Nativism: Race and Immigrants

Nativism is the feeling that immigration and foreigners are detrimental to native-born Americans. Unfortunately, nativist’s feelings are not based on political convenience or logical theories, but on ignorant assumptions that produce religious, racial, and cultural discrimination. Many nativist groups or individuals, both in the past and presently, have one thing in common- the fear of not being in control. The basic thing one has to see is that misinformation and short-sighted fear can often produce the absence of fairness and human dignity.The Ku Klux Klan was a racist group who also committed atrocities in the name of nativism. The KKKs were formed because many people were started to get afraid of the â€Å"rising power of the blacks† and also hated immigration and Jews. â€Å"What was the rising power of the blacks? † Is it because they were not slaves or maybe because they simply wanted to vote, a constitutional right! African Americans were still treated li ke property in the South under the Jim Crow Laws.African Americans were denied their constitutional right to vote by various ways of intimidation; but yet the KKKs could do whatever they wanted and be protected by the â€Å"constitutional† idea that they had the right to express themselves. The KKKs were also anti-Semitic and anti-Semitism was prevalent in the U. S. To understand immigration better one has to see the factors that produced and produce immigration to America. Industrialization and social changes in Europe produced mass immigration from countries like Germany, France, and Ireland.The Industrial Revolution transformed the small, agricultural society into a manufacturing economy which helped the U. S. to prosper and excel. Social changes were another major factor that stimulated immigration. Political upheavals, religious persecution, and a search for adventure were the basic reason for the relocation of these people. Why would they come to the U. S. to purposely try to create a political or cultural upheaval, if the whole reason they left their homelands was escape these problems?The truth of the matter is that they just wanted to seek a peaceful setting that they could create a family and contribute to American society. There were two types of immigrants- the old and the new. The old immigrants of the past( which consequently was also divided into old and new immigration categories) and the new immigrants of today; mostly the Hispanics and Asians. Most of the old immigrants were Europeans- French, Irish, German, Italian, and Polish. Although the new immigrants of that time were discriminated by the native† Americans and the older immigrants ( British, French, and German) there was not the same animosity that is seen between present immigrants and native Americans. In the present, 86% of the newest immigration comes from Latin America and Asia while Europe only contributes 10%. The main difference between present immigration and past immigration is that most immigrants from Europe were male and white; however, present immigration is that most of today’s newcomers are from Developing Countries ; therefore, most are colored people who, either are married or have a family.Some may say that new immigrants are less skilled than the old immigrants and that furthermore, they do not want to â€Å"Americanize† but actually most of the newest immigrants are educated and professionally trained. The problem with the American government is that they don’t give Hispanics or Asians any opportunities because they know that these immigrants will succeed! In fact what they do is oppress these immigrants until these people get fed up and retaliate for survival; then the Americans say how much a problem immigrants are without knowing that in time of vulnerability any human being is going to act irrational.This is a day to day event in the U. S. ; one could say it is â€Å"political drowning of an immigrant. â €  Why is it that these immigrants cannot have equal jobs as the people who have been educated here? The idea that new immigrants cannot effectively contribute to the American economy just because they are culturally different is simply naive. Why is it that the old immigrants did contribute to the advancement of the American economy and the newer immigrants are people who are just useful for menial jobs? One hopes that society’s judgment of present immigration is not determined just on their color of skin.The problem with American society is the pessimistic attitude they obtain when things are not going their way. As Harry Truman wisely said, â€Å"A pessimist is one who makes difficulties of his opportunities and an optimist is one who makes opportunities of his difficulties! † Economically speaking, immigration is beneficial for the American economy. Several arguments are given to try to prove this wrong. Some may say that immigrants take away jobs from Americans . But what jobs? Most immigrants work as maids or janitors, jobs that Americans do not want to do.What would the U. S. do without immigrants who are willing to do humiliating jobs for scarce amounts of money? Or maybe these critics of immigration are talking about the few amount of immigrants who want to excel and become successful? The anti-immigration people feel threatened and fear that these â€Å"minorities† will surpass the â€Å"native† Americans and they will no longer be able to control and manipulate these â€Å"ignorant, gullible immigrants. † Another argument is that immigrants receive more than their fair share of welfare benefits.But yet again in actuality immigrants pay their fair share of taxes. Julian Simon, an economist states, â€Å" immigrant families typically pay more taxes than their native counterparts do. † Also according to Julian Simon, immigrants arrive young and healthy and use fewer services on the average than do native fami lies. New waves of young immigrants do not receive expensive Social Security, Medicare, and other aid to the aged. Finally a common argument is that for the U. S. , immigration is not an economic necessity but a luxury. And like all luxuries, it can help- or it can hurt.The American economy is vital for the existence of the values that this democratic nation was based on. It’s ignorant to say that immigrants do not boost or stimulate the American economy! James Carter, Jr. once said,† Our American values are not luxuries but necessities—not the salt in our bread, but the bread itself. Our common vision of a free and just society is our greatest source of cohesion at home and strength abroad—greater than the bounty of our material blessings. † The common vision that Carter was talking about was and is the most important thing of all- moral values!Currently there are some myths that blind American society concerning immigration. For instance the myth t hat most immigrants are illegal; eventhough, no one really knows how many illegals there are, it is estimated that 300,000 people enter the country illegally each year compared more than a million people who are entering the U. S. legally. Another myth is that most immigrants have less education than native-born Americans. Actually of African-born residents, 88% have had a high school education or better compared with the 77% of native-born who have had a high school education or better.Lastly, the myth that the newer immigrants refuse to learn English. Most of the new immigrants want to learn English but since their so busy trying to survive and work, they don’t have the time or money to have English classes. It seems that at of all the disliked races, the Hispanics and Asians are probably the worst discriminated class. Since blacks have become appeased with what they have, they really don’t create much of a problem. The whites can use them as their puppets and give t hem â€Å"little treats† such as an â€Å"almost important† job.The African- American community is complacent, besides a few black leaderS, they just want to leave things the way they are. Unfortunately the blacks have gone so far and advanced so much that they don’t want to risk losing it all; eventhough, the dream that powerful people such as Dr. Martin Luther King had has not yet been accomplished. It seems that everything that goes wrong is blamed on the Hispanics and Asians. The Asians have always been discriminated somehow in American History beginning from California discriminating the Chinese to the Japanese internment camps after Pearl Harbor.The U. S. has never really had a solid relationship with Asia. But what about Hispanics? In the Immigration Act of 1921 their was no limits put on Latin American countries because the U. S. wanted a good diplomatic relation with Latin America and because cheap labor from Mexico was needed on the farms of California . One could argue the throughout American history immigration has been validated by American society if it is beneficial for the natives in America just as long they don’t feel threatened.For instance the Bracero Program, in 1942 when America needed the labor of aliens to help it with its war effort they allowed Mexicans to work temporarily in America’s industries. It appears that the volume of immigration seemed to rise sharply during periods of prosperity and to sink rapidly during periods of prosperity. The question still remains the same- is it really because of cultural differences or racial differences? But is it really a racial thing? Or does transcend just a simple racial problem? Are we really seeking racial equality?For so long The Nordic theory has told us that the white man deserves to be in power. For so long the white man has thought himself as the majority and all the other races see the white people as the dominant race. But in reality the white race is a minority, they in essence have psychological domination in that everybody thinks they are the supreme race. All the minorities of the world resent the domination that white people have exerted for so long. This resentment turns into hate and eventually the minorities are going to do the same thing the whites did and sometimes even unconsciously do — hate another human being.If one condemns the oppression of the â€Å"white man† than one is in danger of establishing his own form of pride in equality as a substitute for the racism he rejects. Furthermore he becomes arrogant over his own lack of arrogance and becomes prideful over his own lack of pride. To escape from this danger, he needs to cease arguing for the equality of all races, and just assume that racial identity makes no difference. There has always been the delusion of white supremacy based on the fact the white culture is vastly superior than any other culture.The genesis of the dogma of white superiority reveals a fundamental confusion between supremacy and superiority. The first is an undeniable fact of the present world; the second is an invention of the mind to defend the first. Basically the conclusion is that because he is supreme, he is also superior. For so long the colored man has had to submit to white control and pretty soon they are going to get fed up. This could lead to a racial war which would be pointless because this whole racial problem is spiritual not physical!In conclusion nativism belongs to something deeper than just immigration or even racism. Most of the nativists in the Know-Nothings and the KKK did not know that they were blindly proclaiming that the white race is the supreme race. America was built on the basis of freedom and unalienable rights that most countries could not offer. The racial problem will never go away because of the nature of a human being. A human being is individual and only cares about himself and unfortunately the U. S. is a capitalist ic nation who only cares about its interests.One could wish that the social injustices, racial discrimination, and different stereo-types will cease to exist, but as long as humans live on this earth there will always be injustices. The U. S. government will never be perfect no matter how democratic the principles are. Unfortunately, democracy has its flaws and deficiencies just like and other government. Harry Truman wisely said,â€Å" No government is perfect. One of the chief virtues of a democracy, however, is that its defects are always visible and under democratic processes can be pointed out and corrected. We will never live in a just and faultless world because it is both spiritually and psychologically impossible. And history will just keep repeating itself in a continuous cycle, history is a very powerful tool to acclimate one’s self with the human race or the human identity. But one has to remember that one of the best things about good history is its power to red uce national arrogance and to promote reflection and caution for later on. Until we start looking at the human history through the world’s perspective and not just â€Å"American History,† then we will truly excel not only as American people but as a human kind!

Ethics of Compliance Southwest Essay

The purpose of this paper is to present, discuss, and examine the topic of ethical and social responsibility. It will discuss Southwest Airlines’ failure to comply with the Federal Aviation Administration’s rules on inspecting aircraft and what violations occurred. On March 6, 2008, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspectors submitted documents to the United States Congress, alleging that Southwest allowed 117 of its aircraft to fly carrying passengers despite the fact that the planes were â€Å"not airworthy† according to air safety investigators. In some cases, the planes were allowed to fly for up to 30 months after the inspection deadlines had passed, rendering them unfit to fly. Records indicate that thousands of passengers were flown on aircraft deemed unsafe by federal standards. Clearly, this is an issue tied to social responsibility and ethics at the highest level, ignoring the safety inspections put people’s lives in jeopardy. This situation actually began in 1988, when an Aloha Airlines Boeing 737 suffered an accident that killed a flight attendant. The top of the plane’s fuselage tore off, opening up a large section of the plane’s roof, killing the flight attendant. The accident occurred because of cracks in the plane’s fuselage. Since then, the FAA has required regular inspections of 737 fuselages to ensure an accident like this does not occur again. In 2007, two FAA inspectors began to question documentation and inspections at Southwest Airlines. They had reason to be concerned, because they felt their concerns were being ignored, and their supervisor was not investigating their complaints. FAA inspectors Bobby Boutris and Douglas Peters testified before Congress about their experiences, and asked for whistleblower status, meaning they could not be fired from their jobs because of their testimony. Boutris was the first to question records kept by Southwest about airplane inspections. In 2003, he was in charge of inspecting engines for the 737, and he could validate the Southwest’s reports. He told an NPR Radio reporter, â€Å"‘I had found a lot of inconsistencies with the records,’ Boutris says. They were different from aircraft to aircraft; it was very hard to determine compliance'† (Goodwyn, 2008). He notes that he complained to his supervisor, Douglas Gawadzinski, but he ignored Boutris’ complaints. In 2006, Boutris took over safety responsibility for the entire 737-700 series aircraft, and when he reviewed Southwest, he found the same recordkeeping problems he had uncovered in 2003. He notified his supervisor and wanted to send a le tter of investigation, again his supervisor Gawadzinski refused to acknowledge his concerns. Boutris believes it is because Gawadzinski had a close friendship with Paul Comeau, a former FAA employee who went to work for Southwest as their manager for regulatory compliance. Anything to do with Southwest and the FAA went through these two men, and Boutris believes they routinely covered up inspection irregularities or lack of inspections. Boutris continued to complain, and Southwest asked for him to be removed from their inspections. Reporter Goodwyn continues, â€Å"At first, Gawadzinski refused to remove Boutris. But it wasn’t long before the supervisory maintenance inspector told Boutris he was out and that his career was in jeopardy because there had been undisclosed complaints from anonymous Southwest officials† (Goodwyn, 2008). At this point, Douglas Peters, another FAA inspector, were brought in to review Boutris’ investigation into Southwest’s compliance. Goodwyn notes, â€Å"The more he looked into the matter, the more he agreed with Boutris that the flying public was in danger. Peters says the situation defied logic. ‘That something so critical †¦ would be not addressed †¦ I can’t explain it. It’s a mystery'† (Goodwyn, 2008). People from Southwest began to contact Gawadzinski directly, instead of going through Peters. Another reporter states, â€Å"The whistle-blowers complained repeatedly in memos written in 2007 that their concerns about Southwest were not being taken seriously. The underlying safety concern — the airline was unable to keep up with mandatory inspections — had been raised as early as 2003, one charged† (Levin, 2008). Finally, in March 2007, Southwest admitted to flying 47 737s without completing the problem fuselage inspections, which triggered a Congressional investigation. Even more disturbing, the airline continued to fly the planes even after disclosing they had not been inspected – it took almost a week to ground the planes. The two men testified before Congress in April 2008, and the FAA fined Southwest $10. 2 million for the blunders. Reporter Levin continues, â€Å"Last month, nearly a year after the initial problems were discovered, the FAA levied a $10. 2 million fine against Southwest. The vast majority of the fine was imposed because Southwest had certified that it stopped flying the planes as soon as it learned of the missed inspections, FAA officials said† (Levin, 2008). These are the basic facts and timeline of the case. The major overriding issue in this case is that the FAA and Southwest conspired to cover up inspection information, and they did so at passengers and crewmembers expense. The inspections were mandated because the FAA knew this particular plane had critical safety issues. By not inspecting planes and allowing them to continue flying, they were putting everyone on those planes in jeopardy, and they knew it. That is perhaps the biggest ethical concern of this case, that the company knew they had not completed checks, but continued to fly the planes anyway. One of the whistleblowers was told they did not ground the planes because it would â€Å"disrupt† Southwest’s service and flight schedule (Goodwyn, 2008). Every airline has a social responsibility to keep their passengers and crews as safe as possible. Flying is a relatively safe form of travel, however accidents do occur. Maintaining high maintenance and safety standards is simply the right thing to do in the transportation industry; it is the ethical, moral, and socially responsible choice. For an airline to lower those standards, especially because of worries about disruption of service, is simply incomprehensible. For example, the entire airline would be in jeopardy if one of the planes had crashed, and it was found to have been because of a crack that was not detected because of a missed inspection. Indeed, inspections on the aircraft did turn up cracks in some of the planes in question, cracks that had to be repaired before the airplanes took flight again (Wilber, 2008). Thus, Southwest put people in danger, and that is a major ethical violation that has not thoroughly been addressed in the media or by the airline itself. In addition, the FAA was compliant in this ethical transgression, because they allowed it to happen, calling into question the integrity of the organization that is supposed to be primarily concerned with airline safety and maintenance. If the agency doing the oversight is questionable, it brings the entire system into question. This issue should be studied further because it raises so many moral and ethical questions, and it should be studied because it seems, since there seem to be no lasting ramifications for the FAA, that it could happen again, which is even more disturbing. The stakeholders in this case are the people who fly on Southwest Airlines. Southwest damaged their reputation by letting down their stakeholders, and that is extremely disturbing. They put passenger safety in jeopardy over worries about income and disrupted flights, when their first concern should have been safety and only safety. This calls into question the entire integrity of the company. This is more than just the classical interpretation of right and wrong, it is a moral dilemma that should have had an extremely simple solution. Ground the planes, inspect them as quickly as possible, and get them back in the air. The fact that there was any other solution seen to the problem indicates just how unethical and morally irresponsible Southwest was, and the stakeholders should demand compensation for the threat this decision made to their safety. Southwest simply got lucky that one of the affected planes did not develop more serious issues, and the $10. 2 million dollar fine seems quite low in retrospect, considering the damage that could have occurred to people and property had a plane crashed. The economic responsibility of this situation is clear; Southwest had to pay a large fine and ground the planes, losing revenue anyway. Their reputation suffered, although it did not seem to make a dent in their passenger. Most people did not even seem to care that Southwest had endangered them and only a few spoke out in blogs or in other areas when the news broke. Southwest has a serious responsibility to keep its passengers and crews safe, and they lost the trust of at least some people because of their callous disregard for safety. That is a huge moral responsibility, and Southwest has never really acknowledged their failure, which is an even larger ethical concern, it seems. In a statement before Congress, Southwest CEO Gary Kelly said, â€Å"Our compliance with certain specific Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airworthiness directives has been called into question. We have committed to a thorough review and to make any changes necessary to ensure that we are in full compliance with FAA airworthiness directives and our own maintenance programs, policies, and procedures† (Kelly, 2008). However, in previous testimony before Congress, Kelly and Southwest Executive Chairman Herb Kelleher both maintained that Southwest did comply with all FAA requirements, and the safety of passengers was never in question (Kelly, 2008). Thus, Southwest maintains they complied with all FAA regulations and did inspect the aircraft, only under a different maintenance directive than the one the two whistleblowers charged had not been done. It seems like a technicality, and that Southwest is not taking true moral or ethical responsibility for the incidents. They also stated that they did not think they would be fined for the maintenance issues, and it seems as if in their testimony, they were attempting to lay groundwork to fight a fine. However, they did eventually back down and stop contesting the fine, probably because they felt they looked bad enough already. Some recommendations for this case have already been completed. The FAA inspector, Gawadzinski, was transferred to another division, without contact with Southwest. Southwest placed several maintenance and safety personnel on leave, and developed new maintenance and safety guidelines. The two top executives maintain they did not know about the 2007 maintenance charges until March 2008, and as soon as they learned of them, they implemented stronger maintenance and communication directives so they would be notified and aware of any problems. These would have been at least some of the recommendations made in this case. Another would be for Southwest to undergo a major campaign to gain back the public’s trust, as many people would seem to have trust issues in flying on Southwest planes. This would include a media campaign that would address trust issues, and perhaps even a campaign including top executives flying on their own planes. This would not be too costly or difficult to administer, and it would let people know that the company is actually sorry about its actions and is going to be more responsible in the future. It also seems as if the company should apologize to their stakeholders and their crewmembers, not in front of Congress, but in front of them, and with humility. Frankly, their testimony and apology to Congress sounded defensive and insincere, and a true measure of humility might be to offer anyone who flew on those planes some type of compensation or personal apology to make the situation even a little bit more palatable. Of course, that would entail a large expense, but it would make their intentions a bit more acceptable. Finally, they have to be open and above board with their maintenance issues and they have to make quite certain there is nothing questionable about any of their practices. Their maintenance and safety department must be impeccable, and it must always be open to scrutiny not only by the FAA, but by the public, as well. They owe that, at the very least, to the people that choose to fly on Southwest Airlines. In conclusion, this case indicates how deeply ethical issues can affect a business. Allowing planes to fly uninspected is a terrible disservice to the passengers and crews of this airline. It indicates a deep-seated lack of respect for the public, the employees, and the agency created to maintain air travel safety. It also indicates an arrogance that the company can flaunt the system and win. Southwest Airlines has deeper issues than maintenance and safety. It has to take a strong look at its ethics and principles, and alter them to create a more socially responsible organization that respects and values the people it serves. Without a change, the organization will certainly suffer more ethical violations in the future.

The Debilitating Effect of Hierarchical Structures on Those With and Essay

The Debilitating Effect of Hierarchical Structures on Those With and Without Power Then and Now - Essay Example In various forms, hierarchy gives rise to leaders or a handful of principal individuals in a group, which naturally occurs from interactions. Magee and Galinsky (3) discuss the definition and behavior of a hierarchical structure: Resources are unequally distributed across individuals and groups, and positions and roles are granted different amounts of sources of power, which are conferred upon the individuals who occupy them. Like both human and non-human primate societies more generally, most, if not all, organizations have a stratified structure, a pyramid shape with fewer people at the top than at the bottom. Even when one considers the heterogeneity of organizational forms and organizational practices and cultures that are intended to dodge or suppress hierarchy, what is most noticeable is that hierarchy relentlessly rises up against these pressures. Most importantly, hierarchy is a naturally-forming phenomenon that is always present in various forms across all societies in the w orld. It inescapably develops between and within groups even when some organizations reduce the effect of its structure by adopting alternative models of shaping an organization (Leavitt 42). Social hierarchy in organizations is defined as â€Å"an implicit or explicit rank order of individuals or groups with respect to a valued social dimension† (Magee and Galinsky 5). ... 930). Hierarchies create power and control to individuals of the higher rank that hold greater ability, skills and motivation to complete certain tasks within a group. In formal hierarchy, the differentiated structure is constant but passive since changing the assembly of ranks is difficult and borderline unreasonable. On the other hand, the organizational structure in informal hierarchy is weak and conditional because the hierarchical differentiation is only done on short interaction based on stereotype-based expectations (Magee and Galinsky 7). Over the years, hierarchical structures faded and developed a debilitating effect to those members of groups and organizations that possess power and to those who lack one. This gradual weakening of hierarchy will be discussed by exploring the literary pieces, â€Å"The Use of Force† by William Carlos William, â€Å"Those Winter Sundays† by Robert Hayden, and â€Å"My Papa’s Waltz† by Theodore Roethke. William Car los William’s famous short story, â€Å"The Use of Force† presents the application of physical superiority of a person with power to others who have none. In the story, a doctor is shown to diagnose a sick child whom they suspect of having the deadly disease diphtheria. The doctor needed to get a throat culture in the mouth of the child in order to examine the cause of the illness correctly, however the stubbornness of the child and the passive authority of the parents made the process harder to execute. The doctor appeared to be compassionate at first, addressing an open mind to the expressed fear of the child in being examined, and at the reluctance of the parents to accommodate a stranger like him into their home. But as the child becomes more

Global Interdependence Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Global Interdependence - Article Example Davis shows how, the fearfulness of the calamity was accelerated by the callous colonizers that led to the death of thousands of poor men, women and children and livestock. In the article by Odd Arne Westad, hails the USA as an interventionist power whose sole aim and purpose has been territorial expansion. The USA has not been fair in treatment to its own citizens, as we know from the terrible plight of the Black Americans. One of the ideals that worked behind motivating the elites of the United States was liberty, which was accessible to those who had private property and education. Thus, the authors in their respective articles condemn vehemently the destructive force of ruling a supposedly inferior race by a self-proclaimed superior race. Domination is the key theme in all the three writings. All these three writers have criticized domination in terms of rule and interference, thereby weakening a country to the considerable extent and robbing its citizens of their natural wealth and environment. Aime describes colonial invasions as ‘hideous’ and is very justified in calling so since the act of taking over another nation completely destroys it and its people. Only force is the base of the relation between the colonizer and the colonized. Davis’ article only reinstates this theory by citing the example of the infamous famine that crippled India during the British Rule. While India produced enough crops to feed its people, most of it was hoarded and the rest exported to different parts of the world. While millions of people died, the colonizers maintained a policy of non-interference. In the article by Westad is a further reinstatement of the evils of forceful acquisition of others land. Colonizers ge nerally cite the example of the colonized’s ignorance, brutality, superstition etc. as was written by Jefferson to Lafayette in 1813.  

DWI Plea Bargaining and Recidivism and relevance to deterrence and Thesis

DWI Plea Bargaining and Recidivism and relevance to deterrence and social learning theory - Thesis Example From the research it can be comprehended that social learning theory and general deterrence theories are two theories which may be used to combat the problem of drinking and driving. Social learning is based upon group behavior, and the assumption that groups have the same norms, values and beliefs, which are transmitted through the group. Behavior may also be punished or rewarded within the group, and modeling plays a part, in that individuals look at each others' behavior and imitate this behavior. The group also has definitions, which serve as justifications or excuses for behavior. This is the most important part of social learning theory. General deterrence theory, on the other hand, focuses on reinforcement, as opposed to association. It is solely focused on punishment, and the theory is that if punishment is both severe and certain, it is more likely to deter others from engaging in this particular behavior. This theory has less scientific evidence supporting it, although it c an coincide with social learning theory, in that part of social learning theory concerns vicarious reinforcement, which means that individuals in a group see others in their group be rewarded or punished for behavior, and react accordingly. General deterrence is a part in that, if a member of a group is punished, then this is a model to others to stop the behavior. Social learning theory has been implicated in criminality, in particular with regards to violence. Rosenstock, Stretcher, and Becker (1988) state that social learning theory is based upon expectancies and incentives. The expectancies consist of expectancies regarding environmental clues (how events are connected, and what leads to what); expectancies about the consequences of one's own actions; and expectancies regarding one's own competency to perform the behavior necessary to achieve the desired outcome. The incentives part of this equation consists of value of the particular outcome. Akers, Krohn, Lanza-Kaduce, Radosev ich (1979) conceive of social learning theory as a variance of operant conditioning combined with learning by observing other's behavior. In other words, social learning is dependent upon the factors governing operant conditioning, which is dependent upon rewards to reinforce good behavior and punishment to deter bad behavior. Either deviant or conforming behavior may be reinforced, depending upon the punishment and rewards one gets for one or the other behavior. Observation of others is the other part of this equation, and this is where individuals learn by watching others what kind of behavior is rewarded or punished. Others model for them what behavior is good and what behavior is bad – in particular, people learn from others who have great influence in their lives, like peers, teachers or parents. Akers (2006) states that social learning consists of four variables. The first is differential association. This means that the individual associates with others with behaviors, values and norms which are supportive of the particular act in question. This association may either be with peers, parents or others, and it may also be association with video games, television, on-line groups and the like. A definition refers to rationalizations, justifications and excuse for the behavior. Differential reinforcement refers to the anticipation of rewards or punishment for the behavior. Generally, the more likely the behavior is to be rewarded, the more likely the person will engage in this behavior. Imitation refers

Emanuel Medical Center Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Emanuel Medical Center - Case Study Example EMC’s Service Area incorporated the wide city of Turlock and the smaller towns in its periphery. Out of eighty percent of EMC’s patients were residents of the primary service area, sixty-four percent came from Turlock. The twelve small towns in the Turlock’s periphery were EMC’s secondary service area and were within five and fifteen miles from EMC. The secondary service area provided fourteen percent of all ECM’s patients. Residents from without EMC’s primary and secondary service area made up the remaining six percent of EMC’s patients. EMC had a mixed customer base comprising of cultural diversity and patients of different ages. In 1999, EMC recorded that 40.1 of its patients were 65 years and older, patients between 15 and 44 years of age formed 33.2 percent, and the 14-year olds and younger formed 10.2 percent. Hispanics were 32.5 percent of EMC’s patient population and were the fastest growing segment of emergency departme nt admissions. In 2002, the population of EMC’s primary service area was about 200,000 that was a nineteen percent increase from its population of about 168,000 in 1998. A big proportion of EMC’s patient population was baby boomers (Fisher, 2009). There are many hospitals and surgical outpatient clinics within 50 miles of Turlock that compete for patients’ loyalty. Kaiser Permanente’s contract with Memorial Medical Centre of Modesto is one of the large HMOs that provide EMC with insurance-covered patients. HMOs add to EMC’s market advantage because they provide it with this section of the patient population. However, the proximity of EMC’s competitors accelerates the fight for patients.

Compare and contrast the development strategies of Mao Zedong and Deng Essay

Compare and contrast the development strategies of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping. Examine the successes and failures of each strategy - Essay Example The focus on economic and agricultural reform is what made the two leaders very similar. That is, they were both concerned about improving their country through agricultural and economic reform. More so, they were both communists looking forward to lead China in that direction. They both started many social, cultural and economic reforms in which some failed and some were successful. According to Deng, socialism was a means to economic development (Ash, Howe and Kueh 2013, p.15). Deng Xiaoping has been identified as a good leader whose actions led to the improvement of the Chinese society. On the other hand, Mao’s actions resulted in more damage than good for the Chinese citizens. Notably, Mao Zedong suggested many strategies in the establishment of Chinese socialism. Some of these included large-scale land reforms and collectivization of agriculture, which were meant to recover the economy and modernize China. In addition, he transformed the living standards of individuals in rural areas by improving healthcare and introducing middle-school education (Bramall 2008, p.549). The land reforms were marked with the enactment of the Agrarian Reform Law of 1950, which aimed at dismantling China’s feudal system (Shen 2000, p.3). After land reforms, individuals were able to produce more and the increased production provided enough raw materials for industrial development. Thereafter in 1958, Mao introduced the Great Leap Forward under which high targets were created for industry and agriculture. Mao hoped that China could catch up with Britain in steel and other industries, and so he introduced the collectivization of agriculture under which individuals were t o leave their land and join cooperatives. However, this policy failed and had catastrophic impacts as individual’s working incentives declined leading to food shortage. About fifteen million Chinese people lost their lives due to