The Easter Uprising :: History Historical Ireland Essays

The Easter Uprising Ireland was filled with nationalistic views that had set in around the 1890’s. The Irish were tired of the English occupation in Ireland and they were tired of the Protestant religious oppression of Catholics. So this is when Patrick Pearse and James Connolly led a band of around 1,200 Irish Nationalists on Easter Monday into a rebellion against the English, who occupied Ireland at the time. The uprising began the day after Easter, 1916. The rebels took control of the General Post Office and held out for six days. This was a great try by the Irish but it was not a success. â€Å"Although the Rising itself ended in failure, it left behind a tradition of struggle that had far-reaching consequences." (Marxist) This quote by Ted Grant sums up the end of the rising, for what he says is true, it was a failure but had more effects than just a L in the win/loss column for the Irish people. As one person puts it, there were many losses in all â€Å" Between January 1917 a nd July 1923 , well over 7,500 people were killed or wounded, in a country that murder had become a rarity.† The effects were more devastating than just that. One of the effects of the Easter Rising was Irish people speaking out for their country, Ireland. There were many people that wanted to speak out about what was happening to them. The Easter uprising although popular amongst a few amount of people, was not accepted by the masses of Ireland’s population. After the six days that Pearse held out the British army with hardly any time passing put and end to the uprising. One of the things that the British did when they stopped the rebellion was gave what they called peace to the people and arrested the leaders of the rising including Pearse and Connolly. Not all the Irish people agree with the rising. This quote from a leader of the Irish nationalist group shows how ones did disagree; The great bulk of the population were not favourable to the rebels, they got no popular support whatsoever. What is happening is that

Oliver Twist :: essays research papers

OLIVER TWIST CHARACTERS  Harry ~ He is Mrs. Maylie's son, and he is in love with Rose.  Rose ~ She lives with Giles and Brittles, and is unsure on how she feels about Harry until the end.  Oliver ~ Represents the misery and poverty of the poor during the 1800.  Bil ~ He is a professional thief, a very mean person, an alcoholic, and is boyfriend of Nancy.  Toby ~ A thief (he is Bill’s assistant).  Nancy ~ A kindhearted woman who unfortunately pays for being that in the end. She is also Bil's girlfriend (who she is very scared of).  Brittles and Giles ~ The people whose house was broken into by Sikes, Toby, and Oliver. Also the people who took care of Oliver after he came to them almost dead.  Mrs. Bedwin ~ Housekeeper for Mr.Brownlow.  Mr. Brownlow ~ Oliver's first apprentice, he and Mrs.Bedwin took very good care of him.  Fagin ~ Teaches children how to become thieves, but all he does is make the children steal for him so that he doesn’t have to do it himself or an so he wouldn’t get caught doing it.  Doctor Losberne ~ Doctor that helps Oliver after he get shot in the arm.  Mr. and Mrs. Bumble ~ Preppy and Snobby people, and they dislike Oliver.  Mrs. Corny ~ Mr. Bumble's wife, it was her maiden name before she was married to him.  Mr. Monks ~ He was also known as the stranger, but he was really Edward Leeford (Oliver brother).  Mrs. Maylie ~ She is Harry's mother. SUMMARY Bil Sikes, Toby Crackit, and Oliver robbed Brittles and Giles. In the process of the robbery Oliver is shot in the arm and so Sikes wouldn't get caught he left Oliver in a ditch to die. The next morning he walks to Brittles and Giles house and took him in and called the Doctor. When the doctor came he said that he was very excited to see the boy. After Oliver's arm is taken care of Brittles, Giles, Rose, Mrs. Maylie, and the doctor decided not to tell the police, but what they decide to do is take care of him and give him a home. When Oliver told them his story they felt very bad for him, so they left him alone to recover.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When Oliver did recover he finds out that Mr. Brownlow and Mrs. Bedwin had moved to the West Indies.

Sallie Baliunas and the Dangers of Think Tanks :: Global Warming

Sallie Baliunas and the Dangers of Think Tanks Public policy makers increasingly rely on the research of think tank scholars to guide their policy decisions. But who checks the accuracy of think tank scholar research? Unlike academic journal publishing, which follows a rigorous system of peer review and editorial oversight, think tanks publish opinion pieces without regard to the peer review process. Their policy publications are not based on pure academics, but on a complex interaction between academic, political, and economic interests. In Washington, there is no time to focus on the academic details. As Eric Altermann points out in his book What Liberal Media?, think tank scholars â€Å"are expected to spend at least as much time networking with reporters and government staffers as on research.†1 Efficient dissemination of information is as important as the information itself in the think tank business of knowledge. Sallie Baliunas of the Marshall Institute fits Altermann’s think tank scholar profile well. Regarding her involvement in the global warming debate, she has spent less time on the scholarship of global warming and more time advocating the idea that it is simply a myth. She is a senior scientist at the Marshall Institute, which supports her writing of articles against the Kyoto treaty (â€Å"Bush right to oppose [Kyoto] treaty†)2 and the promotion of the idea that global warming is a natural process caused by increased radiation from the sun (â€Å"The Sun Also Warms†).3 Though she has published relatively little in academic journals on the issue, articles such as these are numerous in conservative political forums, such as the website TechCentralStation.com, â€Å"where free markets meet technology.†4 Though she is not considered a global warming expert by professional climate scientists, she is oft quoted by the anti-Kyoto folks as the expert voice that pr oves global warming is a hoax (see any article by Charli Coon of the Heritage Foundation5 or by Chris de Freitas6). Her global warming research has been funded, in part, by corporate oil interests. Think Tanks Baliunas’s association with think tanks does not make her scholarship automatically suspect. However, think tanks dwell in the grey area between scholarship and advocacy, and one must ask in which category Baliunas belongs. Think tanks cannot claim to be completely unbiased, because the majority of their funding comes from corporations, whose interests are not usually only academic, but also economic. Baliunas is an â€Å"Enviro-Sci Host† for TechCentralStation.com, a website sponsored by AT&T, ExxonMobil, General Motors Corporation, Intel, McDonalds, Microsoft, Nasdaq, National Semiconductor, PhRMA, and Qualcomm.

A Walk in the Night by Alex La Guma Essay

Born in 1925 Cape Town, Alex La Guma is a writer, a leader of the South African Coloured People’s organization and a Defendant in the Treason Trial. Graduated High school and then joined the Young Communist League in 1947. He then became a member of the Communist Party a year later. He wrote for the new age from 1955. He wrote many articles for fighting talk in which he captured the atmosphere of the trial proceedings. He was placed under 24 hour house arrest in 1962, and was detained again in 1963. In 1966, he eaves Africa and wrote novels and short stories and received the 1969 Lotus Prize for Literature. In 1972, he edited the Apartheid: A collection of writings on South African Racism by South Africans. He was considered one of the most South African’s major twentieth century writers. A walk in the Night was his first book based on a nature of District sex, Cape Town. La Guma was an important political figure as well. Being charged with treason, banned, house arrest ed and eventually forced into exile, he was chief representative of the African National Congress (ANC) in the Caribbean at the time of his death in 1985. South Africa is a country blessed with an abundance of natural resources including fertile farmlands and unique mineral resources. South African mines are world leaders in the production of diamonds and gold as well as strategic metals such as platinum. It was colonized by the English and Dutch in the seventieth century. The English domination of the Dutch descendants resulted in the Dutch establishing the new colonies of Orange Free State ad Transual. The diamonds in these lands around 1900 resulted in an English invasion which sparked the Boer War. Until the 1940’s, an uneasy power sharing between the two groups held sway when the Afrikaner National Party was able to gain a strong majority. Strategists in the National party  invented apartheid as a meaning to cement their control over the economic and social system. The aim of the apartheid was to maintain while domination while extending racial separation. Beginning in the 1960’s, a plan of Grand Apartheid was executed, emphasizing territorial separation and police repression. The Enactment of Apartheid law in 1948, racial discrimination was institutionalized. Race laws touched every aspect of social life, including a prohibition between marriage, between non-whites and whites, and the sanctioning of â€Å"whites only† jobs. The Population Registration Act required that all South Africans are racially classified into one of three categories: white, black (African), and or Coloured (mixed decent). In 1951, the Bonto Authorities Act established a basis for ethnic government in African reserves known as homelands. The homelands were independent states to which each African was assigned by the government. All of the political rights, including voting was held by an African who was restricted to the designated homeland. The idea was that they would be citizens of homeland and lose their citizenship in South Africa and any right involvement with the South African parliament. The homeland administration refused the nominal independence, maintaining pressure for political rights within the country as a whole. Nevertheless, Africans living in the homelands needed passports to enter South Africa. So they were basically considered aliens in their own country. Alex la Guma, very first novel presents the struggle against oppression by a group of characters in Cape Town’s toughest district and the moral dissolution of a young man who is unjustly fired from his job. Being published in 1962, La Guma has a high reputation that is based on his vivid style, his Coloured dialogue, and his ability to present sympatically and realistically people living under sordid and oppressive circumstances. This book reflects the plight of the South Africans and American blacks, a plight which has â€Å"symptoms† racism, segregation, and injustice. The novel depicts on a conflict between two main races; whites and blacks in 1950’s South Africa respectively. Being set in Cape Town in District Six, in one night in the late 1950’s, the time setting represents Apartheid in South Africa and depicts the abusive attitudes and methods of white South Africans against  their black compatriots. With the obnoxious system going on, there are ha rsh attitudes which the black community has to endure and on the hand it is a little opportunity given to blacks to lead normal lives. Michael Adonis and Willie boy are two main characters and they are set as the epitome of the unfortunate black youth; unemployed, apparently uneducated, and exposed at any moment to the abusive methods of police. Both of them try to find their way out to freedom but can’t they are stuck in delinquency. In the book, there are a lot of negative images of the Negro represented in the perception of the whites. Whites feel that they have the right to treat the blacks in any type of way they want regardless of what anybody says. Whites being the oppressor and the blacks being oppressed. This comes as a reflection of the attitudes of whites which express the feeling of exclusion, alienation, injustice, oppression, violence, humiliation and anything else that is biased in Apartheid of South Africa. Michael Adonis; a young man who gets off a tram and entering what later becomes the setting of the story: District Six. In the beginning, La Guma gives a strong description of what Michael looks like before telling us that he is an angry man. He is viewed as a young man who is easy to anger but is aware of his right to perform a natural function and is willing to work and does not indulge in theft and thugery as others might peg him for. As well he is a man with violent inclinations who nurses anger at length and is therefore prone to explode. Michael Adonis is a young man who is annoyed because he had lost his job for trying to use the restroom. African right to strike and trade union the white employers managed to secure cheap African Labor. In the novel, it depicts the poverty of the Coloured including the employed one. This was meant to perpetuate the African plight and improve the economic situation of the white employer and employee by guaranteeing them the African cheap labor and eliminating the African potential competition as though black South Africans didn’t share the same citizenship with the white South Africans. After being fired from his job, Michael enters a dirty Portuguese restaurant where he finds Willie boy. Willie boy, being another similar character that La Guma explains how he exposes the evil of apartheid. At the restaurant, he  also meets with three youths who inquire about another character called Foxy. Walking out of the cafà © Michael forgets about Willie boy and went about on his own. The psychological torture that blacks and Coloured in South Africa go through, they resort to alcohol, crime and prostitution. Here the characters are doomed because there is nothing they can do about their predicament. Michael stops at the cafà ©, hoping that by so doing he will purge himself of the shame and humiliation of his encounter with the white oppressors. At the same time he throws his cigarette down the pavement and immediately, there are two slum boys who are wearing ragged shirts and have horny feet scramble over it and the details that are described is important because it tells us about the squalor and it is an indication of juvenile delinquency. In contrast of this young boys, there are two policemen who stopped Michael down the street and demanded to know where he was heading to. They search him irrespectively and Michael goes off once more angry and frustrated. He was already in a state of anger because when talking to Willie boy, Willie boy rambles off about why he doesn’t work for white people. While searching Michael, they think he is bhang (drugs) on him. In this scenario, you can see that this is a clear case of police intimidation and harassment of the inability of a person of Michael’s caliber to have the freedom of walking without being stopped. After being stopped, Adonis enters the pub in District Six where a Jew called Mister Ike and he sells behind the counter. Michael orders wine to soothe his rage. Here you also see that Adonis relies on wine to control his temper which describes him as a volatile and unpredictable man. Leaving the pub, Adonis heads home and passes through dirty slums with narrow alleys. At this tenement he stops to watch a cat struggling with a dead fish. He is a man who hates the squalor but has no choice but to live in it. He meets a young lady name Hazel which is the â€Å"lady of the twilight†. He tried to grab her but fails and is left alone on the steps feeling lonely. Again here, he produces more anger and is feeling malicious. At the same time he encounters Uncle Doughty. During this time he helps the old man into his room, drinks his wine, tortures him to unleash his anger, frustration and loneliness, and then kills him. Doughty represents the whites because of his skin color, we can’t forgive Michael for hitting the poor old man who had done no harm to him. Here this is an example of inhumanity and a victim of dehumanization.  With this going on, Adonis sobers up and realizes what he has done and is feeling guilty. At this moment, he is afraid and bolts out the door being unsure of what to do next. Thoughts run through Adonis mind like â€Å"well, he didn’t have no right living here with us colors.† Adonis is a character who is not aware that skin pigmentation doesn’t matter and he equates color with privilege. Willie boy a character who is presented to us a flighty not too serious youth who does not care for work because he refused to work for whites. Also, he is a young man who loves to play the jukebox. Unlike, Michael Adonis, Willie boy strikes out as a layout. Willie boy does not hesitate to point out that he does not work for any white man and yet still survives. Willie boy visits the cafà © to drink cheap wine on credit and at the cafà © there are black girls who messes with the foreigners, in particular sailors of low breed, bringing to the fore the issues of prostitution. He sees one of the sailors fondling of the girls and him objects â€Å"These Jubas. They just messing our girls†¦I don’t like them messing our girls†¦to hell with them†. While we encounter Willie boy again, he is contemplating on getting a loan from Michael. Meeting Foxy’s group who likes ghosts keep turning up and finds Michael door locked. Willie boy try to see if he is in Doughtry’s room and there he finds the old man dead. At this moment, this is the beginning of his running although he is innocent of the circumstances. Through the realistic mode, the author advances the â€Å"cycle of violence† in South Africa that Willie boy has suffered from. Willie boy was beaten by Miss Gypsy and he has been in that type of violence since childhood. â€Å"His mother beat him at the slightest provocation and he knew that she was wreaking the experience upon him for the beating she received from his father†. Another major character is Constable Raalt. A police officer whose present duty is to patrol District 6. He is a Boer policemen who holds a humiliating estimation of the blacks and considers them primitive. Andries his partner is a man who is full of responsibility but is affected by the white collective unconscious that considers the white race as being the superior. So this makes him worried about the white reputation to be affected by the brutality of the white people like constable Raalt. Raalt drive around in a  police van with Andries and is bragging about the problems he has with his wife. Raalt hides his anger at his wife and it like a hard steel under camouflage paint. A guy who is very annoyed at Andries because he does not have similar marital problems. Constable Raalt is a malicious man who likes contemplating others people pains and he is unstable at home who cannot be stable on the job. Andries, the other driver of Raalt wishes that Raalt would transfer to a white are a to avoid his abuse of power against the Coloured. The violence that characterizes South Africa is shown through the character here. He is depicted as a very ruthless man who represents the South African society of white oppressors. Later on, when Willie Boy dies, he considered himself superior to blacks because of the terms he uses such as bastard. To quote Raalt: â€Å"no hotnot bastard gets away with murder on my patrol†. A close reading of A Walk in the night reveals the abusive methods of constable Raalt on the black citizens. Raalt has no respect for Coloured people and could kill them at will. He terrorizes the life of the Coloured people everywhere he goes. He went into the Club House with the aim of intimidating and extorting money from the Coloured man, Chips who runs the place. After Willie boy death, we witness two confrontations. The crowds accuses of Constable Raalt of cold blooded murder, but that is all they can do because Raalt is the law. The overbearing Raalt, the law with his gun, has had his taste of blood and does not care. He loads the wounded Willie boy into the back of the can and continues with his patrol. As Willie boy lies at the back of the police van, pain and nausea wracking his body, Andries is anxious to get the boy to the hospital, Raalt does not bother. Raalt was so concerned that he had his partner stop at a convenience store so he can buy some smoke. Here is where Willie boy traces back to his childhood of his bitter purposeless life all mingled up with his present situation and then dies. Another character that is introduce in the story is Joe. Joe is a poor person with hardly anything to eat. Michaels sees Joe and offers him a bob which is slang for beer. Joe turns down the offer and offer Michael some fish that he had picked up off the beach. One thing to understand about Joe is that he is an open handed person with a good heart even though he is poor. Alex la Guma sees him as a clean heart human being. Michael and Joe also have a  conservation about the segregation of beaches. The curse of segregation also inflicted nonwhites on a large scale; districts and even towns were not allowed for nonwhites to go to without having permits. The frequent absence of Jimmy La Guma at home when Alex was a little child, can be paralleled with the description of Joe’s Father for his family. Joe’s father’s description caused Joe to feel miserable and frustrated. However, the specificity of Joe’s peaceful character makes him able to accept his bitter re ality without resorting to violence. The environment of Black district is placed in sharp contrast with the conductive area where the whites live. The black majority live in the ghettos, in squalors, and in bad housing conditions. The contrast in racial desegregation is brought to the fore as the white oppressors segregate themselves from the Coloured people by living in cozy environments. La Guma presents the degrading conditions of the Lorenzo family who live in one room: â€Å"Four of their children lay sleeping in the narrow single bed against the wall on the side of the room. They slept under the one threadbare, worn, sweaty, blanket, and fitted together like parts of a puzzle into the narrow sagging space, two at each end of the bed.† Grace, Franky Lorenzo’s wife had to use â€Å"the tap in the latrine† to get water to make tea for her husband. This underscores the level of realism in South Africa. Also, here we have Franky Lorenzo who expresses his feelings of whites. On pg. 34, he quotes â€Å"They say, mos, it is us poor people’s riches. You got no food in your guts, and you got no food for your children, but you’re rich with them. The rich people got money but they got one, two kids. They got enough to feed ten, twenty children and they only make one or two. We haven’t got even enough for one kid and we make eight, nine-one a year. Jesus.† Being said, he said this because his wife Grace has an unborn child on the way and they cant even afford for the children they already have. He took his anger out on Grace and hurting her because he made it seem like it was her fault she is pregnant. During the pub scene, we are introduced to the taxi driver. A Coloured taxi driver who wants to awaken the consciousness of his community by conveying the idea that the white capitalist system is responsible for racism and  segregation in the country. The taxi driver represents the communist conviction of the author. He cannot explain it well because he is apparently illiterate, but his conviction is deeply rooted in him. When speaking about the violence of the whites against blacks all over the world, he puts the blame on the capitalist system. The last chapter of the novel is a cinematic rendition of what happens all over district 6 concerning the events and characters that are mentioned. Foxy and his gang go on to their mission, a cockroach waits for darkness to eat up the mess in Doughtry’s room and John Abraham tosses over, unable to bear his guilt; Frank Lorenzo snores peacefully as Grace contemplates the future life she is carrying and Joe heads for the sea. It is a sweep at the characters life and their hopes. Since 1948, The Policy of â€Å"Apartheid† of the South African Government has been one of the most publicized racial policies in the world, that both within and without the union just what the policy is all about has led to some confusion, misunderstanding and controversy. These advocates of apartheid see the separate development of the two major racial groups (European and Bantu). Apartheid has come to be a comprehensive social policy and it touches upon every sphere of social life in South Africa: politics, education, economics, religion, and so far on. The 1960 Sharpeville Massacre was the result of a peaceful protest regarding racist South African policies of apartheid. The enforcement of Pass Laws and the reissue of laws that restricted the movement of Black Africans in White areas in South Africa initiated a protest in Sharpeville. Pan African Congressional Leaders assembled close to 5,000 protesters to bring attention to such unfairness. The intent of the protest was for the South African government to rethink their Apartheid policies and abolish such practices. The protest mood was more â€Å"festive than belligerent† as the crowd moved towards the police station. It is here in which the response moved into the realm where the massacre was evident. The police response to the protest became the primary cause of the massacre.  The police assembled and used disproportionate responses to the protest. The use of low flying aircraft to seek to break the crowd up would be one such measure. The police’s response to the stone throwing of the crowds was the use of armored cars and shooting on protesters. Many of the protesters were shot in the back, indicating that they were trying to run away from the police and were still pursued. The reports of men, women, and children running from the police presence â€Å"like rabbits† only feeds the imagery of their being gunned down in such a callous and cruel manner. This brutality is only emphasized by the police commissioner’s statements about what happened in Sharpeville: â€Å"It started when hordes of natives surrounding the police station†¦If they do these things, they must learn their lessons the hard way.† In this statement, one can see the lack of regard for the life of Black South Africans, one in which state sanctioned violence can lead to massacre so easily. The setting of this novel is important because it brings out the social and moral decay of the society. The realistic depiction of gloom, rot, filth, and neglect is a powerful indication of the destructiveness of the Apartheid black environment of District Six, which affects the moods of people’s lives. The characters here are overwhelmed by the environment and are doomed to â€Å"walk the night† in frustration, uncertain of their destination, ambition, destinies, and purposes in life. Blacks of District Six cannot find a way out of their situation except unlawful behavior. Willie boy engages in petty crimes and violent acts in order to survive. Michael was illegitimately dismissed from his job and resorts to the membership of the gang of Foxy, Hendricks and Toyer, who specialize in robbery and petty crimes as well.

Stefan’s Diaries: Origins Chapter 34

I watched in satisfaction as Damon lustily drank, his tentative sips becoming gulps as he held his face down to Alice's neck. As Alice's nearly lifeless body grew white, a healthy flush rose in Damon's cheeks. As Damon drank the last drops of Alice's blood, I took a few steps outside the shack. I glanced around in wonder. Just last night, the area had seemed desolate, but now I realized that it teemed with life–the scent of animals in the forest, the flap of birds overhead, the sound of Damon's and my heartbeats. This spot–this whole world–was full of possibility. My ring glimmered in the moonlight, and I brought it to my lips. Katherine had given me eternal life. Father always had told us to find our power, to find our place in the world. And I had, though Father hadn't been able to accept it. I took a deep breath, and the coppery scent of blood filled my nostrils. I turned as Damon stepped out from the shack. He seemed taller and stronger than even a few moments ago. I noticed that he had a matching ring on his middle finger. â€Å"How do you feel?† I asked, waiting for him to see everything I saw. Damon turned away from me and walked toward the water. He knelt down and cupped the liquid to his mouth, washing away the remnants of blood on his lips. I crouched next to him at the edge of the pond. â€Å"Isn't it amazing?† I asked. â€Å"It's a whole new world, and it's ours. Forever!† I said, giddy. Damon and I would never have to grow older. Never have to die. â€Å"Y ou're right,† Damon said slowly, as if he were speaking in an unfamiliar language. â€Å"We'll explore it together. Just think. We can go to Europe, explore the world, get away from Virginia and memories†¦.† I touched his shoulder. Damon turned to face me, his eyes wide. I stepped back, suddenly fearful. There was something different about him, a foreignness in his dark eyes. â€Å"Are you happy now, brother?† Damon snorted derisively. I took a step toward him. â€Å"Y ou'd rather be dead than have this whole world for the taking? Y ou should be thanking me!† Fury flashed in his eyes. â€Å"Thanking you? I never asked you to make my life a hell from which I can't escape,† he said, spitting each word into the pond. Suddenly he pulled me into a hug with such strength that I gasped. â€Å"But hear this, brother,† he hissed in my ear. â€Å"Though we will be together for an eternity, I will make an eternity of misery for you.† With that, he released me from his grip and sprinted into the dark forest. As his form disappeared into the black shadows of the trees, a single crow rose from the woods. It let out a plaintive shriek, and then it was gone. Suddenly, in a world that mere moments ago had teemed with possibility, I was utterly alone. EPILOGUE October 1864 When I try to reconstruct that moment when I succumbed to my Power and destroyed my relationship with Damon, I imagine a split second of silence. In that second, Damon turned around, our eyes connected, and we made peace. But there was no silence, nor would there ever be again. Now I constantly hear the rustling of animals in the forest, the quickening of breath that occurs when any being knows danger is near, the pitter-patter-pause of a heart stopping. I also hear my thoughts, tumbling and colliding against each other like ocean waves. If only I hadn't been weak when Katherine stared into my eyes. If only I hadn't gone back to see Father. If only I hadn't made Damon drink. But I did. The fallout of those choices is a mantle that only grows darker and more nuanced with age. And I must live with the consequences of my misdeeds for eternity. LUSTING AFTER MORE OF STEFAN'S DIARIES? TURN THE PAGE FOR A SNEAK PEEK OF BLOODLUST, COMING JANUARY 2011. 1 It was October. The leaves on the trees in the cemetery had turned a decayed brown, and a cold breeze had whistled in, replacing the stifling heat of Virginia summer. Not that I much felt it. As a vampire, the only temperature my body registered was that of the hot blood from my latest victim coiling through my veins. I stood beneath the limbs of a large oak, a light mist swirling around my ankles, my shirt and hands sticky with the fresh blood of the girl I carried in my arms. My brother, Damon, lay prone at the base of the tree, his black eyes staring blankly up at me. It had been days since I'd last forced him to feed. His body had taken on a chalky texture, blood vessels twisting darkly under his skin like cracks. Even now, as I dropped the nearly dead girl at his feet, I had to drape his right arm across her stomach to keep him from rolling over onto his back. Were it not for the blood that had purpled her dress, they would have looked like two lovers holding each other. â€Å"I hate you with everything I am,† he whispered into her ear, though I knew his words were meant for me. She stirred but didn't open her eyes. â€Å"Y need your strength,† I said. â€Å"Drink.† He breathed in and his shoulders went limp. The metallic scent of her blood hung heavy in the air around us. â€Å"That isn't strength,† he said, his eyes fluttering shut. â€Å"It's weakness.† â€Å"Stefan †¦Ã¢â‚¬  This from the girl, Clementine Haverford, who reached a trembling hand out to me, her own sweet blood glistening like a silk glove around her fingers. Last summer, Clementine and I kissed in the shadows of the Wickery Bridge after one of the games Damon had dreamed up for us. She'd allowed my hand to graze the bodice of her blue muslin dress. I kneeled down and tucked a few loose strands of hair behind her ear. A voice somewhere in my mind told me that I should feel regret over taking her life, but I felt nothing. â€Å"You're a monster,† Damon said, keeping his lips as far as possible from the blood that seeped from Clementine's neck. â€Å"Forever is a long time to deny what you are,† I told him. From where we crouched in the hemlock grove, I could see my old neighbors milling around stone grave markers in the very center of the cemetery. My heightened vampire senses allowed me to pick through the crowd of townspeople. Honoria Fells sniffed into a lace handkerchief. Sheriff Forbes kept his hand on his holster. Jonathan Gilbert cleared his throat and flicked open a pocket watch. My head throbbed with every whisper, like the world was breathing secrets directly into my eardrums. Mayor Lockwood stood separate from the others, eulogizing our father, Giuseppe Salvatore –the man who had killed me and Damon, his only family, in cold blood. Father believed vampires to be utterly, unredeemably evil, and so he condemned us to death for trying to save Katherine Pierce, the vampire with whom we'd both fallen in love–the vampire who'd changed us to be like her. Lockwood's voice sliced through the raindrops that had just begun to fall. â€Å"We come together today to say farewell to one of Mystic Falls' greatest sons, Giuseppe Salvatore, a man for whom town and family always came before self.† They stood before a gaping hole in the earth. Father would be wearing the suit he wore to church on Sundays, the black one. With the wide lapels that came together just at the point where I'd accidentally cut him open when he came at me with a stake. I could just make out the winged figure above him, the angel statue that marked my mother's final resting place. Two empty plots lay just beyond, where Damon and I should have been buried. â€Å"It shan't be possible to picture this hero's life,† Lockwood continued, â€Å"but in a portrait in which Giuseppe is flanked by his two fallen sons, heroes of the Battle of Willow Creek.† Damon let out a low, rattling scoff. â€Å"The portrait he paints,† he muttered, â€Å"should contain the muzzle flash of Father's rifle.† He rubbed the place where Father's bullet had ripped through his chest only a week earlier. Mayor Lockwood looked out over his congregation. â€Å"A menace has descended on Mystic Falls, and only a brave few have risen to the challenge of protecting all that we hold dear. Jonathan, Giuseppe, and I stood shoulder to shoulder against the threat. Now we must heed Giuseppe's last words as a call to arms.† Lockwood's voice dragged with it the scent of smoky, blackened wood from the destroyed church on the opposite side of the cemetery. He was talking, ostensibly, about the groups of Union and Confederate soldiers who had been nipping about our part of Virginia for months, but there was no mistaking that he really meant vampires. Vampires like the ones Damon and I had been shot trying to free, like the ones Damon and I had become. â€Å"I could do it,† I told Damon. â€Å"I could run out there and tear out all of their throats before they knew it.† â€Å"What's stopping you, brother?† he hissed. I knew his encouragement came only from the possibility of me dying in the act. I held my breath and listened to Damon's panting, to the droning lies rising from Father's plot, and to some kind of clicking, like a watch or a fingernail tapping against a mausoleum wall. I wasn't used to the rawness of my senses; the world gave me so much more as a vampire than it had as a human. â€Å"Come,† I said, putting an arm around him. â€Å"Let's get one last look at Mystic Falls' finest citizens.† He didn't say anything but leaned into me, allowing me to hold him up as we moved from Clementine's bleeding body toward the grave site. We were just at a mausoleum a hundred yards from Father's grave when Lockwood introduced Gilbert to recite a prayer. Gilbert licked his lips. As he read some prayer or another out loud, I noticed the clicking once more. It picked up in speed as we neared the crowd. The clicking was now a steady, insistent rattle –and it seemed to be coming directly from Jonathan's hand. Then, with my mother's wings stretched wide behind him, Jonathan Gilbert consulted the clicking object in his palm. My blood ran cold. The compass. Jonathan had created a compass that, rather than pointing north, identified vampires. Suddenly, Jonathan looked up. His eyes locked on Damon and me instantly. â€Å"Demon!† He let out an unholy shriek and pointed in our direction. â€Å"I think he means us, brother,† Damon said with a short laugh.

Descriptive Essay: Chelsea Park Happiest Place on Earth Essay

Last Christmas, I spent 5 fun-filled days and 4 magical nights in Disneyland. Daily weather in Anaheim was beautiful. The driveway leading to the park entrance was lined with tall palm trees as they stretched to the heavens in the blazing sunshine. Everyone’s face shone with joy and the children shook their parent’s hands from side to side screaming happily. The sweet smell of fluffy cotton-candy tickled my nose as I entered the park. â€Å"Ooooh!Ahhhhh!† The cries of joy and sounds of machines whirring never seemed to stop. Even though there was lots of waiting with endless long lines, laughter was always in the air and they seemed happy together. A huge Mickey’s Fun Wheel jumped out at me right when I walked into the California Park. The colorful flowers set alongside a beautiful lagoon. The clip-clop of horse drawn carriages brought people back to carefree days. And of course, I never forget the biggest reason for going to Disneyland – the rides. There was a number of eye-catching moments here- some featuring otherworldly creatures, and white knuckle thrill rides through the clear sky. â€Å"Wooooshhhhh!!!† At blast off, California Screamin, took us through twists and turns, with an upside down loop. People were screaming their lungs out when the steel roller coaster soared into the air like a rocket. The terrifying speed made my toes curl and the strong wind pushed my head against the rubber black seat. I cried bloody murder on the coaster as it fell plumb down almost touching the ground. All too soon, it was over. After I got off of the thrill ride, I found my haggard look with disheveled hair through a snapshot picture. This is simply too awful to contemplate. Furthermore, Adventure-land was intriguing tropical land mixed with palm trees, lush bamboo fences, torches, rock formations, straw-thatched roofs and a fake jungle river. Read Also:  Topic for Descriptive Essay Especially, Indiana Jones’ was an unforgettable and realistic ride as we crossed a rickety bridge, passed pool of flaming lava, and dodged a huge tumbling boulder. The truck was the actual one used in the scene where Indy is dragged underneath during a high-speed pursuit, which was very thrilling for me. While the evening sun warmed the old red brick shops to a radiant glow, people were gathering in rows to watch the parade. A joyful parade featured popular characters from Disney movies, marching bands, dancers, and Santa Claus navigating through Main Street, each telling their  own musical story. It was full of unique rhythms and instruments. But the most pleasurable experience of the evening was the wonderful fireworks show. The night sky was ablaze with a spectacular fireworks display. It truly was deserving of being unforgettable. At night the whole area lit up and the sights and sounds were simply wonderful! Disneyland was not just a park with various attractions inside; it had created a completely new world for visitors to fall into. It brought me into the fantastic world and captured the imagination of every child, and even every adult. Visiting Disneyland was the greatest experience ever for me. The trip has left such hunting memories of the good times that I never get over longing to go back again! Suitcase Lady I enjoyed reading Christie McLaren’s essay â€Å"Suitcase Lady†, in which she described Vicomtesses’ life using senses of sight, sound, smell, and touch to convey more vivid feeling. At first when I read the title â€Å"Suitcase Lady† I imagined the story about free soul traveler who likes to travel around the world. However, I realized that it was totally different with my thought. The author starts with sad anecdote used words such as bleary, harsh, ragged cough, and chapped to help better understand of the situation of the lady who is everyday waging her own battle for survival. This essay triggered my emotion towards reality of homeless who unfortunately never get the chance to live comfortable. The quote â€Å"I bum on the street. I don’t like it, but I have to survive† shows the homeless living as given the opportunity to live. â€Å"Her suitcase is full of dream† implied that her suitcase is full of lady’s wishes of a better life. The poor lady cares passionately about the young, the old, and the ones who suffer. However, no one really sympathizes with the kind of harsh realities. Her recourse now is only God because it is even harder to expect the support from the government. Through the essay, the author points out the issue of homelessness in Toronto, Canada. In many ways, homelessness represents a social problem. I think they must be looked after from our attention and support rather than judging with our stereotype towards them.

Cohesion and Discipline of the Party in Government

Parties matter in part because they influence the actions of elected officials. But scholars also note that lawmakers from the same party may not vote together. Party cohesion has varied over time – sometimes party members stick together on many key votes, at other times they are no more likely to vote with fellow party members than with the opposition. Parties have various means at their disposal to encourage members to cooperate in achieving a party program. Sometimes these tools are sufficiently compelling that individual members may back the party program at the expense of their constituents' interest.However the case is quite different in European Parliamentary systems of government where party cohesion is essential for the implementing of government policies that the party in power wishes to impose. Although party cohesion in American government has risen because of intraparty heterogeneity and the realignment of the South (Hetherington and Larson), the party discipline and unity is not nearly as cohesive as those found in Parliamentary systems. This is in large part due to the fact that the tools of the party leaders in each system are different.In Parliamentary systems, because the risk of not voting in terms of party could lead to the collapse of the present regime and government system, party leaders tend to have more effective tools at their disposal to use in encouraging party cohesion/discipline. Party discipline or cohesion  is the ability of a  political party  to get its members to support the policies of their party leadership. Party discipline is essential for all systems of  government  that allow parties to hold  political power  because it determines the degree to which the governmental organization will be affected by the political processes.Party cohesion is closely related to party discipline (Aldrich). Distinctly, however, it is essentially â€Å"coordinated† behavior reflecting the interacting incentives of individual legislators, whereas party discipline is the outcome of a strategic game played within political parties, in which legislators who are party members respond to rewards and punishments determined by some internal party decision-making regime. In political systems other than American presidential democratic system, straying from the party lines can result in the fine and/or expulsion of members such as in the  People's Republic of China (Aldrich).Party discipline tends to be extremely strong in  Parliamentary systems such as in  European countries in which a vote by the legislature against their party is understood to cause the governmental â€Å"collapse† of the present regime (Huber). In these situations, it is extremely rare for a member to vote against the wishes of their party. Party leaders in such governments often have the authority to expel members of the party who violate the party line.Weak party discipline is usually more frequent in congressional s ystems  such as the  United States Congress where power within in the party is more democratic than the authoritarian system seen in parliamentary governments, with leaders dictating order to the members to follow suit. In these American legislatures, it is routine for members to cross party lines on a given vote, typically following the interests of their region (constituents) or following other members of a borderline group within their party.In America the risk is not that high, with party disagreement just results in the upsetting of the party elites without true damaging costs except for the withdrawal of their support. Party cohesion and party discipline are very distinctive under parliamentary government, where a lack of cohesion and/or indiscipline among parliamentarians belonging to government parties may jeopardize the very existence of the government. Certainly from the perspective of making and breaking governments, levels of party discipline are very high in Europea n parliamentary democracies.There are very few examples indeed of parties that have been â€Å"half-in, half-out† of government, in the sense that legislators from the same government party have voted in different ways on key legislative motions of confidence and/or investiture. In this sense parties do go into and come out of government in a unified manner. In the American democracy, this just isn’t the case. Politicians have more allegiance to their regions and constituents than to their party. Because of the way the nomination system works. Party nominations no longer rest in the hands of party elites but in those of the public.Thus it’s better for one’s political career to appeal to the public and not to party. According to other scholars enhance this opinion by adding â€Å"the main influence of party discipline is not on the votes on specific roll calls but on the choice ideologically of the party† (McCarty, Poole and Rosenthal). This suggest s that members will vote in line with their ideals rather than their leadership. To come to this conclusion they observed changing patterns of roll call voting among party-switchers and inferred that legislators appear o coordinate on roll calls because they change policy preferences to reflect those of their parties. Thus the question becomes, why do members of political parties even bother to behave in cohesive manners? Political scientists and elites have attributed this behavior to a trinity of solutions. Electoral incentives for legislators that arise from the value of a party label, strategic incentives within the legislature that reward legislators who behave in a coordinated fashion, and the ability of party leaders to implement a system of rewards and punishments are all attributed reasons (Hix and Simon).Political scientists argue that electoral incentives might generate emergent party cohesion. By creating a type or brand that politicos can blanket themselves under in ord er for voters to infer information about candidates in elections. Recognized legislators join political parties to signal policy positions to voters, doing this so long as it increases their chances of election or re-election. Voters make inferences about candidates’ policy preferences only by observing their party membership.Identifying candidates with their party and ignoring what candidates might actually say about their own policy preferences. Candidates in these models do have underlying policy preferences and thus prefer to join parties comprising like-minded colleagues (Krehbiel). This is because the party policy positions that are part of the brand with which each member is associated are influenced by the positions of all party members.In this system it benefits a candidate to vote along party lines in order to be associated with a specific regime policies, outcomes, and therefore successes. Party membership involves costs that arise from this incentive. There are co sts arising from associating with a party label indicating a unique policy position that differs from the ideal point of the member – and of being associated with a party that will actually implement this position if it is in a position to do so(Snyder and Ting).Since the primary focus of this type of work is on the electoral phase of the political game, and despite occasional references to â€Å"party discipline†, this approach involves no explicit model of intraparty politics– except for the assumption that the party policy platform is chosen by either a dictatorial leader or simple majority voting by party members (Snyder and Ting). In addition, this incentive assumes that politicians are allowed to join, and to remain within, any party they choose. The only â€Å"filter† on party entry in such odels is party policy itself which, combined with the deadweight costs of party membership, discourages legislators with very divergent policy positions from jo ining the party (Snyder and Ting 2002: 95) This means that the underlying process being modeled is a type of sorting or the partitioning of voters between parties, but the logical engine of this model could also be applied to explain the sorting of politicians between parties on the assumptions that party positions are some function of the positions of party members and that politicians want to affiliate to the party with the closest position.While this large body of work gives us useful intuitions about electoral incentives for legislators to affiliate to parties, the main lesson is that electoral incentives may well make a party label a valuable commodity. Thus, if a party’s decision-making regime can intensely threaten to withdraw the party label from party legislators if they fail to abide by party decisions about legislative behavior, then this will make those decisions easier to enforce.On this perspective, party discipline is about legislators responding to explicit or implicit threats by party leaders to impose electoral costs by withdrawing the party label, by casting votes in otherwise costly compliance with party policy. The resources party leaders in both parliamentary and US federal government and parliamentary government context can deploy to structure the incentives of legislatures in a way that ensures party discipline include control over electorally valuable party labels (party identity) and control over sought-after perquisites in the legislature.However, this incentive structure has an important new dimension under parliamentary government, arising from the fact that the legislature typically functions as a recruitment pool for the executive, and political ambition of its members are at the forefront. In Parliamentary governmental system, party leaders have the tools at their disposal to make or break candidates if they dissent, because the stakes are so high. If government parties cannot maintain firm party discipline, then they can not retain a secure hold upon office.When legislative parties do move into government, control over the allocation of important government jobs, whether these are cabinet or junior ministries or other key patronage appointments, typically rests in the hands of a very small number of senior party politicians, who can and do use these offices to reward loyal party members and who can and do punish mavericks by denying them the rewards of office. However, in American politics party leaders do not have the authority to simply dismiss a candidate.They may only throw their endorsement or support candidates with funds and become â€Å"king makers†. It is unrealistic to think that Nancy Pelosi can tell a conservative democrat to go away. She can allow withhold resources (money and her name recognition support). But this won’t be enough if the candidates’ constituents carry him through to victory. Legislative incentives also coexist which derives from improved expectatio ns in relation to a range of legislative payoffs that accrue to legislators who belong to larger rather than smaller cartels or coalitions of legislators.A large part of the relevant literature has been concerned with the role of party in the US Congress, and how the main concern of those elected is to pass legislature and having a single legislative party commands a majority position. The main legislative resource is the ability to capture a majority coalition of legislators. This is achieved by controlling the allocation between legislators of agenda setting legislative offices, such as committee chairs.On this argument, the power to make such allocations is delegated by party members to the party hierarchy, which can use this power to enhance party discipline, which in turn feeds back to enhance the value of the party label in the electoral game. This is important because the legislature is the main political arena in which legislators seek to fulfill their objectives, policy and otherwise. US parties impose discipline on their members by manipulating scarce agenda-control resources is in contrast an alternative influential argument, ( Krehbiel (1993, 1998).This holds that what looks like legislative party discipline is an essentially emergent phenomenon. US legislators choose which party to affiliate to on the basis of their intrinsic policy preferences – in effect joining a party of like-minded individuals and then quite voluntarily behaving in the same way as these on the floor of the House without the need for any â€Å"externally† imposed party effect. Legislators are voting the same way because they like the same policies, or because they are responding to the same non-policy incentive structure put in place by the party hierarchy.There are two roll calls put in place to ensure this outcome (Snyder and Groseclose). On one hand there are â€Å"lop sided† roll calls. In which first, legislators will treat these as a forgone conclusi on and, second, that party leaders will see them as offering no rationale for the (by assumption costly) deployment of party discipline. On the other hand there are â€Å"close† roll calls, for which coordinated legislator behavior makes the difference between winning and losing. There is strong evidence suggesting that the â€Å"party effect† is much higher for close than for lop-sided roll calls.They infer from this that US parties can and do influence the behavior of their legislative members when this makes a real difference, and do not attempt to do so when it does not. Cohesion seems to be closest when the party leadership has publicly identified as a priority, and find much more of a party effect on these than on issues that are not party priorities. Party cohesion in parliamentary government is important to the proper function of government because it essentially in lamest terms â€Å"makes or breaks government†.Under the constitutional regime of parliam entary government, that is pervasive in Europe, almost certainly the most important role for the legislature arises from the fact that the executive gains and retains office as long as it maintains the confidence of the legislature. This requirement is constitutionally manifested in the parliamentary vote of confidence/no confidence in the government (Huber 1996; Lijphart 1992, 1999). The executive under parliamentary government, furthermore, the â€Å"cabinet† of ministers bound together under the constitutionally embedded rule of collective cabinet responsibility.The stability and effectiveness of the government thus depends upon the ability of government parties to maintain disciplined behavior by party legislators. Effective party discipline means that a government is not defeated – either on votes of confidence/no confidence or on key pieces of legislation – because some legislators who belong to government parties vote against the government. Thus, while t he vote of no confidence is the constitutional foundation of parliamentary government, the behavioral foundation can be seen as party discipline.If the government parties maintain firm discipline on the part of their legislators, and if they control sufficient legislative support to take office in the first place, then they can maintain themselves in office, with firm control over the entire political process and facing few legislative impediments to the implementation of their policy and other objectives. Conversely, if government parties cannot maintain firm party discipline, then they cannot retain a secure hold upon office. The key point in all of his concerns the huge incentive in a parliamentary government system for senior party politicians – who themselves will often be members of the government – to maintain firm discipline over the members of their party. What is so striking about incentives for party cohesion and discipline under parliamentary government, as opposed to presidential government, is that these incentives cast the role of party leaders in a completely new light. â€Å"Party leaders† tend to play explicit and implicit roles. Party leaders tend to be seen as managers who essentially offer coordination and enforcement services to party members.As agents of their party, such party leaders have incentives to shirk. Imposing party discipline, by whatever means, is thus the fulfillment of obligation The reason such models of party discipline can look bizarre and unrealistic in the context of parliamentary government is that an â€Å"agency/expensive-discipline† model of party leadership (Cox McCubbins) seems implausible in a constitutional environment where party leaders are senior politicians who are the key players in a series of interlocking at the essence of the political process.Not only do party leaders make the really key decisions – about making and breaking governments, elections, but they also enjoy the benefits of office when this is achieved – whether these are perquisites such as the hefty check, the government jet, or the ministerial Mercedes, or opportunities to shift policy outputs in preferred directions as a result of controlling vetoes and agendas. In a nutshell, maintaining tight party discipline is highly incentive compatible for party leaders under parliamentary democracy.Indeed it is difficult to think of reasons why party leaders in a parliamentary government system would not want to maintain tight party discipline. Except in the matter of a voting on a highly divisive, sensitive, and cross-cutting issue, such as gay marriage or stem cell research for which it is against party interests to be identified with a single unambiguous position – then a legislative â€Å"free vote† can be declared on the matter and legislators can be allowed to vote with their â€Å"consciences†. But the orderly ability to switch free votes on and off is an i ndicator of firm party control over the behavior of party legislators (Aldrich).Parties are institutions in their own right. They are endogenous institutions, but parliamentary governmental parties are more deeply embedded into the constitutional rules of the political game of parliamentary government than a mere behavioral coalition of legislators. They are â€Å"political clubs† with their own set of rules to abide by. They are guided by their own system of rewards and punishment. In parliamentary government, membership of the party is completely dependent on the party label and the incentive of legislatives to be associated with the party brand or label. Cohesion and coordinated voting produce this benefit.In which individual members have an incentive to take part in coordinated behavior if they can get away with doing so. As mentioned before, if members choose not to act in this fashion, they can be exiled from the party and thereby denied access to the party label. Actin g in accordance to party can result in the placement of one’s name on the party ballot. Parties have the right to endorse particular candidates as official party candidates. Under the list-Proportional Representation electoral systems that are very common in parliamentary democracies, parties absolutely control access to and candidate placement on the party list.Therefore, parties in parliamentary democracies directly control access to the party label on the ballot. If denied this, a putative candidate must be admitted to and endorsed by another party, or must form a new party, or must run as an independent. In addition, access to legislative perquisites, whether these are physical office accommodation, speaking time on the floor of the house (perhaps to impress constituents at the next election), or paid positions with access to considerable resources, such as committee chairs.There are thus plenty of opportunities for party hierarchs to reward and punish individual legislat ive party members as they go about their daily lives. No doubt in the U. S. A. the movement towards the establishment of a disciplined and responsible party system is largely confined to the academic world. In the presidential system in US government rewards and punishment do indeed exist but not on the same level as in the parliamentary government (Cox and McCubbins). Party elites cannot simply cast away political hopefuls directly due to the constitution and the format of the political system.Power is not solely in the hands of elites, but the major American parties, national and state, are not based on mass memberships. â€Å"Only here and there in the United States are attempts made to fix a large-scale party membership on a regular dues-paying basis and thus to correspond to the European parliamentary scale (Jackson Moselle). † Party cohesion is absent even among the party workers and all the discipline that exists among party organizers before elections ceases to exist after elections. The problem stems from American attitudes about party.Most Americans identify themselves with a particular party but do not feel that they are obliged thereby to work actively for that party’s nominees (Laver). Anyone can legally qualify himself as a party member just by going through some registration procedure. Unlike the parliamentary system where you must pledge party allegiance before even having one’s name considered on the ballot. No state demands work on behalf of a party’s candidates or contributions to its campaign funds as prerequisites for becoming a legal party member (Giannetti and Laver).Structure of the American party has impact on party cohesion. The party structure in America consists of â€Å"a hierarchy of permanent party committees from precinct to national committee†. The National Committee which stands at the apex is made up of one man and one woman from each of the states picked by some kind of machinery within its State organization. The seemingly hierarchical structure does not produce party cohesion for power is decentralized and each unit is independent and needs not approval form the others.For example, the Chairman of the County Committee does not depend for his post on the State Committee and the latter hardly depends for its tenure or powers on the National Committee. To add to decentralization of power is the absence of uniformity in structure. The most striking feature in the party organization in the U. S. A. is that it is regulated by State laws while in all other democracies party structure is determined by the party itself. Diversity in State laws regarding party organizations naturally does not give scope for political discipline for the parties in America.In addition, primaries took the power of selection away from a band of leaders and activists and placed in by law in the hands of the voters. Unlike in Parliamentary systems where the local party organization selects the cand idates, the national party organization is finally obeyed. V. O. Key express the view that â€Å"by the adoption of the direct primary the organization was stripped of its most important function, that of nomination†. Every political party has two divisions, the organizational and legislative, and party discipline is as essential in the latter as in the former.If party cohesion is judged on the basis of the roll-call vote and the frequency with which members of a party differ among themselves, the index of cohesion in U. S. A. may be said to be very low. â€Å"The relatively low cohesion among Republican and among Democratic Congressmen† is mainly due to the non- parliamentary system of Government. The Congressman in U. S. A. need have no fear that division in the ranks of the party will lead to the dissolution of the legislature unlike in the Parliamentary system. So the significant feature with the roll-call vote in the American Congress is the absence of party cohes ion.Each of the two parties is divided into several factions and the factions in the two parties join or oppose one another irrespective of party labels, depending on the issue put for voting (Krehbiel). The decentralized structure of the parties makes a member depend for his success in elections more on his constituency than on his party. However, party cohesion in American government is not nonexistent, even though it is not as strong as those under the parliamentary democracies system. Each party selects a floor leader, whips and a Caucus Chairman creating a somewhat centralized structure that in practice increase party cohesion.Commonly, the party groups cohere more tightly on some party dividing issues than on others. For example 4,658 members of the House in 11 selected modern sessions only 181 or less than 41 per cent voted with the opposing party more often than with their own. The proportion was slightly higher in the Senate. Out of 847 senators in 9 sessions, 63 percent se cured their parties on a majority of the votes. (Jackson and Moselle)† For there is a tendency for most Republicans to be in voting opposition to most Democrats on controversial issues, showing strong party discipline.Indeed, American party cohesion is on the up rise. Realignment of the South played a role as the South has consistently voted conservatively since the Nixon years (Hetherington and Larson). Another key piece is the ideological differences among the two major parties (Democrats and Republicans) are greater today than they have been in years pass. Scholars have noted that the more ideologically extreme, the higher the cohesion. As parties have more interparty heterogeneity, each party has developed more intraparty homogeneity, which has given rise to roll-call voting (Hetherington and Larson).Strong party leaders also play a role in this phenomenon. Members in each party endow their respective party leaders with powers to advance the policy agenda. Ideological unit y in the 1970s with House Democrats, cause them to place the Rules Committee under the control of party leaders. Thus giving the house Democratic Caucus more power to oust wayward committee chairs who stood in the progress of the party’s initiatives. Demonstrating, American parties have been adjusting to their weak party model, and adapting in a way to influence party cohesive as exhibited so strongly in the American government.It is the clear consensus that Parliamentary government is indeed stronger in party discipline and cohesiveness than its American presidential system counterparts. The main reason for this phenomenon rests in the power of the political elites in each party system and the tools the system provides for their disposal-party label, patronage, etc.. In American politics, elites can only indirectly influence party-line voting as granted to the present political system. However, in parliamentary government, elites directly have the authority to dismiss or ele vate the position of their members, thus encouraging party cohesion.Bibliography Aldrich, John H. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Cox,Gary, and Mathew McCubbins 1993. Legislative Leviathan. Berkeley: University of California Press. Cox, Gary, and Mathew McCubbins. 2005. Setting the Agenda: Responsible Party Government in the US House of Representatives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, forthcoming. Gallagher, Michael, Michael Laver and Peter Mair. 2005. Representative Government in Modern Giannetti, Daniela and Michael Laver. 2005. Policy positions and jobs in the government.European Journal of Political Research. 44: 1-30. Hetherington and Larson. Parties, Politics, and Public Policy in America. 11th edition. 2009 Hix, Simon. 2001. Legislative behaviour and party competition in the European Parliament: an application of Nominate to the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies 39:4 (November 20 01), 663-688 Huber, John. 1996. Rationalizing parliament: legislative institutions and party politics in France. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jackson, Matthew O. and Boaz Moselle. 2002. Coalition and Party Formation in a Legislative Voting Game Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 103, No. 1, pp 49-87.Kollman, Ken, John Miller and Scott Page. 1992. Adaptive parties in spatial elections. American Krehbiel, Keith. 1993. â€Å"Where’s the Party? † British Journal of Political Science 23 (1): 235–6 Political Science Review. 86 (December) 929-937. Laver, Michael. 2005. Policy and the dynamics of political competition. American Political Science Review, forthcoming. Snyder, James M. , Jr. , and Tim Groseclose. 2001. â€Å"Estimating Party Influence on Roll Call Voting: Regression Coefficients versus Classification Success † American Political Science Review. Vol. 95, No. 3, 689-698 V. O. Key:  Politics, Parties and Pressure Groups. p. 12.