a particular decision context and a decision maker with a set of personal values, it may be very difficult to see all sides of the issue. Individual, managerial and organisational success all depend on making the right decisions at the right times.1 However, decision-making is just one component of the problem-solving process. Unless a problem has been defined and its root causes identified, managers are unlikely to be able to make an appropriate decision about how to solve it. Effective managers know how to gather and evaluate information that clarifies a problem. They know the value of generating more than one action alternative and weighing all the implications of a plan before deciding to implement it. A major responsibility for all managers is to maintain a constant lookout for actual or potential problems. Managers do this by keeping channels of communication open and monitoring. When a problem involves others, they need to feel understood and accepted; they must have confidence that the problem can be resolved; they must trust management to see the problem as a learning experience and not as an excuse to punish someone. Whether blameworthy or not, the use of the cloak of social responsibility, and the nonsense spoken in its name by influential and prestigious businessmen, does clearly harm the foundations of a free society. I have been impressed time and again by the schizophrenic character of many businessmen. They are capable of being extremely far-sighted and clear-headed in matters that are internal to their businesses. They are incredibly short-sighted and muddle-headed in matters that are outside their businesses but affect the possible survival of business in general. But the doctrine of â€Å"social responsibility† taken seriously would extend the scope of the political mechanism to every human activity. It does not differ in philosophy from the most explicitly collective doctrine. It differs only by professing to believe that collectivist ends can be attained without collectivist means. The social responsibility of business is to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.

U.s. Military Defense And Education - 1737 Words

Security is most highest priority in every country but To nurture a secure nation, federal spending must be balanced among military defense and programs that provide economic security, such as education and health care . A worthy portion of any country s budget is spent on defence . To some extent it is not a good idea for us to spend money on defending ourselves from imaginary enemies. We spend significant sums of money preparing for wars that we later create and ignore the needs of our own country. There are also other important sectors which needs to develop to bring economic growth. It should be much better to spent in areas such as social welfare, health, and education. We do not need such a massive, sprawling military†¦show more content†¦But it turns out that military spending is actually a singularly good proxy for measuring just how big the multiplier for government spending is. Countries that have a military or army enjoy an array of benefits, ranging from job employment to the military, as well as a form of protection in the event of military conflict. Some countries need a strong military more than others, depending on their strength amongst other countries. The army also provides different job opportunities to locals who leave near military bases. Thousands of folks work in different departments in the military building planes, ammunition, guns, tanks, and other supplies need during combat. In simple terms, some people rely on the military for work so that they can provide for their families. A military that is trained and funded by the government can provide defense for a nation in the event of military or political conflict. In other words, just having an army can make other countries reconsider invading your country as they can assess whether they stand a chance to win or lose their platoons and expend a lot of resources and reputation. Additionally, having a strong military can allow some nations to mobilize their personnel to help others during military conflict. For instance The U.S. continues to give Israel military aid to the tune of $3 billion every year, with plans to expand aid to $4 billion annually.