The article “A dangerous new world of drones” is written by “Peter Bergen” and “Jennifer Rowland”. “Peter Bergen, CNN's national security analyst, is director of the national security studies program at the New America Foundation while Jennifer Rowland is a program associate at the New America Foundation.” (Bergen). In this article the authors have discussed the phenomenon of proliferation of drone technology and have tried to highlight its impacts on the today’s scenario of the world. The arguments are well framed and quantitative information have been presented to back up these arguments by providing statistical data.

Authors are of the view that the drone technology is being proliferated very rapidly in the countries around the globe. Eradicating U.S monopoly of the last decade over this technology, today about 70 countries possess some kind of drones.U.S started this technology and launched it for the first time in their “war against terror” in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The underlying point in this article is that there must be an international framework on the issues of drone technology because of its highly disastrous impacts onthe world order. As many other countries too have established their motives to use the technology against their rivals in the near future and have provided their own justifications for its use, such as China announced that it would target the islands in the South China Sea with drones. These islands are under the control of Japan but China and Taiwan both are claimants of them. Authors think that use of drones by U.S has set a trend for other countries and without an international framework it won’t be possible to stop them from doing so.

Read Full Article...»

In the article “Catholics Then, Muslims Now”, the author Doug Sounders has tried to highlight the underlying factors and beliefs behind the release of the current controversial anti-Islamic video which has been termed as highly disrespectful to the Holy Prophet (PBUH) by the Muslim community around the globe. In author’s view, this video is a continuation to the anti-Muslim eruptions in the United States. These outbursts against Muslims are an outcome of post 9/11 scenarios in the context of a scheme to propagate hatred against Muslims among the resident community of the United States specifically and in that of the whole West in general. A highly organized and well framed strategy has been backing these activities as before this project, a mosque was burned few months back in Missouri and similarly an attempt was made to blow up an Islamic school in Illinois with an acid bomb. The author further sheds light upon the doctrines of those who are backing these activities and links their motives against Muslims to those against the Catholics of such extremists in the past.

The Roman Catholics immigrants were targeted severely since the 19th century and a whole way of hatred was tried to create against them. Writings were published to create an environment of deep distrust against them in the United States. Catholics were termed as extremists, disloyal and were blamed for being inclined towards authoritarianism.As the author “Paul Blanshard” who wrote “American Freedom and Catholic Power” which was New York Times best seller in 1950, said “Catholicism was an ideology of conquest, and that its traditions constituted a form of medieval authoritarianism that has no rightful place in the democratic American environment.”And so at the time this text was dominating the ideology of many of their famous scholars and other prominent liberal figures of the society.  

Read Full Article...»

The dichotomy between the personal and the political has long been a contentious issue in political philosophy now. With the period of Enlightenment followed by the ascent of modernity the importance of the role of the individual has grown immensely over the centuries. The concept of the individual and notions of agency, freedom and equality are the characteristic features of liberal theory. Philosophers with authoritarian undertones have defied these notions and placed an emphasis on public life and the role of the state. In their views the state is an overarching institution which best knows the interest of its people. But with pluralism and diversity on the forefront, liberals continue to argue for the individual’s own freedom to choose. This paper aims to discuss the issue of this divide between what issues are deemed to be the individual’s choice and what issues are deemed to be addressed by the public sphere. For this purpose it will take into account the texts of John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant and Carl Schmitt.

           

John Stuart Mill addresses the question of civil liberty. He is concerned with that aspect of power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual. Mill reiterates the evolution of how political power developed over time and how it has come to define its sphere today. Initially the leader was considered as someone in opposition to the people at large and his authority a weapon of tyranny against which the people needed to be protected. Soon however the populace gained awareness regarding the idea of leadership and it was thought that the leaders should be actually the representatives of the people as opposed to being antagonistic authorities. People realized that if they could identify with their leaders then their own interests would coincide with the interests of the rulers (Mill, 303). This chain of thought soon developed further and the birth of modern democracy took place.

       

    Democracy too over time however deteriorated and distanced itself from many of the premises that it was based on. Soon it was realized once again by people that the form of “self government” that was idealized was fading. Moreover the “will of the people” on which the entire system of government was based was in effect the will of the majority. Soon this “will” of the majority displayed itself in the form of the “tyranny of the majority” (Mill, 305). This too at first is perceived by one as something comprising the domain of the political and hence subject to public debate. But Mill contends on the other hand that a form of social tyranny exists. This is when society tends to uphold certain beliefs and opinions and penalizes socially those who deny these opinions. These thoughts of defiance are not punished legally, however the individual who dares this act experiences the interference of society into his personal domain and in a sense as Mill proposes, imprisons his soul. According to Mill there needs to be a limit on the power of collective opinion to the extent that it does not end up crushing the individual opinion (Mill, 305). So Mill is in a sense proposing that the lines of the private sphere must be respected as regards the importance of individuality. Therefore on the question of political despotism, most political theorists will argue that it is something that needs to be addressed by the society at large since it concerns the well being of the entire polity.

           

Read Full Article...»

The purpose of this report is to identify the latest trends in the “Role of Human Resource Management”. HRM is defined as “a science which manages the employees in an organization in order to achieve organization objectives.” The ‘Role of HRM’ means the ‘purpose’ for which HRM actually exists in an organization; and the ‘work’ that it is expected to do. This report illustrates how the purpose of HRM has shifted from a ‘support function for senior management’ to being a ‘key player in strategy making and strategy implementation’.  The report also considers examples of organizations who have adopted this shift in the roles of HRM, and also considers the benefits and shortcomings of the new roles.

The traditional role of Human Resource Management (or Personnel management) has been as a clerical, support function for senior management. HRM has only been expected to execute policies, deal with paperwork and administration, and do other mundane and mechanical tasks. These tasks have included only the procedural works involved in selection, recruiting, retaining, training and performance evaluation etc. Because of the nature of these tasks, senior management has considered HR to be ‘disconnected’ with the real objectives of the company and a department that does not contribute any value to the Organization.  Dissatisfaction with HR in the past has been such that organizations had started thinking of disbanding HRM completely, or outsourcing it (Ulrich 1998).

However academia has argued that, in a globalized world, competition has increased so much that the only true competitive advantage an organization can now have, is its Human Capital, and for this reason doing away with HR is out of the question. At the turn of the millennium, Dave Ulrich (1997; 1998) suggested new roles which he believed could better utilize the potential of Human Capital. These new roles were for HRM to act as ‘Strategic partners’, as ‘Change Agents’, as ‘Administrative Expert’, and as ‘Employee advocates’ for the organization. Ulrich’s model has continued to evolve over time and is still being gradually adopted by organizations (Bowen et al 2002; Ulrich 2005; Wright 2008).

Of the four roles mentioned above, the ‘Strategic Partner’ role has gained most popularity and acceptance. Strategy is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as ‘a plan of action designed to achieve a long-term aim’. It was suggested that HR personnel should focus on delivering results rather than doing tasks; the desired results being to align the employees and HR policies with the organization’s goals (Beer 1997; Ulrich 1997).

Read Full Article...»