O Pioneers! Essays - O Pioneers!, Happiness,

O Pioneers! O Pioneers! After reading the novel, O Pioneers!, it was hard to judge whether it was a tragedy or a triumph. I think the answer you are looking for would be a triumph. The only way I see it as a tragedy is that Emil and Maria died. I knew, since page six of the book, that they were destined to be together. It kind of broke my heart to see later on that she had married someone else. But when her and Emil got shot, I thought it may finish as a tragedy. But overall, I would see it as a triumph in the way that the Bergsons finally got what they wanted out of their land. It made them rich. Also, Alexandra and Carl finally married. And being that the whole novel was basically based on the land, they were triumphant in getting what they risked, what they longed for. In my opinion, I think the land broke the characters rather than the characters breaking the land. Of course the characters had to plant and sew the fields, but they did that every year. It took the forever, it seemed like, for the land to break them. Thats what the Bergsons had worked for their whole life. The land pulls the family together and makes them work hard to get what they want,...money, happiness. It makes them happy. So yes, the land does break them more than they break the land. In considering Cathers characters, I dont think they become fully Americanized within a generation. At the beginning of the novel, it seems like they are more in tuned with the rest of America. They are economically stable. But when Carl comes back on his first visit, Lou and Oscar scorn him about burning Wall Street. Obviously, America is building and becoming more advanced. While still in Nebraska, people are relying on their crops to get them by. They are still dwelling on their traits, beliefs, and actions that past generations had. Romantic love in this particular novel is very hard to judge whether it is necessary for human happiness. I dont think that it was meant to be the moral of the story, or that love was the basis of this particular novel, but I do think that after reading this that it was necessary in order to be happy. Of course, in one instance, love did end in heartbreak, desolation, and destruction with the scenario of Emil and Maria. But in every story, there has to be a sad moment or a fatality that occurs. But overall, it seemed like Alexandra wasnt going to be happy unless Carl came back and she could be with him. Also, she acted as if her money didnt make her as happy as he did. Lou and Oscar also had love in their life. They moved away from the land in order to marry. Love took them over, not the land or the desire to be rich. So yes, I do think that love is necessary for human happiness. Physically, I consider the men in the novel to be the strongest. But if you look at what the people in the novel had to overcome, emotionally, I think the women were stronger. Well into the novel, Lou and Oscar wanted to get rid of the land because they didnt believe that it was worth anything. They kind of gave up. But Alexandra, being the strong one of the family, hung in there and convinced them that it would one day be worth a lot more than when they started out. Alexandra, throughout the whole novel had to deal with some big tragedies. Her mother, father and brother dying. Her best friend dying, Carl walking in and out of her life, and having Lou and Oscar on her back all the time. She was made to be the strongest character of all. I found that the women of this novel to be stronger than the men. I never really considered generational values all that important until I read this story. While trying to wear Alexandras shoes, it made me realize that the things we carry on generation after generation keep getting more and more valuable. For example, farming that land meant more to John Bergson than anything it seemed like. He wanted to keep that land for generations to come because he knew it would be worth a good amount. Alexandra wanted to keep the land in order to have a better lifestyle. It seems like today, no one is worried about farming the land in order to survive in the real world. It seems that in reality, people have to go to

Juvenile Crime Control Act essays

Juvenile Crime Control Act essays I chose correctional social work because it is my goal to work within the legal system, mainly with juveniles; perhaps in a detention center or a rehabilitation center for dysfunctional children. Hopefully by researching some legislation in this area, I will be able to gain a greater understanding for how the system works and what to be prepared for in the future. The act that I chose to look at an act that involves the sentencing and housing of juveniles who have committed crimes that would be considered felonies if committed by adults. One of the main reasons I believe that a new policy was needed in this area is that many juvenile offenders are habitual offenders. I feel that stiffer penalties are needed in order to deter many from committing crimes again. Felony crimes such as murder and drug offenses are serious offenses that need to be punished in such a way that nothing of the sort should happen again with that individual. The Juvenile Crime Act of 1997(H.R.3) is a federal bill. Its purpose is to use tough juvenile crime control efforts with overall prevention efforts. It will make it easier for juveniles age 14 and older who commit federal violent crimes or federal drug-trafficking offenses to be tried as adults. The bill also allows for the Justice Department to prosecute teenagers 13 years old who break these laws as adults. The bill requires that states set up a system of records for juveniles who are found guilty of serious crimes that would be considered felonies if committed as adults, equivalent to those maintained for adults who commit felonies and kept on file the same amount of time an adult record would be maintained. Typically, juvenile records are only used when the child is a juvenile. This bill will allow that these records be used in future cases. This bill also ensures that state law does not prevent a judge from holding the parents or guardians of a juvenile offender accountable fo r the juveniles c...

Management Strategy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Management Strategy - Essay Example This advancement in technology was based on advanced physics principle than simple electro mechanic as the new equipment relied more on microprocessor-based controls than on electromechanical relays and switches. Following the fact that Lincoln has enjoyed the monotony of owning the laser technology for a long time, the company could use this kind of technology to make productions and sales at the expense of other new companies, hence staying ahead of competition. This gave Lincoln their success that any other company did not have as the bars were highly raised for others to pursue. 2. Lincoln electrical, in its endeavors to pursue laser technologies, had no alternative than to master the laser technology/it had to allow some of the equipment to go extremely custom made so as to be able to perform extremely fine tolerances. To be able to a chieve such equipment, Lincoln electrical would have to part with too much money as this equipment was costing considerably too expensive than was any such equipment in the same industry. Therefore, Lincoln electrical had no choice than to master the laser technology and develop a line of products built on it. The implication of this would mean that, Lincoln must have enough expertise in both human resource and resources allocation so as to be able to master the laser technology in its full application. This would mean that, this company would have to look for both the required funds and resources to be able to facilitate this kind of new technology upgrade which would enable them to raise their annual sales as required. The company was then faced with a tough financial conditions as its required financial outlays were unattainable. This was because the firm had to do a thorough research and development in the line of five products, a process that would cost between 5-15 million dollars.

Kelloggs Special K Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

Kelloggs Special K - Essay Example The company was established at the Battle Creek Toast Corn Flake Company in 1906. It was founded by Will Keith Kellogg to illustrate the increase in his wealth from his work with the brother John Harvey Kellogg at the Battle Creek Sanitarium. The wealth had been created out of sale of Kellogg's Toasted Corn flakes on a huge scale. This led to the renaming of the company into Kellogg Company in 1922 (Kellogg Company, 2011). The strength of the company lies in its world-class innovation abilities. SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS The internal analysis of Kellogg Company is that it focuses on business. Its senior management is aimed at becoming the leader in food retailing industry worldwide. To achieve this, they are empowering their employees and building their brand supported by the integrated focus strategy and operating principles. The foundation of its business lies in its values, its people and its societal commitments. Its core competencies are the skills among the employees that provide th e advantage to the company consisting of the resources available. Kellogg's has far reaching; well defined and clear competences to enable them beat a world’s best. The competences are; it is strategic, functional, and has a corporate ability. It has a flexible structure of organization that fits in the demands and needs of the locals. Kellogg has been developing its image through creating a customer values, customer service efficiency and proper channels of distribution. The Marketing Mix â€Å"Marketing Mix is a well established framework that helps marketers to plan their approach to each market† (Smith. & Chaffey, 2005). Marketing mix of Kellogg’s which is mainly concerned with cereal products, being the major producer of cereal in the world. Consumer wants are fulfilled through the products sold. The current world has consumers that are much more concerned with their health; they tend to buy food products that are healthier especially for their children. Ke llogg’s K special has a range of products that meet the customer demands that are currently higher than expected. They have products that are low in fat, have no preservatives and they have no artificial flavors. There packaging is attractive to children because their mail target is children. Kellogg's supplier power lies under its customers. It poses mainly medium power when purchasing from suppliers. Wheat varies in price because of its extensive force and the cost is passed onto customers of Kellogg’s. Michael Porter’s Five Forces theory states that an industry is influenced by five forces, which are Barriers to Entry, Supplier Power, Buyer Power, Degree of Rivalry and Threat of Substitutes (Kurtz et al., 2009). Kelloggs is not an exception at all and the effect of the forces is evident in its financial as well as managerial reports. Kellogg's product lines are cereals, crackers, cookies, snacks, frozen foods and water. The benefits that a consumer gets are h ealthy products that are standard in nature. The products are manufactured in over 17 countries and are marketed in more than 190 countries according to their annual reports for 2009. The highest consumers are the North America with a 67% margin followed by Europe at 20% then Latin America and Asia Pacific at 8% and 5% respectively. Buyers of Kellogg's products are mostly supermarkets and

Ecological Footprint Reflection (Environmental Sustainability) Term Paper

Ecological Footprint Reflection (Environmental Sustainability) - Term Paper Example In practical approach one’s own personal life style (related to food, mobility or waste) is selected and its ecological footprint is analyzed for four weeks and then reduction strategies (intervention) were employed for that particular life style for the next four weeks. Then a comparison was brought in to see how the reduction strategies affected one’s Ecological foot print. The aim of this project was to analyze baseline food consumption based on calories and the reduction strategy was employed to reduce the calorie intake and to have a healthy diet. The 9th week, which was the first week of intervention failed miserably as that week alone had a large consumption; 1450 ml of alcoholic beverages, 1000ml of ice cream, 1.10 kg of fried chicken, 5 eggs and 4.48 kg of rice put together sums up a large intake of calorie, this high intake was associated to socializing with friends. The following weeks of intervention was more successful as both alcohol and ice cream consumption fell to 500ml each in the 2nd week to nil in the next two weeks for both. Alcohol has a high calorie content of 7 calories per gram and so reduction in alcoholic beverages can have good effect on the ecological footprint. This intervention any way had an effect on the overall alcohol consumption; 2250 ml in baseline tracking (4 weeks) compared to only 1825 ml on application of reduction strategy (4 weeks). At the same time ice-cream consumption was same for both the base line and intervention period. In the meat section the four week reduction strategy helped to reduce consumption of beef from 2.75 kg of initial four weeks (baseline) to 0.80kg and at the same time consumption of pork was reduced from 0.20 to 0.10 kg .Beef provides an enormous amount of calories on an average 250Kcal per 100gram. Pork contains high amount of non healthy fat. The intervention was not successful in reducing consumption of

Analysis of the Armed Special Forces Act 1943 in India

Analysis of the Armed Special Forces Act 1943 in India Civil society is a term oft-repeated in democratic contexts today. Seen as an essential component of the liberal framework of political structures, it is essentially the space of free association for the masses. India, a multicultural democratic country, boasts of a vibrant civil society. At the same time, it also has accusations of being one of the worst offenders of human and civil liberties of some of its people, in the form of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act. This chapter seeks to introduce the motivation, hypothesis, methodology and key concepts of this paper. Introduction The spotlight of global affairs and the ‘march to democracy has been on the Middle East in 2011. Mass rebellions against autocratic, unjust and oppressive regimes have swept the region in a sort of domino-effect swarming hordes of people rose up to replace what seemed no more applicable or tolerable in Tunisia to Tahrir Square in Egypt, in a bid to in-state the only form of governance that allowed ‘power to the people i.e. democracy. This phenomenon has come to the West as a pleasant surprise, that have viewed the Islamic world as essentially subject to notions of conservatism, violence and religion all seen as harbingers of a pre-modern past that the West feels it has left behind for good. â€Å"What is happening in Tunisia and Egypt is the completion of the 1989 revolutions the Egyptians are reclaiming the values of the Solidarnosc and the Civic Forum from the neo-liberals who usurped them The people in Tahrir Square and elsewhere are giving us back the meaning of c ivil society a place where people can talk, discuss and act freely,† says Mary Kaldor , examining the notion of civil society and how it has changed since the last time it was picked up from the annals of a rejected history and reinvented to bring monumental political change in Eastern European states. Closer home, the beginning of summer this year has seen a heated campaign against corruption being driven by a single mans Satyagraha Anna Hazare would definitely qualify as a ‘non-entity even by the modest standards of celebration that Indian civil society activists enjoy. Yet, this army truck driver of the 1960s is today the poster-boy of ‘publicness, coming to symbolise the space for mediation and political interference to bring out moral dividends that is the hallmark of a vibrant democracy. Some have called his actions ‘Gandhian, one of the few attempts at reform emerging from among the non-political that post-independence India has seen, otherwise witnessed only in Irom Sharmilas consistent campaign from Manipur against the travails of militarisation of the north-east region and abuse of power that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act 1958 has become synonymous with. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act, which the Indian government has thought fit to implement in two contexts all the North Eastern states and Jammu Kashmir is arguably among the most contentious legislations of post-Independence India. Said to be based on a 1942 British ordinance intended to contain the Indian independence movement (Quit India movement) during World War II, it was enacted as a short-term measure to allow the deployment of the army in Indias north-eastern Naga Hills but since has been in existence for five decades. It has, since then, also been implemented in Jammu Kashmir which has shown violent separatist aspirations since the late 1980s. The Act has been controversial because of the fact that it gives to the armed forces extended powers of action without accountability, which has led to abuse of power and gross violation of human and civil rights, building around it a sense of impunity. In a democratic framework, this move to retain the sovereign integrity of the Indian state has been vociferously derided by people both within and outside these regions. Even though justifications for the laws existence abound from freedom of operation to existence of provisions for accountability and redress within the armed forces set up, the Act in itself has become a symbol of oppression at the hands of the Indian state and therefore a part of the problem, not the solution. Hypothesis This paper attempts to therefore study civil society in India its role and scope with specific focus on this nugget of legislation that has a strong reference to the case of maintaining or violating civil liberty in a democracy. It seeks to analyse the effectiveness of the Indian democracy in this respect, considering whether ‘power to the people is just another catchphrase or if it goes deeper than that. This researcher is of the view that even though the definition of a modern civil society in a multicultural context as India needs to be revisited, and even though largely (as in the case of the AFSPA) political, military, judicial and legislative action has a will of its own, there is scope for activism and there are voices that get heard. The necessity of such a space of negotiation in a democracy cannot be stressed hard enough. The arbitrariness of power, possible marginalisation of the ‘have-nots and the dilemma of national unity versus individual rights need to be examined in the light of modern liberal rhetoric of freedom and equality that are foundational aspects of the Indian constitution. Methodology The study has used both primary and secondary sources of data along with analysis using both the deductive and inductive methods. I have analyzed government records, media reports, library sources, existing literature on the subject, archival data, think-tank reports as well as spoken / interviewed a few primary sources within the civil society. The study has also use information and experience gathered at symposiums, lectures and workshops related to the topic. It has been largely qualitative in approach, since the issue required an exploration of theory and potential policy-making role of civil society in situations of conflict and civil unrest. Chapterisation The paper shall follow this sequence: the first chapter will examine the trajectory of conceptualisation of civil society in the corpus of philosophy and political studies and its relevance globally as well as in India. The second chapter will elaborate upon the Act, the controversy and the issues surrounding it. In the third chapter, I will look at civil society initiatives regarding this aspect, both in terms of humanitarian redressal and rehabilitation and attempts at political negotiation and policy amendment. It will also look critically at the degree to which these initiatives have worked in mitigating the more negative consequences of the law. The last chapter, in conclusion, will critically analyse the role that civil society has played so far in the dynamics of the Indian democracy and the scope for positive change it contains. The rest of this chapter is dedicated to elaborating on the key concepts of this paper: civil society and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Key Concepts Civil Society: It is crucial to understand what civil society in a changed global context means. Historically, it has been understood to mean the public space that exists between the family and the state that seeks to mitigate the preponderance of individualism as well as the ‘tyranny of the majority. Based on principles of voluntarism, association and pluralism and tolerance, this was an imagination that sought to negotiate with power structures in every context it arose in, whether during industrialisation of England where a new bourgeois class of powerful traders emerged that sought to bargain with the state and the Church for power, or in Eastern Europe of the 1980s where a bid to parlay Communism resulted in associational uprising that stemmed out of sports clubs, trade unions, bars and basements. After 1989, civil society got the rejuvenation that had been missing for the past couple of centuries since Marx and Gramsci had derided it as yet another excuse for state/power domination and co-option of the masses. It has since been taken much more seriously, both academically and in its practical application, although consensus on what it constitutes is hard to come by. However, with democracy becoming the chosen form of ‘correct government, where representation and election to power is ‘by the people, for the people and of the people, civil society assumes new meaning as the arena of civilised battle. There is more to a democracy than public participation through ballot-box approval. This, in a nutshell, could be the motive for a functional civil society.   However, the proprietorship of the West over the concept of civil society is often criticised. By linking it with modernity, it is seen to be a concept both inherently Western and also as the Wests boon to the world. Ernest Gellner paints civil society as the space of the profane that gives freedom to the baser aspects of human beings and their relationships. Having associated it with capitalist liberalism, he posits many upcoming rivals to it such as Islam, Asiatic capitalism, fierce nationalism- leading one to believe that this essentially Western notion is one under threat from more preponderant forces in different parts of the world that do not essentially derive from rationality. Mary Kaldor finds in this a patronising approach of the entire West, evident also in US and Europes response to the upheaval in the Middle East. She observes that there already exists a term for civil society in Arabic Almujtamaa Almadani and therefore finds that the concept has more antiquated roots than otherwise presumed. To offset this overlordism, she says, â€Å"Instead of imposing yet another neo-liberal formula, western countries and institutions should consult the people of the Middle East about how they can help to construct a fairer, more sustainable economy. Instead of giving governments money to buy western weapons, they could discuss with civil society how they could help to restructure the armed forces to provide human security, to establish civilian control over the military, and to convert the substantial military industries to peaceful uses.† Ruminating on the changed idea of civil society, she says disappointedly, â€Å"After 1989, everyone celebrated the idea of civil society. But it was rapidly reduced within the framework of neo-liberal thinking to mean western-supported NGOs who would help to smooth the path of neo-liberal transition.† In the post-Cold War phase, since the world has gone more global, the meaning of civil society has veered towards international-level cooperation and institutionalism, through NGOs, forums, transnational networks of activities to work on a ‘global humanitarian regime. It has now become a buzzword relating to democracies, liberalism, neo-liberalism, anti-war movements, global justice and so on, and thereby is seen as a platform inhabited by activists of all sorts. In the normative sense, civil society is and always has been seen as the arena where consent is generated for and in opposition to concentrated authority. In the descriptive sense, or in considering what all should be included in this realm, lies the tensions should regulatory bodies such as the UN and the World Bank be considered part of civil society? Should one include international NGOs that depend on government funding? Does civil society include religious or ethnic organisations? Does it include militant or sece ssionist organisations that are fighting against an oppressive state or for some defined nationalism? As the concerns that occupy minds in a global world change (such as todays preoccupations include AIDS, landmines, terrorism, nuclear disarmament/disaster, receding water levels etc), the definitions of all realms of society would change too. This paper, taking insights from the corpus of philosophy on the subject, defines civil society as the associational space, lying between the family, state and market, where autonomous individuals voluntarily come together to define and pursue common goals to reap collective benefits. Schmitters definition of civil society, as a set or system of self-organised intermediary groups that: (1) are relatively independent of both public authorities and private units of production and reproduction, that is, of firms and families; (2) are capable of deliberating about and taking collective actions in defence or promotion of their interests or passions; (3) do not seek to replace either state agents or private (re)producers or to accept responsibility fo r governing the polity as a whole; and (4) agree to act within pre-established rules of a civil, i.e. mutually respectful, nature. It is civil society based on the four characteristics of dual autonomy, collective action, nonusurpation and civility that this paper will refer to. The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA): The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act is a law, enacted by the Parliament of India, to meet violent internal situations created by underground militant outfits to further their illegal and ‘unconstitutional causes. The law was enacted to provide necessary powers and legal support to the Armed forces for carrying out proactive operations against the militants in a highly hostile environment that was threatening the integrity and sovereignty of the Indian nation-state. The Act dates back to September 11, 1958, when the Parliament of India passed the act bestowing more power on the armed forces in â€Å"disturbed areas†. First introduced in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura, the Act was later extended to Jammu and Kashmir as the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 in July 1990. The Act allows an officer of the armed forces to fire upon or otherwise use force, even to the causing of death, against any person who is acting in contravention of any law against assembly of five or more persons or possession of deadly weapons, to arrest without a warrant and with the use of necessary force anyone who has committed certain offenses or is suspected of having done so, to enter and search any premise in order to make such arrests. The act also bestows legal immunity to the officials, which means that they cannot be sued or prosecuted. While the law was enacted to mitigate militant action, violence and to quell secessionist tendencies that violated the essence of the Indian union, it has since inception over half a century ago turned into a controversial aspect of governance in the country. An increasing militarisation of areas branded as ‘disturbed and a consequent violation of human rights and civil liberties has resulted in a worsening of conditions in both the regions it has been applied to. Instead of bringing about greater cohesion, or of managing to bring the north-east and Jammu Kashmir peacefully into the fold of the Indian union, the law has become just another reason for the strengthening of secessionist demands. This is in contradiction with the reasoning given for consistent political will to keep the Act in place in the two regions: in a response to the United Nations Human Rights Committee questioning the validity of the AFSPA under the Indian law and in light of Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ICCPR, the Attorney General of India responded that the AFSPA is a necessary measure to prevent the secession of the North Eastern states. He said that a response to this agitation for secession in the North East had to be done on a war footing. He argued that the Indian Constitution, in Article 355, made it the duty of the Central Government to protect the states from internal disturbance and that there is no duty under international law to allow secession.â€Å"The shrill rhetoric demanding that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act be repealed, if allowed to hold sway, may drive us deeper into the dark world of both Islamist terror and the Maoist insurgency, † Brigadier S K Chatterji (retd) has warned more recently. The primary issue of controversy here is the violation of human and civil rights. According to a Human Rights Watch report, the act is in violation in the following respects: The right to life is violated by section 4(a) of the AFSPA, which grants the armed forces power to shoot to kill in law enforcement situations without regard to international human rights law restrictions on the use of lethal force. The right to liberty and security of person is violated by section 4(c) of the AFSPA, which fails to protect against arbitrary arrest by allowing soldiers to arrest anyone merely on suspicion that a â€Å"cognizable offence† has already taken place or is likely to take place in the future. Further, the AFSPA provides no specific time limit for handing arrested persons to the nearest police station. The right to remedy is violated by section 6 of the AFSPA, which provides officers who abuse their powers under the AFSPA with immunity from legal accountability. This section of th e AFSPA prohibits even state governments from initiating legal proceedings against the armed forces on behalf of their population without central government approval. Since such a sanction is seldom granted, it has in effect provided a shield of immunity for armed forces personnel implicated in serious abuses. In practice the AFSPA also facilitates violation of the right to be free from torture, and from cruel or degrading treatment. Since the AFSPA provides powers to arrest without warrant and then detain arrested persons for unspecified amounts of time, the armed forces routinely engage in torture and other ill-treatment during interrogation in army barracks. However, the support from within the armed forces and certain other sections of the political and academic circles is strong for the continuance of this act. Northern Army Commander General Jaswal in Jammu Kashmir gave the following reasoning: I would like to say that the provisions of the Armed Forces Special Power Act are very pious to me and I think to entire Indian ArmyWe have religious books, there are certain guidelines which are given there, but all the members of the religion do not follow it, they break it also, does it imply that you remove the religious book or you remove this chap. My take on it is to find someone guilty, take him to task, but dont touch this pious document or provision of the Armed Forces Special Power Act giving the similarity to religious book.† In the past couple of months Army has argued that without the Act it will not be able to launch proactive operations. The Army will also not be able to use force except in self-defence and not have powers to destroy ammunition dumps and IEDs. The army also says that a majority of human rights abuse cases are found to be false and those found true have been severely dealt with. Human rights activists have however contended time and again that the Act gives excessive powers to the soldiers. Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has said in recent past that there is a need to revoke the Act since it is prone to abuse. One of the grounds that the citizens have stated is that the people arrested or otherwise detained should be allowed to plead their case under section 130 and 131 of the Criminal Code. The Article 21 of the Constitution also gets violated in the process. In spite of the various cases filed and protests initiated there has been no revocation or dialogue towards the same. The issue revolving the AFSPA is that the principle of national integrity and sovereignty is in direct conflict with the liberal democratic frameworks of human rights and the civil society has the potential to the site for this negotiation. This is the premise under which the rest of this paper seeks to examine how the civil society and the Indian state have sought to deal with the AFSPA. CIVIL SOCIETY This Chapter seeks to chart the history of philosophy on civil society, in political sciences and social sciences. It will then look at civil society in India specifically, in todays context, and some of the major criticisms levelled against the concept and its real-time manifestation. Civil Society: The Concept At the abstract level, civil society has historically been conceptualised as a mediating space between the family, state and recently, also separate from the market. It is the site of association, voluntariness and community engagement, set apart from the politics and compulsions of the state as well as the individuality and liberty of the family. Bruce Sievers identifies seven strands that go into the making of civil society: nonprofit and voluntary institutions, individual rights, rule of law, the common good, philanthropy, freedom of expression and tolerance. Emerging in the context of the 18th century industrialisation rampant in Europe that gave rise to a new class of bourgeoisie and the new ideas of utilitarianism and capitalism, civil society gets inextricably linked with libertarian ideals that seek to carve out spaces for autonomous action in every individual and societal aspect.   â€Å"A ‘civil society was civilized and ordered by the rule of law. Unlike tribal so ciety, it was also large-scale and held together by impersonal bonds of interest rather than ties of kin and blood. It was also, to a degree some found frightening, a self-correcting mechanism in which the selfish actions of myriad individuals, brought together only by the rule of law, managed to produce an orderly and dynamic accumulation of prosperity unprecedented in human history,† observes Michael Ignatieff The importance of social engagement and principle of tolerance have only gained more importance in a globalised world that is characterised by multi-cultural, multi-ethnic nations. Robert Putnam identifies civic engagement, dense networks of interaction, political equality, solidarity, trust and tolerance and a strong associational life as crucial to the generation of ‘social capital the resource that could help to facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit in societies. He says that networks of civic engagement foster norms of generalised reciprocity, encourage the emergence of social trust, facilitate communication, collaboration and therefore collective action on common dilemmas and endorse the idea of collective benefits. Through its history, a number of philosophers have vouched for and expanded upon this realm of an advanced society. Alexis de Tocqueville , in Democracy in America, says that Americas answer to the problem of limiting the absolutist state was to have a constitution defined in law and protected by a counterbalancing force of independent bodies. These were the local associations of citizens acting together in the affairs of daily life. This was a civil society engaged in politics, voluntary by nature. His idea of civil society was based in the observation of an absolute sovereignty of the majority, but this principle, which could just as well turn into a tyranny of the majority, was also mitigated through a non-centralised frame of governance that set importance to localised chains of command and responsibility. Civicness emerged in America, he observed, through the relentless formation of associations: â€Å"Americans of all ages, all stations in life, and all types of disposition ar e forever forming associations. There are not only commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but others of a thousand different typesreligious, moral, serious, futile, very general and very limited, immensely large and very minute. . . . Nothing, in my view, deserves more attention than the intellectual and moral associations in America.† Civil Society, for Hegel , is the site that lies between the Family and the State in the Ethical Life, as described in his Philosophy of Right. It is the site where the ‘determination of particularity as per individual rights is given free rein, but which has to acquire a mantle of universality for the rights to become acquirable or even legitimate, so to speak. Here, therefore, are two elements: the concrete person who is out to pursue self-interest and personal motive, and the form of universality, or the generation of common motive, through forming bonds and finding over-lapping areas of interest. A particular end, therefore, assumes the form of universality through this relation to other people, and it is attained in the simultaneous attainment of the welfare of others. It has three dimensions: the system of needs, the administration of justice and the police and the corporation. The system of needs refers to the generation of ‘universal human capital through human beings exceptional capacity to generate needs and spot commonness with others and then to satisfy those needs through work and labour. A single persons particularity of interest can be recognised if he manages to associate himself with one sphere of the needs. The administration of justice is the principle of rightness that becomes universally known through a public legal code. Not only does this embed within the principle of freedom in both subjective individual and universal platforms, it also makes wrongdoing an infringement on the people that live within such an ethical life. The polizei, then, is the bearer and the guardian of this publicly generated and accepted principles of right, the public authority that also looks after public utilities and regulation activities as well. The corporation, on the other hand, is the arrangement whereby common interests are brought to fore through voluntary association as in sports or religious clubs etc. All these aspects together form the civil society for Hegel, the space where freedom of self-interest is allowed to reign but within the limits of the principle of universality.   Antonio Gramsci, however, had a more critical view of civil society, from a Marxist vantage point. He saw civil society not as the benign space that afforded a voice and power to the masses, but as an instrument of domination linked in an unholy alliance with the bourgeois elements in the civil society seeking to protect propertied interests . He was also convinced that the intricate, organic relationships between civil society and political society enable certain strata of society not only to gain dominance within the state but also, and more importantly, to maintain it, perpetuating the subalternity of other strata. In other words, the site of hegemony was civil society it was the arena wherein the ruling class extends and reinforces its power by non-violent means through components such as the press, the libraries, schools, associations and clubs that could all become media for propaganda and homogenisation of the masses. The state and the civil society in his purview are inextri cably linked, which only facilitates subordination by the state without coercion, focussing instead on ‘manufacturing consent. However, he does acknowledge the potential of civil society as a site for breeding revolutions and for newer ‘conceptions of the world to take place. However, the manifestation of this fairly utopian concept is fraught with tensions and dichotomies. Ernest Gellner, in Conditions of Liberty, analyses the role of civil society in the Marxist, socialist and capitalist frameworks and has also assessed post-modern rivals to it that have emerged, such as Islam. The Eastern European states found the concept of civil society useful in gaining independence from a Communist stronghold precisely because of the possibility here for mobilisation of the masses in opposition to totalitarian militarist regimes. Through meetings of trade unions, religious groups, bars etc, the emphasis was on autonomy, self-organisation and withdrawal from the state to create islands of civic engagement for the emergence of a ‘parallel polis. For Gellner, a civil society was â€Å"a profane society, a society that explicitly sought to put the lowest of human desires to productive uses. Mandevilles paradox private vices make public virtues naturalized the profane by demonstrating that â€Å"capitalist individuals were more likely to promote the public good when they looked exclusively to their private interest.† He found the Marxist, and therefore the socialist strain of civil society, that stressed on driving religion out of life and also investing the economic with the ultimate sacredness, as faulty for it denied space to the profane, the self-interest and avarice of human nature that could be harnessed and channelled into collective action. With the ‘disenchantment of the world that comes with modernity and its powerful agencies of science and capitalism came the advent of ‘the modular man    who associates voluntarily with other prototypes, giving rise to a Gesellschaft, the inorganic form of social bonding, through fostered ties, rather than a Gemeinschaft, the organic community based on ties of blood and kin. â€Å"The genius of capitalist civil society is that it not only harnesses our profane energies, b ut relieves us of the moral burden of thinking of them as profane. In so doing, it relieves us of the strain of constant longing for unattainable self-transcendence in desperate simulations of paradise,† says Ignatieff. He also observes that liberty in civil society is essentially negative because there cannot be, in principle, agreement among human beings about the positive ends of political communities, beyond the protection of the liberties of the individuals who compose it. If people seek to overcome their own alienation and separateness, they can do so only as individuals or in voluntary groups. Civil society, then, becomes crucial for maintaining checks and balances, says Ignatieff. The realms of politics, economics and culture are neatly segregated, and power in any one domain does not endow power in another. The society is free, acting through a vibrant media and elected representatives, all functioning within the ambit of law. â€Å"Needless to say, no civil society has ever lived up to this goalyet the formal promise is more than hypocrisy: it remains the standard against which civil society judges itself and from which it finds renewed impetus to reform.† In this sense, civil society, albeit being a flawed ideal, also has the potential for redeeming itself simply by virtue of being embedded in the notion of reform, of itself as well as of society, simply by virtue of allowing private trajectories of interest being followed.   Despite changing meanings, civil societys core rests in a rule-governed society based on the consent of individuals. The ‘social contract that Hobbes defined is another way of understanding the liberal ideas behind the conception of civil society through different phases, civil society can be seen as the process or the space through which different individuals negotiate, argue, struggle against or agree with each other and with the centres of political and economic authority. The element of autonomy, voluntariness and collective action through association remain hallmarks through all definitions of the term. Civil Society in India: It would seem natural that civil society, as has been described and conceptualised above is an integral part of a democracy, with its accompanying notions of equality, public participation, and masses-oriented governance. Robert Post and Nancy Rosenblum describe a consensus among contemporary theorists â€Å"that democracy depends on the particularist, self-determining associations of civil society, where independent commitments, interests, and voices, are developed . Civil society is the precondition for democratic decision making, whether democracy is conceived as deliberation or as interest group pluralism, and this is true even if the goal of democracy is to transcend particularism and arrive at uncoerced agreement or a common will.† According to Joerg Forbrig, a vibrant and functional civil society can contribute to strengthening a democracy in five ways: control of state power through the incorporation of a body of laws, individual rights and thereby becoming a space that overlooks the relationship between the pr Analysis of the Armed Special Forces Act 1943 in India Analysis of the Armed Special Forces Act 1943 in India Civil society is a term oft-repeated in democratic contexts today. Seen as an essential component of the liberal framework of political structures, it is essentially the space of free association for the masses. India, a multicultural democratic country, boasts of a vibrant civil society. At the same time, it also has accusations of being one of the worst offenders of human and civil liberties of some of its people, in the form of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act. This chapter seeks to introduce the motivation, hypothesis, methodology and key concepts of this paper. Introduction The spotlight of global affairs and the ‘march to democracy has been on the Middle East in 2011. Mass rebellions against autocratic, unjust and oppressive regimes have swept the region in a sort of domino-effect swarming hordes of people rose up to replace what seemed no more applicable or tolerable in Tunisia to Tahrir Square in Egypt, in a bid to in-state the only form of governance that allowed ‘power to the people i.e. democracy. This phenomenon has come to the West as a pleasant surprise, that have viewed the Islamic world as essentially subject to notions of conservatism, violence and religion all seen as harbingers of a pre-modern past that the West feels it has left behind for good. â€Å"What is happening in Tunisia and Egypt is the completion of the 1989 revolutions the Egyptians are reclaiming the values of the Solidarnosc and the Civic Forum from the neo-liberals who usurped them The people in Tahrir Square and elsewhere are giving us back the meaning of c ivil society a place where people can talk, discuss and act freely,† says Mary Kaldor , examining the notion of civil society and how it has changed since the last time it was picked up from the annals of a rejected history and reinvented to bring monumental political change in Eastern European states. Closer home, the beginning of summer this year has seen a heated campaign against corruption being driven by a single mans Satyagraha Anna Hazare would definitely qualify as a ‘non-entity even by the modest standards of celebration that Indian civil society activists enjoy. Yet, this army truck driver of the 1960s is today the poster-boy of ‘publicness, coming to symbolise the space for mediation and political interference to bring out moral dividends that is the hallmark of a vibrant democracy. Some have called his actions ‘Gandhian, one of the few attempts at reform emerging from among the non-political that post-independence India has seen, otherwise witnessed only in Irom Sharmilas consistent campaign from Manipur against the travails of militarisation of the north-east region and abuse of power that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act 1958 has become synonymous with. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act, which the Indian government has thought fit to implement in two contexts all the North Eastern states and Jammu Kashmir is arguably among the most contentious legislations of post-Independence India. Said to be based on a 1942 British ordinance intended to contain the Indian independence movement (Quit India movement) during World War II, it was enacted as a short-term measure to allow the deployment of the army in Indias north-eastern Naga Hills but since has been in existence for five decades. It has, since then, also been implemented in Jammu Kashmir which has shown violent separatist aspirations since the late 1980s. The Act has been controversial because of the fact that it gives to the armed forces extended powers of action without accountability, which has led to abuse of power and gross violation of human and civil rights, building around it a sense of impunity. In a democratic framework, this move to retain the sovereign integrity of the Indian state has been vociferously derided by people both within and outside these regions. Even though justifications for the laws existence abound from freedom of operation to existence of provisions for accountability and redress within the armed forces set up, the Act in itself has become a symbol of oppression at the hands of the Indian state and therefore a part of the problem, not the solution. Hypothesis This paper attempts to therefore study civil society in India its role and scope with specific focus on this nugget of legislation that has a strong reference to the case of maintaining or violating civil liberty in a democracy. It seeks to analyse the effectiveness of the Indian democracy in this respect, considering whether ‘power to the people is just another catchphrase or if it goes deeper than that. This researcher is of the view that even though the definition of a modern civil society in a multicultural context as India needs to be revisited, and even though largely (as in the case of the AFSPA) political, military, judicial and legislative action has a will of its own, there is scope for activism and there are voices that get heard. The necessity of such a space of negotiation in a democracy cannot be stressed hard enough. The arbitrariness of power, possible marginalisation of the ‘have-nots and the dilemma of national unity versus individual rights need to be examined in the light of modern liberal rhetoric of freedom and equality that are foundational aspects of the Indian constitution. Methodology The study has used both primary and secondary sources of data along with analysis using both the deductive and inductive methods. I have analyzed government records, media reports, library sources, existing literature on the subject, archival data, think-tank reports as well as spoken / interviewed a few primary sources within the civil society. The study has also use information and experience gathered at symposiums, lectures and workshops related to the topic. It has been largely qualitative in approach, since the issue required an exploration of theory and potential policy-making role of civil society in situations of conflict and civil unrest. Chapterisation The paper shall follow this sequence: the first chapter will examine the trajectory of conceptualisation of civil society in the corpus of philosophy and political studies and its relevance globally as well as in India. The second chapter will elaborate upon the Act, the controversy and the issues surrounding it. In the third chapter, I will look at civil society initiatives regarding this aspect, both in terms of humanitarian redressal and rehabilitation and attempts at political negotiation and policy amendment. It will also look critically at the degree to which these initiatives have worked in mitigating the more negative consequences of the law. The last chapter, in conclusion, will critically analyse the role that civil society has played so far in the dynamics of the Indian democracy and the scope for positive change it contains. The rest of this chapter is dedicated to elaborating on the key concepts of this paper: civil society and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. Key Concepts Civil Society: It is crucial to understand what civil society in a changed global context means. Historically, it has been understood to mean the public space that exists between the family and the state that seeks to mitigate the preponderance of individualism as well as the ‘tyranny of the majority. Based on principles of voluntarism, association and pluralism and tolerance, this was an imagination that sought to negotiate with power structures in every context it arose in, whether during industrialisation of England where a new bourgeois class of powerful traders emerged that sought to bargain with the state and the Church for power, or in Eastern Europe of the 1980s where a bid to parlay Communism resulted in associational uprising that stemmed out of sports clubs, trade unions, bars and basements. After 1989, civil society got the rejuvenation that had been missing for the past couple of centuries since Marx and Gramsci had derided it as yet another excuse for state/power domination and co-option of the masses. It has since been taken much more seriously, both academically and in its practical application, although consensus on what it constitutes is hard to come by. However, with democracy becoming the chosen form of ‘correct government, where representation and election to power is ‘by the people, for the people and of the people, civil society assumes new meaning as the arena of civilised battle. There is more to a democracy than public participation through ballot-box approval. This, in a nutshell, could be the motive for a functional civil society.   However, the proprietorship of the West over the concept of civil society is often criticised. By linking it with modernity, it is seen to be a concept both inherently Western and also as the Wests boon to the world. Ernest Gellner paints civil society as the space of the profane that gives freedom to the baser aspects of human beings and their relationships. Having associated it with capitalist liberalism, he posits many upcoming rivals to it such as Islam, Asiatic capitalism, fierce nationalism- leading one to believe that this essentially Western notion is one under threat from more preponderant forces in different parts of the world that do not essentially derive from rationality. Mary Kaldor finds in this a patronising approach of the entire West, evident also in US and Europes response to the upheaval in the Middle East. She observes that there already exists a term for civil society in Arabic Almujtamaa Almadani and therefore finds that the concept has more antiquated roots than otherwise presumed. To offset this overlordism, she says, â€Å"Instead of imposing yet another neo-liberal formula, western countries and institutions should consult the people of the Middle East about how they can help to construct a fairer, more sustainable economy. Instead of giving governments money to buy western weapons, they could discuss with civil society how they could help to restructure the armed forces to provide human security, to establish civilian control over the military, and to convert the substantial military industries to peaceful uses.† Ruminating on the changed idea of civil society, she says disappointedly, â€Å"After 1989, everyone celebrated the idea of civil society. But it was rapidly reduced within the framework of neo-liberal thinking to mean western-supported NGOs who would help to smooth the path of neo-liberal transition.† In the post-Cold War phase, since the world has gone more global, the meaning of civil society has veered towards international-level cooperation and institutionalism, through NGOs, forums, transnational networks of activities to work on a ‘global humanitarian regime. It has now become a buzzword relating to democracies, liberalism, neo-liberalism, anti-war movements, global justice and so on, and thereby is seen as a platform inhabited by activists of all sorts. In the normative sense, civil society is and always has been seen as the arena where consent is generated for and in opposition to concentrated authority. In the descriptive sense, or in considering what all should be included in this realm, lies the tensions should regulatory bodies such as the UN and the World Bank be considered part of civil society? Should one include international NGOs that depend on government funding? Does civil society include religious or ethnic organisations? Does it include militant or sece ssionist organisations that are fighting against an oppressive state or for some defined nationalism? As the concerns that occupy minds in a global world change (such as todays preoccupations include AIDS, landmines, terrorism, nuclear disarmament/disaster, receding water levels etc), the definitions of all realms of society would change too. This paper, taking insights from the corpus of philosophy on the subject, defines civil society as the associational space, lying between the family, state and market, where autonomous individuals voluntarily come together to define and pursue common goals to reap collective benefits. Schmitters definition of civil society, as a set or system of self-organised intermediary groups that: (1) are relatively independent of both public authorities and private units of production and reproduction, that is, of firms and families; (2) are capable of deliberating about and taking collective actions in defence or promotion of their interests or passions; (3) do not seek to replace either state agents or private (re)producers or to accept responsibility fo r governing the polity as a whole; and (4) agree to act within pre-established rules of a civil, i.e. mutually respectful, nature. It is civil society based on the four characteristics of dual autonomy, collective action, nonusurpation and civility that this paper will refer to. The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA): The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act is a law, enacted by the Parliament of India, to meet violent internal situations created by underground militant outfits to further their illegal and ‘unconstitutional causes. The law was enacted to provide necessary powers and legal support to the Armed forces for carrying out proactive operations against the militants in a highly hostile environment that was threatening the integrity and sovereignty of the Indian nation-state. The Act dates back to September 11, 1958, when the Parliament of India passed the act bestowing more power on the armed forces in â€Å"disturbed areas†. First introduced in the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura, the Act was later extended to Jammu and Kashmir as the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 in July 1990. The Act allows an officer of the armed forces to fire upon or otherwise use force, even to the causing of death, against any person who is acting in contravention of any law against assembly of five or more persons or possession of deadly weapons, to arrest without a warrant and with the use of necessary force anyone who has committed certain offenses or is suspected of having done so, to enter and search any premise in order to make such arrests. The act also bestows legal immunity to the officials, which means that they cannot be sued or prosecuted. While the law was enacted to mitigate militant action, violence and to quell secessionist tendencies that violated the essence of the Indian union, it has since inception over half a century ago turned into a controversial aspect of governance in the country. An increasing militarisation of areas branded as ‘disturbed and a consequent violation of human rights and civil liberties has resulted in a worsening of conditions in both the regions it has been applied to. Instead of bringing about greater cohesion, or of managing to bring the north-east and Jammu Kashmir peacefully into the fold of the Indian union, the law has become just another reason for the strengthening of secessionist demands. This is in contradiction with the reasoning given for consistent political will to keep the Act in place in the two regions: in a response to the United Nations Human Rights Committee questioning the validity of the AFSPA under the Indian law and in light of Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ICCPR, the Attorney General of India responded that the AFSPA is a necessary measure to prevent the secession of the North Eastern states. He said that a response to this agitation for secession in the North East had to be done on a war footing. He argued that the Indian Constitution, in Article 355, made it the duty of the Central Government to protect the states from internal disturbance and that there is no duty under international law to allow secession.â€Å"The shrill rhetoric demanding that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act be repealed, if allowed to hold sway, may drive us deeper into the dark world of both Islamist terror and the Maoist insurgency, † Brigadier S K Chatterji (retd) has warned more recently. The primary issue of controversy here is the violation of human and civil rights. According to a Human Rights Watch report, the act is in violation in the following respects: The right to life is violated by section 4(a) of the AFSPA, which grants the armed forces power to shoot to kill in law enforcement situations without regard to international human rights law restrictions on the use of lethal force. The right to liberty and security of person is violated by section 4(c) of the AFSPA, which fails to protect against arbitrary arrest by allowing soldiers to arrest anyone merely on suspicion that a â€Å"cognizable offence† has already taken place or is likely to take place in the future. Further, the AFSPA provides no specific time limit for handing arrested persons to the nearest police station. The right to remedy is violated by section 6 of the AFSPA, which provides officers who abuse their powers under the AFSPA with immunity from legal accountability. This section of th e AFSPA prohibits even state governments from initiating legal proceedings against the armed forces on behalf of their population without central government approval. Since such a sanction is seldom granted, it has in effect provided a shield of immunity for armed forces personnel implicated in serious abuses. In practice the AFSPA also facilitates violation of the right to be free from torture, and from cruel or degrading treatment. Since the AFSPA provides powers to arrest without warrant and then detain arrested persons for unspecified amounts of time, the armed forces routinely engage in torture and other ill-treatment during interrogation in army barracks. However, the support from within the armed forces and certain other sections of the political and academic circles is strong for the continuance of this act. Northern Army Commander General Jaswal in Jammu Kashmir gave the following reasoning: I would like to say that the provisions of the Armed Forces Special Power Act are very pious to me and I think to entire Indian ArmyWe have religious books, there are certain guidelines which are given there, but all the members of the religion do not follow it, they break it also, does it imply that you remove the religious book or you remove this chap. My take on it is to find someone guilty, take him to task, but dont touch this pious document or provision of the Armed Forces Special Power Act giving the similarity to religious book.† In the past couple of months Army has argued that without the Act it will not be able to launch proactive operations. The Army will also not be able to use force except in self-defence and not have powers to destroy ammunition dumps and IEDs. The army also says that a majority of human rights abuse cases are found to be false and those found true have been severely dealt with. Human rights activists have however contended time and again that the Act gives excessive powers to the soldiers. Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has said in recent past that there is a need to revoke the Act since it is prone to abuse. One of the grounds that the citizens have stated is that the people arrested or otherwise detained should be allowed to plead their case under section 130 and 131 of the Criminal Code. The Article 21 of the Constitution also gets violated in the process. In spite of the various cases filed and protests initiated there has been no revocation or dialogue towards the same. The issue revolving the AFSPA is that the principle of national integrity and sovereignty is in direct conflict with the liberal democratic frameworks of human rights and the civil society has the potential to the site for this negotiation. This is the premise under which the rest of this paper seeks to examine how the civil society and the Indian state have sought to deal with the AFSPA. CIVIL SOCIETY This Chapter seeks to chart the history of philosophy on civil society, in political sciences and social sciences. It will then look at civil society in India specifically, in todays context, and some of the major criticisms levelled against the concept and its real-time manifestation. Civil Society: The Concept At the abstract level, civil society has historically been conceptualised as a mediating space between the family, state and recently, also separate from the market. It is the site of association, voluntariness and community engagement, set apart from the politics and compulsions of the state as well as the individuality and liberty of the family. Bruce Sievers identifies seven strands that go into the making of civil society: nonprofit and voluntary institutions, individual rights, rule of law, the common good, philanthropy, freedom of expression and tolerance. Emerging in the context of the 18th century industrialisation rampant in Europe that gave rise to a new class of bourgeoisie and the new ideas of utilitarianism and capitalism, civil society gets inextricably linked with libertarian ideals that seek to carve out spaces for autonomous action in every individual and societal aspect.   â€Å"A ‘civil society was civilized and ordered by the rule of law. Unlike tribal so ciety, it was also large-scale and held together by impersonal bonds of interest rather than ties of kin and blood. It was also, to a degree some found frightening, a self-correcting mechanism in which the selfish actions of myriad individuals, brought together only by the rule of law, managed to produce an orderly and dynamic accumulation of prosperity unprecedented in human history,† observes Michael Ignatieff The importance of social engagement and principle of tolerance have only gained more importance in a globalised world that is characterised by multi-cultural, multi-ethnic nations. Robert Putnam identifies civic engagement, dense networks of interaction, political equality, solidarity, trust and tolerance and a strong associational life as crucial to the generation of ‘social capital the resource that could help to facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit in societies. He says that networks of civic engagement foster norms of generalised reciprocity, encourage the emergence of social trust, facilitate communication, collaboration and therefore collective action on common dilemmas and endorse the idea of collective benefits. Through its history, a number of philosophers have vouched for and expanded upon this realm of an advanced society. Alexis de Tocqueville , in Democracy in America, says that Americas answer to the problem of limiting the absolutist state was to have a constitution defined in law and protected by a counterbalancing force of independent bodies. These were the local associations of citizens acting together in the affairs of daily life. This was a civil society engaged in politics, voluntary by nature. His idea of civil society was based in the observation of an absolute sovereignty of the majority, but this principle, which could just as well turn into a tyranny of the majority, was also mitigated through a non-centralised frame of governance that set importance to localised chains of command and responsibility. Civicness emerged in America, he observed, through the relentless formation of associations: â€Å"Americans of all ages, all stations in life, and all types of disposition ar e forever forming associations. There are not only commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but others of a thousand different typesreligious, moral, serious, futile, very general and very limited, immensely large and very minute. . . . Nothing, in my view, deserves more attention than the intellectual and moral associations in America.† Civil Society, for Hegel , is the site that lies between the Family and the State in the Ethical Life, as described in his Philosophy of Right. It is the site where the ‘determination of particularity as per individual rights is given free rein, but which has to acquire a mantle of universality for the rights to become acquirable or even legitimate, so to speak. Here, therefore, are two elements: the concrete person who is out to pursue self-interest and personal motive, and the form of universality, or the generation of common motive, through forming bonds and finding over-lapping areas of interest. A particular end, therefore, assumes the form of universality through this relation to other people, and it is attained in the simultaneous attainment of the welfare of others. It has three dimensions: the system of needs, the administration of justice and the police and the corporation. The system of needs refers to the generation of ‘universal human capital through human beings exceptional capacity to generate needs and spot commonness with others and then to satisfy those needs through work and labour. A single persons particularity of interest can be recognised if he manages to associate himself with one sphere of the needs. The administration of justice is the principle of rightness that becomes universally known through a public legal code. Not only does this embed within the principle of freedom in both subjective individual and universal platforms, it also makes wrongdoing an infringement on the people that live within such an ethical life. The polizei, then, is the bearer and the guardian of this publicly generated and accepted principles of right, the public authority that also looks after public utilities and regulation activities as well. The corporation, on the other hand, is the arrangement whereby common interests are brought to fore through voluntary association as in sports or religious clubs etc. All these aspects together form the civil society for Hegel, the space where freedom of self-interest is allowed to reign but within the limits of the principle of universality.   Antonio Gramsci, however, had a more critical view of civil society, from a Marxist vantage point. He saw civil society not as the benign space that afforded a voice and power to the masses, but as an instrument of domination linked in an unholy alliance with the bourgeois elements in the civil society seeking to protect propertied interests . He was also convinced that the intricate, organic relationships between civil society and political society enable certain strata of society not only to gain dominance within the state but also, and more importantly, to maintain it, perpetuating the subalternity of other strata. In other words, the site of hegemony was civil society it was the arena wherein the ruling class extends and reinforces its power by non-violent means through components such as the press, the libraries, schools, associations and clubs that could all become media for propaganda and homogenisation of the masses. The state and the civil society in his purview are inextri cably linked, which only facilitates subordination by the state without coercion, focussing instead on ‘manufacturing consent. However, he does acknowledge the potential of civil society as a site for breeding revolutions and for newer ‘conceptions of the world to take place. However, the manifestation of this fairly utopian concept is fraught with tensions and dichotomies. Ernest Gellner, in Conditions of Liberty, analyses the role of civil society in the Marxist, socialist and capitalist frameworks and has also assessed post-modern rivals to it that have emerged, such as Islam. The Eastern European states found the concept of civil society useful in gaining independence from a Communist stronghold precisely because of the possibility here for mobilisation of the masses in opposition to totalitarian militarist regimes. Through meetings of trade unions, religious groups, bars etc, the emphasis was on autonomy, self-organisation and withdrawal from the state to create islands of civic engagement for the emergence of a ‘parallel polis. For Gellner, a civil society was â€Å"a profane society, a society that explicitly sought to put the lowest of human desires to productive uses. Mandevilles paradox private vices make public virtues naturalized the profane by demonstrating that â€Å"capitalist individuals were more likely to promote the public good when they looked exclusively to their private interest.† He found the Marxist, and therefore the socialist strain of civil society, that stressed on driving religion out of life and also investing the economic with the ultimate sacredness, as faulty for it denied space to the profane, the self-interest and avarice of human nature that could be harnessed and channelled into collective action. With the ‘disenchantment of the world that comes with modernity and its powerful agencies of science and capitalism came the advent of ‘the modular man    who associates voluntarily with other prototypes, giving rise to a Gesellschaft, the inorganic form of social bonding, through fostered ties, rather than a Gemeinschaft, the organic community based on ties of blood and kin. â€Å"The genius of capitalist civil society is that it not only harnesses our profane energies, b ut relieves us of the moral burden of thinking of them as profane. In so doing, it relieves us of the strain of constant longing for unattainable self-transcendence in desperate simulations of paradise,† says Ignatieff. He also observes that liberty in civil society is essentially negative because there cannot be, in principle, agreement among human beings about the positive ends of political communities, beyond the protection of the liberties of the individuals who compose it. If people seek to overcome their own alienation and separateness, they can do so only as individuals or in voluntary groups. Civil society, then, becomes crucial for maintaining checks and balances, says Ignatieff. The realms of politics, economics and culture are neatly segregated, and power in any one domain does not endow power in another. The society is free, acting through a vibrant media and elected representatives, all functioning within the ambit of law. â€Å"Needless to say, no civil society has ever lived up to this goalyet the formal promise is more than hypocrisy: it remains the standard against which civil society judges itself and from which it finds renewed impetus to reform.† In this sense, civil society, albeit being a flawed ideal, also has the potential for redeeming itself simply by virtue of being embedded in the notion of reform, of itself as well as of society, simply by virtue of allowing private trajectories of interest being followed.   Despite changing meanings, civil societys core rests in a rule-governed society based on the consent of individuals. The ‘social contract that Hobbes defined is another way of understanding the liberal ideas behind the conception of civil society through different phases, civil society can be seen as the process or the space through which different individuals negotiate, argue, struggle against or agree with each other and with the centres of political and economic authority. The element of autonomy, voluntariness and collective action through association remain hallmarks through all definitions of the term. Civil Society in India: It would seem natural that civil society, as has been described and conceptualised above is an integral part of a democracy, with its accompanying notions of equality, public participation, and masses-oriented governance. Robert Post and Nancy Rosenblum describe a consensus among contemporary theorists â€Å"that democracy depends on the particularist, self-determining associations of civil society, where independent commitments, interests, and voices, are developed . Civil society is the precondition for democratic decision making, whether democracy is conceived as deliberation or as interest group pluralism, and this is true even if the goal of democracy is to transcend particularism and arrive at uncoerced agreement or a common will.† According to Joerg Forbrig, a vibrant and functional civil society can contribute to strengthening a democracy in five ways: control of state power through the incorporation of a body of laws, individual rights and thereby becoming a space that overlooks the relationship between the pr

Ethics of Cookies Essay -- Technology Computers Internet Essays

Ethics of Cookies eth ·ic 1 plural but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation 2 a : a set of moral principles or values b : a theory or system of moral values <the present-day materialistic ethic> c plural but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group <professional ethics> d : a guiding philosophy HTTP cookie <World-Wide Web> A packet of information sent by an HTTP server to a World-Wide Web browser and then sent back by the browser each time it accesses that server. Cookies can contain any arbitrary information the server chooses and are used to maintain state between otherwise stateless HTTP transactions. Typically this is used to authenticate or identify a registered user of a web site without requiring them to sign in again every time they access that site. Other uses are, e.g. maintaining a "shopping basket" of goods you have selected to purchase during a session at a site, site personalisation (presenting different pages to different users), tracking a particular user's access to a site. This day and age, it is undisputed that computers are one of the greatest tools for a person to have, and a not having a connection to the internet is a dreadful; thought for others. The programs that are used by internet servers are a technology that advance so quickly, that it is difficult for a user to know with what he or she is exactly interacting. For example, if a user were to be browsing through a web site to buy a product, the web site (the server) could build a cookie for the user. The information that a cookie collects is claimed to be harmless by the w... ...may be one answer to this fear of privacy protection but, ultimately it is the responsibility of the internet users and servers to stay informed of the many different risks of the internet. Bibliography Glassberg, Richy. "Don't Fear the Cookie Monster." Mediaweek. 2 Oct. 2000: IQ38. Santa Clara University Expanded Academic Index. The Gale Group. 15 Nov. 2000. <http://w.../purl=rcl_EAIM_0_A66014940&dyn=5!xrn_4_0_A66014940?sw_aep=scuweb_cn> "How Web Servers' Cookies Threaten Your Privacy." Junk Busters. 14 Nov. 2000 <http://www.junkbusters.com/ht/en/cookies.html> Lawler, Barbera. "Hot button: online privacy." Silicon Valley News. 5 Nov. 2000. San Jose Mercury News. 15 Nov 2000 <http://www.mercuryce...news/viewpoints/docs/Soapbox05.htm> "Persistent Cookie FAQ." Cookie Central. 14 Nov 2000. <http://www.cookiecentral.com/faq.htm>