Individualism

Pursuit of Happiness

Happiness is not one thing; it means different things in different places, different societies, and different cultural contexts. There are multiple “pursuits of happiness”. It’s impossible to define “happiness”. It’s left to each of us to define what “happiness” is. Happiness cannot be achieved in minutes it comes from the pursuit of happiness, Working towards and achieving goals. Pursuit of happiness differs from person to person and from culture to culture. Diener and his colleagues (Diener et al. 2003) believe life evaluations are important to the quality of life in all societies because it is hard to imagine either a good life or a good society without a positive sense of SWB. However, they argue that every culture has set values, and goals that people use to evaluate their happiness. Culture refers to beliefs, social norms, religious background, these characteristics shared by people in a place and time for everyday existence. Understanding the culture differences will allow you to understand the differences in of happiness.

For the most part each culture has certain values and goals that are looked upon to be the acceptable norm for happiness and that is how happiness is measures. The media, parents, schools, peers influence the way people think, act, and feel towards a successful life. The general population that surrounds you influences people’s ideas about the meaning of happiness and how to achieve it. Comparing the traditional American perspective on happiness with the traditional Asian perspective on happiness, by cultural and historical factors that contribute to happiness.

Americans are individualistic culture which means the people are primary focus is that of themselves and their immediate families. In contrast to Asians, which are, collectivistic cultures, where the members are concerned more with the well being of the group rather then their own well-being. On average, people living in wealthy nations are happier than those living in less wealthy nations. The untied States is near the top of the income measure, 6th in life satisfaction. Japanese like and have high income, but only moderate in subjective well-being.

China ranks very low on income measure and higher then Japanese in subjective well being measure. Over the past 25 years, history of international surveys have not changed the ranking have been quite stable. | Asia collectivist culture characteristics traits:

1. Each person is encouraged to be an active player in society, to do what is best for society as a whole rather than themselves.
2. The rights of families, communities, and the collective supersede those of the individual.
3. Rules promote unity, brotherhood, and selflessness. Working with others and cooperating is the norm; everyone supports each other.
4. As a community, family or nation more than as an individual.

United States Individualism cultures characteristics traits:

• “I” identity.
• Promotes individual goals, initiative and achievement.
• Individual rights are seen as being the most important. Rules attempt to ensure self-importance and individualism.
• Independence is valued; there is much less of a drive to help other citizens or communities than in collectivism.
• Relying or being dependent on others is frequently seen as shameful. People are encouraged to do things on their own, to rely on themselves.

The stereotype of a ‘good person’ in collectivist cultures is trustworthy, honest, generous, and sensitive, all characteristics that are helpful to people working in groups. In contrast, a ‘good person’ in individualist cultures is more assertive and strong, characteristics helpful for competing. Asian members rate happiness and life satisfaction on the lower end of the scale. They do not think of their life as being happy or sad, satisfying or dissatisfying it just is what it is.

Believing emotional feelings are temporary they live in the now rather then wanting more for tomorrow. In Asian cultures, regard how others view you and necessary related to how they view themselves. Positive feelings occur when pleasing others, fulfilling social expectations. Achieving goals that enhance interdependence is directly related to happiness in collectivist cultures. For Americans positive feelings are strongly related to goal achievement. Achieving goals enhances our independence giving us a sense of pride and accomplishment.

That feeling is important to Americans in reaching happiness promoting mutual trust and support in relationships is directly related to happiness and well being within the Asian culture. In individualistic cultures, a shared belief in the importance of feeling good about oneself promotes self-enhancement and social exchanges characterized by mutual approval and praise. Considering the wide ranging influence of culture on peoples feelings, thought, and behaviors, different types of persuasive messages may very well influence people differently in cultures as distinct as north America and east Asia.

The cultural differences between USA, France and Japan are evident throughout both Hofstede’s and Trompenaars’ dimensions. With regard to Hofstede, USA has a high IDV ranking, an average MAS ranking, a low PDI, and a low UAI ranking with relation to France and Japan. USA’s IDV ranking is the highest among the others involved in Disney’s multinational project and this results in US being the most individualistic nation where people hold very loose bonds among themselves; whereas Japan holds the lowest IDV ranking and is a collectivist society where people are integrated into groups.

When examining these countries with regards to MAS ranking, Japan outruns both US and France by far. Judging by that ranking Japan places a greater importance on gender differentiation than U.S, while women in France may hold similar values to those in US and Japan the level of difference between their assertiveness and competitiveness and that of men is less than in masculine countries.

France has the highest PDI ranking making it very unequal in terms of societal classes and organizations; whereas Japan is relatively average and U.S ranks the lowest making it a nation with a stable cultural environment in which interaction between power levels is not only permitted but encouraged. In terms of UAI ranking, Japan rates the highest and is a society that appreciates a structured environment with strict rules and guidelines whereas US has the lowest UAI among the three countries and as a nation it has a greater lever of tolerance for a variety of ideas and beliefs than France and Japan, respectively.

With regard to Trompenaars’ dimensions France and Japan are both particularistic and communitarian countries, whereas USA is more universalistic and individualistic. However USA and France have other attributes such as being emotional, specific and achievement-oriented when Japan is neutral and focuses on diffusion and ascription. Some of the problems faced by Disney related to the above cultural differences occurred upon the openings of parks in the above countries. When Disney opened a park in Japan it turned out that the lines for the rides had to be redesigned due to the proximity of people waiting in line to those who cross the line while walking the park premises. In Japan it is considered discourteous when people cross in front of others.

This aspect could be attributed to Japan being a neutral country with a low IDV in which close contact is reserved for close family and friends and therefore this type of non-verbal communication is not welcomed. U.S having a low ranking in the Uncertainty Avoidance Dimension allowed Disney entrepreneurs to incorporate an authentic Chinese dish into a park that was intended to be an All-American experience. However, perhaps the lack of attention to strict rules and procedures which is also an attribute to the UAI dimension was responsible for the above dish triggering an angered reaction from environmentalists.

Another incident that can be attributed to cultural differences would be France’s protest to cultural imperialism that the citizens believed was Disney’s primary intention when building Euro Disneyland. According to Trompenaar, France is believed to be an emotional country and citizens rebelled against Disney by posting protest signs and vocally expressing their disapproval. The approach that Disney chose when creating Euro Disneyland which in part ignored the territory for the park’s location, French farmers’ heritage and other cultural differences can be attributed to US’s low LTO dimension. However since US is an emotional nation as well Disney resolved the above dispute by launching an aggressive campaign addressing the concerns.

One of the major mistakes the company made in its Euro Disney operations was discouraging potential employees to apply for jobs by enforcing a strict appearance code that was contradicting with French customs. Among other cultural distinctions, France is known for its fashion and most of the time fashion involves differentiating oneself from the rest. While the applicant may be fitting for a job, he or she may have a two-tone hair color and according to Disney that is not acceptable. While it is important to maintain a brand image, the applicants’ qualifications should outweigh his or her appearance. If I were the HR manager at Disney USA I would adapt the code to the standards of French culture and fashion, aim for neatness as opposed to strict guidelines and place a greater impact on applicants’ ability to achieve the company’s set objectives.

While negotiating in Europe one would have to be sensitive to certain verbal and non-verbal communication criteria that could impact the negotiation in a positive or a negative way. Some verbal communication would include using direct and explicit messages to keep the negotiation focused and goal-oriented, being precise and to reduce barriers between parties. While conducting negotiations in Japan, one would have to adjust the verbal communication to the following guidelines: using indirect and implicit messages, use fewer words, allow pauses and understatements, focus on relationship of the parties and the speaker, and note the context of the speaker’s message.

In general some of the crucial communicating and negotiating skills that are required for a successful International HR manager include familiarity with customs and heritage of particular country of interest, ability to adjust to diversity, adapt to varying cultural aspects, and keeping an open mind. The above skills are important because they set the International HR manager apart from other HR managers who lack the required knowledge in order to carry out international negotiations properly and successfully.

Overall it seems that Disney carries a regiocentric orientation in its worldwide parks. It aims both for profitability and public acceptance by adapting each park to the unique standards and expectations of each country, negotiates between region and subsidiaries, allows regional integration and national responsiveness in terms of choosing a location that is served by public transportation and is also accessible for other European countries. It also allows flexible manufacturing by adjusting heights of tables in the Japanese park and redistribution within region. Disney has a Guided Missile Organizational Culture because it carries a strong emphasis on equality and task orientation. This can be seen through Disney hiring individuals from different European countries not just France where the park is located and by focusing on customer service.

The above orientation and organizational structure are reflected in Disney’s HR operations. Disney aims to be an organization where emphasis is placed on teamwork, balancing work and play, and energy. This encourages employees to express their ideas and opinions and feel that they are an important asset to the organization. Disney also encourages diversity among its employees and places a great emphasis on quality; individual contributions to maintaining company’s quality standard may be rewarded by different recognition programs.i This displays the company’s focus on goal achievement and encourages team members to be enthusiastic about achieving that goal.

Margarita Arnold HIS 112-100M Critical Essay #1 The three fundamental principles of the Enlightenment listed in the text of Traditions and Encounters are popular sovereignty, individual freedom, and political and legal equality. According to Gombrich, the author of the A Little History of the World, the three fundamental principles of the Enlightenment are tolerance, reason, and humanity. Traditions and Encounters describes popular sovereignty as a “contract between the rulers and the ruled” (623).

The king or monarch is a representative of the people who has political rights, but the people hold their personal rights to life, liberty, and property. Individual freedom principle ties in to the personal right of liberty as a freedom of speech with no censorship. Political and legal equality states that everyone should be regarded as equals not matter what their profession is. Individuals should participate in creating laws and policy. If there is no general representative elected, then the people would act as representatives.

This is a laissez faire thought- leave us be or let us do, although not mentioned in Traditions and Encounters as one of the fundamental principles. Laissez faire thought, meaning about the state of French commerce, did come after the Enlightenment, a little before the French revolution. Laissez faire encompasses the three fundamental principles in one thought: leave the people be. A Little History of the World states that tolerance, or common sense could unite all men and all beliefs “should be respected and tolerated” (214).

Reason explained nature and paranormal things such as witchcraft. Gombrich proclaims that reason “is given in equal measure to all mankind the world over” (215). Human dignity prohibits a person to be publically humiliated. This meant that people could not be marked as criminals by branding or cutting of limbs. From Traditions and Encounters and A Little History of the World individual freedom and tolerance could be compared as the same principle on the basis of tolerance could be regarded as the right to free speech and common sense that all people deserve.

Gombrich pairs reason and tolerance in the same category, whereas they are quite different by reason meaning that things in nature could be explained by trial and error. Gombrich credits Frederick the Great as the bravest king to embrace the Enlightenment ideas because he wanted to make Prussia “a model state” (217). Gombrich’s assessment of Frederick the Great in A Little History of the World is accurately stated, because Frederick the Great did support the Enlightenment and made things easier for his people.

He was still a king of course, and any tried to do what any king would: “to make Prussia the mightiest of all the German states” (217) The correlation between the Enlightenment and the revolutions are the ideas that the general population could have these rights of freedom, equality, popular sovereignty, and tolerance. Revolution comes after people realize that human rights are not administrated properly with great merits to John Locke, Voltaire, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who were courageous enough to speak out in those turbulent times. The Enlightenment did not single handedly cause the French or American revolutions.

The French revolution occurred because of unrests in the middle and lower classes, lack of funds due to Seven Years War and the overindulgent spending of the monarchs. The American leaders were also influenced by the Enlightenment, and fought against their oppressor- England. Equality, freedom of speech and of the press, and religious tolerance are all Enlightenment ideas that were assimilated into the core and the laws of America. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote about the rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.

These ideas resonate John Locke’s argument in where individuals are the governors and that “the governments derive their power and authority from ‘the consent of the governed’” as stated in Traditions and Encounters, 625. These Enlightenment beliefs led unswervingly to the American Revolution, in which the colonists gained control over their own futures and the future of America. The American Revolution was especially productive, because it led to the establishment of a government by the people and for the people.

The French and American Revolutions proved to the world that monarchs and overlords could be dethroned and that the common man, through reason, could attain his freedom. Without these revolutions, Europe would be stuck in an archaic system of monarchs and the Catholic Church ruling through fear and oppression. The differences between the American and French revolutions are that the colonies were revolting against an overseas king, while the lower class French were revolting against their king. The American Revolution revolted against England, while the French Revolution revolted gainst France, Prussia, Austria, Spain, Britain, and the Netherlands as stated in Traditions and Encounters, 629. The French Revolution and American Revolution were fought in different parts of the world, as well as continents. The French Revolution was by far bloodier with the use of the guillotine, but lacked self-government as described in Traditions and Encounters. Gombrich’s description of the French Revolution in and A Little History of the World is a very violent revolution, which started with a very amusing characterization of the royalty.

The kings of France “were incompetent, and content merely to imitate their great predecessor’s outward show of power” through “pomp and magnificence” (220). The kings of France were the only ones that did not live in a reality of the Enlightenment. Through the National Assembly, “terror [was] spread among the enemies of Reason” (225) and executions of the royalty such as King Louis XVI, and Marie Antoinette prevailed. During the French Revolution, a new violent party emerged named the Jacobins.

According to A Little History of the World, the Jacobins were “not only against the aristocrats: they were against anybody who disagreed with them, and anyone who crossed them lost his head” (224). One of the leaders of the Jacobins was Robespierre, a “stiff, sober and dry lawyer” (225) who always spoke about virtue. Robespierre was an insuppressible human being with a love for condemning people’s heads to the guillotine. Robespierre at first announced Christianity was an ancient superstition, then accepted God and declared himself as the priest of the Supreme Being.

Traditions and Encounters compared to A Little History of the World Does not describe Robespierre the same way as Gombrich does. Robespierre is portrayed in Traditions and Encounters as a “popular radical” (629) who tried to eliminate Christianity and establish a cult of reason in place of Christianity with new calendar days and year. The Jacobins allowed some rights for women such as property rights, and divorce. It was not mentioned in A Little History of the World that Robespierre died by his favorite execution method: the guillotine.

Robespierre was one of the leaders of the Jacobins, and he advanced the ideas of the Enlightenment through the Revolution. Robespierre advanced the Enlightenment through the reign of the Jacobins, and the use of the guillotine, sending people to their deaths who still believed in monarchy. After the French really saw what he had done, his reign of terror has gone too far, Robespierre was sent to guillotine by his own people that he liberated.

History as we know has many ways of describing it, with all the historical events that occurred in the past it is a result of our American system. As Americans, we live in a land of opportunity and because of that we have the freedom to live . “Every individual should be able to support themselves out that wouldn’t include the government’s aid”. This idea was originally introduced in Herbert Hoover’s speech when he was president of the United States. Although this idea refers back during the Great Depression, Hoover believed that Americans shouldn’t be assisted somehow by the government, financially speaking.

In my perspective, I see rugged individualism as to any individual who is not being aided from the government, but also not just financially, but incentively through the mind. As I read along through books that relate to the American Dream, Hoover’s idea of rugged individualism became more visible. Similarly books like “Ragged Dick” by Horatio Alger, “The Great Gatsby” by Scott Fitzgerald and “A Raison in the Sun” by Lorraine Hansberry, are comparable that the idea of rugged individualism is still being used and even through today’s society.

To illustrate rugged individualism through the book Ragged Dick, Alger created a book disclosing the 19th century lifestyle of a poor boot black. In this book rugged individualism shows because of how Alger describes the motivation through his main character “Dick”. He was fourteen years young and worked as a ‘bootblack’ aka shoeshiner boy and slept in dirty torn up clothes on the streets of New York City. Alger portrayed him as any ordinary boy that lived the hard life in the streets; he smokes and drinks occasionally.

However, Dick would still practice good deeds and some gentlemen would be impressed that how would a bootblack be so humble and attentive in his work in the streets of New York. “.. He was above doing anything mean or dishonorable. He would not steal, or cheat, or impose upon younger boys, but was frank and straight-forward, manly and self-reliant. His nature was a noble one, and had saved him from all mean faults. ” Dick is a good example of someone who I thought that reflected rugged individualism.

He was brought up by himself and never had much of a role mode to look up to while growing up. He relied on himself to get customers to get their boots shined, he didn’t complain about living on the streets or how filthy is his clothes was from the work that he does. In my point of view, Dick didn’t have help from anyone, or didn’t expect anything from anyone, and if he did he would be more than grateful and smart enough to invest it in the right ways.

In the book, he was treated very well by an older man and his son, and during that time in the book he acted very humble as he explains that he lives on a cardboard box on the streets and didn’t really see that hygiene wasn’t so important to him, but what was important was how he was going to feed himself and live in the future. And as soon as he found a plan to get better at what he does he uses that money to save for an apartment and to invest in for the future. Although wealth can bring you happiness and success in life, it can also you direct you in the wrong places.

The main character of the book by Fitzgerald is Gatsby who is a wealthy man. He tries to use his wealth to attract the attention of a women named Daisy. This is not the right way of to get someone to love you but he’s also thinking that his money can bring him success of happiness. He believes that his money will make him succeed in his attempt to get Daisy to fall back in love with him. He would be known to throw the largest parties every saturday, and his guest wouldn’t even know who is he truly and why there’s a party. At that time in the early 1920’s, every person in new york city loved to party.

Furthermore Daisy likes the fancy things, the partying and it all seems so good, but her heart is still committed to her husband. Therefor Gatsby’s plan was not successful because his plan wasn’t a way of receiving love back. Rugged individualism may not seem evident, but it does in a way that Gatsby wanted to help from his money to get his dreams to come true didn’t work out. For he wanted the parties to draw her attention, even his large land and big mansion couldn’t help him to fulfill his dreams with Daisy. Lorraine Hansberry created a book that was about dreams.

In the story A Raisin in the Sun, the main characters each have their own dream that they want to fulfill. The Youngers family struggle to attain these dreams through out the end of the story. Walter who is the man of the house wants to afford things for his family and give them a decent life to live and not having to hold back for his wife and kids. There’s Beneatha his sister who wants to be a doctor and their Mama who just wants to best for their family. Although things didn’t go as planned, fights and tension between Walter and his family even his wife, things became a learning lesson to each one.

Mama always knew best, and when it all came down to one decision, it had to go Mama’s way. That Walter had to turn down the offer of a big check to keep them from staying away from living at a all-white neighborhood. This taught Walter that his son, Travis, looks up to him as the man of the family, and in the long run, his decisions will be reflected on his son. He wouldn’t want his son to think this is right. Walter was stubborn throughout the book that he just wanted to money to provide for his family, another house to live in, pearls to wear on his wife, and a better life for his son.

But Walter didn’t earn that money, it was just the life insurance of his father and he didn’t earn any of it himself. In this book Walter is the example of rugged individualism because although he was stubborn to realize that it was wrong to receive that check to not live in an all-white neighborhood. If he accepted it, the money coming in wouldn’t be because he worked hard for it, it would because he wanted the white people to have their way of keeping their neighborhood an all-white neighborhood.

But no one shouldn’t be told to live a certain area because of their skin color. So when Walter rejects the offer, he is also accepting the fact that he will have to work harder to provide, and try to uplift his family in some way. It’s better than uplifting his family in the wrong way by accepting that offer. That insurance check was tempting for Walter to accept, but he didn’t and later when his son would grow older, he can then explain to him that he has worked for every bit of that money that kept his family together.

In America today, we still struggle with people who don’t live up to the idea of “rugged individualism”. I believe it isn’t really called by that term, but people know it as the American Dream. People who aren’t familiar with both are those who think reaching your lifetime goals don’t require any effort or any struggles. For those who become millionaires are results of hard work and labor that put in to achieve in life. Anything worth having is worth fighting for, and along the path there needs to be struggles and failures, but it is still a choice to keep trying and to not give up.

History as we know has many its ways of describing it, throughout all the historical events that occurred in the past it is a result of our American system. As Americans, we live in a land of opportunity and because of that we have the freedom to live. With the three books that i’ve mentioned, they are examples of the having the opportunity to uplift themselves in their lives. In each book they have reflected to the idea called “rugged individualism” which was introduced by Herbert Hoover when he was president of the United States.

According to Hoover this idea meant that “any each individual should be able to support themselves out that wouldn’t include the government’s aid”. Even so, I see rugged individualism as to any individual who isn’t being aided from the government, but also not just financially, but incentively through the mind. As I read through the three books, each author had their ways of reflecting rugged individualism through their characters, and with the struggles and decisions they made through the books.

Jessica Taylor 13, February 2012 AP English Mrs. Mercer Self-Sufficiency and Individualism Can Harm a Community Henry David Thoreau goes to the woods to live away from duties and to live a life of leisure. He moves far away from any method of communication, such as the post office. He wishes to live independently and self-sufficiently. The quote “I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life…and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. ” He summarizes his reasons for living in the woods in this quote.

Thoreau wants to live deliberately; to choose his own course and have no one else influence his life. He doesn’t want to get old and look back and realize that there are things in life that he wanted to do, that he has never done. If everyone in a community lived by the virtues of individualism and self-sufficiency, then there would be no community. In a community, everyone contributes something. Individuals in a community work together, in order to solve problems and issues facing the community. Such as, if there has been a terrible natural disaster, communities work together to repair the damage.

If the damage is more extensive in some areas than others, then the individuals of that community can work harder to restore it. If everyone in a community lived by the virtues of individualism and self-sufficiency, then in times of crisis or suffering, there would be no sense of community where people helped one another. Also if a community lived by these virtues, then there would be no trust. In order to gain or build trust, there has to be some sort of connection between individuals. In Thoreau’s self-sufficient world, there was no communication.

If a person held the virtue of self-sufficiency, this may make other individuals feel offended. People would feel offended because today’s world is all about communication. If an individual blocked out other people and did not allow them to help him/her, then this might make the other individual feel as if they were not beneficial. Instead of being a community, it would be more of a rivalry between individuals. There would be no trust or companionship. In times when individuals would need each other’s help; there would be no sense of alliance.

Everyone would be against one another, because everyone would feel as if each other were untrustworthy. In the United States, we are one giant community; there are many communities within the major one. In times of war or battle, we stand together. Above all, the citizens in the U. S are able to come together to fight the battles when needed. If every citizen in the U. S lived by the virtues of self-sufficiency and individualism then there would be no U. S. in times of war; there would be no army. In an army you must work together to find the best solution to the problem, there has to be teamwork and trust.

In a self-sufficient world, everyone would want to do things in their own way, and in return this would cause chaos. A community is a beneficial factor, without it we have nothing. Yes, being self-sufficient can be a helpful virtue, but in the condition of the community it is one virtue that can destroy the community. If there was no sense of an alliance, there would be no way to survive a natural disaster or fatal event. A community can strive and recover from a setback, whereas, if an individual was self-sufficient, then this would be much more difficult.

Democrats and Republicans The United States of America is known to have two major political parties. The Republican party and the democratic one. Both parties are based on views and principles being completely opposites of each other. The Republican party is known to be a conservative party, while the democratic party is known to be liberal. Two concepts that are opposites to each other.

The democratic party will most certainly convince the majority of the people that it is the ideal party to remain in office because it promotes economic equality, it advocates civil rights and individual freedom, and because it is a liberal party. The two major U. S political parties have different policies and views. These two parties being Democrats and Republicans. Economically, republicans promote more equality because their taxes are the same for everyone. This means that taxes should not be higher for people with a higher income or lower for people with a lower income.

They also believe that by minimizing government spending they would be able to balance their budget. Republicans also support the constitution to the highest degree. They are convinced that its laws are flawless, and want the constitution to become the base of U. S law, and do not believe in the majority rule. A rule that states that the vote of of the majority of the people should either make or banish a law. Republicans are also known to be conservatives. The word conservative is defined as the holding to traditional attitudes and values and being cautious about change or innovations.

Republicans would very much like to live their lives the way the founding fathers of America had without having to go through change or innovation. (Gould 565-483) At a first glance at the economic views of the republicans, it is common to find it more equal. However, why should a person that makes minimum wage pay same taxes as the C. E. O of an international corporation. The democratic party has different points of views on tax reform policies. The party believes in equality therefore it constructed its 2012 tax reform policy to cut taxes for every working family, and not for millionaires. Black, 565-483) This means that every working family still pays taxes, however their taxes would be cut, meaning they would be paying less taxes than before. As for the “ millionaires” and higher class of society they will still pay the same taxes as they did before. This policy is more likely to be considered as equal because it is not rated fair when people from different social classes with a big difference in their incomes pay the same taxes. Especially because the taxes will eventually be lowered for the lower classes because they would be unable to afford paying the regular and high taxes.

This will also lead in the cut of taxes for the high social class, which then makes the whole concept unequal. Not just for the people but also for the national economy (Witcover, 791-545). A democracy is a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. The democratic party is also known for being the party of the people. It is the the oldest political party and has origins that fall back all the way to Thomas Jefferson, and Andrew Jackson.

Thomas Jefferson was one of the founding fathers, one of the main authors of the Declaration of independence, and the third president of the United States. As for Andrew Jackson he was the seventh president of the United States and influenced his followers to create a modern democratic party. In a democracy it is essential for everyone to vote. It is considered as defending a point of view and opinions (Bass, 437-83). The democratic party is mostly concentrated on making all the people have equal rights, both women and men. Allowing each of them to have individual freedom.

A freedom that a person has full control over until it is misused and breaks the law. The democratic party is for women having complete right to make their own decisions. For example, if a women decides to get an abortion, it would be possible for her to do so. (Black, 565-483) It remains a choice the woman has to make. A choice that is not restricted by law. In a democratic party, people are allowed to vote to promote what they would like. For example if it is illegal in a state for a homosexual couple to get married, and the majority of the state votes for this law to be banished.

It is most likely that gay marriage will become legal in that state. These concepts all advocate individual freedom, and equality (Bass 437-84). The democratic party is a party that favors liberal positions. The word liberal is defined as being open to new behavior or opinions and will to discard traditional value (Bass 437-84). Modern American liberalism unifies social liberalism, social justice, and a mixed economy. Theses three theories have allowed abortion rights for women, gar rights, and government strategies for education and healthcare.

Liberals also favor diplomacy over military action. Which could only make the people of any country feel safer. Diplomacy would help resolve many word conflicts, and could even prevent war, or incidents that might result in tragic outcomes. Liberals also favor the separation of church and state. This measures the restraint between a religion and the way laws of a nation are built. All of these facts influence the chain of thoughts democrats have. However, their chain of thoughts could not be influenced by a bias opinion based on religion or tradition.

It could only be influenced by current events, and new ways to deal with different and repeated situations, and by the majority of votes (Witcover, 791-545). To conclude, in this actual context, the socio-democrat political model of the democratic party seems to be the one that fits best the expectations of the vulnerable population. This political party also compromises between the conservative values of the american society and its constant changes. Therefore,  the arguments mentioned above explain the mandate renewal that americans expressed in the last elections.

Eitzen How does the Benedictine value of Community relate to individual isolation? And/or how does the Benedictine value of Respect for Persons relate to poverty and inequality? According to the Benedictine Rule 4-Respect for Persons you are to “Honor everyone and never do to another you do not want done to yourself. ” Recognizing the image of God in each person and honoring each one in their giftedness and limitations.

If, in fact, we are practicing excessive individualism then this is directly related to poverty and inequality today. Poverty in the United States “officially” refers to people who fall below the “official poverty line. ”  In general, however, poverty is a complex subject that depends not only on official definitions but on the perspectives of people as well. For example, if we were to look at the actual numbers of poor people, we may find that whites have a lower proportion of people in poverty than other racial groups.

But if we looked at poverty solely by age we would find that children under the age of 18 are the most likely to be poor and that many of the elderly live only slightly above the poverty line. By practicing excessive individualism we are promoting inequality. We are keeping one group of people at a particular level by having those who have the most power and money make the rules for those in a less favorable position. Individualism also keeps us from feeling obligated to others and when we feel no obligation we are less likely to help someone in need.

In addition when we feel no obligation we also feel no sense of community and this will eventually lead to isolation. We need to realize that we cannot survive on our own, we need others in order to survive and thrive. If we were to follow the Benedicitine rule of Respect for Persons there would be no poverty because you would not want to be in poverty yourself and there would be no inequality, as you would not want to be unequal.