Advantages and Disadvantages of Cryopreservation

Advantages and Disadvantages of Cryopreservation In the world of science this two procedures Vitrification and Slow cooling are use to keep the biological materials such as cells, bone marrow , DNA etc at the low temperature , when compared to their normal temperatures. These two procedures will come under the Cryobiology. Cryobiology: It is the study of life below the low temperature. Background: In the centuries 2500 BC this was used by the people of Egypt for the medical purpose. They used to stop the bleeding and injuries during the injuries. In the latter centuries this was brought into popular by Robert Boyle. For the first time it was the Christopher Polge who used the bull sperm in cryopreservation. The 1970s brought great development in cryobiology by Zeo Layland who brought Slow Cooling technique which laid a path to the birth of first human embryo frozen, which latter used all over the world for the animals, cells and human biology. In the year 1986 Dr. Christopher Chen in Australia used the slow frozen oocytes for the pregnancy in the world for the first time. Advantages of cryobiology: Helps in the preservation of biological materials. By this the biological materials can be preserved for long time. Sperm, gametes, embryos, tissues, bone marrow, organ can be preserved. Helps to study the adapting nature of plants and animals under the low temperature. Cryopreservation: This is the process, which come under the Cryobiology. This is the process in which the cell is kept under the very low temperature which causes the cell to stop its biological chemical reactions and finally the cell leads to death. But sometimes the cell which is kept under the process of cryopreservation may get damage, when it is taken to the low temperature. Some of the biological materials are kept under very low temperature which is the liquid phase of the liquid nitrogen. Because it is the best process for the preservation some complex biological compounds which lead to stop their biological chemical reactions. In order to be free from the risk the most two techniques used are the Slow Cooling and Vitrification. Background: James Lovelock is the important person who made the Gaia theory fame. Using this theory he said that the damage that occurs to the red blood cells is due to the osmotic stress during the process of the freezing. In the early years of 1950s he said that when the cell faces the increase of salt concentration make it to dehydrate for the loss of water to the external ice which may cause the damage of the cell. In the year of 1950s they are rapid development of the freezing techniques which made helping in bringing the pregnancies. Before this the insemination of frozen sperm was brought into live. Latter in the 1957 the scientist of the United Kingdom started the cryopreserving the fowl sperm. In the year of 2000s the baby was born by the cryopreservation egg, Laina Beasley born in July 2005. Not only in the human beings, this is brought into the animals which made to the result of A Ocelots kitten born in Cincinnati Zoo in 2001. As freezing damage in the cells are of two aspects. The primary one is that cell gets damage due to the ice crystal, and the second is the damage of cell when more ice is formed due to the concentrate of the solute. Latter in the USA they made a solution for this aspects of the damage in cell by the typical rate of cooling 1C/min but this rate of cooling depends on the size of the cell and the water content in the cell. In this they are a form of anti-freeze known as the cryprotectant which is used to equalize the physical optimal parameter osmotic. Cryoprotectants have ability to protect the cell to face the freezing injury which was discovered accidentally. Cryoprotectants: When the biological materials are kept under the preservation they are need to be protect for the long time. At same time the protected material should be able to function for a long time when they are rewarmed to the sub zero level. During the process of the preservation some chemicals are used to preserve them in low temperature and in the same way they are rewarmed, and should have the ability to function for a long time. But in some cases of preservation chemicals are not used such as in fungi, yeast. The cryoprotectants are used in this cases, now a days some chemicals like dimethyl sulfoxide, glycerol. But in some of the specimens the dimethyl sulfoxide affects the preservation due to the toxicity nature. (Smith, 1983) This toxicity can be reduces to some level by use of glucose Advantages of Cryoprotectants: Helps the material from rapid cooling Prevents from formation of ice in the intracellular region. When the cell undergoes high concentration of solute it helps to prevent from dehydration (Mazur, 1984). Helps the cell to function even after the rewarming. Slow cooling: This is the early technique used in the cryopreservation which is used to prevent to the cell from the damage in the freezing Background: It is the control rate technique which was developed in the 1970s which has been enabled the first human embryo birth. From then this technique is used all over the world for the biological materials. And some machines which are used in the cryopreservation bring the cell to the freezing point such as the liquid phase of the liquid nitrogen. This technique machines are used to freeze the oocyte, blood products, sperms, skin, embryo, general tissues and stem cells preservation in research labs, hospitals all over the world. But in the slow cooling the cell gets dehydrate Vitrification: This is the new technique used in the cryopreservation which is used to prevent to the cell from the damage in the freezing. It is the preservation at extremely low temperature without any freezing. In this process can be done without the involvement of the cryoprotectants. Background: Right from the development of the slow cooling the glycerol is used to cryobiology as the cryoprotectant for the bull sperm and blood cells. But however it is know that glycerol is not helpful to prevent the whole organ from the damage. For more suitable cryoprotectants in those cases many of the biotech companies worked to develop. In the 21st century the kidney of rabbit is preserved at -135oC, which made as the vitrification cocktail, because latter the kidney which is preserved at the -135oC was again planted back into the body of rabbit, the kidney was found to be functioning without any failure. At present preservation of the brain is under the progress, they are looking to prevent the brain from damaging such as damage to the tissues and loss of the memory in the brain which was encoded. The Institute of Cryonics are working to preserve the whole body without damage in the cells, tissue and all the organs which should again function properly when they are transplanted, this is in the progress. In this the freezing involves in ice crystal formation, which lead to the damage of the sensitive structures such as the blood vessels. For a successful vitrification it needs combinations of the two factors, one is the high concentration of solutes in the bathing medium capable of glass formation, and the other is the extreme rapid cooling of the samples. In the year 1985 for the first time the cryopreservation of mouse embryos by Rall and Fahy. Steps that to be followed for the successful vitrification are concentration and composition of the vitrification solution The procedure used to equilibrate cells in this solution The cooling/warming conditions The procedure used to dilute cells from the vitrification solution Freezing injuries: In a living cell the liquid water is most important to maintain its structure and function, when this cell is kept in the freezing preservation, due to the low temperature then to its survival then the cell faces the freezing injuries which may lead the living cell to destruction. When the cell is under the preservation the injury that effect is shown in the figure the inverted U in this the position of the cell which it can function normally is shown as the survival point , when this cell is put on to the freezing beyond its limit, that is a cell has its own capability for a certain limit of low temperature or high temperature, when this cell exceeds the limit of low temperature the solution around the cell makes it injury, in such cases the intracellular ice formation will be occurred, at this stage the cell leads to the injury and destruction occurs. In some cases like the high cooling rate the cell undergoes both the extracellular and intracellular. Freezing injuries at high cooling rate: When we take most of the cells they have the thermodynamic point at -0.5oC. But when we need to preserve the cell the cell must get freeze, to do this the cell will be undertaken below -5oC. At this position the cell undergoes the super cooling at which the medium around the cell and the cell remain unfrozen, due to the protective solute that is bounded around and within the cell. The cell which is taken to the low temperature between the -5oC and -15oC the ice forms in the external medium. At which the cell content remain super cooling in an unfrozen state. The ice which is formed in the external medium will affect the extracellular solute. The solution concentration in the extracellular solution will increase when the temperature gets decreases and the ice will be grown, this increase of ice is the ice phase. Due to this the chemical imbalance is occurred between the biological material and the unfrozen external solution. The external part of the cell gets frozen when the water flows off, this occurs when the higher chemical potential then the water of the partly frozen solution outside the cell. And this subsequent physical event in the cell depends on the rate of cooling in the cell. If the cooling is sufficiently slow, the loss of water rapidly by exosmosis. When this occurs the result of the cell will dehydrate and will not freeze intracellular. TZ p3 When the cooling is too rapid the rate at which the chemical potential of water extracellular solution decreases is much faster than to the rate which water can be diffuse out of the cell and they will be the end result in the intracellular ice formation. In the shown figure the cell under the preservation will have the outflow of the intracellular water which may lead to shrink of the cell and the extracellular ice will be formed which leads to the shrunken cell with little or no ice formed internally. It is the indirect assumption that the formation of the ice inside the cell is unpreventable. At present many of the studies have been suggested that intracellular ice formation during the process of the freezing causes the death or damage of the cell. In the process of the intracellular ice formation they are three possible ways which it can be occurred. Chilling injuries: Chilling injury is defined as the low temperature stress on the absence of freezing. Actually the word chilling injuries is used in the botany, in the early 18th centuries to describe the plants which are subjected to the low temperature that is chilling temperature above the 0Â °C were often damaged irreversibly. The temperature shock was first used in 1934 to show the irreversibly damage to mammalian sperms that occurred when these cell undergo rapid cooling below the body temperature at which few degree fall down rapidly in a minute of time. At these both sperm cells and the plant cells the chilling injury are similarly related mechanism. In the process of chilling injuries they are two types direct chilling injury and the indirect chilling injury. Direct chilling injuries: This is also known as the Cold shock. This is mostly used to describe both phenomena, which is expressed quickly upon reduction in temperature and Dependent on cooling rate. Cold shock injury is almost independent of the rate of warming. Injury is increased as the period incubation at the reduced temperature is extended. Indirect chilling injuries: Indirect chilling injuries are usually evident following a relatively long exposure period at the time of the reduced temperatures, and its enable to the independent of the rate of cooling. Metabolic and enzymatic processes can find in the fast developing embryos. Especially in Drosophila and zebrafish the injury get more rapid at the low temperatures. This is due to the co-ordination is increased lost with decreasing temperature. The reduction in temperature will affect the enzyme rate reaction to a different extent. SIMILARITIES BETWEEN CONTROLLED SLOW COOLING AND VITRIFICATION: (Baudot et al., 2002) In the process of preservation both the techniques have the similarity of freezing during the process of preservation. In slow cooling the cooling is done intracellular and extracellular and in the same way in vitrification, but little change at place where ice crystal formation is occurred in slow cooling and not in vitrification Somehow both techniques are similar with slight changes during the process of the preservation of biological materials. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CONTROLLED SLOW COOLING AND VITRIFICATION IN CRYOPRESERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS: (Kuleshova, 2002) Vitrification techinque Slow cooling technique This is simple technique This is complex technique This safer technique This is risky technique This more costly technique This cheaper compare to vitrification Ice crystal dont form in the process of freezing In this ice crystals formation is seen This is most successful technique Not much success then vitrification Cell death will not occur Have the chances to the cell death ADVANTAGES OF VITRIFICATION AND CONTROLLED SLOW COOLING IN CRYOPRESERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS: In the cryopreservation the both techniques vitrification and controlled cooling techniques are used to preserve the biological materials for a long time. Vitrification technique has the uniqueness for the preservation of the oocytes, because the oocytes brought under this technique have more capable to the fertilization. This oocytes lead to the normal pregnancy. In process of the vitrification the ice crystal formation is not occurred both in the intracellular and the extracellular. In vitrification the whole cell including the medium solidify (freeze). In the process of vitrification the cell doesnt get any damage and dont lead the cell to death (Kasa, 2004). The preservation of materials at a controlled slow cooling, we can store the materials at -196oC, best example is storage of hematopoietic cells (Hill et al., 1972). The main advantages of cooling and warming rates are that it contains very less amount of cryoprotectants, with this it can reduce toxic effect and also osmotic injury (Orief et al., 2005). DISADVANTAGES OF CONTROLLED SLOW COOLING AND VITRIFICATION IN CRYOPRESERVATION OF BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS: When we come to the vitrification we dont face any unfavarable conditions during the process of preservation, because of cryoprotectants which toxic in nature and more cost(Chi, 2001). Ice crystals are occurred in the intracellular and the extra cellular region of cell in the process of preservation in slow cooling technique. This is the major disadvantage in controlled slow cooling. (Kasa, 2004). Main Outcome Measure: As per the reported number of pregnancies done after transfer of embryos which were cryopreserved by vitrification. Both slow cooling and vitrification procedures have successful cryopreservation of human embryos and oocytes. Both procedures have healthy births, but slow cooling of oocytes gives very low success rates. Vitrification is a promising novel technique in reproductive technology CONCLUSION: As per the reference and my knowledge controlled slow cooling and as well as vitrification are useful techniques for the preservation of biological materials, when compared vitrification technique is more useful technique for the preservation as slow cooling technique. Vitrification is a simple procedure that requires less time, safer and more cost effective than slow cooling.

Counter-Terrorism Strategies Reveal the Limits of Human Rights as a Cosmopolitan Discourse in the Age of Global Terror

Since the start of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, human rights were introduced as a system that exceeded any boundaries, such as religion, gender, ethnicity and nationality, in order to protect each individual. It was an attempt to universalize human standards of decency, morality and dignity, by way of constructing a global human community. It is through this that human rights were able to be changed and recognised as a standard for global order, regulated through international law. The act of terrorism is not a new concept, and has been responsible for many innocent lives over many years, however not until the attacks on the United States, known as 9/11, has terrorism become such a globalized issue. It was through the symbolic destruction of capitalism, coupled with the vast media outlets to create witnesses that allowed for Western society to face a new threat of vulnerability. The mass production of human rights violations aimed at such a seemingly powerful Western country induced a culture of fear, specifically regarding the weaknesses in national security. Terrorism, national security, and war became the dominant dialogue throughout international politics, and governments began to develop counter-terrorism legislation in order to enhance feelings of safety and security, but also to seek retribution against terrorist groups. It is through this introduction of new counter-terrorism legislation that allows the expectations of human rights protection to become confused, as state security becomes the prime concern. This new legislation becomes a shield to hide behind when human rights violations are committed, allowing the state to use the premise of counter terrorism as a justification for neglecting what was previously an internationally standardized notion of human rights protection. It then becomes a paradoxical debate of violation and protection, where policies designed to protect society from these human rights violations, not only affect the terrorists whom they are aimed at, but start to affect the people who’s rights they aim to protect. Where the notion of human rights is concerned in protecting the individual, counter-terrorism in the age of global terror re-employs these boundaries between the individual in the interest of the state, and disregards human rights. Pojman (2006) states that terrorism is a type of violence employed to deliberately target non-combatants in a ruthlessly destructive and often random manner in order to support concrete political or religious objectives. Because of its random ature, the act of terrorism destabilizes any notion of a human rights system by allowing each individual to be susceptible to its effects. Denying one their right to life is depriving them of their most fundamental human right. According to Anthony Giddens (in Pojman), the difference between what he labels as â€Å"old-terrorism† and â€Å"new-terrorism† lies in its locality in geographical terms, where the first is concerned with nationalist ideology and remained local, and the latter is focused on its global implementation (2006). September 11th became the poster for this â€Å"new-terrorism†, bringing with it the stark realisation that Western Society was not impervious to terrorist regimes. The vulnerability of the United States seemed not to have been considered previously, and the mass murder evoked an intense culture of fear amongst the people, only to be further manipulated by the media, causing governments to strike with new legislation. The notion of prevention was a strong instigator for new strategies, where the state intended to seek out terrorist activity before it happened. Terrorism uncovers the limits of the human rights system in achieving universal consensus. However the authority of rights is more so undermined when counter-terrorist acts violate these moral principles in the constant pursuit of their re-avouchment. Under the title of counter-terrorism, democratically defined countries are deserting fundamental principles of human rights that were once upheld, such as the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, freedom of expression and the right to seek asylum (McCulloch, 2003). The entire premise behind having a universal declaration of human rights was to maintain a society in which people could have access to a global mechanism of protection and support. However counter-terrorism has dismantled these ideals and replaced them with suspect and presumed guilt. The position of human rights in the international community has been seen as dispensary to the higher priority of achieving security through counter-terrorism. Faced with the exposure of the weakness to its homeland, the US opted for a military based counter-terrorism approach, resulting in the deployment of military forces into the Middle East and Central Asia, initiating what was known as the War on Terror (Schorlemer, 2003). The invasion of Afghanistan was designed to strengthen state borders from afar by defeating terrorists at their source. However, in order to do so, the US strategy was to utilize violence to secure their human rights. In using violence, they contradicted exactly what they were fighting for. The state of emergency that was declared following 9/11 and the climate of fear fostered by terrorist activity destabilized the notion that all individuals are entitled to rights protection. In a state of war, honouring human rights is neither practically possible nor theoretically required (Luban, 2002). It becomes intrinsic in the system of war that constitutional rights and civil liberties of populations can be brought to a halt under the pretence of enhancing state security, all the while allowing for the deterioration of basic human rights under circumstances of organised violence. The US disregard for abiding to the universal human rights of global citizens can strongly be seen in the military intervention in Afghanistan, and further in the counter-terrorism strategies of rendition, torture and detainment practiced by the US and their allies in pursuit of security. Under the model of war, the lethal use of force on enemy troops is permissible, and the accidental maiming and killing of civilians is seen as collateral damage rather than victims of atrocities (Luban, 2002). Therefore, by declaration of war, George W. Bush implemented a counter-terrorism strategy, that by virtue of its nature undermines the system of human rights as an internationally enforceable system available to all individuals. This is reinforced by highlighting its illegitimacy in instances of war. As terrorism is not an enemy in the conventional war sense, as it is not a visible and tangible body with a defined territory, the US forces in Afghanistan have relied on using air strikes to atta ck insurgents, according to Garlasco (reference). Usual requirement of evidence or proof before a conviction becomes less regulated or required when at war, with plausible intelligence and insufficient evidence adequate as the foundation for action (Luban, 2002). In situations of flawed or limited intelligence, it has not been terrorists but civilians that have become victims of air strike assaults, thus having their right to life stolen from them (Garlasco). An example of this kind of fatal mistake occurred in the Afghani town of Uruzgan in 2002, where faulty intelligence concerning the location of Al-Qaeda fighters led to the execution of a lethal air strike, killing 21 civilians. This problematic endeavour to protect our rights is therefore legitimizing civilian casualties as collateral damage of war. Counter-terrorism strategies have justified the illegal detainment, torture and rendition of suspected terrorists as a necessary process in achieving security and paradoxically reasserting the human rights of moral citizens. The aftermath of September 11th brought about the legitimization of human rights violations through new counter-terrorism laws, whereby these violations can most distinctly be witnessed through the treatment of prisoners in the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Democratic rights such as the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, and freedom from torture were all eradicated in the operations that took place at the base, denying them these basic civil liberties in an unrelenting pursuit of truth and justice for the violence inflicted on American citizens on September 11th. Common practice has been the illegal detention of suspected terrorists, where the rights to due process and a fair trial are not upheld. Recently, the evidence against the military has been growing, including official Pentagon documents, indicating that interrogators consistently employed hard line counter-resistance measures in absolution to induce prisoner co-operation. Such measures include sleep deprivation, prolonged isolation, painful body positions, feigned suffocation, beatings, sexual provocation and displays of contempt for Islamic symbols (Bloche and Marks, 2005). Under the 1984 United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT), an event is considered torture if it satisfies three constitutive elements; the infliction of severe mental or physical suffering, for the recipient to be perpetrated for a purpose, and for this to occur by way of an official (Hocking and Lewis, 2007). The operation of torture in counter-terrorist tactics echoes the breakdown of moral consensus on the use of torture, with the US disrespect for this international human right setting a negative global standard (Wilson, 2005). Therefore, when another State executes this act of torture, the US and their Western Allies seek their services for interrogating their own suspected terrorists, rather than condemning the act. The US, since September 11th, has engaged in transferring their suspects to other countries, where the torture and interrogation can be carried out. This instance of rendition mirrors the practices undertaken by the Swedish Government, where they abducted extremist Islamic suspects and transferred them to Egypt, where torture under interrogation is considered legal custom (Bloche and Marks, 2005). Counter-terrorism has allowed for the undermining of the adoption of human rights globally. Where western democratic states were formerly viewed as human rights advocates, they now deny this role of leadership in aid of suppressing this culture of fear induced by global terrorism. Counter-terrorism strategies have both enhanced the degradation of human rights in regards to the moral basis for international relations, and allowed for the threat of terrorism to be used by state governments to increasingly militarize the protocol of law enforcement and increase the surveillance of civilians (McCulloch, 2003). The war on terror has perpetuated a permanent state of emergency with no foreseeable end. Thus in many western countries, the prolonged war against terror is being used politically rather than legally, to justify the permanent restriction of civilian human rights (Zizek). Shielded by the counter-terrorism legislation, states have put into practice new national security laws whilst pre-existing emergency legislation has achieved legitimacy, claiming to be an essential response to the threat of terrorism (Wilson, 2005). In support of their counter-terrorism strategies employed abroad, states such as Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada and the US have relied upon internal strategies to curtail the threat of terrorism. Such measures include the indefinite detention of suspected terrorists without trial or judicial review, the increased surveillance and reduced privacy protections, the dramatic increase in the powers afforded to domestic spy agencies, the right to silence and choice of legal representation eradicated completely, and the vastly expanded resources afforded to military and police engaged in homeland security (McCulloch, 2003). The civil and political liberties that were considered so important during the devising of the UDHR, are now ironically being violated by the very people who them in place. The power to detain people will increase state security organizations power to suppress dissent by adding detention to the potential adverse consequences of political opinions that challenge the political status quo (McCulloch, 2003). In times of global terror, the implementation of increased surveillance does not invoke a feeling of security amongst society, but conversely, further extends the culture of fear that occurs through constant intimidation and increasingly inhibited freedoms. The dispensability of human rights in times of state emergency is revealed when our global principles can be undermined by counter-terrorist strategies so immediately. The principle of counter-terrorism, to enhance state security, has reinforced the rigidity of national borders, by entrenching foreigners and citizenship as acceptable bases for distinction and discrimination and the rejection of humanitarian concerns for individual needs (Mertus and Helsing, 2006). The figure of the refugee as the individual, deprived of citizenship and reliant on the goodwill of other states, illustrates this collision between the protection of individual versus the protection of the state (Humphrey, 2002). After the Second World War, the refugee acquired a measure of political significance as victims of persecution. However the contemporary threat of terrorism has redefined refugees as victims of an international system of nation states founded on a hierarchy of exclusion (Humphrey, 2002). Rather than generously extending protection to individuals seeking asylum from persecution, torture and war, counter-terrorism strategies have increased the conditionality in the acceptance of refugees. ‘Boat people’ arriving on remote areas of the northwest shoreline of Australia constitute the manifestation of the international refugee crisis in this country. Recent asylum seekers are confined in remote detention centres in economically poor island communities to the north of Australia. This criminalization of refugees by the Australian government reflects a rejection of their moral responsibility as human rights guarantors whilst ironically committing human rights violations of their own. The detainment of asylum seekers inflicts a greater degree of suffering on these individuals with detention providing a re-traumatizing environment that may contribute to the development of mental health problems (Stout, 2002). The political discourse employed by the government in relation to ‘boat people’ stripped the refugee of compassion and their human rights by referring to them as ‘illegal’s’ that pay ‘people smugglers’ (Humphrey, 2002). Thus rather than alleviate the suffering imposed on refugees by virtue of their situation, various States are going to extreme lengths to undermine the legitimacy of their asylum claims by making invalid character judgments. Similar to human rights, the category of refugee is non-racial; in theory a state is obliged to extend support and assistance to a refugee without racial selectivity. Australia has a history of denying asylum based on race, such as the exclusion of Chinese immigrants during the 1880s, and now this racial exclusion is being inflicted on individuals of Middle Eastern descent based upon them sharing the same ethnicity as Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorist groups. The racial assumptions that acquaint the Afghani or Iraqi race with terrorism have falsely led to the prolonged detainment and refused asylum of Middle Eastern individuals. Thus terrorism has accelerated the shift in global attitudes toward refugees from one of state moral responsibility to the prioritization of state security over accepting claims for asylum. Whilst viewed as a strategy of counter-terrorism, enhanced border security and the increased conditionality required for refugees to gain asylum disqualifies human rights as a unifying discourse without qualification. The implementation of counter-terrorism strategies by Western nations in reaction to the 9/11 attacks were largely reactionary and centred on enhanced state security to reduce the likelihood of terrorist activity infiltrating national borders. The contemporary manifestation of terrorism represents a clash of civilizations, pitting the culture of Islamic fundamentalism against a Western culture composed of modernity, secularity and democracy (Pojman, 2006). In this clash human rights rests precariously in the middle. On the one hand, terrorism denies victims their rights, yet the enactment of counter-terrorism strategies to address these violations paradoxically impedes on the rights of global citizens. The way in which western countries have responded to the threat of terrorism has not only violated principles of human rights and international law but has also proved to be ineffective in combating terrorism. Almost eight years after the proclamation of the ‘global war on terror’ terrorists are still striking with alarming frequency and ease in our cities: Madrid, London, Sharm el Sheikh, Bali and Mumbai represent the more recent and appalling acts. If our world is in a state of war, why is it that western forces have not been as successful as past governments in achieving victory in similar time periods as in past wars (Hocking and Lewis, 2007)? The First World War was won in five years and the Japanese Empire in World War II was defeated in four years following their attack on Pearl Harbour. Despite all the energies and resources deployed to strengthen the West’s ‘War on Terror’, global terrorism has not lost its power to recruit combatants and inflict destruction on unsuspecting communities (Hocking and Lewis, 2007). In the context of terrorism, war has proven to be ineffective as it fails to address the environment with which terrorism has evolved. Terrorist organizations flourish in societies that have been marginalized by globalization and where there are unresolved conflicts and few accountability mechanisms for addressing political grievances (Hocking and Lewis, 2007). The feeling of despair and sense of hopelessness rooted in oppression, ignorance, poverty and perceived injustice have been identified as causal factors in the development of terrorism. Just as the benefits of globalization and modernity have been unequally distributed so have the capabilities of marginalized populations to gain access to their human rights. Thus to combat terrorism, the implementation of social and economic policy can help to mitigate exclusion and the impact of rapid socio-economic change which foster the grievances which terrorists exploit to gain legitimacy (Hocking and Lewis, 2007). Greater emphasis on counter-terrorism strategies, which address the causal factors of terrorism, will thus increase individual access to human rights and diminish their marginalization and global inequality. Terrorism is a political and criminal activity that undermines the foundation of the contemporary human rights system. It rejects the notion that by virtue of every individual’s humanness they should have access to a host of civil, political and socio-economic rights. The attack of 9/11 exposed security weaknesses of the US, subsequently inducing fear in all western states that they could too be easily targeted by religious extremist factions. Counter-terrorism has aimed to heighten state security often to the detriment of upholding universal principles of human rights. Just as terrorism views all enemy citizens with the same contempt that is there is no distinction between the president and an average citizen, in many regards counter terrorism makes no distinction between terrorists and civilians in that human rights restrictions are imposed on all individuals in states of emergency. Once relied upon as states of human rights advocacy and leadership, western states have legitimized the rejection of human rights under the banner of counter-terrorism. The ‘War on Terror’, increasing surveillance of citizens, restriction of their constitutional rights and the abandonment of state’s moral duty toward asylum seekers symbolizes the dispensability and conditionality of universal human rights. The abrogation of human rights underlying contemporary counter-terrorism practices reflects the limits of the human rights system to neglect in times of emergency, fear and vulnerability.

Lord of the Flies Symbolism Analysis Essay

Plato, a famous Greek philosopher born in 428 BC, once said, â€Å"The measure of a man is what he does with power.† This statement shows that man will truly be defined for what he does with the power he receives; whether he would use it for manipulation, cruelty and lofty desires, or whether he would treat everyone fairly, maintain democracy and control himself in such a high position. In William Golding’s Lord of The Flies and George Orwell’s Animal Farm, the power is shown and given to a character, which would use it for his own benefits and does not choose to do what is right for those under his power. Jack, a power-hungry dictator, uses his manipulative and deceiving tactics to reign over a group of schoolboys who get stuck on an island. Napoleon, a pig, uses power along with fear to control the other animals around him and asserts violence to get his role as a leader. The desire for power and control in both characters stimulates them to use fear and violence as a way of keeping their high position and satisfying their needs. It is clear that the two leaders Napoleon and Jack both used physical harm as a way of getting their message across to their other citizens. Jack displayed this behavior after he gets his own tribe, where he ruled merciless and punishes anyone he is not pleased with. When Roger and Robert were having a brief conversation in Chapter 10, they said, ‘He’s going to beat Wilfred’. ‘What for?’ ‘I don’t know. He didn’t say. He got angry and made us tie Wilfred up. He’s been†- he giggled excitedly- â€Å"he’s been tied up for hours, waiting-.†(Golding 176). This shows Jack and his cruel use of power among his own tribe. Napoleon, on the other hand, doesn’t punish his own tribe, but does go to an extent where he vows a death sentence towards anyone who is working or wants Snowball to come back to the farm. This is shown in the execution of four pigs, â€Å"Without any further prompting they confessed that they had been secretly in touch with Snowball ever since his expulsion, that they had collaborated with him in destroying the windmill, and that they had entered into an agreement with him to hand over Animal Farm to Mr. Frederick. They added that Snowball had privately admitted to them that he had been Jones’s secret agent for years past. When they had finished their confession, the dogs promptly tore their throats out, and in a terrible voice Napoleon demanded whether any other animal had anything to confess.† (Orwell 73). Despite being a pig, Napoleon shows the same qualities as a human dictator and even goes as far as to making innocent pigs confessing to a crime they had never done. Within both leaders, anger becomes the main reason for punishment to the citizens. Both leaders, nonetheless, use their people for their own benefit whether they were given permission or not. In Lord of the Flies, Jack went as far as to stealing Piggy’s glasses without Piggy’s consent in hopes of being able to make a fire at any time he requests. Regardless of Piggy’s anger and necessity for glasses, Jack steals them and even kills Piggy when Ralph, Piggy, Sam and Eric confronted his tribe for Piggy’s glasses. Along with this situation, in Animal Farm, Napoleon’s desire for power and money drives him towards betraying his best worker who works for him every second he is awake for whiskey money. The animals would work continuously for Napoleon, and this is clear in Orwell’s statement in chapter VI, â€Å"All that year the animals worked like slaves† (Orwell 53).

Affirmative Action Essay - 561 Words

The purpose of affirmative action is to ensure equal opportunity for minorities. But it has strayed from its original intent and has become largely a program to achieve not equal opportunity but equal results. It is a system of quotas forced upon American businesses and working class by the federal government. A law which forces people to look at race before looking at the individual cannot promote equal opportunity. Affirmative action continues the judgement of minorities by race; it causes reverse discrimination, and contradicts its purpose. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Affirmative action is not creating a colorblind society. In fact it continues the judgement of minorities according to race. Affirmative action forces employers and†¦show more content†¦When a minority is turned down because of the color of their skin, it is unconstitutional. But when a white person is turned down because they are white, it is called equal opportunity. There is no excuse for anyone to be judged by something as trivial as race. There should not be a double standard. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;The third major reason why affirmative action should not exist is that it completely contradicts its purpose. Its purpose is to create a colorblind society. But in reality, it forces people to look at race by mandating quotas. The thinking behind affirmative action is to eliminate racism, we must first take race into account. Yet this causes a judgmental atmosphere in which many people feel cheated because the focus has been taken off the individual and placed everyone into groups based on race and gender. It is illegal for the government to require quotas as well. Therefore affirmative action is unconstitutional and should be illegal. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Affirmative action is also taking the focus off the individual. That is why Florida governor, Jeb Bush, has banned race and gender preference with his â€Å"One Florida† plan which will end affirmative action. The plan also guarantees that every student within the top 20% is guaranteed admission into college. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Seldom has a democratic government’s policy so completely contradicted the core values of its citizenryShow MoreRelatedThe Affirmative Of Affirmative Action Essay1389 Words   |  6 Pages Many affirmative action efforts have been made since the end of the Civil War in order to remedy the results of hundreds of years of slavery, segregation and denial of opportunity for groups that face discrimination. Many African Americans such as President Barack Obama, Senator Cory Booker, the writer Toni Morrison, the literary scholar Henry Louis Gates, media star Oprah Winfrey, and rap star Jay-Z have achieved positions of power and influence in the wider society (Giddens, Duneier, AppelbaumRead MoreAffirmative Action1160 Words   |  5 PagesAffirmative Action Marlene S. Smith MGT/434 October 28, 2013 Thomas Affirmative Action Affirmative action is an action that was purposefully designed to provide full and equal opportunities for employment and education for women, minorities, and other individuals belonging to disadvantaged groups. This paper will assess the rudiments of Affirmative Action as it applies to public and private sector employers. The paper will also evaluate what employers are subject to affirmative actionRead MoreAffirmative Action1559 Words   |  7 PagesRESEARCH PAPER AFFIRMATIVE ACTION INTRODUCTION Affirmative Action is an employment legislation protection system that is intended to address the systemized discrimination faced by women and minorities. It achieves this by enforcing diversity through operational intrusions into recruitment, selection, and other personnel functions and practices in America. Originally, Affirmative Action arose because of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s desire to integrate society on educationalRead MoreAffirmative Action1571 Words   |  7 PagesName Professor Name Management 11th November 2011 Affirmative Action Thesis: Affirmative Action has helped many women and minorities in entering the job market. Although there has been a lot of hue and cry regarding the benefits of the affirmative action and the suitability of candidates selected thorough affirmative action; research has shown that affirmative action is beneficial and the candidates of affirmative action perform as well as those who are selected through theRead MoreAffirmative Actions1078 Words   |  5 PagesRunning Head: AFFERMATIVE ACTION Affirmative Actions Affirmative action is an action taken by an organization to select on the basis of race, gender, or ethnicity by giving due preferences to minorities like women and races being not adequately represented under the existing employment. To make the presentation of all these compositions almost equal in proportion to do away the injustice done in the past. The Supreme Company need to design an affirmative action program in the light ofRead MoreAffirmative Action1759 Words   |  8 PagesAffirmative Action Right? Affirmative action has been around for decades. Some believe it isn’t fair but others do. Those who believe and agree with affirmative action tend to say, â€Å"The principle of affirmative action is to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people† (Bidmead, Andrew pg 3). Others that disagree with it and find it unfair simply see it as another form of discrimination, giving one group extra advantages based upon nothingRead MoreAffirmative Action And Its Effects On Affirmative1263 Words   |  6 PagesThroughout America there are many different views on the effects of affirmative action. Many see it as a negative policy which gives an unnecessary advantage to minorities in America. In a 2009 Pew Poll, â€Å"58% of African Americans agree† and only â€Å"22% whites agree† that there should be â€Å"preferential treatment to improve the position of blacks and other minorities† (Public Backs Affirmative Action†). Today affirmative action and other racial injustices tend to be in the spotlight quite often, suchRead MoreAffirmative Action774 Words   |  4 PagesAffirmative action is a practice that is intended to promote opportunities for the â€Å"protected class† which includes minorities, woman, and people with disabilities or any disadvantaged group for that matter. With affirmative action in place people of this protected class are given an even playing field in terms of hiring, promotion, as well as compensation. Historically, affirmative action is only known to have protected African Americans and woman; however that is not the case. Affirmative actionRead MoreAffirmative Action : Gender Action Essay970 Words   |  4 PagesAffirmative Action (ADD PROPER INTRO) Affirmative action, in its broadest sense, are attempts to help create labor and educational opportunities for groups that have been disadvantaged in the past. (Miriam Webster). Evidence has shown that throughout history, many groups have been discriminated against, and because of past (discriminations?), they continue to experience obstacles in areas of hiring, promotion, renting, buying, gaining education, and everyday economic activities. Thus, affirmativeRead MoreAffirmative Action Is An Action Or Policy? Essay1774 Words   |  8 Pages Affirmative Action remains one of the more complicated and controversial topics dealt with in American society. Affirmative Action is an action or policy designed to protect specific groups who suffer from discrimination, and provide them with programs and special opportunities. These government or private programs were designed to set right historical injustices towards the members of these groups who have suffered things like employment and e ducational disadvantages from racial discrimination