“In the normal course of events, Presidents come to this chamber to report on the state of the Union. Tonight, no such report is needed. It has already been delivered by the American people”. These words spoken by President George W. Bush began one of the most important speeches is American history. A mere nine days after the incident, Bush was facing the insurmountable task of addressing a fragile nation looking for answers. His response was a carefully planned attack on Al-Qaeda and segues into the war on Iraq. This address to the nation used what many call political language to try to persuade a nation to follow his cause. This political language contained several of the bad habits or tricks that George Orwell outlined in Politics and the English Language. The four language tricks that he describes are: Meaningless words, pretentious diction, verbal false limbs, and dead metaphors. Although it was written in 1946, many of his theories are still true today and can be found in President Bush’s inaugural address.
The most evident language trick in Bush’s address was the use of meaningless words. In Politics and the English Language, Orwell outlined several examples of what he believes were meaningless words. Two of those words, appear predominately in Bush’s address: Freedom and democracy. President Bush commonly refers to terrorists and Al-Qaeda as “enemies of freedom”. Freedom can be viewed in many ways and it all depends on one’s point of view. People in Afghanistan might see freedom as the removal American forces from their area, while President Bush may see freedom as being able to live a normal life. The definition of freedom becomes quite vague and therefore has no finite meaning. The word democracy is also used without any special meaning to it. Democracy is often used to represent America and how it is the ideal way. Ironically, many critics complain that the American electoral system is not perfectly democratic. Perhaps the best example of this came from President Bush himself, when he won the presidency despite not receiving the most votes. If this system can be called democracy, then it truly shows no meaning for the word democracy.
Like all politicians, Bush used several words in his address that could easily replaced with shorter and easier to comprehend words. Orwell describes these words as pretentious diction and they are found throughout the address. Words like directive, pretense, piety, and pluralism could easily be replaced by words that are more common to everyday people. These words stop the flow of the address because it leaves the reader unsure about the meanings of them.
Many of the sentences in the presidential address feel boring and long due to the use of operators and verbal false limbs. They add syllables to the sentence but aren’t of any more use. These verbal false limbs replace verbs and nouns that could express meaning in much better ways. For example, in the phrase “hand over every terrorist”, the words ‘hand over’ can be replaced by single verbs such as surrender or relinquish. These verbs specify the meaning and make the sentence seem less commonplace.
Metaphors are always an effective way to describe something but sometimes when the metaphors are overused and dead, it defeats the purpose. When the same metaphor is used over and over again, the metaphor loses its meaning and effectiveness. Bush declares that the generation will lift a “dark threat of violence” from its people. Violence is very commonly referred to as a threat and associated with darkness. When the reader sees this, it will not evoke any new images because it has been seen too many times before.
President Bush’s presidential address skillfully rallied a lost nation towards a common goal. However, the bad habits that George Orwell outlines in Politics and the English Language are apparent throughout the speech. The use of meaningless words, pretentious diction, operators or verbal false limbs, and dead metaphors significantly reduce the effectiveness of the speech. Unfortunately, political language typically goes hand in hand with these four language tricks. They are, essentially, what makes political language different from everyday English language. This is the reason why many people complain that political language is hard to understand. If politicians ever want to shed their negative image and appeal to the common man, then they should take a page from Orwell’s book and stay clear of the bad habits that affect the English language.
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Saturday, April 4, 2009
WAL-MART: A group of intellectuals tackle America’s giant
Nelson Lichtenstein, Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism (New Press, 2006)
On average, every minute almost 10 000 consumers visit an American Wal-Mart store. It is the largest private employer in the United States and Mexico and operates stores in eight different countries. There is no denying the ubiquity of the corporation in our everyday lives and the significant role that it plays in determining the future of our world economy. Nelson Lichtenstein attempts to explore the profound influence as well as the humble beginnings of this multinational giant in his collection of essays, Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism. Lichtenstein, a professor of history at the University of California Santa Barbara, assembled the diverse group of scholars to compare their perspectives on Wal-Mart and the “global manufacturing-transport-distribution chain in which that corporation is the largest and most significant link” (x). The common theme that is expressed throughout the book is that Wal-Mart has become the template for twenty-first-century capitalism. While all of the contributors may agree on that aspect, their opinions deviate on whether this template is the source of a capitalist revolution or demise. Although each essay is written independent of each other, they are broadly organized into three sub-themes: History, Culture, Capitalism; A Global Corporation; and Working at Wal-Mart. These three themes aim to explain Wal-Mart’s phenomenal rise to the top, and their strategies to remain there.
Wal-Mart’s ruthless ascent to the top is as much attributable to favourable timing and location as its charismatic founder, Sam Walton. The first Wal-Mart discount store opened in Bentonville, Arkansas in 1962 with a simple concept; generate high inventory turnovers using low markups. In order to maintain low markups, Walton realized that it was absolutely necessary to keep labour costs at a minimum. Fortunately, the New Deal and civil rights revolution had not been firmly established in Arkansas which meant that Walton could play around with minimum wage laws. Moreover, thousands of men and women were desperate for jobs after the agricultural revolution, which made farming more capital intensive. As the years went on, Wal-Mart capitalized on events such as the failure of unionization in Arkansas, Reaganomics, and NAFTA to keep costs low. While other discount retailers and the dominant corporation of the time GM suffered from rising wages, Wal-Mart actually saw their real wages decrease in the years after 1970. This is nothing out of the ordinary as Wal-Mart has built an empire based on being different and trying new techniques to increase efficiency. As Wal-Mart grew, it tirelessly searched for innovative technologies to implement in order to improve their economies of scale. For example, the use of communications technology reduced management costs and allowed Wal-Mart to expand while still being able to micromanage each individual store. It was evident that Wal-Mart was changing the way retailers conducted business. It was only a matter of time before Wal-Mart took over the rest of the world.
For years, retailers were forced to accept the manufacturer’s prices if they wanted to do business. The emergence of Wal-Mart shifted the power towards retailers because manufacturers were fighting to get their products on Wal-Mart’s shelves. Also, the rapid growth of global manufacturers gave retailers more choice, and often a cheaper option than its American counterparts. This power shift ushered in an era of post-Fordism, a period characterized by globalization of production, extreme capital mobility, and high levels of employment insecurity and stratification. A prominent feature of the post-Fordist economy was the logistics revolution of the global distribution chain. As the proportion of merchandise being imported was dramatically increasing, a more efficient method of trade was necessary. Of course, Wal-Mart set the template with inter-modal freight transport and Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags. Inter-modal transport used more than one mode of transportation to move freight which Wal-Mart used in conjunction with their famous distribution centers. This method resulted in a faster and cheaper way to get inventory. Accordingly, the system of production and distribution shifted from push to pull, where the retailer tracked consumer behaviour and demanded an exact amount. Wal-Mart used this pull system to keep wastage to a minimum and constantly improved it by sharing consumer data with its suppliers. The result is greater sales and lower costs for both Wal-Mart and its suppliers. Wal-Mart’s globalization of the distribution chain continued past the supplier as they began to open retail stores worldwide. As Chris Tilly points out in his essay, one of their most successful ventures was in Mexico. In fact, it’s 2004 sales in Mexico were greater than the next three leading competitors combined (189). The point is reiterated that Wal-Mart has built an empire based on taking advantage of favourable conditions. Firstly, thanks to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), goods could move freely between America and Mexico. Also, at the time there were few large, modern retail stores and on top of that, Wal-Mart bought the leading retailer in Mexico, Cifra. The low income population welcomed Wal-Mart because of the cheap goods and the abundance of jobs, which paid relatively well for them. There are however, limits to this success. Since Wal-Mart has established itself as a template business, other Mexican retailers have begun to modernize and adapt some of their efficient practices. As Wal-Mart’s piece of the pie is decreasing, the pie itself is also shrinking. The polarization between the rich and the poor is expanding and with the ever-present risk of economic recessions, less people can actually afford to shop at Wal-Mart. Nevertheless, Wal-Mart was a trailblazer in international expansion for retail companies, who previously preferred to stay in North America. As the section suggests, Wal-Mart has truly become a global corporation and their ideas involving globalization – intermodal transport and international establishment – have become the model for large-scale growth for companies in America.
Wal-Mart’s non-conformist ideology has historically changed the American economy and is currently revolutionizing the global economy. However, there is one issue where Wal-Mart’s refusal to let up has drawn a storm of criticism. The final theme that the essays explore is ‘Working at Wal-Mart.’. This is the aspect of the Wal-Mart template that people fear most. For years Wal-Mart has been accused of “vociferous antiunionism, embedded gender discrimination, compulsive cost cutting and near comprehensive control over workers and the workplace” (213). In Wal-Mart’s defense, these practices have been rampant in discount retailing for years. It is just that Wal-Mart has become the epitome of bad labour relations because they have so ruthlessly used them to their advantage. The author depicts working at Wal-Mart as a demanding and unjust occupation. Every single employee from top to bottom of a Wal-Mart store each faces his or her own difficulties from the authoritarian executives. The lowest paid employees, in addition to being poorly compensated, are under constant surveillance. The threat of unionization was so great to Wal-Mart that private investigators and lie detector tests were often utilized in stores. When exceptional workers seem interested in forming a union, managers find fault with their work and fire them. To ensure maximum productivity, workers are shamed in front of their peers for bad jobs and constantly taken down a notch to prevent them from aspiring towards greater pay or position. These stressing conditions are only the beginning for female workers. The culture of Wal-Mart has always been patriarchal with a vast majority of men in managerial positions. It stems back to the early days when it was thought that promotions should be reserved for men because they were responsible for supporting their families. Women have consistently been paid far less than men at Wal-Mart and are rarely given the opportunity for advancement. This discrimination has become so endemic that a class action lawsuit has been filed by 1.6 million women who claim that they have been denied promotions and raises. As the template of American business, the result of this case may set a precedent that will echo throughout every workplace in the country. The blame for all of this discrimination cannot be placed squarely on the managers. Near impossible demands are given to store managers who have a limited wage budget to spend. Managers are expected to continually cut costs and increase sales which the executives constantly monitor. A common message from executives is “if you don’t beat yesterday, management could have your job at any moment” (254). It is easy to understand why some managers might be tempted to resort to unethical practices such as the discriminatory acts towards workers. Fortunately, progress has been made in the fight for greater labour rights at Wal-Mart. Aside from North America, all Wal-Marts around the world are unionized. The difficulty in getting unions in North America is Wal-Mart’s use of leverage in denying unions to form. Unless the entire American Wal-Mart workforce (1.3 million people) does the impossible and unites together to fight for a union, Wal-Mart can always fire the employees in favour of unions. Union expert Wade Rathke advocates a ‘Wal-Mart Workers Association’ that stands up for labour rights and provides a voice for workers. The prevailing belief among unionists like Rathke is that if nothing is done to prevent to conditions that are in place in Wal-Mart today, the future is not only grim for the state of workers in Wal-Mart, but for companies everywhere.
By the end of the book, there is a clear notion that Wal-Mart has and will play a big factor in our world economically, socially, culturally, and politically. It is the model of efficiency and innovation. It is spreading its mid-west values throughout the world. It is the heartless giant that treats its employees unfairly. It is Wal-Mart. This is the message of Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism. Unlike its topic of focus, the book itself is inefficient in delivering that message. That is not to say that it is not an excellent read for one who wishes to get a comprehensive look into the history, culture, and ideology of the much revered company. However, while you are being served a full plate of information and statistics, you are also being stuffed with author bias and conflicting opinions. Ironically, the appealing strength of the book doubles as its inherent weakness. The diverse group of contributors provides an in-depth examination of the retailing giant from different perspectives but this interdisciplinary approach is hardly effective. Although Lichtenstein wants to present both sides of the argument, his collection is like listening to a debate where the opposing sides are arguing different topics. While James Hoopes seems to toe the company line by declaring “there is no denying the high morale of many Wal-Mart employees” (98), David Karjanen argues that Wal-Mart “simply cannibalize[s] sales from existing firms putting them out of business” (157). Amidst all this, some essays managed to stay neutral and provide an impartial view on Wal-Mart. In Lichtenstein’s own essay, he provides and excellent example that illustrates the varying impacts of Wal-Mart. He introduces four women: a single mom who depends on Wal-Mart’s low prices; a woman who lost her job as a result of Wal-Mart forcing other companies out of business; a Chinese labourer that makes goods for Wal-Mart for low wages; and the loyal wife of a Wal-Mart assistant manager. Four women. Four lives affected. Two for the better and two for the worse. Chris Tilly also provides an interesting look into Wal-Mart’s expansion into Mexico by observing the favourable conditions for Wal-Mart’s entry but also mentioning the limiting factors that could affect its growth.
Another deficiency of the collection of essays is since the contributors explore different issues and topics, there is little to no continuity between the chapters. They are autonomous of each other and show that little planning was made beforehand to link them together. While the essays are sorted into three loosely based sub-themes, some essays are expository and do not aid in the exploration of any themes. The essays in each section can be read in any order and still have the same effect. A more effective manner would be to present them cumulatively so that each essay builds upon the next. Once you reach the conclusion, you will be able to reflect upon the themes and concepts more adeptly than before. The fact that there is no true concluding essay to this collection leaves us searching for closure on the themes that were explored.
The essays themselves were quite well-written as is expected from a group of professionals and academics. The level of language and use of business terminology was suitable for university level students but some business concepts may be unknown to the average reader. The clean organization of each essay into sub-headings made the information easier to read and comprehend. Each author provided ample amounts of evidence to support their statements and the information was presented in a variety of ways. Many real-life examples were given to show the practical implications of Wal-Mart’s influence and occasional graphics were displayed for the reader to visualize the information.
Overall, Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism is definitely required reading for anyone interested in Wal-Mart. It poses a simple question: To what degree will Wal-Mart create the template for twenty-first-century capitalism and what does that mean for us. Although the answer is not presented clearly by the authors, it provides enough information for the reader to formulate his or her own opinion. Therefore in a way, the book acts like a Wal-Mart manager. Stressed to accomplish an ambitious task – investigate Wal-Mart as a template of capitalism -, the book makes the reader go overtime to do all of the work. At the end up the shift, the reader is left with a feeling that they did not get what they deserved.
On average, every minute almost 10 000 consumers visit an American Wal-Mart store. It is the largest private employer in the United States and Mexico and operates stores in eight different countries. There is no denying the ubiquity of the corporation in our everyday lives and the significant role that it plays in determining the future of our world economy. Nelson Lichtenstein attempts to explore the profound influence as well as the humble beginnings of this multinational giant in his collection of essays, Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism. Lichtenstein, a professor of history at the University of California Santa Barbara, assembled the diverse group of scholars to compare their perspectives on Wal-Mart and the “global manufacturing-transport-distribution chain in which that corporation is the largest and most significant link” (x). The common theme that is expressed throughout the book is that Wal-Mart has become the template for twenty-first-century capitalism. While all of the contributors may agree on that aspect, their opinions deviate on whether this template is the source of a capitalist revolution or demise. Although each essay is written independent of each other, they are broadly organized into three sub-themes: History, Culture, Capitalism; A Global Corporation; and Working at Wal-Mart. These three themes aim to explain Wal-Mart’s phenomenal rise to the top, and their strategies to remain there.
Wal-Mart’s ruthless ascent to the top is as much attributable to favourable timing and location as its charismatic founder, Sam Walton. The first Wal-Mart discount store opened in Bentonville, Arkansas in 1962 with a simple concept; generate high inventory turnovers using low markups. In order to maintain low markups, Walton realized that it was absolutely necessary to keep labour costs at a minimum. Fortunately, the New Deal and civil rights revolution had not been firmly established in Arkansas which meant that Walton could play around with minimum wage laws. Moreover, thousands of men and women were desperate for jobs after the agricultural revolution, which made farming more capital intensive. As the years went on, Wal-Mart capitalized on events such as the failure of unionization in Arkansas, Reaganomics, and NAFTA to keep costs low. While other discount retailers and the dominant corporation of the time GM suffered from rising wages, Wal-Mart actually saw their real wages decrease in the years after 1970. This is nothing out of the ordinary as Wal-Mart has built an empire based on being different and trying new techniques to increase efficiency. As Wal-Mart grew, it tirelessly searched for innovative technologies to implement in order to improve their economies of scale. For example, the use of communications technology reduced management costs and allowed Wal-Mart to expand while still being able to micromanage each individual store. It was evident that Wal-Mart was changing the way retailers conducted business. It was only a matter of time before Wal-Mart took over the rest of the world.
For years, retailers were forced to accept the manufacturer’s prices if they wanted to do business. The emergence of Wal-Mart shifted the power towards retailers because manufacturers were fighting to get their products on Wal-Mart’s shelves. Also, the rapid growth of global manufacturers gave retailers more choice, and often a cheaper option than its American counterparts. This power shift ushered in an era of post-Fordism, a period characterized by globalization of production, extreme capital mobility, and high levels of employment insecurity and stratification. A prominent feature of the post-Fordist economy was the logistics revolution of the global distribution chain. As the proportion of merchandise being imported was dramatically increasing, a more efficient method of trade was necessary. Of course, Wal-Mart set the template with inter-modal freight transport and Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags. Inter-modal transport used more than one mode of transportation to move freight which Wal-Mart used in conjunction with their famous distribution centers. This method resulted in a faster and cheaper way to get inventory. Accordingly, the system of production and distribution shifted from push to pull, where the retailer tracked consumer behaviour and demanded an exact amount. Wal-Mart used this pull system to keep wastage to a minimum and constantly improved it by sharing consumer data with its suppliers. The result is greater sales and lower costs for both Wal-Mart and its suppliers. Wal-Mart’s globalization of the distribution chain continued past the supplier as they began to open retail stores worldwide. As Chris Tilly points out in his essay, one of their most successful ventures was in Mexico. In fact, it’s 2004 sales in Mexico were greater than the next three leading competitors combined (189). The point is reiterated that Wal-Mart has built an empire based on taking advantage of favourable conditions. Firstly, thanks to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), goods could move freely between America and Mexico. Also, at the time there were few large, modern retail stores and on top of that, Wal-Mart bought the leading retailer in Mexico, Cifra. The low income population welcomed Wal-Mart because of the cheap goods and the abundance of jobs, which paid relatively well for them. There are however, limits to this success. Since Wal-Mart has established itself as a template business, other Mexican retailers have begun to modernize and adapt some of their efficient practices. As Wal-Mart’s piece of the pie is decreasing, the pie itself is also shrinking. The polarization between the rich and the poor is expanding and with the ever-present risk of economic recessions, less people can actually afford to shop at Wal-Mart. Nevertheless, Wal-Mart was a trailblazer in international expansion for retail companies, who previously preferred to stay in North America. As the section suggests, Wal-Mart has truly become a global corporation and their ideas involving globalization – intermodal transport and international establishment – have become the model for large-scale growth for companies in America.
Wal-Mart’s non-conformist ideology has historically changed the American economy and is currently revolutionizing the global economy. However, there is one issue where Wal-Mart’s refusal to let up has drawn a storm of criticism. The final theme that the essays explore is ‘Working at Wal-Mart.’. This is the aspect of the Wal-Mart template that people fear most. For years Wal-Mart has been accused of “vociferous antiunionism, embedded gender discrimination, compulsive cost cutting and near comprehensive control over workers and the workplace” (213). In Wal-Mart’s defense, these practices have been rampant in discount retailing for years. It is just that Wal-Mart has become the epitome of bad labour relations because they have so ruthlessly used them to their advantage. The author depicts working at Wal-Mart as a demanding and unjust occupation. Every single employee from top to bottom of a Wal-Mart store each faces his or her own difficulties from the authoritarian executives. The lowest paid employees, in addition to being poorly compensated, are under constant surveillance. The threat of unionization was so great to Wal-Mart that private investigators and lie detector tests were often utilized in stores. When exceptional workers seem interested in forming a union, managers find fault with their work and fire them. To ensure maximum productivity, workers are shamed in front of their peers for bad jobs and constantly taken down a notch to prevent them from aspiring towards greater pay or position. These stressing conditions are only the beginning for female workers. The culture of Wal-Mart has always been patriarchal with a vast majority of men in managerial positions. It stems back to the early days when it was thought that promotions should be reserved for men because they were responsible for supporting their families. Women have consistently been paid far less than men at Wal-Mart and are rarely given the opportunity for advancement. This discrimination has become so endemic that a class action lawsuit has been filed by 1.6 million women who claim that they have been denied promotions and raises. As the template of American business, the result of this case may set a precedent that will echo throughout every workplace in the country. The blame for all of this discrimination cannot be placed squarely on the managers. Near impossible demands are given to store managers who have a limited wage budget to spend. Managers are expected to continually cut costs and increase sales which the executives constantly monitor. A common message from executives is “if you don’t beat yesterday, management could have your job at any moment” (254). It is easy to understand why some managers might be tempted to resort to unethical practices such as the discriminatory acts towards workers. Fortunately, progress has been made in the fight for greater labour rights at Wal-Mart. Aside from North America, all Wal-Marts around the world are unionized. The difficulty in getting unions in North America is Wal-Mart’s use of leverage in denying unions to form. Unless the entire American Wal-Mart workforce (1.3 million people) does the impossible and unites together to fight for a union, Wal-Mart can always fire the employees in favour of unions. Union expert Wade Rathke advocates a ‘Wal-Mart Workers Association’ that stands up for labour rights and provides a voice for workers. The prevailing belief among unionists like Rathke is that if nothing is done to prevent to conditions that are in place in Wal-Mart today, the future is not only grim for the state of workers in Wal-Mart, but for companies everywhere.
By the end of the book, there is a clear notion that Wal-Mart has and will play a big factor in our world economically, socially, culturally, and politically. It is the model of efficiency and innovation. It is spreading its mid-west values throughout the world. It is the heartless giant that treats its employees unfairly. It is Wal-Mart. This is the message of Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism. Unlike its topic of focus, the book itself is inefficient in delivering that message. That is not to say that it is not an excellent read for one who wishes to get a comprehensive look into the history, culture, and ideology of the much revered company. However, while you are being served a full plate of information and statistics, you are also being stuffed with author bias and conflicting opinions. Ironically, the appealing strength of the book doubles as its inherent weakness. The diverse group of contributors provides an in-depth examination of the retailing giant from different perspectives but this interdisciplinary approach is hardly effective. Although Lichtenstein wants to present both sides of the argument, his collection is like listening to a debate where the opposing sides are arguing different topics. While James Hoopes seems to toe the company line by declaring “there is no denying the high morale of many Wal-Mart employees” (98), David Karjanen argues that Wal-Mart “simply cannibalize[s] sales from existing firms putting them out of business” (157). Amidst all this, some essays managed to stay neutral and provide an impartial view on Wal-Mart. In Lichtenstein’s own essay, he provides and excellent example that illustrates the varying impacts of Wal-Mart. He introduces four women: a single mom who depends on Wal-Mart’s low prices; a woman who lost her job as a result of Wal-Mart forcing other companies out of business; a Chinese labourer that makes goods for Wal-Mart for low wages; and the loyal wife of a Wal-Mart assistant manager. Four women. Four lives affected. Two for the better and two for the worse. Chris Tilly also provides an interesting look into Wal-Mart’s expansion into Mexico by observing the favourable conditions for Wal-Mart’s entry but also mentioning the limiting factors that could affect its growth.
Another deficiency of the collection of essays is since the contributors explore different issues and topics, there is little to no continuity between the chapters. They are autonomous of each other and show that little planning was made beforehand to link them together. While the essays are sorted into three loosely based sub-themes, some essays are expository and do not aid in the exploration of any themes. The essays in each section can be read in any order and still have the same effect. A more effective manner would be to present them cumulatively so that each essay builds upon the next. Once you reach the conclusion, you will be able to reflect upon the themes and concepts more adeptly than before. The fact that there is no true concluding essay to this collection leaves us searching for closure on the themes that were explored.
The essays themselves were quite well-written as is expected from a group of professionals and academics. The level of language and use of business terminology was suitable for university level students but some business concepts may be unknown to the average reader. The clean organization of each essay into sub-headings made the information easier to read and comprehend. Each author provided ample amounts of evidence to support their statements and the information was presented in a variety of ways. Many real-life examples were given to show the practical implications of Wal-Mart’s influence and occasional graphics were displayed for the reader to visualize the information.
Overall, Wal-Mart: The Face of Twenty-First-Century Capitalism is definitely required reading for anyone interested in Wal-Mart. It poses a simple question: To what degree will Wal-Mart create the template for twenty-first-century capitalism and what does that mean for us. Although the answer is not presented clearly by the authors, it provides enough information for the reader to formulate his or her own opinion. Therefore in a way, the book acts like a Wal-Mart manager. Stressed to accomplish an ambitious task – investigate Wal-Mart as a template of capitalism -, the book makes the reader go overtime to do all of the work. At the end up the shift, the reader is left with a feeling that they did not get what they deserved.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the 32nd president of the United States of America, was one of the most influential and greatest American presidents. Hated by his critics, and loved by his supporters, Roosevelt served a record 4 terms in office from 1933-1945. In that time, his importance was shown in guiding America through arguably it’s two worst epidemics, World War Two and the Great Depression. Despite guiding America out of the ravages of the Great Depression, many opponents accused Roosevelt of being socialist, the enemy of American capitalism. While there is some truth in it, to accuse a great American president of this would be absurd. However, it is true that, Franklin D. Roosevelt was USA’s most socialist and left-wing president in history.
Roosevelt’s famous plan for America, also known as the ‘New Deal’, introduced several socialist reforms to America. Roosevelt first proposed this in a speech before the 1933 election. It called for drastic measures to heal the weak economy and bring America out of the depression. However, this deal was harshly criticized by its opponents who deemed it un-American because of its unprecedented ideas. In fact, the Supreme Court rejected many of the legislatures because it violated the constitution. It brought intense government control and regulation to most of the country’s economy. Numerous programs such as the National Recovery Administration (NRA), and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) promoted agricultural and business regulation, price stabilization, and public works. Most of the land became owned by the government which was extremely left-wing. The United States had never experienced such a thing. To raise more money for public works, Franklin Roosevelt also had to raise taxes. As a left-wing politician, he believed that America needed higher taxes to get out of the depression.
Throughout all of his terms, Franklin Roosevelt would always try to gain as much power as possible for him and the government. To Roosevelt, America needed the government to control many aspects in order for it to get out of the Great Depression. Consequently, the government took over the banks, social welfare, utilities, securities, and other economical factors. In his Emergency Banking Bill, Roosevelt received control over banks, currency, and foreign exchange. Furthermore, Roosevelt’s Industry Recovery Act let the government intrude on businesses the much higher levels. Other bills such as the Executive Reorganization Act only gave more power on his stronghold on America. It is very obvious that Roosevelt did not believe Americans could not get out of the depression by themselves. Instead they needed strict rules and control from the executive branch and himself.
No matter what Franklin Roosevelt did, he would always look out for the working class. This was largely what helped him rise to a landslide victory in 1933 and in his following elections. The working class devastated the most during the Great Depression and they looked towards Roosevelt as a saviour. In speeches, he would call out the “forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid” and promise economic relief. In fact, the second part of his New Deal was solely dedicated to social and economic legislation to benefit the mass of working people. After he was elected president, Roosevelt began establishing many relief programs such as the WPA (Works Progress Administration) and the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps). These programs greatly lowered unemployment in the nation by employing thousands of workers for building and construction. In fact, the CCC alone employed over 2.5 million out-of-work men to help and preserve the environment. This showed that not only was Roosevelt concerned with the economy, but he also wanted to help the environment. Another crucial part of his New Deal proposed programs to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers, other groups that were hit the hardest by the depression. This all followed Roosevelt’s socialist views of equal rights for the whole public, giving no preference to the upper-class.
There’s no doubt that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a great American president. Whether he did it with traditional American ways is still in question. Roosevelt himself even said, “Let it be symbolic that in so doing I broke tradition” Roosevelt was assigned the tough task of getting America out of the depression and that’s exactly what he did it. By giving the government total control over many aspects of the economy, he slowly eased it back to strength. The workingman also got a well-deserved hand, by providing them jobs, and better services. Even if it meant raising taxes, which primarily affected the upper class. Ironically, in America’s darkest times, their most socialist president helped them regain strength in their capitalist system. Never one that was afraid to stray away from capitalism, Roosevelt may be the most socialist president America will ever have.
Roosevelt’s famous plan for America, also known as the ‘New Deal’, introduced several socialist reforms to America. Roosevelt first proposed this in a speech before the 1933 election. It called for drastic measures to heal the weak economy and bring America out of the depression. However, this deal was harshly criticized by its opponents who deemed it un-American because of its unprecedented ideas. In fact, the Supreme Court rejected many of the legislatures because it violated the constitution. It brought intense government control and regulation to most of the country’s economy. Numerous programs such as the National Recovery Administration (NRA), and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) promoted agricultural and business regulation, price stabilization, and public works. Most of the land became owned by the government which was extremely left-wing. The United States had never experienced such a thing. To raise more money for public works, Franklin Roosevelt also had to raise taxes. As a left-wing politician, he believed that America needed higher taxes to get out of the depression.
Throughout all of his terms, Franklin Roosevelt would always try to gain as much power as possible for him and the government. To Roosevelt, America needed the government to control many aspects in order for it to get out of the Great Depression. Consequently, the government took over the banks, social welfare, utilities, securities, and other economical factors. In his Emergency Banking Bill, Roosevelt received control over banks, currency, and foreign exchange. Furthermore, Roosevelt’s Industry Recovery Act let the government intrude on businesses the much higher levels. Other bills such as the Executive Reorganization Act only gave more power on his stronghold on America. It is very obvious that Roosevelt did not believe Americans could not get out of the depression by themselves. Instead they needed strict rules and control from the executive branch and himself.
No matter what Franklin Roosevelt did, he would always look out for the working class. This was largely what helped him rise to a landslide victory in 1933 and in his following elections. The working class devastated the most during the Great Depression and they looked towards Roosevelt as a saviour. In speeches, he would call out the “forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid” and promise economic relief. In fact, the second part of his New Deal was solely dedicated to social and economic legislation to benefit the mass of working people. After he was elected president, Roosevelt began establishing many relief programs such as the WPA (Works Progress Administration) and the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps). These programs greatly lowered unemployment in the nation by employing thousands of workers for building and construction. In fact, the CCC alone employed over 2.5 million out-of-work men to help and preserve the environment. This showed that not only was Roosevelt concerned with the economy, but he also wanted to help the environment. Another crucial part of his New Deal proposed programs to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers, other groups that were hit the hardest by the depression. This all followed Roosevelt’s socialist views of equal rights for the whole public, giving no preference to the upper-class.
There’s no doubt that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a great American president. Whether he did it with traditional American ways is still in question. Roosevelt himself even said, “Let it be symbolic that in so doing I broke tradition” Roosevelt was assigned the tough task of getting America out of the depression and that’s exactly what he did it. By giving the government total control over many aspects of the economy, he slowly eased it back to strength. The workingman also got a well-deserved hand, by providing them jobs, and better services. Even if it meant raising taxes, which primarily affected the upper class. Ironically, in America’s darkest times, their most socialist president helped them regain strength in their capitalist system. Never one that was afraid to stray away from capitalism, Roosevelt may be the most socialist president America will ever have.
Richard Bedford Bennett
"I propose that any government of which I am the head will at the first session of parliament initiate whatever action is necessary to that end, or perish in the attempt."
-- R.B Bennett, June 9, 1930, on eliminating unemployment.
Canada’s 11th Prime Minister, Richard Bedford Bennett, had the difficult task of guiding Canada out of its difficult times in the 1930s. From, August 7, 1930 to October 30, 1935, Bennett’s main objective as Prime Minister was to get Canada out of the “Great Depression” which peaked during the early 1930s. Many attempts to help the unemployed such as the $20 million aid and the Relief Act, which gave single unemployed men a subsistence living, were among his many plans to help the people of Canada. However, his attempts to help Canada as a country were largely unsuccessful such as preferential tariffs, which failed to increase trade exports. Bennett’s new deal promoted minimum wage, health, unemployment insurance, and government regulation of banks and trade. Unfortunately, it was too little too late as Bennett’s Conservatives lost to Mackenzie King and the Liberals in the 1935 election. The Great Depression would forever be synonymous with Richard Bennett and the Conservatives. Bennett studied at Dalhousie University and got a teaching certificate at the New Brunswick provincial school. He worked as a teacher and principal in New Brunswick before moving to Calgary to practice law. Bennett became a member of legislature in 1909 and had constituencies in Calgary and Calgary West. In 1921, Bennett was appointed Minister of Justice by Prime Minister Arthur Meighen and became Attorney General. He became the Conservative party leader in 1927 and was elected Prime Minister in 1930. Among his achievements are the creation of the Bank of Canada, Canadian Wheat Board, and in 1941, he was made a Viscount. Although he was unable to fix Canada’s economy, Bennett did all he could to help the individuals of Canada. Bennett responded to all of the letters sent to him during the depression and replied with money inside. Throughout his successful life, Richard Bennett never married and stayed single until his death.
-- R.B Bennett, June 9, 1930, on eliminating unemployment.
Canada’s 11th Prime Minister, Richard Bedford Bennett, had the difficult task of guiding Canada out of its difficult times in the 1930s. From, August 7, 1930 to October 30, 1935, Bennett’s main objective as Prime Minister was to get Canada out of the “Great Depression” which peaked during the early 1930s. Many attempts to help the unemployed such as the $20 million aid and the Relief Act, which gave single unemployed men a subsistence living, were among his many plans to help the people of Canada. However, his attempts to help Canada as a country were largely unsuccessful such as preferential tariffs, which failed to increase trade exports. Bennett’s new deal promoted minimum wage, health, unemployment insurance, and government regulation of banks and trade. Unfortunately, it was too little too late as Bennett’s Conservatives lost to Mackenzie King and the Liberals in the 1935 election. The Great Depression would forever be synonymous with Richard Bennett and the Conservatives. Bennett studied at Dalhousie University and got a teaching certificate at the New Brunswick provincial school. He worked as a teacher and principal in New Brunswick before moving to Calgary to practice law. Bennett became a member of legislature in 1909 and had constituencies in Calgary and Calgary West. In 1921, Bennett was appointed Minister of Justice by Prime Minister Arthur Meighen and became Attorney General. He became the Conservative party leader in 1927 and was elected Prime Minister in 1930. Among his achievements are the creation of the Bank of Canada, Canadian Wheat Board, and in 1941, he was made a Viscount. Although he was unable to fix Canada’s economy, Bennett did all he could to help the individuals of Canada. Bennett responded to all of the letters sent to him during the depression and replied with money inside. Throughout his successful life, Richard Bennett never married and stayed single until his death.
Labour Unrest in 1920s Canada
After the Winnipeg general strike, the Canadian government became aware that working conditions were not good. A major labour issue was the exploitation of child labour. In 1929, the law was passed declaring that children under 14 years old were prohibited from working in factories. However, young children continued to work in the farming and fishing industry. Some of the kids that were treated to most unfairly were known as the ‘Home Children’. Home children were British orphans that were sent to Canada to start a new life. These children were placed under little supervision but were still overworked. The Co-operative Commonwealth Federation leader J.S Woodsworth declared “We are bringing into Canada in the guise of philanthropy and turning them into cheap labourers”. The problem was apparent, and many Canadians believed that the government did not do enough to solve it. New parties began to form, speaking for the interests of specific groups such as farmers, and French-Canadians. The United Farmers enjoyed success in the west when they formed the governments of Manitoba and Alberta in the 1920s. The United Farmers promoted social welfare measures like old-age pensions and widow’s allowances. In the East, Maritimers did not have the luxury of having a party speak for their interests. Industrial workers were working under low wages and poor working conditions. Furthermore, thousands of jobs were being lost and little development was occurring. Maritimers finally decided to do something so they grouped together to form the Maritimes Rights Movement. The movement pressed the federal government to act on Maritime concerns and King responded with the Royal Commission on Maritime Claims in 1926. This document called for assistance for the coal and steel industries and improvements to ports. Thanks to these new labour conscious parties, workers across the country finally began to get to conditions that they deserved since the end of World War One. Labour would continue to be a glaring issue for Canada but because of the new policies set by these parties, Canada was a lot closer to fixing it.
William Lyon Mackenzie King
“The decision of Canada on any important issue… should be made by the people of Canada”
-- Mackenzie King, Imperial Conference, 1923
A fiery and passionate politition, William Lyon Mackenzie King transformed Canada from a British dominion, into a self-governing country. Born on December 17, 1874, in Berlin, Ontario, King would become an influencial figure in Canadian history. King studied at the Universities of Toronto and Chicago before getting a Ph.D from Harvard in Political Economy in 1909. At only 26, King became Canada’s first deputy minister of labour and the editor of the Labour Gazette. Throughout his life, his constituances included Waterloo North, Ontario; Prince, Prince Edward Island; York North, Ontario; Prince Albert, Saskatchewan; and Glengarry, Ontario. As a devoted liberal, he became the party leader in 1919 and was elected tobe Prime Minister on December 29, 1921. His term was shortly interupted during the ‘King-Byng” crisis in which he resigned on June 28, 1926. He returned as Prime Minister on September 25, 1926 after defeating the conservaties, who took over after he resigned, in a landslide. King was beaten by Richard Bennett and the Conservatives after his inability to deal with the Great Depression. Canadians re-elected King as Prime Minister on October 23, 1935 where he remained in power until November 15, 1948. During his three separate tenures as Prime Minster, King achieve many political accomplishments. Among his most important documents passed, was the Balfour declaration and the Statute of Westminster. Both documents led to the continuing independence and identity of Canada. King’s famous fight with Governor General Byng led to his resignation and fueled King’s belief that Canada should be more independent of Britain. King also created the Old Age pension in 1926, Unemployment insurance in 1940, and the Family Allowances Act in 1944. In 1930, King made history when he appointed Cairine Wilson as the first female senator. In the public eye, King appeared to be quiet and mannered but in his personal life, he was a hot tempered man who greatly believed in the spiritual world. King never married in his life and consulted a a psychic before any major decisions. William Lyon Mackenzie King retired from politics in 1950 and died on July 22, 1950.
-- Mackenzie King, Imperial Conference, 1923
A fiery and passionate politition, William Lyon Mackenzie King transformed Canada from a British dominion, into a self-governing country. Born on December 17, 1874, in Berlin, Ontario, King would become an influencial figure in Canadian history. King studied at the Universities of Toronto and Chicago before getting a Ph.D from Harvard in Political Economy in 1909. At only 26, King became Canada’s first deputy minister of labour and the editor of the Labour Gazette. Throughout his life, his constituances included Waterloo North, Ontario; Prince, Prince Edward Island; York North, Ontario; Prince Albert, Saskatchewan; and Glengarry, Ontario. As a devoted liberal, he became the party leader in 1919 and was elected tobe Prime Minister on December 29, 1921. His term was shortly interupted during the ‘King-Byng” crisis in which he resigned on June 28, 1926. He returned as Prime Minister on September 25, 1926 after defeating the conservaties, who took over after he resigned, in a landslide. King was beaten by Richard Bennett and the Conservatives after his inability to deal with the Great Depression. Canadians re-elected King as Prime Minister on October 23, 1935 where he remained in power until November 15, 1948. During his three separate tenures as Prime Minster, King achieve many political accomplishments. Among his most important documents passed, was the Balfour declaration and the Statute of Westminster. Both documents led to the continuing independence and identity of Canada. King’s famous fight with Governor General Byng led to his resignation and fueled King’s belief that Canada should be more independent of Britain. King also created the Old Age pension in 1926, Unemployment insurance in 1940, and the Family Allowances Act in 1944. In 1930, King made history when he appointed Cairine Wilson as the first female senator. In the public eye, King appeared to be quiet and mannered but in his personal life, he was a hot tempered man who greatly believed in the spiritual world. King never married in his life and consulted a a psychic before any major decisions. William Lyon Mackenzie King retired from politics in 1950 and died on July 22, 1950.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
