White Privilege - White people Essay Example for Free

White Privilege White people Essay A variety of factors within our society prevent equal opportunity. We still live in a racialized society where the color of our skin often determines how we are treated. Many white people do not recognize, or want to recognize that race still significantly impacts lives. Many white people are taught growing up not to think as racial beings, and this may contribute to many denying the privileges that go along with being white. Historically, the goal for equality and opportunity for everyone has not always existed and this has caused a heavy influence on society today. My research focuses on and investigates knowledge and perception on the importance of race, and how denial affects us all. White privilege is a social relation that benefits white persons over non-white persons. A said advantage enjoyed by persons of a socially privileged class based on the color of their skin. A racial category, which involves European-Americans and the â€Å"invisible norm† (IAW. 350) against other racial categories. It’s important to understand white privilege and how it affects society. A lack of understanding and recognition of unearned privilege may lead us to lack a desire to create a diverse atmosphere, and ways we can be more aware. White privilege may affect how we interact with each other and how those who do not share such advantages are affected. Some question, if white privilege still exists, and if it’s that big of a deal. And, if so, how can we work on reducing these effects? The idea of white privilege is said to divide whites and blacks into their own economic categories. While white people are given opportunities and benefits, dark colored skin people may be at a disadvantage to these opportunities and benefits. â€Å"Many analysis of white privilege interpret whiteness as an intangible economic good† ( Black Reconstruction in America: W. E. B. Du Bois. ). White privilege is the original form of racism that has existed throughout much of American history. Race has been used to define cultural categories of ‘white’ and ‘non-white’ human beings. Whites were defined as being the superior species and blacks were considered inferior and incapable of advancing themselves. The history of this way of thinking and racism go back hundreds of years and is the foundation of white privilege. Institutions gave preferential treatment to people whose ancestors came from Europe compared to people whose ancestors came from Asia and Africa. The white class was granted political and economic rights that people of color were denied. These past laws and the idea of race is what have directly contributed to our social inequalities, but do social inequalities currently exist? Many people today will contest that white privilege does in fact still exist. Most often, the person contesting is a white person being accused of enjoying social privilege simply because they are white. White privilege is a term that universally describes and views all white people as being granted with these advantages, but the majority of white people have to work hard to get to the position they desire. These positions aren’t reserved based on the color of our skin. We aren’t born with the right for a free ride, and we earn our way up just as any other person has to. This seems to be accurate and may give a quality argument to white privilege. Although, for white people born with greater resources it may be hard to see, and may not feel privileged or more powerful than others. Growing up comfortable and privileged may just be a way of life that we take for granted, unconsciously knowing we do. â€Å"Many people are unaware of their preferences for lighter skin† (The Persistent Problem of Racism: Skin tone, Status and Inequality. 238). Those who do enjoy these white privileges, it’s just normal. However; white privilege does vary depending on many factors. This may include sex, age, socioeconomic status and others. White skin may in fact be the favored group in our society. Statistics have shown white men and women hold more power positions than black men and women. We may be unaware that being white matters, but we still participate, intentionally or not. In her essay Seeing and Making Culture, Hooks, describes what it is like growing up poor. She says, â€Å"Many middle class black folks have no money because they regularly distribute their earnings among a larger kinship group where folks are poor and destitute† (IAW. 433). As I read this essay I noticed the terms ‘black’ and ‘white’ were used many times to describe a person. Also, it was as if she was implying most black people are poor and white people portray an economic class privilege image. She does acknowledge white poor people, but seems to focus on being black and poor. She explains what college was like as a young black girl, and says, â€Å"Students in the dormitory were quick to assume that anything missing had been taken by the black and Filipina women who worked there† (IAW. 433). The essays claim is the way we see and judge poor people, but it makes an attempt to acknowledge disadvantaged poor black people as well. This is an example of the way humans group other humans, stereotyping by race. As a white person we may feel being viewed as white and privileged people will automatically think we are spoiled jerks. The creation of our system in which race codes superiority over others has been bestowed upon us. Even though it’s confusing it’s purposeful American history. We must remind ourselves this system is not based on each individual white persons intentions to continue claiming that white privilege is rightly ours. Regardless of our personal intent the effects are the same. Our society, throughout history, sees white as normal and all other races as different from normal. Today, white people’s privileges may be something we cannot not get. For example, if I buy a box of band aids that say flesh color, I know it means the color of my white skin. White people have been educated to understand our culture and our race as being the social norm. Social norm is defined as beliefs within a society of appropriate behavioral expectations. An example of behavioral expectations of our white society is a young white boy reading a book as the social norm, but a young black boy reading a book is ‘acting white’. The white boy seemingly normal but the black boy performing a ‘white persons’ behavior. Comedian Chris Rock often talks of white privilege, and uses the issue in his stand-up routines almost always. At one point he says to an audience of many white people, â€Å"None of ya would change places with me! And I’m rich! That’s how good it is to be white! It’s not like slavery ended and then everything has been amazing† (Chris Rock. About America). Even in an interview about life as a comedian he says, â€Å"Black people have first- hand knowledge on racism† (Chris Rock. Hilarious Interview). Racism is so deeply rooted in our society. Is it even possible for people of any skin color to just look at people as humans? It is assumed, no matter our skin color, we gravitate to people who look like ourselves. This includes personality, religion, morals as well as features. We are naturally attracted and comfortable with people who resemble ourselves. This seems like a normal behavior. It doesn’t necessarily mean we dislike other races. Regardless of skin color, people who are white/black/brown, all discriminate against other races and cultures. Most all humans are guilty of making judgments against another before knowing or learning anything about the person. This applies to people of all groups and of any color for many different reasons. It is an unconscious act, and a part of our human nature. White privilege is an unwilling and non-owned racism that has been ingrained into our mindset throughout history. Racism comes from both sides. People of all colors are continuing these behaviors and racism continues to be a modern day battle. Racism is affecting us all. If white privilege is inequality among races it is creating dysfunctional relationships between races. Many black people feel white people have an obligated duty to clean up the racist messes they have created throughout history. People with dark skin have negative feelings toward people with light skin for slavery and civil rights. How is this fair? Most people dislike racism, and this includes white people. Our society has created a practice of stereotyping into categories by skin color. Many white people feel targeted for their white privilege. Are we in denial white privilege still exists, or is it a misunderstanding? It has been said an advantage of white privilege is white people having more wealth that is being passed from generation to generation. We benefit from this financial assistance giving white people a better starting point in life. Although, in my experience, my family and ancestors have worked hard for their money and some of my family living in poverty. I have not benefited from any wealth being passed down to me. Throughout history white people have worked hard and in return they claim the land and wealth. Is white privilege today being confused for cultural differences, or are we taught not to recognize it? â€Å"Many white Americans have lived under the assumption that if they worked hard, they would be rewarded. Now more white Americans are sharing unemployment lines with â€Å"those people† – black and brown† (Tim Wise. White Like Me. ). People of color say they worry about being discriminated against for the color of their skin. They feel disadvantaged when seeking housing, employment or simply shopping in stores. They feel they have worked just as hard as white people, but they still don’t make it to their level of success. Also saying having light skin is one less worry white people have, and People who are poor and white, still have the benefit of ‘looking white’ and the advantages that come along with having white skin. White people have even claimed the identity of who we are as Americans. It seems history continues to echo, making ‘white’ the default race in America. There are Asian Americans, African Americans, Mexican Americans and Americans, and we automatically assume American is a Caucasian person, without adding something extra to the name. It seems white dominates the American population. A white American is considered to be the model race. It has been consistent that white is the national identity. White people are the majority in most regions. We have stayed confined in a world that doesn’t challenge this distribution of power and this allows continued inequality and injustice in the United States. Shouldn’t we understand there’s only one race, the human race? As humans we are different. We have different hair color, eye color, personality and skin color. â€Å"The accident of where one is born is just that, an accident† (IAW. 669). Is the idea of different races ignorant thinking, I mean we can all reproduce with one another! My first day of high school I was surprised when I stepped out of my mother’s car and looked around to see the majority of students were black or brown. I have to admit I was a bit intimidated. I was worried I may not fit in. This high school was very multicultural. Still today, when I tell people where I went to high school they may make a racist joke, or say, â€Å"oh the gangster school†. I get irritated, because it’s a typical stereotype. My experience was ok. I had friends with brown, black and white skin. We all came from different backgrounds, but we were all very close friends, and most of us are still today. Some of my dark skinned friends would joke around and call me white devil or white girl. It was ok and considered normal for the dark skinned kids to make jokes about the white kids, but NOT ok for the white kids to make jokes about brown/black kids. Although, we made friendships work, the white kids never completely fit in to the cliques. We were the ‘white’ boy or girl of the group. â€Å"Back when television was dominant, young whites could consume black style and expressive culture† (IAW. 514). This describes almost every white boy or girl, and my high school experience. And now today, â€Å"the racial perceptions and biases we develop in our off-line lives, they conclude, likely creep into our online lives† (IAW. 515). So, just like my real-life high school experience, it has continued into our new age technologically advanced generation, where social media is taking over. Myspace and facebook are the new age cliques. And, as in the real world, is racially divided. It is being said more white people are using facebook and darker skinned people are using myspace. â€Å"Researchers began to ponder how social inequalities impact engagement with the internet† (IAW. 506). Social media mirrors our social divides in the real physical world. People migrate towards others who share the same values and beliefs, and who they are most comfortable interacting with. â€Å"Social inequalities still matter in the physical world. And as we are learning they also matter in the virtual world† (IAW. 507).

Ovids Devaluation of Sympathy in Metamorphoses Essay -- Ovid Metamorp

Ovid's Devaluation of Sympathy in Metamorphoses  Ã‚        Ã‚  Ã‚   Ovid reveals two similar tales of incest in the Metamorphoses. First, he describes the non-sisterly love Byblis acquires for her twin brother Caunus. Later, he revisits the incestuous love theme with the story of Myrrha who develops a non-filial love for her father, Cinyras. The two accounts hold many similarities and elicit varying reactions. Ovid constantly tugs at our emotions and draws forth alternating feelings of pity and disgust for the matters at hand. "Repetition with a difference" in these two narratives shows how fickle we can be in allotting and denying sympathy, making it seem less valuable. Both tales begin drawing forth a sense of disgust for the situation in general yet arousing pity for each girl's predicament. Ovid clearly labels the love Byblis and Myrrha pursue illegitimate when he summarizes the moral of Byblis' tale stating, "when girls love they should love lawfully" (Mandelbaum 307) and reveals that "to hate a father is / a crime, but love like [Myrrha's] is worse than hate" (338) before describing Myrrha's tale. By presenting the girls as criminals, Ovid leads us to despise them. He then proceeds to draw out sympathy for Byblis and Myrrha as he describes their unsuccessful attempts to overcome these desires. Byblis dreams intimately about Caunus, but "when she's awake, she does not dare / to let her obscene hopes invade her soul" (308). "[Myrrha] strives; she tries; she would subdue / her obscene love," but she cannot (339). Right away, Ovid makes us question if these situations deserve our sympathy. Byblis and Myrrha compel readers to sympathize with their plight as they orally confess their incestuous passions. They use selective lang... ...d leaves us feeling sorry for Myrrha. Ovid tells this tale of forbidden sin twice to show how inconsistent we are in allotting pity. He begins both tales drawing forth our contempt for the matters at hand, then ends both tales with images that arouse our pity. Throughout each story, our emotions sway between pity and disgust. Even though incest disgusts us, we sympathize with Byblis and Myrrha as they seek incestuous loves. Byblis' broken heart arouses our sympathy, yet Myrrha's "fulfilled heart" disgusts us. Ovid devalues our sympathy by showing how unstable we are with our emotions. Works Cited Mandelbaum, Allen, trans. The Metamorphoses of Ovid. By Ovid. San Diego: Harcourt Brace & company, 1993. Crane, Gregory, ed. Perseus Project. 1995. Tufts University. 6 Oct. 1999 <http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/text?lookup=ov.+met.+init>      

Why was Malthus wrong about Japan?

Today Japan is a highly developed first world country with a vast population and a booming economy. The demographic history of Japan and how it reached this renowned economic status has been the focus of much theorising and has engaged the minds of many demographers, economists and historians for centuries. Japan is unique in the way its population has changed and its economy has developed without the stimulus of overseas markets. It does not boast the best physical landscape, being 85 percent mountainous, and it is not well endowed in terms of resources. Despite these negative attributes however, Japan has developed, and to such an extent it can now boast one of the worlds leading economies. Indeed Japan was the only country outside the western world to have developed at a similar rate. In the 18th century a Swedish doctor, P. Thunberg commented on Japan, ‘Of all the countries that inhabit the three largest parts of the globe, the Japanese deserved to be ranked first, and to be compared with the Europeans. ‘ (Modern Japan, P. Duus. ) It stands to reason therefore that Japan's history merits such a wealth of discussion amongst academics. Part of Japan's success as a country has to be attributed to its longstanding political regime. For centuries Japan was an empire ruled by an emperor based at Kyoto. From the 12th century however Japan was governed by Shogun (military leaders) who oversaw the day-to-day life of the Japanese people. The emperor, in effect, was under house arrest, taking a submissive role being more of a spiritual leader to the people. The year 1600 saw an important event for the political governing of Japan. It was in this year that a battle (Sekigahara) established the supremacy of the Tokugawa family as ruling shoguns. From 1600 to 1868 this family ruled and these 268 years of Japan's history became known as the Tokugawa period. It is this period that is of fascination to many demographers as during this time Japan experienced stagnation in its population but it also seemed to be the onset of its economic success. From the early 18th century to the Meiji restoration in 1868 Japan's population stayed at around 33 million. It is this 150-year period of stagnation that is of interest to studiers of the demographic history of Japan. There is also much discussion as to whether the population as it was, was inextricably linked to economic growth or vice versa. Searches for explanation of population trends date back centuries. One of the earliest and probably the most famous explanation of observed population figures in the world in general, was put forward by the Rev. Thomas R. Malthus in the 18th century. In 1798 Malthus's ‘Essay on Population' was published, in which he wrote at length on past, present and future population trends of mankind. His most famous stance on population levels was that ‘population, when unchecked increases in geometrical ratio; subsistence only in an arithmetical ratio. (Malthusian Population Theory, McCleary. ) He believed that mans (sic) power to produce population is greater than his power to produce subsistence, thus meaning that that the population of a country was constantly held in check by misery and vice. From this a simple model is produced illustrating the point that if populations increases; food prices will increase; real income will decrease; and thus mortality will increase (figure 1. ) The ultimate check according to his works was the want of food, but this was never an immediate check except in the case of actual famines. The constant checks can be classified into two sets, preventative and positive. Positive checks are multifarious and include such components as exposure to the elements, epidemics, war, plagues, famines and extreme poverty. The preventative checks can be further sub-classified into vice and non-vice. According to Malthus however, there is only one preventative check that can be classified as vice and this is moral restraint. The consideration of moral restraint was a latter thought from Malthus, added to his ‘essay' in 1803. From this a more optimistic model of possibility was constructed (Fig 2. ) The two checks vary inversely from one another and can be in operation with varying affect according to the society in which there are operational. The situation as it was in Japan must have had some constituent that caused the observed trends in population. If Malthus's theory is believed to have been operational in Japan then some sort of check was holding the population at its stagnated rate. Japan, unlike Europe at the time was a closed system. Emigration was unheard of and likewise nobody entered the country. Internal migration was also low, although would not have affected population figures. This was mainly due the Tokugawa establishing a period of isolation, cutting Japan off from the rest of the trading world. In terms of Japans population this meant that migration was not responsible for the stagnation, therefore according to Malthus it must be due to high mortality rates and/or moral restraint alone. Malthus travelled to various European countries to study their population trends in order to supplement the work in his first essay. He did not however make it as far as Asia, but did manage to comment on Japan and China in his work. He tended to make generalisations about Japan based on his thoughts about China, believing that in both of these countries moral restraint was not practiced, as it was only adapted to Western Europe. His work led him to believe that in Japan and China marriage was universal and occurred at a very young age. Taking this into account, Malthus attributed positive checks on population to the cause of the stagnation the Tokugawa period. Included in the positive checks Malthus believed occurred in Japan was the act of infanticide or ‘mabiki', literally meaning ‘thinning out. ‘ Again he depicted Japan as being similar to China, but whether he was wrongly casting aspersions about Japan or whether infanticide was one of the components accountable for the population trends is another area that has been widely debated. Many people in this field of work since Malthus have devised various explanations as to the cause of Japans stagnation, and many have been curious as to whether Malthus was right about Japan. In order to deem Malthus right or wrong on this topic information on fertility and mortality levels as well as the marriage system and evidence of infanticide is needed. Early studiers of Japan's history found a way of gathering such information. During the Tokugawa period a registration system, known as Shumon Aratame Cho, was devised (mainly for tax reasons) that recorded births, deaths and other such information for villages in Japan. By studying, what were tantamount to an early form of census, family reconstitution is possible and a better idea of the overall demographic change at that time in Japan is given. Generations of population historians have performed village studies and different generations have varying ideas about the trend in population. The first generation of population historians believed Malthusian checks to be in action in Japan. Subsequent work has questioned this conclusion and many other avenues of thought have been opened up. Levels of fertility are related to marital patterns. This is an area that Malthus had decidedly definite views on in Japan. A control on marriage may have been responsible for the stagnation experienced between 1700 and 1850. This kind of population control may have been conducted in Japan in order to yield positive benefits from lower fertility levels, managed food prices and improved real incomes. Malthus believed that nuptuality in China and Japan was universal and occurred at a young age. He did not believe that controls on marriage could occur in Japan as outside Western Europe h thought that ‘the passion between the sexes is necessary' and cannot be overcome (Malthusian Population Theory, McCleary. From studies of nuptuality records (including components such as age at marrying and proportion of people ever married) it is shown that marriage was universal in Japan but was not at such an early age as it was in China. If nuptuality levels for Japan are compared with England and China for the same time period, then Japan falls somewhere in the middle (see fig 3. ) Universal marrying would suggest high levels of fertility but as discussed this was not the case in Tokugawa Japan. The issue of marrying at a later age can account for low levels of fertility, and possible reduced fecundability in women. Other factors can be attributed to fertility levels and many studies have been carried out in this area. T. C Smith, part of a later generation of population historians, conducted a study of a village which he named ‘Nakahara,' to give an overall general pattern of what was occurring in Japan at this time. Smith looked at fertility levels of the village and constructed fertility curves to examine the possibility of infanticide. The curves showed low levels of fertility, and were convex suggesting that there was an absence of birth control in the village. This adheres loosely to the standard levels of fertility at the time; although the figures in question were lower (fertility levels were naturally low in Tokugawa Japan, lower than pre-industrial Europe. ) Smith believed that the low levels of fertility were due not only to factors such spacing and lactational amenorrhea, as put forward by some of his contemporaries (e. g. Cornell), but also to the practice of infanticide. If Smith's study is consistent with the rest of Japan, then Malthus's theory would be true. However fertility curves alone do not prove beyond doubt that infanticide was occurring. L. Cornell believed the reasons for the low levels of fertility could be explained by factors other than infanticide. She believed the low level of fertility in general in Japan was a result of cultural rather than structural patterns. One of the main reasons put forward for this was the long lactation periods of Japanese mothers. It is biologically proven that the longer the lactation period after birth the harder it is for a couple to conceive their next child. This, Cornell attributes to the observed low fertility levels. Another reason put forward is migration patterns of males in villages at that time, causing a reduction in fecundability. Migration to castle towns, where employment had a large pulling power, was seasonal in villages and as a result of long periods of migration, fecundability decreased and fertility was kept at a low level. Cornell believed that these factors not deliberate controls on family size by the practice of infanticide as other academics believed, caused low levels of fertility in Japan. This was brought about by controls on society by over-riding cultural trends. Smith however, had evidence other than fertility curves to support his claim about infanticide. He studied the sex bias in families in Nakahara to add weight to his argument. He believed that the sex of the next child in a family was enforced by infanticide. Assumptions are easily made that this practice accords with the widely heard of folklore that males were the preferred sex in Japanese households, therefore one would expect the sex ratio to be male biased. However Smith found from his studies that the sex of the next child was not biased to males. He tabulated the evidence, which showed that in a family with predominantly male children, the next child was more likely to be female, and in families that had equal number of male and female children, the next child was most likely to be a male. The opposite was true in families with predominantly female children. However sex selectiveness was not found in other studies, for example in a study by Hayami, there was no evidence of sex selectiveness in families. Smith used this evidence to suggest that infanticide was a means of family limitation in Japan. Another piece evidence he found for the practice of infanticide was that small landholders had fewer children than large landholders, suggesting that family limitation was practiced as a long-term plan, so as to not put financial on the existing family and to maintain living standards. This idea has been rejected however by other authors such as Hanley and Yamamura who believed that infanticide was not only practised by peasants and poor families, but also by the rich who chose to limit their family in order to husband assets. Many authors speculate that infanticide was also practiced to limit the number of male heirs in a family and lessen the competition for family headship. On the matter of infanticide in Japan, contrasting ideas make it difficult to conclude if Malthus was correct in his assumption. However what can be concluded is that villages would have undoubtedly varied in their practices and beliefs. From a persons study of one village it would be wrong to conclude that infanticide was or was not practised in general in Japan. What would be a fair assumption would be to say that infanticide probably was operational in some areas and not in others. However it seems unlikely that infanticide alone, occurring in some areas would lead to the stagnated population that occurred in Japan at this time. Other checks on population must now be looked at to prove or disprove Malthus's theory. It is a given that fertility levels were low in Tokugawa Japan, so according to Malthus mortality must be a contributing factor of the population stagnation. From the Shumon Aratame Cho it is difficult to gain an idea of mortality levels, especially infant mortality. It has been estimated (Cornell) that by as late as 1926 a quarter of all deaths in Japan were infants. In the early Tokugawa period death rates were high and fluctuating. The life expectancy at birth at this time was in the low thirties. Epidemics as a constant check, proposed by Malthus, occurred regularly in Japan; however by about the 16th century the population was large enough to support such disasters. There were also some wide spread famines, particularly bad ones occurring in the 1730's, 1780's and the 1830's, which obviously would have made a dent in population figures. However there is a tendency for populations to recover quickly from famines, and many people would have simply moved away from the area. These two Malthusian checks seem not to have had a large impact on death rates, suggesting Malthus was wrong about Japan in this case in point. Death rates not associated with widespread disasters, must also be take into account. Mortality levels were generally higher in the cities, of which there were about 200 at this time, than in the countryside. An increase in the number of people living in cities could account for a high national mortality level; however improvements in the standard of living meant that death rates actually decreased in these areas. It seems that in this period of Japan's history contrasting factors were at work keeping the death rates at a constant level. Warfare decreased at the beginning of the Tokugawa period, lowering death rates; but epidemics were introduced, increasing the rates. Similarly death rates increased slightly as cities grew, but the improvements of living standards combated this increase. Malthus was correct in the sense that checks on population were occurring in Tokugawa Japan, however he did not account for the fact that Japan with a completely different culture and set of traditions from Europe, would have had different ‘checks' on the population working in opposition to the ones he proposed. A picture is now appearing of life in Tokugawa Japan. Fertility levels were low; mortality levels were high and fluctuating at the start of this period but then decreased towards the end. These two demographic variables can account in part for the population remaining constant for so many years, but it is not exactly in accordance with what Malthus thought about Japan. In reality Japan was much more akin to England in terms of its demography than China. Malthus was wrong in this case as well. He presumed Japan to be dissimilar to European countries and because of its locality in relation to China, to be much more alike it neighbouring country. Malthus had some general thoughts on population, not specific to Japan, but which are also wrong in Japans case. Malthus believed that ‘man (sic) does not like hard work', and this is why subsistence cannot take keep pace with population. This would ultimately lead to a positive check on population, which Malthus did believe was occurring in Japan. From the time of the Tokugawa period to present day, the people of Japan have shown to have been hardworking, which is represented in the level of their economic success today. From the 17th century agriculture was the main employment sector in Japan. During this century agriculture took off at a vast rate and began to keep pace with the growing number of mouths. As the population slowed and productivity continued to increase, the per capita food supply also increased. Small-scale cultivators dominated the agricultural economy in Tokugawa Japan, but this was only the starting point of the economic transitional change in Japan. By the late Tokugawa period, ‘proto-industrialsation', a term referring to the production of goods for distant markets was underway. New technologies spread and output of products such as soy sauce, bean paste and vegetable oil was a substantial proportion of all non-agricultural output. Proto-industialisation was concentrated in rural areas, which meant migration to large cities slowed, which in turn would have affected mortality rates, as mortality was consistently higher in these areas. In this case Malthus was also wrong in his assumptions about Japan. The population did not grow in a geometric ratio whilst the subsistence only grew in an arithmetical ratio. In fact quite the opposite occurred during the Tokugawa period in Japan. Overall it seems Malthus was wrong in most of his assumptions about Japan, such as universally low ages of marriage, moral restraint not being practised and widespread infanticide. However he did touch upon factors that operated in Japan as they did in many other countries at that time, such as family limitation and preventative checks affecting population numbers. In fact given the very little first hand knowledge Malthus actually knew about Japan, the only way his speculations could have been correct would have been purely by chance, which as highlighted is the not the case. Malthus was incorrect in his assumptions about the extent to which population-influencing factors occurred in Japan. Never the less he gave many population historians a foothold to further investigate the demographics of historic Japan.

Analysis of Orwells Coming up for Air and 1984

4. On the surface, Coming Up for Air and 1984 are completely different thematically, as one deals squarely with the past and the other is firmly concerned about the future. A deeper probe reveals striking similarities in the way Orwell perceives the effects of war on an individual and collective psyche. Reading both of these novels in tandem reveals the way World War Two solidified many of Orwells beliefs about totalitarian governments and the pitfalls of modernity. Moreover, Orwell seems convinced that society is headed down the wrong road. Orwell uses the past to send a warning about the future in Coming Up for Air, and that warning is articulated and expressed with full force in 1984. One of the main differences between Coming Up for Air and 1984 is that the former is concerned more with the ravages of capitalism, industrialization, and urbanization; whereas the latter is concerned more with totalitarianism and the failure of democracy. Another difference is that Winston in 1984, and eventually Julia also, completely distance themselves from the past. The past is being continually rewritten with the help of tools like the memory hole and the agencies like the Ministry of Truth and Ministry of Love. In fact, the memory hole in 1984 contrasts sharply with the memory lane nostalgia that encapsulates George Bowlings search for inner peace and identity. Yet both novels show that the past does not necessarily have a bearing on the future. The past controls Bowlings life,Show MoreRelatedAldous Huxley And Orwell s Dystopian Dispute1882 Words   |  8 PagesHuxley and Orwell’s Dystopian Dispute This essay aims to note the various ways in which our modern times share, although diluted, notable aspects central to the dystopian cities in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and the setting called Oceania in 1894 by George Orwell. In both novels the reality of its citizens have been sculpted by a direct effort from the residing government. Their aim is principally at controlling the one facet that guides and motivates humans, their seeking of pleasure. TheirRead MoreApple Inc History4725 Words   |  19 Pagesthat the project was more of a hobby than a business venture at first. In Apple Confidential; The Definite History of the World’s Most Colorful Company he said â€Å"it never crossed my mind to sell computers. It was Steve who said, ’Let’s hold them in the air and sell a few.’†Along the way they had help with their ideas from members of the Homebrew Computer Club, a computer hobbyist group. Their first product the Apple I, a circuit b oard, was completed in early 1976. Originally Jobs and Wozniak each triedRead More PARADISE FLUBBED: Pynchon the New World Essay4618 Words   |  19 PagesPARADISE FLUBBED: Pynchon the New World When, in Gravitys Rainbow, A screaming comes across the sky, it is the sound of a V-2 rocket arcing up and over the English Channel.But the rockets vapor trail (which Pirate Prentice sees from kneedeep in the primordial mulch of his bananararium) points further on: over the Atlantic, on toward America, the New World, Tyrone Slothrops yearned-for, perhaps illusory home. The rockets path ends a fraction of an inch above the readers head, theRead MoreOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 Pagescontributions to organization theory made by critical management studies. It really is pathbreaking in terms of its inclusion of material that does not appear in other texts. Professor Hugh Willmott, Cardiff Business School, UK This is one of the most up-to-date and comprehensive texts in the field of organization studies. It takes the reader through different perspectives and various topics on management and organizing, discussing these in some depth and detail. It offers a historically grounded, critical-reflexive