Impact of Boxer Rebellion on Chinas World Relations

Impact of Boxer Rebellion on Chinas World Relations What impact did the Boxer Rebellion have  on China’s relations with the rest of the world? The Boxer Rebellion instigated an unprecedented coordinated military response from international powers after The Righteous and Harmonious Fists more commonly known as the Boxers had mutilated and slaughtered thousands of Chinese Christian converts, Western missionaries and foreign nationals.[1] The atrocities occurred between 1898 and 1900 when the Boxers began targeting their perceived enemies in the Shandong region of China before spreading north to Beijing. The Boxers could not differentiate between the Christian missionaries’ desire to proselytise China’s peasants and forced westernisation. This paper contends that the Boxer Rebellion both wounded and opened relations between China and the outside world. Clearly, the discriminate violence of the Boxers shocked and angered the international community.[2] Therefore, far from achieving their objective of purging China from globalisation and the westernisation of Chinese peasants, it caused the world to hone in on Chin a. Inadvertently the Boxer Rebellion opened international relationships with China and the outside world. Countries like the United States refrained from argumentative dialogue and began to have meaningful diplomatic discussions with the Chinese government. Nevertheless, the Boxer Protocol, signed in 1901, seriously affected China’s relationship with the world. The protocol virtually bankrupted China’s economy. The Qing Dynasty was forced to pay three hundred and thirty three million United State dollars indemnity to foreign countries affected by the Boxer’s violence.[3] The Boxer Rebellion like the majority of insurrections has no narrative from the insurgents. The historiographies of rebellions are a combination of texts of victims, politicians, historians and other academics as in the case the Boxer Rebellion. The majority of eyewitness accounts are usually anonymous but reveal the harsh reality of death associated with insurrections. Cohen gives a perfect ex ample of this when he cites an eyewitness account of a Chinese individual who witnessed the scene of death during the Boxer Rebellion in Tianjing in 1900, the eyewitness describes the atrocities of the rebellion, they declare, ‘There are many corpses floating in the river. Some were without heads, others were missing limbs. The bodies of women often had their nipples cut off and their genitalia mutilated†¦ There were also bodies in shallow areas by the banks with flocks of crows pecking away at them. The smell was so bad we had to cover our noses the whole day. Still, no one came out to collect the bodies for burial. People said that they were all Christians who had been killed by the Boxers and the populace dare not get involved.’[4] Boyd contends that ‘most Westerners went to China to make money or to make converts.’[5] Neither reason was popular with the Righteous Harmonious Fists (Boxers). They viewed themselves as representatives of the Chinese peasantry and rigorously opposed all foreigners. Although, by the end of the nineteenth century, China’s population had reached three hundred and fifty million the majority of Chinese peasants had never encountered foreigners or Western missionaries.[6] Nevertheless, the Boxers held a strong belief that foreigners and Christian missionaries were responsible for the breakdown in the fabric of simple Chinese peasant society and they dishonoured their traditional spiritual and community. Furthermore, the Boxers attributed China’s natural disasters such as flood, drought and famine to the corruption of Christianity. Drought followed the great flood of the Yellow River in 1898 and left two million peasants starving and desperate. The Boxers a bott om up organisation without official leadership saw themselves as representatives of the peasantry in the Shandong region of northern China.[7] Likewise, the missionaries imposed power in the villages they occupied and they were involved in legal decision-making. The missionaries infuriated the Boxers even more because they were not just content to proselytise Christianity they also rejected Confucianism.[8] Harrison contends that the Boxers believed Catholic missionaries posed the greatest threat to Chinese morality. She argues that the Boxers targeted villages where the well-established Catholic missionaries had taken on the role of officials. The Boxers believed that because central government had failed to tackle the issue of village politics and moral issues they would take the law into their own hands.[9] However, this argument is neutralised by the excessive violence and murder of Catholics committed by the Boxers in the villages of central Shanxi.[10] The Boxers believed they were impervious to pain; they could withstand attack from both sword, and bullet. Their strange beliefs made them merciless fighters and a therefore a dangerous enemy of foreigners, Chinese Christian converts and missionaries. Even if their beliefs were well founded and justifiable, their methods of resolving their perceived problems were inexcusable and crude.[11] The Boxers fervent mystical beliefs are not a new phenomenon because allegedly, in preceding years Chinese peasants had experienced similar supernatural powers following natural disasters. Male peasants believed that they acquired special ‘religious’ spiritual powers to overcome the disasters.[12] However, the Boxers method of dealing with the threat was incomprehensible. Fleming’s contentious claim that at the beginning of the Boxer regime, ninety percent of the Boxers were just peasants in ‘fancy dress’ is debateable. However, he declares that as time went by thei r ‘sartorial costume’ of red and yellow turbans and sashes became less important and the majority of Boxers held strong political ideologies.[13] Following the suppression of the Boxer’s by the international counterinsurgency force,[14] each nation affected by Boxer violence sought retribution. However, some nations were less harsh than others were. For example, the United States highlighted this in their response. Secretary of State John Hay fearing China’s partition by European nations following the Boxer Rebellion issued a memorandum in July 1900 to those countries affected by the rebellion. Hay suggested that they should continue to support China’s ‘administrative and territorial integrity.’[15] In reality the United States were protecting their own trading interests in China. Furthermore, the United States practised a strict anti-imperialistic foreign policy.[16] However, the United States outward support of the Qing Dynasty was a contradiction of their policies towards Chinese immigrants. Ironically, the Chinese Exclusion Act 1882 and the Geary Act 1892 effectively prevented Chinese peop le from entering America.[17] After the suppression on the Boxer Rebellion, China supported American military presence in Beijing to repel any further rebellions following the defeat of the Boxers. The United States politely refused and withdrew from China in October 1900. The commander of the American counterinsurgency force stated, ‘Let us hope that this generous, charitable, and magnanimous treatment of the vanquished may prove an example to the nations of the world, and a step forward in the world’s progress toward a higher and nobler humanity. We are glad to know that this work is appreciated to you. It is needless to tell you, however, that the United States does not maintain an army for the purpose of furnishing the city of Peking with good municipal government, and as a business proposition your appeal for the United States forces to remain longer in Peking has little to stand upon.[18] Britain was slow to respond to the Boxer Rebellion.[19] However, retrospectively the Boxer Rebellion caused Britain to adopt a more vigorous foreign policy. Indeed, because of the inadequacies of the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary Lord Salisbury in dealing with the Boxer Rebellion, the Conservative government made significant changes to the Diplomatic Service.[20] Sir Claude MacDonald the British minister in Beijing despite being fully aware of the Boxers violence against foreigners, Christian converts and missionaries in northern China refused to contemplate that the Boxer would spread across China.[21] Indeed, Otte contends that Britain’s blasà © attitude to the Boxer violence only changed after the siege of Beijing legation district that began on June 14th 1900. For fifty-five days, the Boxers laid siege to the square mile legation district in Beijing.[22] When the multilateral counterinsurgency force finally arrived in Beijing in August 1900, they displayed to the world for the first time that a sense of unity was possible. The multilateral force consisted of all the nations who had personnel in the legation. The force consisted of approximately twenty thousand troops. The Japanese were the dominant force with ten thousand troops. Japan demonstrated to China and the world that the importance of China was truly international and not just Eurocentric.[23] Furthermore, the multilateral force with the aim of rescuing the personnel and their families from the Beijing Legation district were given different instructions from their governments. German emperor Kaiser Wilhelm II commanded his troops to show no mercy to the Boxers after they had murdered the German Minister in Beijing Baron von Ketteler. The Kaiser declared to his troops before they left Bremerhaven, ‘Just as the Huns a thousand years ago, under the leadership of Attila, gained a reputation by virtue of which they still live in historical tradition, so may the name of Germany become known in such a manner in China, that no Chinese will ever again to look askance at a German.’ [24] Clearly, the Boxer Rebellion affected relations with Germany and this was borne out by the first point in the Boxer Protocol, it declared, ‘†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.Prince of the First Rank, Chun, was appointed Ambassador of His Majesty the Emperor of China, and directed in that capacity to convey to His Majesty the German Emperor the expression of the regrets of His Majesty the Emperor of China and of the Chinese Government at the assassination of his Excellency the late Baron von Ketteler, German Minister†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. The Chinese Government has stated that it will erect on the spot of the assassination of his Excellency the late Baron von Ketteler, commemorative monument worthy of the rank of the deceased, and bearing an inscription in the Latin, German, and Chinese languages which shall express the regrets of His Majesty the Emperor of China for the murder committed†¦[25] The first article of the Boxer Protocol clearly highlights China’s humiliation. Germany like other governments wanted to punish and embarrass China after the Boxer Rebellion. The proceeding articles in the protocol all required apologies, monument erections, the destruction of Chinese arms and fortresses, and the forfeiture of land to foreign powers.[26] However, as previously mentioned, the most damaging article in the protocol was the three hundred and thirty three million dollar indemnity with four percent interest. Undoubtedly, the multilateral troops took revenge on the Boxers and their supporters, Boyd contends that rumours of looting, rape, and torture committed by multilateral troops spread throughout Beijing. [27] Schoppa argues that the Boxer Protocol is the lowest point in Chinese international relations and their ultimate humiliation. The protocol signed on the 7th September 1901 between China and the Powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Spain, United State s, France, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, and Russia was yet another unequal treaty that humiliated the Chinese government. The terms of the protocol not only restricted China’s domestic privileges, they increased foreign interests in China. Therefore, the fifty years of humiliation that began with China’s defeat in the Opium Wars extended into a new millennium. Therefore, the Boxer Protocol crippled Chinese spirit, economy and international prestige.[28] Although, the Boxer Rebellion and the consequent protocol severely damaged China domestically and their international reputation it instigated the dismantlement of their biggest burden, the corrupt Qing Dynasty. The Empress Dowager Cixi deceived the international community by pretending that her troops were suppressing the Boxers. However, the reality was that she despised foreign intervention as much as the Boxers did. She cleverly encouraged the Boxers to turn the Chinese peasantry and country against the foreigners. The Boxers declared ‘Support the Qing, destroy the Foreigners.’ Foreigners included missionaries and Chinese Christian converts. As Esherick contends, the Boxer Rebellion was not a true rebellion, as they did not oppose the Chinese Qing government.[29] The rebellion failed to resemble the excepted definition as ‘an organized armed resistance to an established ruler or government.’[30] Once the Qing dynasty realised that counterinsurgency would overthrow the Boxers they soon renounced their involvement so they could continue in the eyes of the West as a legitimate government.[31] However, inevitably the Boxer Rebellion demonstrates that China’s international relations were damaged by the more primitive actions the Boxers and the more sophisticated and sinister intervention of the Qing Dynasty.[32] In conclusion, the Boxer Rebellion clearly left an indelible mark on China both domestically and internationally. The ruthless action of the Boxers against foreigners, Chinese Christian converts, and missionaries was viewed by the outside world as unjustified and inexcusable. The Boxers clearly believed that they were acting in the best interests of peasants who made up the majority of the Chinese population. Their violent activities led to the Boxer Protocol in 1901 that almost bankrupted China through the huge financial reparations. The further articles of the protocol heaped further humiliation on China and allowed international powers access to prominent trading areas. However, arguably inadvertently the Boxer Rebellion prevented China from being colonised by major international powers. The Boxer Rebellion undoubtedly stirred the United States to intervene in order to save their trading rights in China. They sent a clear message to Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and Russ ia to support China’s administrative and territorial integrity. Furthermore, the Boxer Rebellion was the catalyst for disintegration of the dishonest Qing Dynasty. Although, the Qing Dynasty under Empress Dowager Cixi supported the Boxers it was not to protect the interests of China’s peasantry. Even though the Boxer Rebellion eventually instigated improved foreign diplomacy, it is indisputable that their actions not only led to the massacres of foreigners, Chinese Christians and missionaries it led to thousands of deaths of their own people. The international counterinsurgency forces showed no mercy when they exacted retribution on the Boxers and their sympathisers. The ease in which the Boxers and Imperial guard were defeated by the multilateral counterinsurgency forces compelled the Chinese government to modernise their military. The Boxer Rebellion reiterated the Eurocentric ideology that the Chinese are uncivilised. Furthermore, the rebellion alienated the western community from China even though it inadvertently improved international diplomacy and rid China of the corrupt Qing Dynasty that ultimately led to China becoming a republic in 1912. The ease in which the Boxers and Imperial guard were defeated by the multilateral counterinsurgency forces compelled the Chinese government to modernise their military. Bibliography Books Boyd, J., A Dance with Dragon. The Vanished of Peking’s Foreign Policy (London: I. B. Tauris Co. Ltd, 2012). Cashman, D., America in the Age of the Titans: The Progressive Era and World War I (New York: New York University Press, 1998). Cohen, Paul, in ‘Humanising the Boxers’, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World (Plymouth: Rowman Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), pp. 179-197. Cullinane, M., Liberty and American Anti-Imperialism: 1898-1909 (New York: Palgrave MacMillian, 2012). Durschmeid, E,. Beware the Dragon, China: 1,000 Years of Bloodshed (London: Carlton Publishing Group, 2008). Esherick, J., The Origins of the Boxer Uprising (Oakland: University of California Press). Fleming, P., The Siege at Peking (Edinburgh: Birlinn Ltd, 2001). Harrison, Henrietta, in ‘Humanising the Boxers’, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World (Plymouth: Rowman Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), pp. 1-15. Otte, Thomas, ‘Heaven knows where we shall finally drift’: Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Rebellion’ in Kennedy, G. Neilson, K. (eds), Incidents and International Relations: People, Power, and Personalities (Connecticut: Praeger Publishers, 2002). Schoppa, K., The Columbia Guide to Modern Chinese History (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000). Seonnichsen, J., The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (Santa Barbara: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2011). Spence, J., The Searching of Modern China (London: Century Hutchinson Ltd, 1990). Steiner, Z., The Foreign Office and Foreign Policy, 1898-1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970). Journals Oulett, ‘Multinational counterinsurgency: the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901’ Small Wars Insurgencies. 20: 3.4 (2009): pp. 507-527. Radio broadcast Bragg, M., ‘The Boxer Rebellion’ In our Time. BBC radio 4 archive broadcast (21.30, 9 March 2009) Internet source ‘Rebellion.’ Oxford English Dictionary (03 April 2014). Available online: http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/159201?isAdvanced=falseresult=1rskey=nNKkrE Date accessed: 02 April 2014. ‘Boxer Protocol, 1901, Peace Agreement between the Great Powers and China 09/07/190’ (03 April 2014) Available online: http://china.usc.edu/(S(ivfmlzuvquerbb45edthpbze)A(irVj2QZVywEkAAAAYWQzZmNiZGMtZTBhNC00MDc1LTg5ZTItOGQ4OGU4MGI0NTk3Uo36FF2grKtLe_4GD64z6sKQqsw1))/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=420 Date accessed: 03 April 2014 1 [1] Oulett, ‘Multinational counterinsurgency: the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901’ Small Wars Insurgencies. 20: 3.4 (2009): p. 511. [2] Durschmeid, E,. Beware the Dragon, China: 1,000 Years of Bloodshed (London: Carlton Publishing Group, 2008)p. 172. [3] Spence, J., The Searching of Modern China (London: Century Hutchinson Ltd, 1990), p. 235. [4] cited by Cohen, Paul, in ‘Humanising the Boxers’, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World (Plymouth: Rowman Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), p. 186 [5] Boyd, J., A Dance with Dragon. The Vanished of Peking’s Foreign Policy (London: I. B. Tauris Co. Ltd, 2012), p. xvi. [6] Fleming, P., The Siege at Peking (Edinburgh: Birlinn Ltd, 2001), p. 36. [7] Bragg, M., ‘The Boxer Rebellion’ In our Time. BBC radio 4 archive broadcast (21.30, 9 March 2009) [8] Ibid. [9] Harrison, Henrietta, in ‘Humanising the Boxers’, in Bickers, R. Tiedemann, R. (eds), The Boxers, China, and the World (Plymouth: Rowman Littlefield Publishers Ltd, 2007), p. 12 [10] Harrison, Henrietta, in ‘Humanising the Boxers’, p. 7 [11] Oulett, ‘Multinational counterinsurgency: the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901’, p. 508. [12] Bragg, M., ‘The Boxer Rebellion’ In our Time [13] Fleming, The Siege at Peking, p.36. [14] Oulett, ‘Multinational counterinsurgency: the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901’, p. 508. [15] Cashman, D., America in the Age of the Titans: The Progressive Era and World War I (New York: New York University Press, 1998), p.436. [16] Cullinane, M., Liberty and American Anti-Imperialism: 1898-1909 (New York: Palgrave MacMillian, 2012), p. 4. [17] Seonnichsen, J., The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (Santa Barbara: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2011), p. xiv. [18] cited in Oulett, ‘Multinational counterinsurgency: the Western intervention in the Boxer Rebellion 1900-1901’. p. 518. [19] Otte, Thomas, ‘Heaven knows where we shall finally drift’: Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Rebellion’ in Kennedy, G. Neilson, K. (eds), Incidents and International Relations: People, Power, and Personalities (Connecticut: Praeger Publishers, 2002), p. 30. [20] Steiner, Z., The Foreign Office and Foreign Policy, 1898-1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), p. 180. [21] Otte, Thomas. ‘Heaven knows where we shall finally drift’: Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Rebellion’, p. 26 [22] Otte, Thomas. ‘‘Heaven knows where we shall finally drift’: Lord Salisbury, the Cabinet, Isolation, and the Boxer Rebellion’, p. 29 [23] Bragg, M., ‘The Boxer Rebellion’ In our Time [24] Fleming, The Siege at Peking, pp. 135-136 [25] ‘Boxer Protocol, 1901, Peace Agreement between the Great Powers and China’ (09/07/1901). Available online: http://china.usc.edu/(S(ivfmlzuvquerbb45edthpbze)A(irVj2QZVywEkAAAAYWQzZmNiZGMtZTBhNC00MDc1LTg5ZTItOGQ4OGU4MGI0NTk3Uo36FF2grKtLe_4GD64z6sKQqsw1))/ShowArticle.aspx?articleID=420 Date accessed: 03 April 2014 [26] Fleming, The Siege at Peking, pp. 250-251 [27] Boyd, J., A Dance with Dragon. The Vanished of Peking’s Foreign Policy, p. 22. [28] Schoppa, K., The Columbia Guide to Modern Chinese History (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), p. 171. [29] Esherick, J., The Origins of the Boxer Uprising (Oakland: University of California Press), p. xiv. [30] ‘Rebellion.’ Oxford English Dictionary. 2014, Available online: http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/159201?isAdvanced=falseresult=1rskey=nNKkrE Date accessed: 02 April 2014. [31] Ibid. [32] Esherick, The Origins of the Boxer Uprising, p. 312

The Prospects for a National Missile Defense :: Research Papers

The Prospects for a National Missile Defense Imagine this scenario: approximately fifteen intercontinental ballistic missiles are unintentionally launched from Russia. The missiles are equipped with several nuclear warheads, and their final target is the United States. The United States already possesses an early-warning system and thus detects the missiles more than twenty minutes before they land. However, even though they can detect the missiles, the United States has no means of defending itself from them. If even one of the warheads lands inside the United States, the consequences will be devastating. Hundreds of thousands will perish, millions more will suffer life-altering injuries and diseases, and the targeted city will lie in ruins. The prospect of a ballistic missile attack has been a fear in the United States since the 1950s, and that concern has been renewed with the end of the Cold War. Currently nations have limited means of protecting themselves. Both Russia and the United States have the bounded capability to d efend against short-range missiles, but neither can protect their territory from intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). As a result of a growing concern in the United States, Congress has pushed for a national missile defense system. The purpose of a national missile defense system is to destroy a ballistic missile launched on the US before it can ever reach it. If an operational national missile defense system were implemented, the United States would theoretically be able to thwart any ballistic missile attack on any of its fifty states. Two questions must be answered, however, before the United States begins the implementation of a national missile defense system. First, how feasible and reliable is the technology of the system? Second, assuming that the defense system would be operational and could protect the United States against a ballistic missile attack, what implications would such a system hold for international security? That is, would it serve as a stabilizing or destabilizing factor? This paper will serve to show that the technology for NMD is feasible when its technical components are looked at individually, and it is only a matter of years before a national missile defense system could be minimally operational. However, if countermeasures are taken against an NMD system, it will never be completely successful in a ballistic missile attack. Finally, regardless of its feasibility an NMD system would destabilize international security and could possibly even reinitiate another arms race, and for this reason, alternatives should be considered.

Placing criminals in prison benefits everyone

In early times, prisons served an entirely different purpose from the one it does today.   While it was basically still for the enforcement of the law, it was used as a holding area for people accused of crimes and in the process of trial, and for those accused of lesser crimes as non-payment of debts.   Back then, the only two penalties for crimes were death and banishment.Over the years, imprisonment for crimes has considerably changed.   The cause for imprisonment and the conditions of prisons have changed depending on the norms and capability of societies.   However, there still stands one common reason for imprisonment of persons convicted of crimes and that is basically to keep them away from society.   It is for the purpose of keeping the public safe from criminal elements such as them and to prevent them from committing crimes again.There are four major social benefits of incarceration that must be considered in measuring the cost effectiveness of imprisonment:   retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation or incapacitation.   (Catherine Bucci, 2005).Society believes that offenders must be penalized.   This belief is as old as time.   The difference is the penalties imposed on crimes, which are markedly different from society to society, from era to era.   Serving time in prison is the convicts’ retribution for the crime they committed. Putting criminals behind bars serves to warn others of similar fate and hopefully prevent them from committing crimes also.   Imprisonment of convicts is a deterrent to potential criminals.   While serving time in prison, the convict may receive intervention to curb criminal mentality.   They are made to do activities that will take their minds off from their negative side and bring out the positive in them.   While in prison the criminal is not able to commit crime under the watch of law enforcement agents.   All these ultimately benefits society as they all focus on the control and prev ention of crime.There are four morally justified purposes for punishment.   (Ryan Kummamer, 2007).To Protect Society.   Imprisonment will keep the offender away from the public.   This is to ensure that the public will be safe and protected from further threats from criminals.  Ã‚   Society is assured that the criminal is under police custody and could do no harm again.   If the criminals are allowed to roam the streets unchecked and uncontrolled they pose a great threat to the peace and order of the community.To Reform the Offender.   Prisons are not just penitentiaries but also reformatory institutions.   While serving time, convicts are provided with opportunities that will help them to be contributing and productive members of society when they are released from prison.   These opportunities are made available to them thru skills training and rehabilitation and therapy sessions.   If prison changed the offenders, it will a better and welcomed change.As a Deterr ent to Potential Criminals.   The threat of imprisonment and serving long prison term should serve as a strong warning to potential criminals.   The threat which brings fear deters persons from committing crimes that would surely send them to jail.   Studies even show that a prison term is more feared than the death penalty.   This reinforces the assumption that imprisonment is an effective deterrent for potential offenders to keep away from committing crimes.Penalty and Pay Back.   Justice calls for penalty to be imposed for the commission of crime.   An offender commits a crime for which society wants him to pay.   The penalty of imprisonment serves as the punishment.   Imprisonment brings back order, paying back of what was taken away or restoration to the proper order and condition of a community before the incident of crime.   When the offender is put behind bars, a sense of peace once more prevails in the community that once was shaken by the crime.All four r easons justified the means to an end.   Imprisonment will have served its purpose if in the end, a reformed convict integrates to mainstream society and does not turn into a recidivist.There are several basic theories regarding criminal justice and its relation to individual rights and social control; Restorative Justice, Retributive Justice, and Transformative Justice.   (Raymond E. Foster, 2006, 2007).Imprisonment is likewise justified if the ends of justice were met and served.Restoration.   Justice calls for the restoration of what has been taken away from society because of the crime committed.   At times there were chaos, anger, disruption from normalcy and confusion.   When a criminal is confined in prison, he is taken away from the community.   This becomes the time for the community to pick up the pieces to start over.   The condition of the community before the incidence of the crime is brought back.Retribution.   The offender suffers what the victims had i n essence suffered as well.   Since time in memorial, every part in history made offenders pay up for the crimes against persons, society and humanity.   This age is no different, so that people would realize that crime definitely pays.Transformation.   Everybody deserves second chances, including convicts serving prison terms.   Their confinement in penal institutions must bring something good and purposeful.   Convicts are given the means to reform within the walls of prison.   When they are released they are hoped to become changed from the criminal that was committed to the facility to a reformed person who would re-join society.Today, unlike in the 50’s when families provide the backbone of society, many factors like broken homes cause the high incidence of crimes.   Without strong societal support and an equally effective criminal justice system crimes would be hard to control.   Given all the avenues to pursue criminal justice, deterrence must still be the first measure sought.   Deterrence from the commission of crimes is effective to fight crime.   If there is a big threat to criminals like fear of being incarcerated, that would be deterrence enough to prevent further commission of crimes.The recorded low crime rate in the 80’s up to the 90’s has been due mainly to the high possibility of   prison sentence and increased prison time for serious offenses.   Legislation to these ends had a big impact on the downward trend of crime rate.   Laws raised the odds of imprisonment and made crimes unattractive to would-be criminals.Imprisonment is a more acceptable option to a society that frowns upon capital punishment.   Church groups, civil society and human rights advocates are all against the death penalty.   In many other countries, they deplore the conditions of jails as unfit for humans giving due concern over the rights of accused.   These groups tend to see   the other end of the scales of justice .   However, prison conditions and intervention approach done and extended to convicts serving time make imprisonment the just alternative to capital punishment.Somehow justice must be carried out in a situation where a crime has been committed.   The scales of justice must be equally in favor of the perpetrator of the crime and the victim, and society in general.Imprisonment satisfies all ends of justice.  Ã‚  Ã‚   The convict must pay for the crime committed against persons and society.   Society in turn demands that justice be served thru commensurate penalty.   As penalty for a crime committed, retribution is met.   A compassionate society could find it to forgive a convict who has served time in prison for a crime committed.   Giving second chances to convicts, reformation is satisfied.  Ã‚  Ã‚   Separating the convict from society until he has repent, done time and is deemed ready to re-join society.   Public protection is assured.  Ã‚   Imprisonment scares people away from crime, then crime prevention is guaranteed.Sources:Bucci, Catherine.   (09 Jan 2005).   Rising Sanctions for Repeat Offender.Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, from  http://www.ecoon.unconn.edu/Bucci_internshippaperexample.docCrime Fighters:   Justice.   (16 Jan 2006).   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, from  http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/fighters/prisonservice.shtmlPrison Reform. (13 Jan 2007).   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_reformCrime and Punishment in Americ:1999.   NCPA Policy Report No. 229.   (Oct 1999)Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.ncpa.org/studies/s229/s229.htmlStrategic Goal Six:   Protect American Society by Providing for the Safe, Secure & HumaneConfinement of Persons in Federal Custody.   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.usdoj.gov/ag/annualreports/pr2001/Section06.htmlKummamer, Ryan.   (2007).   On Capital Punishment.   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, from  http://www.newcitizenship.net/2006/12/on-capital -punishment.htmlFoster, Raymond E.   (2006-2007).   Criminal Justice.   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.hitechcj.com/criminal-justice-degree-online/ Placing criminals in prison benefits everyone In early times, prisons served an entirely different purpose from the one it does today.   While it was basically still for the enforcement of the law, it was used as a holding area for people accused of crimes and in the process of trial, and for those accused of lesser crimes as non-payment of debts.   Back then, the only two penalties for crimes were death and banishment.Over the years, imprisonment for crimes has considerably changed.   The cause for imprisonment and the conditions of prisons have changed depending on the norms and capability of societies.   However, there still stands one common reason for imprisonment of persons convicted of crimes and that is basically to keep them away from society.   It is for the purpose of keeping the public safe from criminal elements such as them and to prevent them from committing crimes again.There are four major social benefits of incarceration that must be considered in measuring the cost effectiveness of imprisonment:   retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation or incapacitation.   (Catherine Bucci, 2005).Society believes that offenders must be penalized.   This belief is as old as time.   The difference is the penalties imposed on crimes, which are markedly different from society to society, from era to era.   Serving time in prison is the convicts’ retribution for the crime they committed. Putting criminals behind bars serves to warn others of similar fate and hopefully prevent them from committing crimes also.   Imprisonment of convicts is a deterrent to potential criminals.   While serving time in prison, the convict may receive intervention to curb criminal mentality.   They are made to do activities that will take their minds off from their negative side and bring out the positive in them.   While in prison the criminal is not able to commit crime under the watch of law enforcement agents.   All these ultimately benefits society as they all focus on the control and prev ention of crime.There are four morally justified purposes for punishment.   (Ryan Kummamer, 2007).To Protect Society.   Imprisonment will keep the offender away from the public.   This is to ensure that the public will be safe and protected from further threats from criminals.  Ã‚   Society is assured that the criminal is under police custody and could do no harm again.   If the criminals are allowed to roam the streets unchecked and uncontrolled they pose a great threat to the peace and order of the community.To Reform the Offender.   Prisons are not just penitentiaries but also reformatory institutions.   While serving time, convicts are provided with opportunities that will help them to be contributing and productive members of society when they are released from prison.   These opportunities are made available to them thru skills training and rehabilitation and therapy sessions.   If prison changed the offenders, it will a better and welcomed change.As a Deterr ent to Potential Criminals.   The threat of imprisonment and serving long prison term should serve as a strong warning to potential criminals.   The threat which brings fear deters persons from committing crimes that would surely send them to jail.   Studies even show that a prison term is more feared than the death penalty.   This reinforces the assumption that imprisonment is an effective deterrent for potential offenders to keep away from committing crimes.Penalty and Pay Back.   Justice calls for penalty to be imposed for the commission of crime.   An offender commits a crime for which society wants him to pay.   The penalty of imprisonment serves as the punishment.   Imprisonment brings back order, paying back of what was taken away or restoration to the proper order and condition of a community before the incident of crime.   When the offender is put behind bars, a sense of peace once more prevails in the community that once was shaken by the crime.All four r easons justified the means to an end.   Imprisonment will have served its purpose if in the end, a reformed convict integrates to mainstream society and does not turn into a recidivist.There are several basic theories regarding criminal justice and its relation to individual rights and social control; Restorative Justice, Retributive Justice, and Transformative Justice.   (Raymond E. Foster, 2006, 2007).Imprisonment is likewise justified if the ends of justice were met and served.Restoration.   Justice calls for the restoration of what has been taken away from society because of the crime committed.   At times there were chaos, anger, disruption from normalcy and confusion.   When a criminal is confined in prison, he is taken away from the community.   This becomes the time for the community to pick up the pieces to start over.   The condition of the community before the incidence of the crime is brought back.Retribution.   The offender suffers what the victims had i n essence suffered as well.   Since time in memorial, every part in history made offenders pay up for the crimes against persons, society and humanity.   This age is no different, so that people would realize that crime definitely pays.Transformation.   Everybody deserves second chances, including convicts serving prison terms.   Their confinement in penal institutions must bring something good and purposeful.   Convicts are given the means to reform within the walls of prison.   When they are released they are hoped to become changed from the criminal that was committed to the facility to a reformed person who would re-join society.Today, unlike in the 50’s when families provide the backbone of society, many factors like broken homes cause the high incidence of crimes.   Without strong societal support and an equally effective criminal justice system crimes would be hard to control.   Given all the avenues to pursue criminal justice, deterrence must still be the first measure sought.   Deterrence from the commission of crimes is effective to fight crime.   If there is a big threat to criminals like fear of being incarcerated, that would be deterrence enough to prevent further commission of crimes.The recorded low crime rate in the 80’s up to the 90’s has been due mainly to the high possibility of   prison sentence and increased prison time for serious offenses.   Legislation to these ends had a big impact on the downward trend of crime rate.   Laws raised the odds of imprisonment and made crimes unattractive to would-be criminals.Imprisonment is a more acceptable option to a society that frowns upon capital punishment.   Church groups, civil society and human rights advocates are all against the death penalty.   In many other countries, they deplore the conditions of jails as unfit for humans giving due concern over the rights of accused.   These groups tend to see   the other end of the scales of justice .   However, prison conditions and intervention approach done and extended to convicts serving time make imprisonment the just alternative to capital punishment.Somehow justice must be carried out in a situation where a crime has been committed.   The scales of justice must be equally in favor of the perpetrator of the crime and the victim, and society in general.Imprisonment satisfies all ends of justice.  Ã‚  Ã‚   The convict must pay for the crime committed against persons and society.   Society in turn demands that justice be served thru commensurate penalty.   As penalty for a crime committed, retribution is met.   A compassionate society could find it to forgive a convict who has served time in prison for a crime committed.   Giving second chances to convicts, reformation is satisfied.  Ã‚  Ã‚   Separating the convict from society until he has repent, done time and is deemed ready to re-join society.   Public protection is assured.  Ã‚   Imprisonment scares people away from crime, then crime prevention is guaranteed.Sources:Bucci, Catherine.   (09 Jan 2005).   Rising Sanctions for Repeat Offender.Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.ecoon.unconn.edu/Bucci_internshippaperexample.docCrime Fighters:   Justice.   (16 Jan 2006).   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/fighters/prisonservice.shtmlPrison Reform. (13 Jan 2007).   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_reformCrime and Punishment in Americ:1999.   NCPA Policy Report No. 229.   (Oct 1999)Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.ncpa.org/studies/s229/s229.htmlStrategic Goal Six:   Protect American Society by Providing for the Safe, Secure & HumaneConfinement of Persons in Federal Custody.   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.usdoj.gov/ag/annualreports/pr2001/Section06.htmlKummamer, Ryan.   (2007).   On Capital Punishment.   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.newcitizenship.net/2006/12/on-capital-punishment. htmlFoster, Raymond E.   (2006-2007).   Criminal Justice.   Retrieved 17 Jan 2007, fromhttp://www.hitechcj.com/criminal-justice-degree-online/

Essay about Mistakes Made in the United States and Mexican...

Argument #1: The United States and Mexican War was unlawful. America acted supreme over Mexican land and their rights without a valid reason. The US government used Manifest Destiny as excuse to expand borders and go to war with Mexico. The term â€Å"manifest destiny† was born by John O’Sullivan and was thought of a year before the war began. During the year 1846, people were moved by manifest destiny and seeked influence from the government to push west. The idea of manifest destiny could have been used as an excuse from the government to go to war with Mexico because California was already wanted by America. John L. OSullivan on Manifest Destiny, 1839. John L. OSullivan on Manifest Destiny, 1839. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Jan. 2014. The†¦show more content†¦Argument #3: The United States government handled the slave debate poorly. The government handled the slave debate poorly because this is what caused America to enter a civil war. The Missouri Compromise, from the beginning, was a terrible idea. The Missouri Compromise was made to solve short term problems, so it would eventually have to be demolished. This compromise had to end because there would always be conflict between the number of free and slave states, which would cause imbalance within the government, meaning they had to resolve this problem once again. Not only did the Missouri Compromise increase the conflict between free and slave states, but it added on to the sectionalism in America. The Compromise of 1850 is another example of America handling the slave debate poorly. The Missouri Compromise would become void because now it would cause confusion on whether or not a state above the Missouri Compromise line was free, and whether a state below the Missouri Compromise line was slave. The Compromise of 1850 was not thought all the way through and it would add fire to the debate, which was already growing. Territorial Expansion 1790-1861. History of the United States :. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Feb. 2014. Argument #4: The Indian Removal Act was an unnecessary and terrible thing to do because they had no jurisdiction in doingShow MoreRelatedHistory And Its Impact On America1289 Words   |  6 Pageshistory are very important because of how they happened and what effects those historical events made possible in the future. Without history America would not know where we came from or how we got to where we are today. History helps us as Americans make decisions that could improve our future as a country, because without history to lead us in the right direction we could constantly make the same mistakes over and over again. There are many important times in history that greatly influenced how AmericaRead MoreThe Mexican War Of Mexico1466 Words   |  6 PagesThe Mexican War Starting in 1845 and concluding in 1850 with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was the era where the Mexican war occurred. This war had triggers with disagreements on the ideal of Manifest Destiny and major actions by President Polk that led the United States into attempting to annex Texas. Texas at that time was independent and was not part of Mexico nor America. Mexico wanted Texas to stay neutral that they threatened a war to the United States if they tried anything to attempt anythingRead MoreThe American Of The Mexican American War Essay1470 Words   |  6 PagesThe Mexican-American War was a result from the rising conflict between Mexico and the United States on who has the rights for Texas after Texas gained its independence from Mexico on March 2, 1836. Before Texas annexed with the United States on December 29, 1845, it was an independent state with 9 years of being free from Mexico . Although Mexico never acknowledged Texas to secede from them, the Texans and the United S tates did so the U.S. decided to add Texas as the 28th state. After Texas gainedRead MoreWhen Speaking Of Mexico In Relation To Its Experience With1203 Words   |  5 PagesWhen speaking of Mexico in relation to its experience with the United States not many are aware of or want to acknowledge the dark underbelly of foreign affairs between the two. From the very beginning of the creation of the newly settled United States, they have been in constant disagreement and forced negotiations. This, very prominently, has caused an almost constant tension between the neighboring countries that has shaped a molded both cultures, economies, and societal norms into what they areRead MoreExpansionism Under James K. Polk1276 Words   |  6 PagesExpansionism under James K. Polk During the years surrounding James K. Polks presidency, the United States of America grew economically, socially, and most noticeably geographically. In this time period, the western boundaries of the Untied States would be expanded all the way to the Pacific Ocean. Many Americans in the 19th century believed that the acquisition of this territory to the west was their right and embraced the concept of Manifest Destiny. This concept was the belief thatRead MoreExpansionism Under James K. Polk Essay1310 Words   |  6 PagesExpansionism under James K. Polk During the years surrounding James K. Polks presidency, the United States of America grew economically, socially, and most noticeably geographically. In this time period, the western boundaries of the Untied States would be expanded all the way to the Pacific Ocean. Many Americans in the 19th century believed that the acquisition of this territory to the west was their right and embraced the concept of Manifest Destiny. This concept was the belief thatRead MoreThe Royal academy 1811-1815 In 1811 Samuel Morse’s father allowed him to attend the Royal Academy1000 Words   |  4 Pagesand practice painting. He practiced there from 1811 to 1815 alongside some of the most famous artists of his time. Later, he furthered his artistic career. He painted many portraits of people ranging from merchants to former presidents of the United States. In time, Samuel Morse went on to paint Marquis de Lafayette in 1825. This is said to be one of his best works of art in his career as an artist. Wife dies 1825 On February 7th 1825, Morse’s wife, Lucretia Pickering Walker, died. Morse receivedRead MoreA Brief Note On The United States And Mexico1447 Words   |  6 Pagesthrough language, beliefs, customs, traditions and government (Nowaczyk, n.d.). Mexico is a country in South America that the United Stated has a very strong relationship with. We share a 2000 mile border so a two-sided relationship is very important between us because it has a direct impact on the lives of over a million Americans. Because of this, the United States and Mexico have been able to endure a steady relationship over many decades. For people to be aware of the culture of any countryRead MoreWinfield Scott Essay1281 Words   |  6 PagesAbstract Winfield Scott was a true American hero. Serving in 3 wars and numerous other battles and conflicts, he left a legacy that was talked about for over 5 decades. He served in the War of 1812, the Mexican War, and the Civil War. He began his military career and advanced quickly in the ranks. He was a formidable leader and very studious in military tactics. A big man, he stood at 61/2 feet tall, and demanded respect both when in uniform and without. He was referred to as Old Fuss andRead MoreOnly A Few Times In The Course Of Human History Has A Single1482 Words   |  6 Pagesone of those select few. Stephen F. Austin was able to create a country out of nothing but the wild untamed west. That country would ultimately become the 28th state of the Union and today is home to more than 27 million people with a GDP comparable to Australia. To better understand Stephen F. Austin is to better understand not only the state of Texas but the people that call it home. Stephen F. Austin was born to Moses and Maria Austin in Virginia on November 3rd, 1793. If not for his father, Moses