Sunday, September 9, 2007
Research
Globalisation and Culture
http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/cultural/globcult.htm
Terroism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/recent/sept_11/changing_faces_01.shtml
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/WarOnTerror.asp
Environment and biodiversity
http://edu.iucnp.org/ei.htm
http://www.globalissues.org/EnvIssues/Biodiversity.asp
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
“The mother of revolution and crime is poverty” (Aristotle) Do you agree?While revolution usually has good reasons to justify it, crimes, in most cases, are not to be pardoned. However, both are grouped together under possible solutions of poverty despite of their contrasting nature. Needless to discuss, poverty is obviously a socially undesirable phenomenon to be seen in any communities. When people are deprived of the essentials for minimum standard of living, they will not just sit there not do anything about it. Hence, revolution and crime may be what they feel is a bridge that links them to a better life. On the other hand, it is too narrow to restrict the causes to poverty only.
The minimum requirements of essentials may be food, safe drinking water and shelter, which are the most fundamental, or social resources like education and healthcare. Since people are important resources of the country, the basic needs of the people have to be met before a country can progress. Thus, when the bare minimum is not even achieved, resentment towards the existing government grows as long as the problem prevails. Revolution might be seen as a solution to end poverty. The Russian revolution of 1917 is one such example. Widespread inflation and food shortages contributed to the revolution. Moreover, the government and nobles enjoyed at the expense of the vast majority’s sufferings. This creates an unbalanced feeling on the part of the people. Here they are suffering yet those people at the top are leading extravagant lifestyles and indifferent to the agony they undergo. If the government were incapable of alleviating their pain, or not even trying, the people would take the things in their own hand. In this aspect, revolution is inevitable.
Revolution requires a considerable amount of support from society for it to be inaugurated while crime is the risk an individual is willing to bear for a change. When the poor are driven to a certain limit in which they feel they have no way out, they are willing to risk everything. They definitely know the consequences of crime but they are just too desperate for a change. A Canadian research has showed that poverty and crime rates are interrelated. The poor are at a higher risk of committing crimes. It is a realistic world out there, nothing is more important than having the basic essentials for survival. At their stage of desperation, crime may be their best and only way out.
On the other hand, there are other reasons, which account for revolution and crimes. There are many types of revolutions, which vary in their purpose and target audience. For example, China’s Cultural Revolution in 1966 was a struggle for power. It did not help in improving the lives of the people, many died in the ensuing purges and industrial production dropped by 12% from 1966-1968. Not all revolutions are due to poverty or result in better standard of living.
People have unlimited wants; they are seldom contented with what they have. When the basic needs are met, they would ask for more. Looking at the positive side, when one is not contented with his present situation, he is motivated to work harder to achieve the targets set. However, he may resort to crimes when greed gets the better of him. In the case of National Kidney Foundation (NKF) scandal, revealed several malpractice by the former NFK board and management. The funds supposedly donated to help the needy, was misused. As such, they have betrayed Singaporean’s trust of the organization. They were paid high salary, which in other words mean they were not in need of this amount of money. Their behaviour may only explain their greediness.
Poverty may not be ideal, but society will not only consists of the rich. The emphasis is not on the comparison of rich and poor but more importantly, to minimize disparity between the two.
> |