The Subject Of Human Rights And Globalisation Politics Essay

The Subject Of Human Rights And Globalisation Politics Essay The subject on human right and globalization are not easy topics to discuss, mainly because of different connotation and understanding of the terms globalization and human rights. Some scholars defined Globalization, as conceived process that turns the world into a global market for goods and services dominated and steered by the powerful gigantic transnational corporations and governed by the rule of profit  [1]  . In which scholars argue that all the human rights of the people in the world, particularly in the south mostly developing countries are critically endangered in this context scholars view globalization as posing new treats not adequately governed by existing international human rights  [2]  . On other hand, globalization is seen as turning the whole world into one global village in which all peoples are increasingly unified and all the fences or barriers are detached, so that the world witnesses a new state of fast and free flow of people, capital, goods and ideas . In this context globalization is bringing prosperity to all the corners of the globe, and spreading human right and freedom as well as justice, human rights and globalization are then viewed as two topics mutually reinforcing and positive in improving human well-being.  [3]  The topic of Human right and Globalization are subject of discussion among scholars and policy makers in the world today, where there are clear pictures on how Globalization has positively contributed to the universality of human rights and created more potential for its promotion across the world, some scholars disagree with this assumption and argue that, to some instance globalization put human rights in danger. This paper examines the impacts of globalization and it achievement of human rights with focus it will explore the interaction linking the state and none states with the market to evaluate the effects of globalization on the accomplishment of human rights standards in the world. Working with the definition cited by Allan (2009), that sees Globalization as process that turns the whole world into one global village in which all peoples are increasingly interconnected and all the fences or barriers are removed, so that the world witnesses a new state of fast and free flow of people, capital, goods and ideas. One will say that globalization has positively contributed to human rights, as these processes allows non governmental actors to be involved with transnational social movement networks, increasing consciousness and information politics that have potential to address both traditional and emerging forms of human rights violation. Understanding this global village phenomenon allows scholars to look deeply on transnational integration and increased mobility has simultaneously strengthened the protection of individual rights and the dignity of individuals. At its core globalization is the interrelationships, interconnection, and interdependence of all the countr ies of the world. It is the spread of capitalism across the globe bringing with it both opportunities of business and a flow of capita. However, it is more than just free trade; the forces that allow businesses to operate beyond national borders allow activists, journalists, and scholars to work on a global scale. in this context, Globalization resulted in a significant loss of control and sovereignty for the state  [4]  , its argued by Apodaca (2001) that states no longer hold a control over the allocation of public goods and services  [5]  , information is gained by everybody either through internet or international media, people get access to foreign information and this is believed to have contributed positively to spread of human right around the globe  [6]  . While some nation states still restricts it citizens to access international news, like the case of china, scholars still argue that Globalizations has weakened government power to control people movements. In other word globalization has also lead to a noticeable empowerment of actors such as transnational corporations, civil society groups and intergovernmental economic organizations, and lead to a rapid development of human rights.  [7]  In short; due to improved technology, less government interferences, and free movement of people and goods, globalization increased media coverage draws the attention of the world to human right violations, which leads to improvement in human rights. As argued by Marquardt that globalization offers great opportunities to generate more universal observance of human rights, but it also poses serious dangers to the fundamental rights of the individual  [8]  . Moreover, globalization is essentially a synonym for global business and is personified by three organizations: the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Trade Organization (WTO). These organizations are at the center of a great debate over the virtues and evils of globalization. There are many convincing arguments both against and in favor of globalization. For positive side, scholars argue that globalization of capital contributes positively to the universality of human rights as it permits a flow of capital to the most productive and resourceful business projects. This trend is believed to boost profits, which make the economy grow, which mostly results in constructive social goals, such as higher employment levels that improves living standards, education become affordable, lower taxes, and larger capital expenses on people, in areas such as health care which play very significant role in improving human conditons. Globalization of capital in addition i s believed to have remarkably developed and increased attention to womens rights and incorporation of womens human rights into the human rights discourse (Moghadam 2005). It has also created economical opportunities for women. Though, many of these opportunities are formed in sweatshops and low payment jobs. Nevertheless, they increase women participation in the economy, even if it is largely in the informal sector the potential demand of empowering women is increasing (Mae, Bayes et al. 2000). Furthermore, supporters of globalization argue that, while the state is the agent charged with the protection and promotion of human rights, it is also traditionally the primary violator of those rights.  [9]  Kind models of globalization recommend that the liberalization of markets reinforces human rights by encouraging growth and plunging the authority of the state. Without a doubt, a number of studies on human rights, defined as physical integrity rights, do indicate a connection between economic development, conventionally calculated by GDP, and the higher attainment of human rights. The right to personal integrity is essential in that, the exclusive of these rights, no human can survive without being in panic for his or her life and well-being. Scholars have revealed that there is an elevated level of individual integrity infringements in underdeveloped countries. The free market or liberal economic policies, it is believed, that it will not only promote development in poor countries but in addition it will uphold civil liberties and democracy. It was argued by Moore as cited by Apodaca (2001) that,economic liberalization is also thinning the power of the governments by removing capital out of the hands of the state and making it accessible for of individuals to get financial resources, these are those individual are those who search not just for legal protection but moreover greater influence in policies affecting them  [10]  . this demonstrate that globalization in this regard is privileging individuals and weakening abusive governments. Scholars have been studying the issue of multinational corporations in connection to human rights, and the result seem to be more positive than one might aspects, according to Richards and Gellenys quantitative studies, there are key points that are indentified to be positively influential to human rights specifically in Less Developed Countries (LDCs). First property rights, is argued to be influential to investors who would prefer to invest in a nation where property rights are respected and where rule of law is followed, that gives them guaranty that their property and investments will be respected. Moreover, labour policies are additional concerns that most MNCS look at before investing as argued MNCs evaluate labor and wage policies, which including as well the right of workers to organize, safety standards, social welfare policies and wage rate  [11]  . Reputation is an additional point that is believed to bsse influential for investors, Richards and Gelleny argue that comp anies may seek to improve their reputation by associating their product with improving human rights. Otherwise they may run the risk of being exposed to an embarrassing media campaign highlighting their connections to regimes that abuses human rights  [12]  . Additionally to their findings, Richards and Gelleny discovered that countries where government respect open political participation and open media and freedom of worship and free movement of its people MNCs appear willing to invest. There are known to be additional benefit of Globalization in connection to human rights, these including education and access to new technology, as its argue by Stiglitz that, globalization has reduced the sense of isolation felt in much of the developing world and has given many people in the developing countries access to knowledge well beyond the reach of even the wealthiest in any country a century ago  [13]  . He further argue that foreign aid, is an additional aspect of the globalized world, which has brought benefits to millions, often in ways that have almost gone unnoticed, globalization in this way provide help for educational services for those who had no information for instance in HIV/Aids prevention, its helps in other projects that were ignored by nation governments. In contrast, the benefits of globalization on human rights are not universal. As most scholars argues, Globalization has increased the gap of poverty, that makes the rich are getting richer and the poor are becoming more poorer. Those who reject the notion that Globalization contributed positively to human rights argue that: Globalization has led to exploitation of labor. Prisoners and child workers are used to work in inhumane conditions. Safety standards are ignored to produce cheap goods. These arguments are issues that one should take into consideration when debating the impact of globalization on human rights, as it provide us with evidence how inequality and poverty are measured and what the results of such measurements are. Additionally, those on the opposition to the benefit of globalization on human rights argue that the influence of the World Bank- and IMF and their structural adjustment policies that include privatization of the economy, has made Multinational Companies an d corporations which were previously restricted to commercial activities to have increasingly influence on political decisions of developing countries, this lead to governments inability to maintain social welfare in developing countries. As is argued by Dr Samir Naim-Ahmed that; Since the Universal declaration of Human rights in 1948 many countries of the world ,whether in the north or the south succeed in enhancing the implementation of human rights , particularly in the economic, social and cultural domains simply through policies of subsidizing food, housing and services such as health care , transportation ,sanitation, culture and education . Many countries, particularly in the south made considerable achievements in the field of the right to work simply by taking decisions to protect local industries from competition and thus creating job opportunities for their population.  [14]   Moreover, a scholar against globalization in relation to human rights like Alison Brysk (2002) argues that social rights and economic rights have been mostly abandoned both in terms of international recognition and policy implementation. He further argues that The recent phase of globalization enriched some but did not improve the human rights conditions for a large segment of the world population.  [15]  It was further argued by Apocade that Labor rights and social services have been denied by the upward trend of neoliberal policies. Improvements in civil and political rights have been rough, mostly symbolic, and perhaps unsustainable. Especially since the attacks of September 11, 2001,  [16]  national security and order have reemerged as values that are considered to be more important, and that can be maintained only at the expense of human freedoms. Measures taken by the United States and its allies in connection to their war on terror show the fragility of human rights th at were assumed to be well-established and secure at least in mature Western democracies. Moreover, scholars argue that due to free markets and a rapid access to goods, Terrorists have access to classy armaments increasing their ability to inflict damage. As the case of Terrorists use the Internet for communicating which create more treat to the world? Its has been disputed that, the strictness agendas imposed by financial institutions have some very unenthusiastic outcomes on the people living in developing countries, those against globalization argue that demands from global financial organization has formed perhaps the strongest form of reliance since the beginning of dependence. In order for a state to be eligible for financial support from global organizations, the government must approach its economic policies to meet the terms with the regulations and standards recognized by the main actors. Thus, states in required of credits give up their administrative power to global agencies such as the World Bank, the IMF, or the World Trade Organization (WTO)  [17]  . With Many MNCs having superior resources than many Third World states. Third World countries rely on those corporations for financial support, monetary flows, industrial transfers, and employment opportunities for their citizens. Economic globalization thus exploits the developing world: cheap labor, minimal skill transmission, restrictions on technology transfers, and no long-term commitment to stay or reinvest in a countrys economy. Consequently, foreign capital reinforces and strengthens repression in developing countries. To attract or preserve foreign investment, governments must lower business costs, thus suppressing labor demands and reducing corporate taxation rates. Moreover, Corporations are growing constantly the power of which must not be underestimated. For example, it can damage liberty with inhumane working conditions, child labor or the ruthless destruction of the environment and hence the fundamentals of life. The question as to whether and how such power is controllable raises explosive legal and economic issues.  [18]   A more negative view of developing countries integration into the global economy, often attributed to dependency or neo-Marxist theorists, holds that multinational corporation activity contributes to human rights abuses. Its argued that due to these conditions and the level of poverty in developing countries many MNCs have larger revenues than many developing countries states. Third World countries are dependent on MNCs for trade, financial flows, technological transfers, and employment opportunities for their citizens. Economic globalization thus exploits the developing world: cheap labor, minimal skill transmission, restrictions on technology transfers, and no long-term commitment to stay or reinvest in a countrys economy. Consequently, foreign capital reinforces and strengthens repression in developing countries. To attract or preserve foreign investment, governments must lower business costs, thus suppressing labor demands and reducing corporate taxation rates. It was argued by A podaca (2001) that due to weaknesses of governments, if government officials attempt to enact unfriendly policies, the result could lead to capital flight, loss of tax revenues, and massive unemployment. States may feel that they have no option but to entertain MNCs if they want to increase their economies, employment, and tax revenues  [19]  . The discussion on globalization and human right has lead scholars to look at the issue of culture and human rights, its has well provided topic of discussion that most policy makers seem to disagree on, the issue of The Western human rights approach which primarily focuses on civil and political rights to the effective segregation of economic and social rights. These arguments are based on what Pieterse cites the conceived understanding of Globalization in sense that the world is becoming more uniform and standardized, through a technological, commercial, and cultural synchronization emanating from the west, and that globalization is tied up with modernity  [20]  . Moreover, the thrust of social and political rights believed to be a way to protect the individual from the unrestrained power of the state which seem to be different in Asia  [21]  , as it was cited by Apodaca that political and civil rights, for Asian-values advocates, may be deferred until other, more pressing, economic rights are met. It was further argued by Apodaca that to accelerate economic development and to maintain a stable political environment, a state may have to resort to authoritarian governing practices, often suppressing labor demands and political opposition  [22]  ; this was a scandalous exposure in a 1993 declaration, Singapores then Minister for Foreign Affairs Wong Kan Seng declared a cited by Apodaca (2002) that: Poverty makes a mockery of all civil liberties. Poverty is an obscene violation of the most fundamental of individual rights. Economic growth is the necessary foundation of any system that claims to advance human dignity, and that order and stability are essential for development.  [23]   it was argued by Wong as cited in Apodaca (2002), if political and civil human rights are an obstacle to economic progress, they would not be accepted, and an overemphasis on individual rights would retard the process of development. For many Asian leaders and policy makers, according to Apodaca economic rights are the most fundamental of rights, while political and civil rights are viewed as a luxury to be considered only once everyone is fed  [24]  . In short, those against globalization in connection to human right argue that, the results of globalization are the way many people have been poor and for many countries social and political instability and chaos. They further argue that IMF has made mistakes in all the areas it has been involved in: developments, crisis management, and in countries making the transition from communism where it was believed that human rights were not respected to capitalism. The most divisive topic in rejection of globalization and human rights is structural adjustment programs which resulted to failure of most states that were hoping to benefits from it, in contrast it created a gape between the poor and rich. As the case of education in developing countries, where more social services are restricted by the b y the IMF, health care as well are known to be been affected by the structural adjustment program. All these are known to have negative impact on human rights globally. While most scholars discuss the benefit of Globalization is sense of connection and creation of a global village, a place where people from all over the world meet and move freely, one will argue that this is just a theory but in actual sense these movements of people are restricted by developed nations, people are not as free as it sound to get American visa, or European visa. In conclusion, Markowitz argues that globalization and human rights are known as wide conditional fields that hold expressive and descriptive power and as political, juridical, economic and cultural development and institutions. Presenting promises of liberation from restraining national limits and substitute to caste, gender and a racial hierarchy, the discourse of globalization and human rights offers avenues for resisting local structures of power and asserting identity claims via supranational organizations and the state  [25]  . While there are still resistance on how much is globalization improving human right , based on the above arguments one will still close this debate by stating that the situation of human rights has improved in general compared to previous centuries, where slavery was dominant, colonization was the leading mode and government were not democratic. For instance, due to globalization one can argue that the rights of women and children are seen to be bett er and recognized as well as safeguarded than in earlier times this might be associated as well to the need for development and the interconnection that globalization is promoting. Moreover, freedom of expression has been facilitated via internet where activists have chance to rise their voice freely (though this might not be easy in countries like china but there are seen to be improvement due to the globalized technology), freedom of religious belief is a very problematic problem due to the war on terrorism. Freedoms of movements is known to have improved in the last decades due to increasing technology, this allows human rights activist to move and get information easily that ever before. In addition, the modern means of communication helps in realization of person and people rights.

Distributive Justice and Its Relevance Under Indian Constitution

PAPER ON THE TOPIC THE PHILOSOPHY OF DISTRUBUTIVE JUSTICE AND ITS RELEVANCE UNDER INDIAN CONSTITUTION The jurisprudence of distributive justice, according to juristic cynics, is an essay in illusion. The basic social system is built on gross inequalities and the power to lobby and mould State policy, even judicial policy, is heavily in the hands of the proprietariat. Being social realists and meliorists we have to work with the materials that we have and try to read the constitutional provisions in such a manner that the human essence of distributive justice is won by dynamic interpretation and socialist understanding.The Indian Constitution visualizes an affirmative State action for bringing about a new social order based on justice, social, economic and political (Art. 38). The Directive Principles of State Policy contain the directions of change towards such a new social order. The researcher has examined various theories of justice and has examine how the John Rawl’s theory of justice which means that justice is fairness is the most apt for the Indian situation. Even in th e Constitution we find different strategies of justice. Keywords: Justice, Distributive Justice, Constitution.INTRODUCTIONEver since the birth of society, justice has been one of the most important quests of human endeavor. Justice means giving one what is due to him. As a principle of law, justice delimits and harmonises the conflicting desires, claims and interests in the social life of the people. In the modern society if we take the view that all its problem of distribution then the recourse is left open to distributive justice and nothing else. Distributive justice embraces the whole economic dimension of social justice, the entire question of distribution of goods and services within the society.It demands equality in the distribution or allotment of advantages or burdens. The aim of distributive justice is to strike a balance in the socio-economic structure of the society and bring equipoise between the conflicting interests of individual citizens. It is submitted that the pr oblem of distributive justice in one sense is more a matter of procedural fairness to individuals than of substantive rightness or wrongness of the rules themselves. More specifically, it would seem that even bad rules can be applied justly and good rules in an unjust way, but it does not mean that it is not the concern of the substantive law.Much will depend upon the structure of the society. To establish distributive justice we must create a public system of rules by reference to which the conflicting claims which inevitably arise can be authoritatively determined. Distributive justice essentially is the function of a just society. The problems of Indian society are so complex, perplex and varied that a single formula for distributive justice cannot be found. The Constitution of India talks of justice in the Preamble as well as in Article 38 of the Constitution which is a directive principle of state policy.The Constitution talks not of justice but of social, economic and politica l justice. It does not merely envisage a system of corrective justice in which rights and obligations arising out of the present social structure are enforced. It clearly saw that the existing structure was unjust and needed to be changed. This is what we call distributive justice.PHILOSOPHY OF JUSTICE AND DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICEEver since men have begun to reflect upon their relations with each other and upon the vicissitudes of human lot, they have been preoccupied with the meaning of justice.Justice shares with natural law an institutional immortality which presents a constant paradox: it is so ancient that everything has been said about it, and so modern that it constitutes a continuous and inescapable problem in the ever-changing context of a contemporary society. Justice, as Aristotle said, â€Å"is the bond of men in society. † and â€Å"States without justice† are as St. Augustine said, â€Å"robber-bands. † Fiat justitia ruat coelum let heavens fall, justi ce had to be done became the abstraction of many religious, political, moral and legal philosophers of all ages.The power of justice is so great that it strengthens and excites a person fighting for just cause. All wars have been fought by all parties in the name of justice, and same is true of the political conflict between social classes. On the other hand, the very fact of this almost ubiquitous applicability of the principle of justice prompts the suspicion that something may be wrong with an idea that can be invoked for any cause. Social groupings of today are dynamic, not static, and they do not find the ideal equipoise in a condition of mere imperturbability.Justice is considered to be the primary goal of a welfare state whose very existence in turn rests on the parameters of justice. The greatest contrast, however, between ancient and modern thinking about the social harmony of justice is in the changed conception of individual personality in relation of law. I. The problem of Justice The importance of the subject of justice and the frequency of its use would naturally lead one to believe that there is an accepted definition of justice or, if not, at least a workable definition of justice is capable of being carved out.But defining justice is not as easy as it appears to be. There are difficulties inherent in the concept of justice and it is because of this reason that it is wholly indeterminate and belies all attempts to define it. Hens Kelsen perturbedly remarked: No other question has been discussed so passionately; no other question has caused so much precious blood and so many bitter tears to be shed; no other question has been the object of so much intensive thinking by the most illustrious thinkers from Plato to Kant; and yet, this question is today as unanswered as it ever was.It seems that it is one of those questions to which the resigned wisdom applies that man cannot find a definitive answer, but can only try to improve the question. What i s ‘just’ is again a question which largely remains unanswered and mostly hinges on the hunch of the bench as it nowhere informs us how to recognise or distinguish a just man from the other. The term justice has two aspects, namely, abstract justice and concrete justice. In the abstract sense ‘justice’ means a course of conduct both legel and moral, which tends to augment human ‘welfare’.Those human actions which do not intersect mankind have no significance either for ethics or for jurisprudence. The answer to the question as to what actions affect human welfare varies from age to age or generation t generation depending on divergent conceptions of human welfare prevailing in a given society during a given period of time. It is through the abstract notion of justice that its true significance in its practical application can be ascertained and appreciated. In the concrete sense, justice plays a positive role in regulating the procedural safegua rds afforded to litigants in the courts of law. II.Meaning of Justice and Distributive Justice Grotius and Leibniz believed in the concept of society as the co-operation of beings endowed with reason defined justice as custodia societatis Justum est quod societatum ratione utentium perfecit. This means justice puts an end to the conflict between the individual and the universal, the microcosm and the macrocosm, and brings about the synthesis between the whole and the parts. Justice thus seems to entail the conflict of competing claims and not infrequently the clash of powerful social interests with the right of individuals ensnared from time to time in the mechanism of raison d’ Etat.That is why justice is by its very essence a justitia communis, which reconciles in itself and transcends the commutative, distributive, and universal principles. To Plato, justice is a virtue of that psyche or soul which is the quint-essential personality of human creature. In the Republic the q uest is for justice as the complete expression of the soul’s excellences and, therefore, of the whole moral man. Plato tells us that the four supreme moral qualities both in state and the individual are wisdom, courage, temperance or moderation and justice; and the greatest of these, the indispensable, is justice.Aristotle said that justice implies a certain degree of equality; this equality might, however, be either arithmetical or geometrical, the first based on identity and the second on proportionality and equivalence. Arithmetical equality leads to commutative justice, geometrical equality to distributive justice. The second is the business of the legislator, while the first is the business of the judge. Political rights and goods should be apportioned according to distributive justice, punishments should be imposed and damages paid according to commutative justice.The theory of justice thus involves an examination of the body of rights and duties accepted in a society i n the light of the formal principles of equality, the aim being to rid it of arbitrary elements; that is discrimination not grounded on relevant differences. According to John Stuart Mill, a society which is governed by the legal philosophy of distributive justice is one which: Should treat all equally well who have deserved equally well of it, that is, who have deserved equally well absolutely.This is the highest abstract standard of social and distributive justice; towards which all institutions and the efforts of all virtuous citizens should be made in the utmost degree to converge. It is thus universally considered just that each person should obtain that (whether good or evil) which he deserves; and unjust that he should obtain a good, or be made to undergo an evil, which he does not deserve. This is perhaps the clearest and most emphatic form in which the idea of justice is conceived by the general mind. As it involves the idea of desert the question arises of what constitutes desert.The characteristic of distributive justice is the expansion of the spirit of collectivism, the promotion of the feeling of co-operation and the exercise by society of its collective powers in support of the legitimate claims of individual life. Its formula is â€Å"to every man according to his needs† rather than â€Å"to every man according to his deserts. † The distributive justice considers how it can secure too each individual a standard of living and such a share in the values of civilization as shall make possible a full existence of human life.In all these ways, the notion of justice according to law is gradually pervaded by the notion of justice and the distributive justice in the law. III. Concept of Distributive Justice Modern social and economic developments have made it clear that individual justice, justice between the wrongdoer and the victim is only a partial and incomplete form of justice and it is in the notion of distributive justice, i. e. , rendering to each man his due, the essence of justice lies.The development of the welfare state is generally thought of as an application of the notion of distributive justice. Moreover, the cry for equality of opportunity for the underprivileged and weaker sections of the society is being increasingly heard these days and this demonstrates the importance of the notion of distributive justice in modern consciousness. Distributive justice embraces â€Å"the whole economic dimension of social justice, the entire question of proper distribution of goods and services within the society†.It demands equality in the distribution or allotment of advantages or burdens. The advantages or burdens which are to be distributed are of numerous kinds such as wages, taxes, property, punishments, individual or social performances or rights and duties as allocated and apportioned by the legal system. Distributive justice aims to strike a balance in the socio- economic structure of the society t o bring equipoise between the conflicting desires, interests and claims of the individual citizens. Justice P. N.Bhagwati succinctly explains distributive justice as: And when I talk of justice, I mean not commutative justice but distributive justice, justice in depth, justice which penetrates and destroys inequalities of race, sex, and wealth, justice which is not confined to a fortunate few, but takes within its sweep the entire people of the country, justice which ensures equitable distribution of the social, material and political resources of the community. This is the kind of justice which we in India are trying to realize through the process of law and our substantive law is being geared to this task.Distributive justice includes the quality of being just and fair to all the individuals in the society or group. It seeks to give everyone what is due to him. What is due cannot be ascertained by absolute standards because the standards change with changes in the socio-economic c onditions of the society. It does not mean only a just distribution of the material goods of life, but also means and includes the reasonable requirements of human body, mind and spirit. It takes in both the means and the end, the process as well as the product.It seeks to meet out justice through just means, unjust means may satisfy some, but cause injustice to others. Distributive justice means justice to all and not to a few or a favored class. It does not introduce class conflicts, but seeks to improve and harmonise the society with a view to avoid the socio- economic imbalances. The readjustment of social claims may involve a transfer of resources from one section of the society to another, but the transfer is only an equitable reallocation of the resources and not a destruction of the structure itself.Distributive justice demands preferential treatment of the weaker sections of the society, but that is only to correct the imbalances existing in the society and not to cause unn ecessary harassment or injustice to the advanced sections thereof. Thus, it seeks to remove the imbalances in the social, economic and political life of the people. There cannot be distributive justice unless the society progresses in all the directions. In short distributive justice helps to bring about a just society.The right to distributive justice may be defined as the right of the weak, aged, destitute, poor, women, children, and other underprivileged and downtrodden segments of the society to the protection of the state against the ruthless competition of life. It seeks to give adventitious aids to the underprivileged, so that they may have an equal opportunity to compete boldly with the more advanced sections of the society. It is a bundle of rights; in one sense it is carved out of other rights; in another sense, it is a preserver of other rights.It is the balancing wheel between the haves and have- nots. Its aim is not to pull down the advanced sections of the society, but only to uplift the backwards and the underprivileged sections thereof without unduly and unreasonably effecting and undermining the interests of the former. It only prevents unjust enrichment at the expense of the underprivileged and ensures a balanced and harmonious development of the society. It is this approach and understanding of the concept of distributive justice which permeates the Indian Constitution and is adopted here for the purposes of this work.This takes us to the study of principles of distributive justice which serve as the criteria for evaluating the propriety or justice of distribution. IV. Theories of justice The theories which take in their sweep the above mentioned principles of distributive justice are: – Utilitarian, and – Contractarian. The former represents an established tradition of ethical thought, though subject to continuing refinements and restatements. The later owes much to John Rawls, who, in recent times has most illuminatingly used the idea of primordial social contract to arrive at the basic principles of justice.It is often reiterated that the theories of justice must take into consideration at least three important facets of distributive process: a) The ‘total amount of goods (or utility) to the distributed’; b) The ‘pattern of distribution arrived at’; and c) The distributional procedure described aptly as the ‘principle of selection by means of which the distribution is arrived at’. An attempt is made here to examine the different facets of these theories and to ascertain the extent to which they satisfy the demands of distributive justice.Utilitarian Theory of Justice Utilitarianism is essentially an aggressive theory. Its premise is the greatest good of the greatest number. Justice in its essence is distributive in character. The three principles of justice enumerated above demand that a person’s share of good should be proportional to some quality he posse sses. It is, therefore, unlikely that utilitarian theory will be able to accommodate principles whose form contrasts directly with that of the greatest happiness principle.It is submitted that why someone committed to aggregating good should care how that good is distributed among different people. The main weakness of the utilitarian theory from the perspectives of distributive justice is that it accords a paramount role to the quantity of good or welfare distribution. This has been pointed out by Brandit in the following words: â€Å"If quantity of welfare can be raised by a grossly unequal distribution- for instance, as in an efficient system of slavery- then we have to favour inequality.Equality, on utilitarian scheme, is a servant of quantity of welfare. † John Rawls takes this insight as his starting point in developing a contractual theory of justice which is intended to remedy the deficiencies of utilitarianism. It may thus seem that the utilitarian theory does not br ing home the expectations of society because our needs and desires differ qualitatively and are mutually incommensurable.Man harbours the most varied needs, for example the need for food, rest and sleep, occupation, sexual activity, culture and knowledge, artistic experience and recreation, love and respect, power and social esteem, etc. If all the needs of an individual cannot be satisfied, and if he is faced with a choice, for example, between listening to symphony and eating a good dinner, this choice cannot be described as a rational alternative between two measurable quantities of pleasure. Contractarian Theory of JusticeAccording to John Rawls: â€Å"Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override†. Rawls understands society as a co-operative venture for mutual advantage. In a co-operative society, there is a social union and a shared end, conceived not as a substantive goal, but as a plan of conduct which will assure that the endowments of each will be complementary to the good of all. The actual differences between individuals in terms of natural abilities, social advantages, wealth, etc. are viewed as a cause of social discord; the differences tempt men to pursue their own advantage, what all have in common is a moral personality and this must be the basis of justice. The utilitarian theory fails to accommodate this very conception of justice. To replace it, Rawls has offered the following principles of justice: All social primary goods- liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, and the bases of self- respect are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any, or all, of these goods is to the advantage of the least favoured.V. The Constitutional Scheme of Distributive Justice Indian Constitution opens with the preamble which states in unequivocal terms that the people of India have solemnly resolved to secure to all its citizens: Justice – social, ec onomic and political, equality of status and of opportunity and to promote among them all fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation.The Objectives Resolution from which this phrase has been carved out states: This Constituent Assembly declares its firm and solemn resolve to proclaim India as an Independent Sovereign Republic and to draw up for her future governance a Constitution: a) Wherein shall be guaranteed and secured to all the people of India justice, social, economic and political; equality of status, of opportunity, and before the law; freedom of thought, expression, belief, faith, worship, vocation, association and action, subject to law and public morality; and b) Wherein adequate safeguards shall be provided for minorities, backward and tribal areas, and depressed and other backward classes. Referring to socio- economic justice, Dr. S.Radhakrishnan said that it intended to effect a smooth and rapid transition from a state of serfdom to one of freedom. Then emphasizing the need for such a change, he said, â€Å"it is therefore necessary that we must remake the material conditions†. The phrases thus used by the Founding Fathers clearly indicate that socio-economic justice in its realization is distributive in character. It contemplates a change in social structure in order to effect a transition from serfdom to freedom and attempts to remake the material conditions of the society. Granville Austin has also observed: â€Å"The Constitution was to foster the achievement of many goals. Transcendent among them was that of social revolution. Through this revolution would be fulfilled the basic eeds of the common man, and, it was hoped, this revolution would bring about fundamental changes in the structure of the Indian society†. Thus, the scheme of distributive justice as visualized in the Objectives resolution was incorporated in the preamble, the fundamental rights and the directive princip les of state policy and other provisions of the Constitution. You can read also  Justice System Position PaperThe gist of the scheme may be stated thus: Constitution ordains the state to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice- social, economic and political shall inform all the institutions of national life. For the establishment of social order, the people of India have been given the following fundamental rights: a) Right to equality; ) Right to six freedoms- freedom of speech and expression; to assemble peaceably and without arms; to form associations or unions; to move freely throughout the territory of India; to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business; c) Right to life and personal liberty; d) Right against exploitation; e) Right to freedom of religion; f) Cultural and educational rights; g) Right to constitutional remedies. In addition to these, the directive principl es of state policy also express in categorical terms the ideals of distributive justice. Article 38 requires the state inter-alia, to minimize the inequalities in income and endeavor to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals, but also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.Article 39 requires the state to make available to all the citizens adequate means of livelihood; to distribute ownership and control of material resources so as to sub serve the common good; to operate the economic system in such a way that it does not result in concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment; that there is equal pay for equal work; to protect the health and strength of workers men and women and the tender age of children against abuse and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their age and strength, that children are given oppo rtunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.The state is also required to provide equal justice through the mechanism of free legal aid in order to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizens by reason of economic or other disabilities; to provide right to work, to education and public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement and other cases of undeserved want; to make provision for securing just and humane conditions of work and for maternity relief, to provide work, a living wage, conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities; to secure the participation of workers in the management of undertakings, establishments or other organizations engaged in industry; to secure for all the citizen s a uniform civil code throughout the country, to provide free and compulsory education for children below the age of 14 years; to promote the educational and economic interests of the Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes and other weaker sections; to raise the level of nutrition and standard of living and to improve the public health. Thus, it can be said that the Constitution of India has twin objectives: First, to usher in a new social order ensuring distributive justice to all the citizens and; second, to protect the liberties of the people from the onslaughts of autocratic and arbitrary power. These two ideas run like a golden fabric through the entire scheme of the Constitution.Indeed, the substantive and the procedural provisions of the Constitution harmonizing the said two concepts give a new philosophy and sustenance to our socialist, democratic republic based on rule of law. But to our dismay, many of the legislative actions destined at distributive justice pursuance to t he implementation of the directive principles of state policy were struck down by the courts from time to time. The directives have been relegated to the position of inferiority. The bewildering judgments of the Supreme Court right from the days of Champakam Dorairajan,Quaresh, Kerela Education Bill, including the Golaknath, the Bank Nationalisation, the Privy Purse and the Minerva Mills have shattered all the hopes of the Government to implement the directive principles of state policy.These ecisions crippled the state machinery and paralysed the movement of the nation towards an equalitarian social order. These decisions represent a saga of judicial misunderstanding of the avowed ideals of the Constitution. This approach is inherently inconsistent with the spirit of the Constitution ignoring the realities of the Indian societal structure. The poverty of the Indian masses cannot be mitigated by eulogizing the fundamental liberties and mellowing down the positive efforts of state de stined at distributive justice. The Constitutional goals of distributive justice can be achieved only if the courts adopt a pragmatic and sociological approach without making such ado about the rights in interpreting socio-economic legislations.It is submitted that both fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy aim at establishing a just social order based on the philosophy of distributive justice ensuring dignity to the individual not only to the few privileged persons, but to the entire masses of the country including the have nots and the handicapped, the lowliest and the lost. Both these represent a broad spectrum of human rights. The concept of distributive justice as embodied in the Constitution is a living concept of revolutionary import. It gives sustenance to the rule of law and meaning and significance to the ideals of a welfare state. The freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution are not an end in itself, but the means to achieve distributive justice.Ou r Constitution is the unique document for the upliftment of the down-trodden and weaker sections of the society. The greatest need of the hour, therefore, in our society in social integration of the weaker and oppressed sections of the people with the rest of the society. This demonstrates that our Constitution does not leave the individual at the mercy of the law of nature representative of competitive modal of society. It assigns a prominent role to and imposes heavy responsibilities upon the state to assure a dignified life to each individual irrespective of what he deserves on meritarian consideration. Yet, in a way it incorporates the need-based principle of justice.It means securing to each and every human being the basic necessities of life like food, clothing, housing, medicine, education and the like etc. This is the voice of distributive justice and the very Dharma of the Indian Constitution. ——————————à ¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€œ [ 1 ]. Sudesh Kumar Sharma, Distributive justice under Indian Constitution, Deep & Deep Publications, New Delhi, 1989 [ 2 ]. http://www. spotlaw. in/text/910011996/9100119961206001. htm (accessed on 9 march 2013) [ 3 ]. http://www. spotlaw. in/text/910011996/9100119961206001. htm (accessed on 9 march 2013) [ 4 ]. Sudesh Kumar Sharma, Distributive justice under Indian Constitution, Deep & Deep Publications, New Delhi, 1989 [ 5 ]. VII Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, 512 (1953) [ 6 ].Quoted by Justice George Vadakkel in his paper entitled â€Å"Law, lawyers and political development†, Vol. VIII (4), Journal of Bar Council of India, 629 at 635 (1981). [ 7 ]. Address by Justice P. N Bhagwati at the opening session of the Sixth Commonwealth Law Conference on 18th August, 1980 in The challenge of social justice, 20-21 (1985). [ 8 ]. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (1976 Reprint) [ 9 ]. R. B. Brandit, Ethical Theory, 415 (1959) [ 10 ]. John R awls, â€Å"Distributive Jusitce† in P. Laslett and W. G. Runciman (ed. ), Philosophy, Politics and Society, 3rd ser. 50 (1967) [ 11 ]. I C A. D 59 [ 12 ]. II C A. D. 269 [ 13 ]. II C A. D. 273 [ 14 ].Granville Austin, The Indian Constitution: Cornerstone of a Nation, introduction (1979 Reprint) [ 15 ]. Art. 38(1) [ 16 ]. Art. 14 to 18 [ 17 ]. Art. 19(1)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g). [ 18 ]. Art. 20 to 22 [ 19 ]. Art. 23 and 24 [ 20 ]. Art. 25 to 28 [ 21 ]. Art. 29 to 30 [ 22 ]. Art. 32 [ 23 ]. Art. 38(2) [ 24 ]. Art. 39(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f). [ 25 ]. Art. 39-A [ 26 ]. Art. 42 [ 27 ]. Art. 43 [ 28 ]. Art. 43 A [ 29 ]. Art. 44 [ 30 ]. Art. 45 [ 31 ]. Art. 46 [ 32 ]. Art. 47 [ 33 ]. 1951 SCR 525 [ 34 ]. AIR 1958 SC 731 [ 35 ]. AIR 1958 SC 956 [ 36 ]. AIR 1967 SC 1643 [ 37 ]. AIR 1970 SC 607 [ 38 ]. (1971) 1 SCJ 295 [ 39 ]. (1980) 3 SCC 625

An Analysis of Project Networks as Resource Planning Tools

An Analysis of Project Networks as Resource Planning Tools| Usage and availability of resources are essential considerations when establishing Project Networks in Resource Planning. This analysis has focused on some of the risks of certain actions used to offset resource constraints, advantages/disadvantages for reducing project scope, and options/advantages/disadvantages for reducing project duration. If implemented correctly, careful consideration of the outlined risks will make managing a project a little less painless. | Following is an analysis of project networks as resource planning tools.The analysis will be segmented into three topical areas to include: * Risks associated with leveling resources, compressing, or crashing projects, and imposed durations or â€Å"catch-up† as the project is being implemented; * Advantages and disadvantages for reducing project scope to accelerate a project and what can be done to reduce the disadvantages * Three options for reducing pro ject duration and advantages and disadvantages to these options Risks Associated with Leveling Resources, Compressing, or Crashing Projects, and Imposed Durations or â€Å"Catch-Up† The text (Gray and Larson, 2008) gives good definitions for the risks associated with certain actions used to offset resource constraints. The act or process of evening out â€Å"resource demand by delaying noncritical activities (using slack) to lower peak demand† (Gray and Larson, 2008) is considered leveling resources.This action ultimately increases the resource utilization, which is more than likely the desired result. Even though one may get the desired results resource-wise, leveling resources often results in pushing out the end-date of a project. In most cases, that is the extreme outcome. Another risk that bears its head when slack is reduced, is loss of flexibility which equates to an increase in critical activities. Without slack anywhere in a project network, ALL activities bec ome critical. This means that everything has to fall perfectly in place in order to stay on the prescribed timeline. Compressing a schedule means that you will be conducting project activities in parallel. Compressing is not applicable to all project activities.A good example can be seen if you have activities labeled â€Å"Hire Workers† and â€Å"Dig Foundation†. You can’t implement the â€Å"Hire Workers† and â€Å"Dig Foundation† activities in parallel because to dig a foundation you need to have someone to do the digging. (brighthub. com/office/project-management/articles/51684. aspx#ixzz0ongX7ECF, 20 May 2010). Risks of compressing include: * Increases risk of rework * Increases communications challenges, and may * Require more resources Crashing a schedule involves allocating more resources so that an activity can be completed on time or before time, assuming that by deploying more resources the activity can be completed earlier.One good aspe ct about crashing a schedule (just like compressing), you do not need to crash all activities. The activities that impact the schedule are those with no slack, thus being the only ones that are affected. Risks associated with this action are as follows: â€Å"Budget: Since you allocated more resources, you will not deliver the project on-budget. Demoralization: Existing resources may get demoralized by the increase in people to complete activities that were originally assigned to them. Coordination: More resources translates to an increase in communication challenges† (brighthub. com/office/project-management/articles/51684. aspx#ixzz0onfuKUmj, 20 May 2010).These risks combined or by themselves can ultimately pose the overall risk of reducing the effectiveness of the existing resources. Advantages and Disadvantages for Reducing Project Scope to Accelerate a Project and what can be Done to Reduce the Disadvantages Reducing the scope of the project can lead to big savings both in time and costs. It typically means the elimination of certain tasks. At the same time scaling down the scope may reduce the value of the project such that it is no longer worthwhile or fails to meet critical success factors. An advantage to reducing project scope is the project is more likely to stay on schedule and on budget. It also allows for more focus being applied to the remaining deliverables in the project scope.A disadvantage that may arise is loss of quality in work due to key quality deliverables selected to be cut in order to balance the timeline of the project. The key to offsetting the disadvantages is â€Å"reassessing the project requirements to determine which are essential and which are optional. This requires the active involvement of all key stakeholders. More intense re-examination of requirements may actually improve the value of the project by getting it done more quickly and for a lower cost. † (just answer. com 21 May 2010) Three Options for Reduci ng Project Duration and Advantages and Disadvantages to these Options Reducing the duration a project can be managed by reducing the duration of an activity/activities almost always results in higher direct cost.When the duration of a critical activity is reduced, the project’s critical path can be change with other activities and that new path will determine the new project completion date. Following are three options to reducing project duration. Adding Resources: This is a popular method to reduce project time by assigning additional staff and equipment to activities-if it is assessed appropriately. The activities at hand need to be researched accordingly and proper determinations of how much time will be saved prior to just throwing bodies at it. The first thing that comes to mind when you add resources is â€Å"double the resources, reduce the length of the project in half.The unforeseen disadvantage that arises is the increase in the amount of time that an existing tea m member must spend in explaining what has been done already and what is planned. This increases the overall communication time spent by the team which phenomenally ends up adding/losing valuable time. Outsourcing Project work: A common method for shortening the project time is to subcontract an activity. The subcontract may have access to superior technology or expertise that will accelerate the completion of the activity (Gray and Larson, 2008). Additionally, significant cost reduction, and flexibility can be gained when a company outsources (Gray and Larson, 2008).Disadvantages that may be experienced are conflict due to contrasting interpersonal interactions and internal morale issues if the work has normally been done in-house (Gray and Larson, 2008). Scheduling Overtime: The easiest way to add more labor to a project is not to add more people, but to schedule overtime. The www. businesslink. gov outlines potential advantages of using overtime working include: * a more flexible workforce * the ability to deal with bottlenecks, busy periods, cover of absences and  staff shortages without the need to recruit extra staff * increased earning for employees * avoidance of disruption to jobs where the workload is more difficult to share,  e. g. ransport and driving * the ability to carry out  repair and maintenance which has to be done outside normal working hours However, disadvantages may include: * the expense of premium overtime rates * inefficiency if employees slacken their pace of work in order to qualify for overtime * regular long working hours, which  can adversely affect employees' work, health and home lives * fatigue, which  may increase absence levels and lead to unsafe working practices * employee expectations of overtime, leading to resentment and inflexibility if you try to withdraw it. (businesslink. gov, 22 May 2010) Conclusion Usage and availability of resources are essential considerations when establishing Project Networks in Reso urce Planning.This analysis has focused on some of the risks of certain actions used to offset resource constraints, advantages/disadvantages for reducing project scope, and options/advantages/disadvantages for reducing project duration. If implemented correctly, careful consideration of the outlined risks will make managing a project a little less painless. References Brighthub. com. Difference Between Schedule Crashing and Compressing, Retrieved 20 May, 2010 http://www. brighthub. com/office/project-management/articles/51684. aspx#ixzz0onfuKUmj Brighthub. com. When to Crash or Compress a Schedule, Retrieved 20 May 2010 http://www. brighthub. com/office/project-management/articles/51684. aspx#ixzz0onfuKUmj Read also: Conveyor Belt Project

The Military Use Of Atomic Bombs And The Justification For...

The military use of atomic bombs and the justification for America doing so is a highly controversial topic. On August 6th, 1945, America dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, and changed the world forever. Three days later America dropped another atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Nagasaki. During that week, hundreds of thousands were affected as the atomic age dawned. The United States needed to use atomic bombs in order to end the Second World War effectively. There are several reasons for this, including the fact that the United States wanted to end the war as quickly as possible in order to save millions of Allied and Axis soldiers from dying during several more years of war, to save millions of dollars on many more years of war, to justify the cost, to impress the Soviets, and to bring to an end the aggressive tyranny of Japanese Imperialism. Ending the war promptly was a high priority for the United States, as it would minimize casualties and reduce the high cost of traditional warfare. American President Harry S. Truman made a wise and accurate decision for his time and circumstances. President Truman, who made the decision to use the atomic bombs, was not looking for a reason to drop the bombs; Truman was looking for a way to end the war quickly in order to save lives. A swift end to the war would entail dropping the atomic bombs. The main priority for President Truman was to end the war as quickly as possible with the fewest U.S. casualtiesShow MoreRelatedWhy Truman Chose to Drop the Atomic Bomb895 Words   |  4 PagesAmericas decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan was only done to assert our position over the Soviet Union, and Japans surrender was only an extra accomplishment of the attack. During the years 1939 to 1947, numerous conferences were held to discuss diplomatic matters, and the strive towards getting Japan to accept an unconditional surrender. The Japanese had already been weakened, and the military predicted that they would eventually be forced to surrender in a short amount of time. Even theRead MoreThe United States Was Justified For The Attack Of Hiroshima Essay1342 Words   |  6 PagesJapan. The nuclear bomb was made in the south western for the sake of the United States under top mystery conditions. The Manhattan Project was constructed by Dr. Robert Oppenheimer who was a German Jew that fled from the Nazi party. For a long time, the Germans and Americans were in a race to finish the bomb first. It was viewed as a stupendous achievement when on July 1945, in the New Mexico betray, the primary nuclear bomb exploded in a trial. On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on HiroshimaRead MoreThe Dropping Of The Atomic Bomb On Japan5502 Words   |  23 Pagesrelation to the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan? Sub Issues Questions: Scott Carroll The dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945 and Nagasaki on August 9th, 1945 was the first and last time the weapon has been used to date; the atomic explosions exposed the true potential of nuclear warfare whilst also highlighting the global superiority that America possessed at the conclusion of World War II. On August 6th, 1945 â€Å"Little Boy†, a uranium atomic bomb was dropped on HiroshimaRead MoreThe Dropping Of The Atomic Bomb On Hiroshima3031 Words   |  13 PagesThe dropping of the Atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945 and Nagasaki on August 9th, 1945 was the first and last time the weapon has been used to date; the atomic explosions exposed the true potential of nuclear warfare whilst also highlighting the global superiority that America possessed at the conclusion of World War II. On August 6th, 1945 â€Å"Little Boy†, a uranium atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in an effort by the United States (U.S.) and backed by the Sovie t Union, the British andRead MoreUse of the Atomic Bomb at Hiroshima and Nagasaki Essay1271 Words   |  6 Pageswere gasping and pleading, Save me! Give me water! Glasses, caps, and water bottles were scattered all over. The streets were filled with glass fragments. It was heartbreaking to see so many children crying and dying. They were saying, ‘I hate America! Many adults were killed, too. And I saw dead horses, cats, dogs and other animals. - Torako Hironaka (Exposed approximately 1,300 meters from the hypocenter in Hiroshima, Japan), August 6, 1945. The fateful decision was made on July 25, 1945Read MoreThe Destruction Of The War Essay1250 Words   |  5 PagesOn August 6th 1945, a U.S aircraft titled ‘Enola Gay’ flew over Hiroshima to drop the most infamous atomic bomb in history. This bomb instantly vaporized everyone within a 1KM radius of the drop point, leaving the rest to die slowly from lethal burns or poisoning. Then three days later, another devastating bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. While there were no American deaths as a result, 200,000 Japanese citizens, mostly children, elders and women perished as a result of these attacks.Read MoreThe Nuclear Attack On Nagasaki1315 Words   |  6 Pagesnuclear attack on Nagasaki was necessary in ending the Asia - Pacific War; to do this, the military grounds of the nuclear attack on Nagasaki will be examined. In order to analyse this, it is vital to highlight President Truman s official military reasons for using the atomic bomb, why detonating the bom b was preferred to invasion, and why Nagasaki was chosen as a target so soon after the first atomic bomb. With reference to opposing views, it s vital to understand Japan’s perceived ability in warfareRead MoreOn August 6, 1945 The United States Revolutionized Warfare1526 Words   |  7 PagesOn August 6, 1945 the United States revolutionized warfare by dropping an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan. President Truman jotted down in his diary, â€Å"We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world. It may be the fire destruction prophesied in the Euphrates Valley Era, after Noah and his fabulous Ark† (Sadao 103).   There has been much controversy regarding this brutal attack on the Japanese, which according to the American Historian, John A. Garraty,   it is known to be â€Å"theRead MoreThe Debate Over The Atomic Bomb On Hiroshima And Nagasaki1383 Words   |  6 Pages The debate over the impact of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki concerns the ethical, legal and military controversies surrounding the United States atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This tragedy occurred on two occasions; the 6th and the 9th of August 1945, and signified the conclusion of the Second World War, 1939-1945. There were many questionable motives involved in the event, as such a decision required moral certainty. Proceeding the bombings, the terms of surrender forRead MoreThe Dropping Of The Atomic Bomb On Japan Essay2238 Words   |  9 Pagesrelation to the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan? (Intro 1—Context/Cover) The dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6th, 1945 and Nagasaki on August 9th, 1945 was the first and last time the weapon has been used to date; the atomic explosions exposed the true potential of nuclear warfare whilst also highlighting the global superiority that America possessed at the conclusion of World War II. On August 6th 1945 â€Å"Little Boy†, a uranium atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in an effort