Political Correctness Is On Par With Communism

There has to be a reason for it. It is unnatural. Perhaps it is to do with some of the modern foods people eat these days? Or something in the coffee? I hope it isn't anything to do with all the Chinese ingredients companies now add to so many of our foods today without telling us. If Chinese food has been killing the dogs in America and making people ill, as I read recently, I don't want to be eating it! Whatever it is I'm looking for, it needs to be found quickly for it is responsible for a pronounced lack of common sense in too many people. Some of these people shoulder enormous responsibilities, and we rely on them to use their common sense to keep us from harm. One such person is the Chief Inspector of Prisons, Anne Owers.

Leyhill Open Prison in Gloucestershire - it has no perimeter security fence whatsoever - has been ordered to house up to 50 very high risk criminals, including a "relatively large group of men" sex offenders. This is the prison where almost 400 inmates simply walked out between 1999 and 2006. During that time the inmates here were disappearing at the rate of more than one a week. Mostly they were those convicted of robbery and burglary offences, but alarmingly they also included 22 murderers and 7 rapists.

Anne has at least had the common sense to question the "appropriateness" of placing such higher-risk inmates in open jails, but still wallows around in a fudge of uncertainty. Like so many today, if it isn't written down somewhere exactly what to do, she appears to be at a loss. She talks of the guidance on whether such offenders should be in open prisons as being "unclear", and complains there are no clear rules on whether high risk prisoners should be put on normal resettlement programmes where they work in local colleges or companies. What? She needs guidance and rules for this? Has she no savvy?

I have to question why any person should need to be guided in order to know whether or not murderers and sexual offenders, some of them rapists, should be kept in open prisons where they can simply walk out. Even just a modicum of common sense will say: no, they must always be kept in secure accommodation - and yet strangely it has been the Prison Service's policy to send these offenders to Leyhill for years.

In my mind, whoever decides prison policy might well benefit from a trip to the convent in Lisieux where St. Thérèse, the Patron Saint of Common Sense, spent some years - and if they don't find any, perhaps they should stay there! Other than that they should be forced to take up residence with their families somewhere close to Leyhill - given time, I'm sure a few of the inmates would love to pop in on them to say thanks!

I hate having to bring it up yet again, it is becoming tedious, but it really does need to be kept in the news. Our appalling NHS has suffered a scathing attack by the Scottish newspaper the Daily Record under the front page headlines: Scotland's Killer Hospitals. The paper revealed that almost 1 in 10 patients pick up an infection in a Scottish hospital, and in one Glasgow hospital the rate is nearly 1 in 5. The hospital acquired infections (HAIs) kill more than 500 patients a year in Scotland alone and cost the NHS a staggering £183million.

In England and Wales, where HAIs are almost as prevalent, to add to this deplorable situation we now learn that more than 24,000 hospital patients were reportedly given the wrong treatment last year. In some cases this has led to serious injury and even death.

Our NHS really cannot be allowed to continue on in this state. It never used to be like this, so why is it now? All the money they are spending - wasting? - on various "health issues" in an attempt to take the focus off their own gross failings must cease immediately, and they must knuckle down and address the real health threat to the nation - themselves! That money needs to be spent in the hospitals cleaning them and teaching the staff and doctors basic hygiene standards. A 1 in 5 chance of catching an infection that might kill you, and if it doesn't it is still most unpleasant, has to be dealt with as a matter of urgency.

I have little doubt that someone still with some common sense left needs to be brought in to give those in the NHS the "guidance" and "direction" that so many people cannot seem to function without these days. The worrying factor is: people with common sense are becoming increasingly harder to find.

Britain has 4.2 million CCTV cameras, 1 for every 14 people - that's more than in the rest of Europe all put together! - and yet we still have some of the worst crime rates in Europe. Cameras are an easy "cop out" for politicians - it makes it look like they are addressing the problem - and whilst cameras have been invaluable recently in tracking the movements of terrorists, so we do need them, they are a long way from being the answer to preventing crime on our streets. Proof of this comes from the Holloway Road in London. With more than a hundred cameras along its two-mile length it is the most spied upon road in Britain, and yet last year, over a period of just 6 months, we're told 430 offences were committed there, including 29 serious assaults, 15 robberies and 32 burglaries.

What does common sense suggest to you? A few more police needed on the street? It's something worth a try, isn't it? But I doubt that they will get them - they'll probably install another couple of cameras, so pulling yet another copper off a street somewhere to stare at a screen.

So, where has all our common sense gone? Have we just lost it, or has it been stolen? Only those who have managed to retain at least some of theirs will know the answer to this one. Common sense has been stolen from us by those who forced us into political correctness. Wherever they encountered it, these people took it away from us. No-one is allowed the freedom now to analyse anything for themselves and come to their own sensible conclusions anymore - to use their own common sense - as we are told precisely how we must react to everything and every situation. We have become little more than a nation of zombies, unable to think for ourselves and just going through the motions of life like some bored repertory actors. However, with Gordon Brown's pledge to bring back competitive sport for our children, there is a slight glimmer of hope on the dark horizon. It needs to be grabbed and nurtured.

Common sense has always said to me that the winners are likely to be the best ones to do the job. Political correctness has for decades taken away competitiveness, so we have never really known who was best - we just guessed, or waited for a palm to be greased! School sports were banned in case those not good at them should feel inferior, and so too for a long time, and for the same reason, were many school examinations. Where common sense said everybody should have equal opportunities and achieve what they could from them, political correctness said everybody should be equal. The former is an admirable concept and is easily attainable; the latter is an utter impossibility, unless we are all dumbed down to the lowest possible denominator.

Political correctness is on par with communism: we are all equal, except we find some are far more equal than others - and they will be the ones who make up the rules. If you still have your common sense with you, it will be immediately apparent that, under this system, those least able to do a good job of making the rules are equally likely to be those doing just that job. Is it any wonder we are in such a state today?

Isn't it about time we threw out political correctness, and started using some common sense? Equal rights for everyone under the law - yes! But an equal (downtrodden) people, where one size fits all - no! We are all individuals. Our Creator made us that way, and no man has the right to change that!

Key political concepts

Pragmatic view of power

Origin of the word (Politcs comming from the latin: poly, meaning many, and tics, meaning blood sucking creatures)

Samuel Gompers' maxim, often paraphrased as,"Reward your friends and punish your enemies,"^[4] hints at two of the five types of power recognized by social psychologists: incentive power (the power to reward) and coercive power (the power to punish). Arguably the other three grow out of these two:

Legitimate power, the power of the policeman or the referee, is the power given to an individual by a recognized authority to enforce standards of behavior. Legitimate power is similar to coercive power in that unacceptable behavior is punished by fine or penalty.

Referent power is bestowed upon individuals by virtue of accomplishment or attitude. Fulfillment of the desire to feel similar to a celebrity or a hero is the reward for obedience. This is an example of incentive power as one rewards oneself.

Expert power springs from education or experience. Following the lead of an expert is often rewarded with success. Note that expert power is conditional to circumstances

Politics

Politics is the process by which groups of people make decisions. The term is generally applied to behavior within civil governments, but politics has been observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions.

Politics consists of "social relations involving authority or power" and refers to the regulation of a political unit, and to the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply policy.

Political science (also political studies) is the study of political behavior and examines the acquisition and application of power. Related areas of study include political philosophy, which seeks a rationale for politics and an ethic of public behavior, and public administration, which examines the practices of governance.

The Dead Confirm Obama Benefit Details

The surviving members of the Grateful Dead have fleshed out the details regarding their upcoming benefit for the Presidential campaign of Senator Barack Obama. As previously reported, Bob Weir, Phil Lesh, Bill Kreutzmann and Mickey Hart will perform together for the first time since 2004 on October 13. The group has now confirmed that the benefit will take place at State College, PA’s Bryce Jordan Center, with the Allman Brothers Band and an undetermined opening act also set to appear. Confirming numerous reports, guitarist Warren Haynes and keyboardist Jeff Chimenti will augment the core members of The Dead.

Last February, Weir, Lesh and Hart performed together for the first time since 2004 at a Deadheads for Obama show held at San Francisco’s The Warfield. In May, Weir also joined Phil Lesh & Friends onstage as part of the closing of the Warfield celebration. At that performance, Weir helped Lesh and his band through “Cream Puff War,” “Morning Dew,” “New Minglewood Blues” and “Viola Lee Blues” as part of the group’s recreation of the Grateful Dead’s self-titled debut. Hart and Weir have also shared the stage a few times in recent memory, most notably in Golden Gate Park as part of the Green Music Festival.

Though reunion performances are scarce, the members of The Dead have played together a few times since 2004. In 2005, all the core surviving members of the Dead sans Phil Lesh shared the stage at the Comes a Time benefit. A year later, Weir, Hart and Kreutzmann collaborated with former Grateful Dead vocalist Donna Jean Godchaux-MacKay at Gathering of the Vibes and, in early 2007, the three musicians performed with Haynes and an assortment of guest musicians at an inauguration party for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. If the October 13 benefit goes well, The Dead is expected to tour in April and May of 2008.

Presidential Candidates '08 - Where They Stand

Without doubt it's important to vote in the upcoming 2008 U.S. presidential election, yet it's even more important to cast an informed vote. This means comparing presidential candidates in terms of where they stand on the issues – fortunately, this is something which is easy and simple to accomplish on the Web, if you know the best online resources.
One might hope that, this time around, the Internet will loosen up the decades-old stranglehold TV has had on the public consciousness where presidential voting is concerned. After all, do we really want the next president to be the candidate who makes the best TV impression during debates, Sunday morning talk shows, and randomly-reported sound bites?
No, of course not – it's the candidate's position on major issues that's really most important to us. But at the same time, keeping each of more than 15 candidates' positions on issues straight can be like trying to juggle four balls while balancing a banana on your nose – particularly since some of them have an unfortunate tendency to alter their position on certain issues in mid-campaign.
Television is fine as far as getting a sense of the “presidential-ness” of the candidates and a feel for their leadership qualities. But it's not so fine when you need to understand exactly where each one stands on the major issues of the day vis-a-vis the other candidates. This is where the Web can help, and it does the job quite well.
Issues Quiz
To begin, check out your current knowledge of the candidates' positions with this brief quiz --

Using a word processor or piece of paper, record what you think are the positions of some or all of the following candidates on each of several issues, then go to the Issues Grid (http://websearchguides.com/issues_grid.htm), prepared by PoliticalBase.com.
Suggested Candidates: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John Edwards, John McCain, Fred Thompson, Mike Huckabee
Corresponding to each candidate, indicate “for,” “against,” “strongly for,” or “strongly against” for each of the following issues:
1.Minimum Wage
2.No Child Left Behind Act
3.Iraq War Withdrawal
4.Affirmative Action
5.Universal Health Care
6.Legalized Abortion
7.Same Sex Marriage
8.Social Security Reform
9.Free Trade
So how did you score? If you're like most people, you didn't do too well, but this is definitely information you need to familiarize yourself with before casting your vote.
Of course, you need not totally agree with the Issues Grid developed by PoliticalBase.com. For example, the Issue Grid's representation of Clinton's and Edward's positions on “Social Security Reform.” as “strongly against” seems to me to need clarification. (Note that you can click on the issues in the left column for elaboration.) So I suggest that you review this Issues Grid with caution and look also at some of the other Internet resources discussed below.

NEW YORK TIMES ELECTION GUIDE (http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/index.html)
Probably one of the more objective and thorough e Internet sites for comparing presidential candidates is that of the NY Times. (Incidentally, a NY Times Online subscription is not needed to access the material.) On the home page you get the following info on each candidate:
Topic Page - (Books he/she authored; Books about him/her; Selected NY Times articles on candidate (e.g., there are almost 4000 listed on Clinton); Biography
Blog Posts from the Times' Politics Blog
Detailed Profile of the candidate
On the left sidebar, notice the heading “ISSUES.” At present the issues covered are: Abortion, Climate Change, Health Care, Immigration, Iraq and Iran. When you click on an issue you go to a page providing a general briefing on the issue, then specific position quotes on the issue from each candidate.
Of course all of the above can take you hours, maybe days, to plow through, unless you target specific info. If you're looking for quicker, easier overviews as a basis for comparing the presidential candidates, try the following comparison tool.

COMPARE CANDIDATES TOOL(http://thebostonchannel.com/compare-candidates/index.html)
WCVB-TV in Boston has come up with this “Compare the Candidates” site, and it's so good it may turn out to be all you need – at least, for making your initial decision. Start by scrolling down the page and select two candidates, one on the left side of the page and a second on the right. Let's say we pick Clinton and Giuliani. Presto, there are their photos, a link to their bios, and their policy positions (as construed by WCVB, anyway) on Foreign Affairs, Iraq, Homeland Security, Immigration, Economy, Education, Energy, Climate Change, Health, Social Security, Stem Cell Research, Same Sex Marriage, Abortion, and Gun Control.

Political Integrity: an Example out of Africa

We live in a cynical age where the values of truth, honesty and integrity seem to be in short supply. We are therefore always looking for examples of such values in action, especially with regard to politicians.

I would like to offer you such an example from Africa. You have probably never heard of this man, but for me he stands as a true model of integrity. It's not Nelson Mandela, but Mr. Mandela would certainly be proud to have his name mentioned in the same breath with him. His name is Julius Nyerere.

Julius Nyerere was the man who led then Tanganyika, today called Tanzania, to independence from Britain in 1961. Unlike many other independence movements, this one succeeded without a single drop of blood being shed.


I had the privilege of living two years in Tanzania shortly after independence. Being a city boy (I grew up in Los Angeles), for me Tanzania was quite a revelation. I virtually lived in a mud hut, suffered through a drought, saw leprosy, and contracted both malaria and dysentery. All of these things affected me. But getting to know Julius Nyerere as a political leader was truly a life-changing experience.


When Nyerere became head of state in 1961, he was so popular that he could easily have taken on the trappings of a king or potentate. But he did exactly the opposite. He chose to live very modestly, because that was his nature.


More importantly, he inspired confidence in everyone, and never betrayed that confidence, because that also was his nature. He of course had political enemies. They were often critical of his ideas and policies – but never the man. The worst I ever heard anyone say about him was, “President Nyerere is doing all the wrong things for all the right reasons.”


Julius Nyerere was a realist riding a wave of idealism.


For example, shortly after taking office, he cut the salaries of all government ministers by 20-50 percent, including his own. Although by world standards these ministers very poorly paid, by Tanzanian standards they were very rich. Nyerere argued that such a poor country simply could not afford to maintain its government in such a lavish style. Any minister who refused the cut was invited to leave the government, and a number of them did.


In the 1960s, the first thing a newly independent country wanted to do was set up a national airline and rush to industrialise. Nyerere was different. He concluded that Tanzania could not become truly industrialised for at least a century. So instead of devoting all its energies and limited resources to trying to build an industrial base, it made more sense to strengthen its agricultural base.


This meant reforming the schools. Instead of turning out potential clerks, shop assistants and middle managers for the cities, the goal should be to turn out scientific farmers. These would then go back to their villages to teach their compatriots, who were mainly subsistence farmers.


Advocating this was close to heresy. Most people felt that the purpose of going to school was precisely to escape from the backward rural villages. There was considerably opposition to Nyerere’s idea, but ultimately it was implemented.


As a Peace Corps teacher in a boarding school, I could immediately see the difference. Suddenly, we were required to start a school farm and to grow much of the food the students would be eating. The students didn’t take kindly to having to do manual labour, but eventually the protests subsided and farming became part of the daily routine.


At roughly the same time, Nyerere looked at Tanzania’s university students, who were the elite of the elite. It is important to understand that there were only about a thousand university students in the country out of a population of nearly 10 million because Tanzania had virtually no educational base. At the age of 6, less than half the children were in school. There was a severe examination to go from primary to secondary school, which nearly 85 percent failed because there just wasn't any place for them. So those who reached university were by definition the elite of the elite.


Nyerere noted that it took the total annual income of 78 Tanzanians to keep one university student in school for one year. To help cover the costs, he proposed that on graduation each student give two years to public service.


Once again, rebellion; the students went on strike. Once again, Nyerere stood his ground, declaring that as much as the country needed university graduates, it needed true Tanzanians more. He therefore closed the university for a year and sent the students back to their rural villages to rediscover their roots. Those who received good reports from their village headman were allowed to return the following year.


A neutralist during the Cold War, Nyerere was basically a man of peace. However, he could take military action when the situation called for it. For example, in 1978 he sent Tanzania troops into neighboring Uganda to oust the notorious dictator Idi Amin, who fled into exile.


When he retired as head of state in 1985, Nyerere took on the role of roving diplomat and peacemaker. Because he was so trusted, he was invited to mediate disputes all across the African continent. For instance, he was instrumental in bringing an end to the slaughter in Burundi in 1996. He also worked tirelessly to put an end to apartheid (racial segregation) in South Africa.


Nyerere didn’t look like the consummate leader he was. He was rather small and had a bushy little moustache that made him look like a chocolate Charlie Chaplain. But when he spoke and when he wrote, you knew that you were in the presence of someone special. He was affectionately known as “Mwalimu”, Swahili for teacher, which is what he was before going into politics. This was a sign of respect, not reverence.


I am not a very emotional person. But when Julius Nyerere died on October 14, 1999, I felt a sudden emptiness in me. It was as if something good had left the world. And it had.


Nyerere was a devout Catholic and in 2005 he was proposed for beatification. He is currently under consideration for canonization, which is one step away from sainthood. I don’t think I would put him on such a high pedestal. I didn’t necessarily agree with everything he did. But I never doubted that it was always for the best of reasons.


Every time I hear his name, I still feel the same emptiness I felt on the day he died. So if you are ever tempted to say that politics and integrity don’t mix, please remember Julius Nyerere. You will never find a better model of integrity, either in politics or in daily life.


Philip Yaffe is a former reporter/feature writer with The Wall Street Journal and a marketing communication consultant. He currently teaches a course in good writing and good speaking in Brussels, Belgium. His recently published book In the “I” of the Storm: the Simple Secrets of Writing & Speaking (Almost) like a Professional is available from Story Publishers in Ghent, Belgium (storypublishers.be) and Amazon (amazon.com).

There is No Business Like Political Show Business

Sen. Obama trotted out Oprah. Sen. Clinton put her family on display, including former President Bill, and she teared up in New Hampshire. These are just the warm ups for the main political show of election 2008.

Gov. Huckabee had Chuck Norris at his side at numerous events. The Chuck Norris appearance with Gov. Huckabee was not as extensively covered by media as were the Oprah and Clinton family events. Sen. Clinton's choking up on camera was shown over and over and over just prior to New Hampshire. It gave her the boost she needed from women voters to grab a close win after being upset by Sen. Obama in Iowa.

The campaign trail will increasingly be like going to the movies or watching the "tube" as Hollywood tries to take advantage of the lazy voters among us. Most recently, Boston Legal on A.B.C. took some strong swipes at the Bush administration and the Iraq war. They attacked the National Guard as well. This propaganda will be seen more and more on TV in the coming months.

Let's look at the Obama-Oprah and Clinton family events.

Sen. Obama proudly proclaimed that the turn out for one Obama-Oprah event was the biggest turnout for a political event ever for any candidate in this campaign. Yet, after Oprah gave a rousing speech, people began leaving the stadium in droves while Sen. Obama was making his speech. Obviously, star struck Oprah fans came to see their idol and could care less about Sen. Obama's views on the issues of this campaign.

To counter Oprah, Mrs. Clinton put family members on display as if to say - "Family values, not star power, are more important to me." Well, that should be the case in every election whether it's a Democrat, Republican, or Independent saying it. The truth, however, cannot be hidden from active voters. The love affair between the Clinton's and Hollywood is well documented. Hollywood money is being poured into the Clinton campaign, along with advice about how to influence star-struck voters.

The only bright spot in media thus far has been Charlie Gibson and A.B.C. News for putting on the live debates. The debates were largely balanced efforts to give voters some solid information from the candidates. In my opinion, the Republican debate was much more lively and revealing than was the Democrat debate. I was disappointed that Sen. Clinton's claim to offering "35 years of change", as qualification to be President, was not challenged by an opponent or media.

You may think that I am anti-Clinton, anti-Obama, or anti-Democrat. I really don't care about political party affiliation, male-female, or black-white-brown-yellow, or Christian-Mormon-atheist-agnostic.

While I am decidedly conservative, I do not lean toward the G.O.P. In fact, there are conservative Democrats and Independents, too. At this point, I haven't begun to decide whom I will vote for. To be honest, I am not impressed by any single candidate of either party. Likely, as it always does, it will come down to the lesser of two evils. But, I will vote because, if I do not vote, I will have no right to complain about my government.

So, what is my motive for this article?

I am antagonistic toward any group that attempts to manipulate the electorate by virtue of money or star power. These are the people we need to guard against and any candidate who makes deals with any special interest group should be crossed off our list of choices.

Think about it. Will Hollywood moguls and other power brokers not expect something in return for their support if their candidate wins? And, can the candidate ignore them once in office? No, not if he or she wants to be elected to a second term in the White House.

Hollywood's agenda is the most dangerous one for America. They want the government to leave Hollywood alone so they can promote their liberal agenda and make piles of money. They claim the rights of "free speech" and "artistic freedom". In fact, it's all about the money they make by appealing to the basest leanings in our human nature. The more unfettered are the movie moguls, the more tickets and DVD's are sold.

If Hollywood gets control of the White House and Congress, look for laws regulating them being watered down or repealed. Look for violent crime and drug use in the movies and on television becoming even more graphic because the movie and TV rating systems will be scrapped or watered down. The result will be a society that will increasingly believe there is no right or wrong and will no longer be hindered in satisfying the basest of desires at the expense of others.

Perhaps you think I have gone off the deep end and see a demon behind every bush. My answer to that is simple - "When in doubt, shout it out!" I would rather find that my fears are unfounded than have to admit I knew the truth and remained quiet.

Not Your Traditional Office Politics

I spent years in deep denial about office politics. I flatly refused to believe it was necessary to "play" politics in order to succeed. And - with a symbolic if not actual
stamp of my foot - if it was necessary, then I'd sacrifice my career on the altar of my disdain!

Many people confound themselves with the same denial and the same definition of office politics: bad, deceitful, backstabbing,
brown-nosing - all of the slimy things we often think of, both in and out of the office, when we hear the word "politics."

Many years later, and after teaching myself and others to navigate successfully through a lot of political undercurrents, my viewpoint has turned around completely. Successful
personal politics, both at home and in the office, is nothing more - and certainly nothing less - than the art of understanding and practicing meaningful, alert, and complete communication.

Let's look at these three components individually.

Meaningful communication has a wide scope, ranging from avoiding the use of jargon and overly technical explanations, to simply being sure we're giving our audience what they need. It means giving a useful answer that takes the questioner's context into consideration, instead of one that adheres only to the letter of what was asked. It encompasses compassion, understanding when someone needs help even when he or she hasn't said so.

Alert communication means that we're paying attention to what's going on around us. When someone does, asks for, or objects to something, the alert communicator has a pretty good idea what's behind those actions: we understand the context within which the person is operating (or at a minimum, we recognize that this context is there). When we understand the context - whether or not we agree with it - we can participate in a
solution where everyone wins, or at least no one loses. When we are alert to communication on all levels - verbal and nonverbal, including action or lack of action - we can prepare for whatever happens, instead of being startled by it.

Complete communication is akin to "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." It means leaving nothing out - but it
doesn't mean using the truth as a blunt instrument to make others feel or look bad. It means providing the context when we ask for something, so that others can understand the why behind our request, and see how their response fits into a bigger picture. And it means saying the important things to friends and family instead of assuming that they know how we feel.

Just like any tool, political ability can be turned to good uses or bad. I can use a hammer to smash a priceless piece of art, or I can use it to tap a finishing nail into a
beautiful piece of furniture. In either case, it's not the hammer that caused the end result; it's what I've done with the hammer.

Likewise, I can use my political ability to undermine others, turn their ideas into mine, and inflict guilt on anyone who fails to meet my expectations. But I'd much rather take
the skills I've learned - and they can be learned, though they're not often taught in today's schools - to help others succeed, applaud their achievements, and be clear about what I want and need so others can give me the gift of helping.

Surviving Office Politics At Your New Job

Whether you are just starting your first job or your 10th job, you will find that office politics is consistent in all companies.
Office politics is something that is inherent in any company you may work for. It’s part of the culture and you won’t be able to avoid it. So just how do you survive office politics and still get to make your talents shine? Simple, you need to market your talents everyday, just as you did during the
interview that got you the job.

You basically need to focus on fitting in with the scheme of things around the office. Be friendly and outgoing and offer support to your co-workers and management when possible.
Refuse to engage in the sleazier side of office politics and soon management and your peers will take notice of you. You will win their support and respect.

Don’t be afraid to toot your own horn to management. Don’t assume that they should know what you do all day. They have their own agenda and may take notice of some things
that you do, but many things may go nnoticed. Your positive attitude and activities will rally support and leave a lasting impression to everyone.

It’s ok to offer to take on additional responsibilities, but only do it if you have the time or someone else hasn’t stepped up to the plate. Don’t bite off more than you can chew, it will make matters worse and make you
look incompetent. The trick is to show that you are worth more and soon you will not only fit in, but also come to be relied on for more important assignments.You will be a player in the game of office politics, no
longer an outsider looking in. An increase in
responsibilities usually means a raise as well.

Playing the game of office politics well can lead to many rewards in your career. In addition to fitting in and getting personal recognition when an opportunity presents itself, you also need to accept constructive criticism just as well. Never take it personally, rather look at it as a chance to
grow and learn from mistakes. If you come off as defensive when you are being criticized, it will sabotage any chance you have of becoming part of a group.

Know your limitations, toot your own horn, play by the rules, make your talents shine and most of all, respect yourself and those around you. Remember that you will not be able to please all of the people all of the time. But pleasing those that count, those in authority and those that you work closely
with is equal to winning half the battle. Be subtle, make the transition as seamless as possible and make yourself useful. Only then will you have a chance at winning the war. It is the easiest way to survive office politics in any company.

THE POLITICS OF VIOLENCE

The recent elections gave us an indigent insight into the complex character of our People. The events have become another, among many other motivating reasons for Filipinos to live anywhere else but on this country. Their main argument is that the bleakness of the political landscape will eventually kill whatever chances we have for improving ourselves as a people. But can anyone blame us? Look at our situation. Investors are starting to move away. Leaving our economy hopelessly indebted.

Our politics has lost its dignity and turned into a circus. We are the only country where Mexican soap opera stars are received like royalty in the presidential palace. There are lesser and lesser job opportunities for Filipinos and one of the few more lucrative occupations involves talking to foreigners on a phone with a false accent. How miserable Filipinos must be...

A cousin of mine bluntly retorted that I should be making only constructive and positive suggestions instead of destructive and negative ones. But there is nothing positive about affirming what is nakedly wrong and incorrect. And there is nothing destructive about remembering the sins of the past. There is nothing negative about criticizing the diseases of the present. What this country needs is something I am skeptical any of our leaders have the balls to offer. The truth. If only Filipinos were more objective and politically mature things would be different. Our mind set is focused on ourselves to utter disregard of others and the truth. It has never changed.

In the elections, whoever loses claims to have been cheated. I can’t blame them because if they won, they would have been the cheaters we love to indulge in gossiping instead of devoting time reading good literature such as success stories. It gets even worse, crab mentality in the Philippines is so blatant that every election, everyone tries to put one down.

Even most of the media people who have a hand in molding the peoples opinion cannot even do what they are supposed to do and report there events without pre-judgment. They could say, whatever they desired against Muslims and only a few people would challenge them because there is no organized way to challenge stereotypes & bias in media. What is also obvious is the widespread bias of Filipinos, which are their love for Americans and their hatred for Muslims.

The media has to understand that we Muslims are mutually sympathetic to one another. When I hear the news that a Muslim brother in any part of this country is in pain. I am instinctively sympathetic to my Muslim brother. I may know little about the problem he is facing but I cannot and should not suppress my natural sympathy. This love is born of the bond of brotherhood, which the Islamic religion is keeping to establish between its followers. Everyone in our generation dreams of being rich successful and happy. But the dreams require us to hop on a plane and become domestic helpers.

In short we think that being a Filipino is a liability because this nation does nothing to help the youth. It’s depressing that our leaders think that only people who are 18 and above should be served well because their political careers depend on their votes.

What our leaders should understand is that the opinion of everyone matters even if those opinions wont necessarily be expressed through the ballot on election day as a citizen of this country. I’m sick and tired of hearing statements that seek to convince that the Philippines is a good country. The truth is its not.

It’s far from good. That’s why staying in the Philippines has simply become intolerable. A clear example to justify my stand are leaders who claim that the Philippines is one of Asia’s growing economies.

As far as I know we have been a growing economy ever since Martial law. I never heard anywhere or at any point that the Philippines had already grown to a strong economy. How can the government make me believe that our economy is getting better when I constantly see Sampaguita girls carrying babies and risking their lives just to beg for coins in the streets. Is that how they picture a growing economy? This country is poor. Very poor our minimum wage earners can hardly get enough food and shelter our national debt has reached trillions of pesos and god knows when we will be able to pay for it.

I have come to a conclusion that the Philippines is a country of beggars. Begging is no longer taboo. Decency is no longer a practice. Our Peoples change of character is the direct result of the educational system. Education in the Philippines is mediocre.

In my province I have seen students cross a river in a Banca, walk in muddy roads and flooded streams to reach their classes. School buildings with broken roofs, classrooms with no blackboards and tables with no chairs. One can hardly study let alone learn in such an economically challenged atmosphere. The department of education should look into this outrageous problem that mocks the constitutional obligation of the state to provide free quality education to all children including Muslims.

Our leaders say that we should be proud because we are run by a democracy. Clearly the voting public and the candidates feed on each other to create an incestuous relation of the rule of the corrupt and the corruptible.

In the past few elections only the elite have successfully influenced the outcome of our election. Worse even drug lords and loan sharks have also found a way to use their dirty money to win polls. This brand of politics is destroying the image of the Bangsamoro. Making us dirty and corrupt. Something is wrong with a people who instead of putting a drunkard into therapy we send him to Malacaٌnang.

Something is very wrong with a people who instead of throwing a coup leader behind bars we send him to senate. Something is obviously wrong with a people who instead of holding grafters, tax evaders and rapist to account for their sins against society we send a number of them to congress. This country is run by corruption not democracy. And yes were even proud of it.

The military is tasked with the burden of protecting its citizens. But for such a strong organization it is very alarming and upsetting to see that it is the most vulnerable entity to political pressure. This vulnerability can be traced to the military’s utter ignorance of the constitution, it’s role in defending it, and its ignorance that the dishonest and greedy generals capitalize upon.

The Bangsamoro people continue to suffer the agony of war waged by the government troops against our mujahideens. Thousands of my Muslim brothers have left their homes and livelihood due to these hostilities. The truth should come out that the military is the one provoking us to fight in order to justify and raise government funding for its war against terror.

Have you noticed the standard of living in Mindanao is low compared with that of Visayas and Luzon? Government records attest that Mindanao only gets 10% of the national budget. Considering it’s the second largest island and provides most of the country’s resources. If there are any investments coming in, the Bangsamoro people aren’t enjoying them. But those in places like Cagayan de Oro, Iligan City and other non-Muslim dominated provinces. The truth is the government regularly manipulates population statistics to minimize the Muslim count. Since only Christian birth and death records are recognized as official. There is no accurate census available on the current number of the Bangsamoro population. Thus voter representation in Muslim Mindanao and the need for government infrastructure in our province is denied.

The government is responsible for steering this nation. Without that responsibility the government has no purpose and would have no right to exist. This country needs to be told the plain truth that this country is doomed and should work towards a miraculous cure. This government must take heart and at least have pity on the poor of this nation, especially the Bangsamoro who has no ambition but to be free. Free from this wretched country.

Politics

Politics is the process by which groups of people make decisions. The term is generally applied to behavior within civil governments, but politics has been observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions.

Politics consists of "social relations involving authority or power" and refers to the regulation of a political unit, and to the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply policy.

Political science (also political studies) is the study of political behavior and examines the acquisition and application of power. Related areas of study include political philosophy, which seeks a rationale for politics and an ethic of public behavior, and public administration, which examines the practices of governance.

Talking Politics With Teens

It can be challenging to discuss politics across generations without someone melting down (usually you) or tuning out (usually them), but it's not impossible. Here are six traits of adults with the power to engage teens and inspire them to activism.

Be teachable. A conversation isn't about one person sharing knowledge and information with another. That's better known as a lecture (or so I've been told). Listen to teens, allowing them and others to inform your opinions.

Be honorable. It's okay to take issue with a candidate's positions, but disparaging his or her character is a definite turnoff to teens and twenty-somethings. To everyone, in fact.

Be flexible. Your candidate isn't Jesus. Teens appreciate hearing how we disagree with the person we support. Give them the grace to do the same, and don't take differing opinions personally. Endorsing your candidate's opponent doesn't mean a young person is repudiating your authority. Although it might.

Be controversial. Surprise and provoke them once in a while by saying something radical, starting with "I totally disagree with _____" or "I 100% agree that ____."

Be passionate. Caring deeply about an election is contagious. Young people who watch us thinking deeply and talking freely about our opinions will be more likely to do the same. And they'll be more likely to vote now and in the future if they remember us faithfully trekking to the ballot box during primaries and elections.

Be web-savvy. More and more, teens are influenced by the viral power of the web. Through sites like YouTube, MTV Think, MySpace, and Facebook, they're inviting each other to join causes and catching fire about the issues.

But web-surfing's not just for teens, especially not this election. Geeks are jamming the web with tools to inform all of us about the candidates and their positions. Five websites in particular can help even the most undecided voter make a choice.

Expert Voter: Provides a handy-dandy one page matrix of clips with the candidates sharing views on Iraq, immigration, energy, nuclear proliferation, healthcare, education, social security, taxes, and campaign reform.

Fact Check: Monitors the truth of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases.

Match-O-Matic: Developed by ABC and USA Today, this interactive site quizzes you on your views to see how you match up on the hot issues with the candidates.

Ask Your Lawmaker: Users submit questions and vote on them, and then journalists track down lawmakers in Congress and on the campaign trail to get those questions answered.

Vote Smart: Volunteer citizens provide biographical information, voting records, issue positions, interest group ratings, public statements, and campaign finance information so you can find out who your candidates are really representing.

These are nonpartisan resources, and user-friendly for teens and adults alike. Why not send your teen a link or two to show off your cyber skills, as well as to demonstrate your desire to make informed decisions? Despite their technology addictions, teens are still open to adults who listen, care, can admit when they're wrong, and aren't afraid to take a stand.

The Politics Of Fashion

Everyone knows that clothes make the man. From the executive suits that litter Wall Street like the remnants of a ticker-tape parade to the coveralls and work boots worn by construction workers and mechanics, clothes tell the story of who we are and where we're going. Even when the workday is done, what we choose to wear on our own time is still a reflection of our personalities. From the sweat-suit to the wet-suit, our clothes are meant to be not only functional, but forthcoming as well. Clothes tell others what we like, and often, how we spend our time. Sports franchise logos are constantly on display on Main Street America. T-shirts with well known television, film and music icons can be seen almost anywhere. Clothes have something to say, and people are beginning to realize that the responsibility of being a walking billboard requires us to choose wisely.

Now, more than ever, politics are entering the realm of fashion. Blatantly political phrases and slogans are becoming more prevalent on the backs of the public than the bumpers of cars. There are even items of clothing that advertise specific candidates or political parties and were actually purchased by someone, somewhere (not obtained as a door prize at a party fundraiser). But what options exist for those who like a little subtlety with their agenda? Enter the merger of socially conscious art and clothing. Less politically charged and infinitely more fashionable, boutique clothiers have created garments that are the realization of the finite balance between the message and the medium. Using art as the instrument of exchange and clothing as the canvas, these pioneers of significancy are providing people with a method of expressing themselves both in figure and in fact. What better way for entrepreneurs to meet the demands of a public that is focused on reflecting a belief in both style and substance.

Power And Politics

Many of the leaders in our society are guided by unhealthy intentions. Instead of seeking to serve the people and heal our nation’s ills, their actions and decisions are primarily motivated by their desire for power. Many of the people running our country are run by their addictions to approval, sex, power and control. Unfortunately, few truly healthy individuals want to submit themselves to the necessary abuses inherent to our political races - the verbal abuse both given and received, the huge amounts of money spent, the integrity sacrificed through the concessions, lies and manipulations offered in order to win. Our system of electing our officials is so corrupt that there is little possibility of attracting a person with a strong, personally responsible, loving inner adult self. This is not to say that none of our elected representatives are honest and caring. Some are certainly motivated by positive intentions but, unfortunately, they constitute a minority.

There is no training required in personal responsibility to run for office. Our leaders are not required to heal their dysfunctional aspects in order to become honest and trustworthy people. The prerequisites for political positions mostly include having enough money, enough powerful people behind the scenes, being male, and being white.

Our political arena is designed to attract wounded people who need approval and power in order to feel worthy and validated. Obviously, such a person, with little or no internally derived sense of self-worth and integrity, is very susceptible to corruption. As the adage says: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Power corrupts when a person is motivated by his or her desire for power over others, and few people have accomplished enough inner healing to transcend the desire for control over others.

A healthy person in office who is more concerned with serving the people than with getting re-elected could accomplish a great deal. Such a person was depicted in the movie Dave. In this film the actual president is in a coma and the White House officials, seeking to conceal the truth from the public so they can maintain control, put a look-alike into the president’s seat. Dave, however, is a man of heart, and rather than allowing himself to be controlled he sets about making necessary changes - cutting money where it is not needed and allocating it into more crucial avenues, like child care and the creation of jobs. He even takes responsibility for the corruption of the actual president and gracefully "dies" as the actual president is dying so the vice-president, a man of great integrity who was maligned by the power structure, could take over in his rightful place. The movie is, of course, a fantasy. Sadly, we would never elect a man of such integrity - a straightforward, honest, caring, and financially middle-class man like Dave. Our election process does not allow for this.

Revamping our election process would give people like Dave an opportunity to run for office. We desperately need people who care more for the common good than for their own popularity. We need brilliant, creative, honest and caring people to lead our country, but this will never happen with our present election system. We have incredible talent in this great country of ours, talent that could eliminate hunger and homelessness, and heal the internal wounds that create health problems, drug abuse, racism, violence and crime. But this talent is rarely tapped because running our country has been based on the earthly values of greed and power over others rather than the spiritual values of honesty, compassion and caring.

Unfortunately, neither our government nor most big businesses are based on the spiritual principles of compassion and caring about the common good. I have no doubt that if our government was based on spiritual principles we would not have the hunger, homelessness, crime, health problems, and drug abuse that are endemic to our modern society.

The Politics Behind Olympics Games

Among the Greeks, fitness competitions and games were nationalistic in spirit; states were said to have been prouder of Olympic victories than of battles won. Women, foreigners, slaves, and dishonored persons were forbidden to compete. Contestants were required to train faithfully for 10 months before the games and had to take an oath that they had fulfilled the training requirements before participating. At first, the Olympic Games were confined to running, but over time new events were added. The winners of the Olympics were crowned with chaplets of wild olive, and in their home city-states male champions were also awarded valuable gifts and privileges.

As a visible focus of world energies, the Olympic Games have been prey to many factors that have thwarted their ideals of world co-operation and athletic excellence. Like in ancient Greece, nationalistic fervour has fostered intense rivalries that have at times threatened the survival of the games. Although officially only individuals are able to win Olympic medals, nations routinely assign political significance to the feats of their citizens and teams. For example, between 1952 and 1988 rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, rooted in mutual political antagonism, resulted in each boycotting games hosted by the other (Moscow, 1980; Los Angeles, 1984).

Politics has influenced the Olympic Games in other ways, from the propaganda of the Nazis in Berlin (1936) to pressures leading to the exclusion of white-ruled Rhodesia from the Munich games (1972). At Munich, nine Israeli athletes were kidnapped and murdered by Palestinian terrorists.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC), which sets and enforces Olympic policy, has struggled with the licensing and commercialisation of the games, the need to schedule events to accommodate television networks, and the monitoring of athletes who seek illegal competitive advantage, often through the use of performance-enhancing drugs. In 1998 a scandal erupted with revelations that bribery and favouritism had played a role in the awarding of the 2002 Winter Games to Salt Lake City, Utah, and in the selection of some earlier venues.

But, regardless of the Olympic Games tensions, it is historically proven that sports have acted as a liaison between nations and have greatly contributed to their evolution. Beginning with the sociological, psychological and physiological aspects of the human nature, sports have gained the praise of people worldwide, as they have contributed to their well being. Group-oriented, since in order to be a winner one has to compete, sport brings people closer together and generates team-spirit along with mind and physical awareness. But, whether or not the contemporary Olympic Games act as an opportunity for nations to learn from one another and cooperate or are just another opportunity for people to engage in competitive and hostile rivalries, only historians of the future will be able to judge with some certainty.

Surviving Corporate Politics

Opportunities Are Made, Not Created

In the business of corporate politics, one thing has become very clear: Most business decisions are grown from the grassroots level. Sure, it may all seem likes it’s coming from corporate HQ, with announcements and presentations that have their organisations in perpetual flux, but make no mistake about it, most of those decisions have been influenced by lobbyists in the lower levels. The bigger the organization, the harder it may be to see, but that does not make it any less relevant, only more difficult to find. Executives do not know enough about the true inner workings of a company to be able to form a strategic plan capable of reaching the lower levels of business. Executives rely heavily on input from ladder seekers within their own organisations on which they build their business cases.

How can the everyday negro (or lower level manager) take advantage? The easiest way is by following the old adage, “Necessity is the mother of invention”. I can’t tell you how many positions and even whole departments have been created based on creative folks jumping in to take on gapped responsibilities that other teams have shirked due to lack of funding or inadequate training. If managed properly, stepping up to meet corporate deficiencies can lead to influencing corporate decisions. How so? Advertising works! Never step up to addressing a problem without due recognition for it once it has been resolved. A great example would be to send out a broadcast email congratulating everyone for a great effort resolving the issue. Identify which actions were taken by what group, and what the resulting positive impacts where in terms of improved financial numbers, lowered costs of doing business and/or increased employee/customer satisfaction. Make sure to not only send this out to all the people within your organisation that were involved, but to their bosses as well. You would now have succeeded in improving your own image by enhancing those around you that is subtle enough to get score you points, and keeps folks happy about working with you at the same time.

Opportunities are easy to come by. They are stated at meetings, identified in corporate memo’s, or spoken about in various work related social gatherings. Follow up a complaint from a colleague with more questions as to the details of the issue. Find out their take on the source of the problem, who or what is the cause, and what measures they have implemented as a work around. History about the issue(s) can also be learned by asking casual questions as to how many other departments or customers are affected, and for how long, as well as finding out who has been implicated in the past. Take the information learned back into your own team and try and find solutions that are mutually advantageous. Some teams may feel like you are stepping into ‘their’ territory, but that can usually be countered with the simple argument that taking away problem issues will lead to improved efficiencies in their remaining tasks. You must always remain in partnership with the departments with which you are working. The business world has been getting smaller and smaller. Cases were Executives have lost and taken back over specific teams multiple times over the course of only a few years is becoming a common occurrence. If you try to start empire building, you had better succeed, otherwise you will be forever branded, and no one will help you. It is not a good deal in the long run. People used to be able to jump companies and start again, but acquisitions, take-overs and turn-over rates can put you back in reporting position to someone with which you are no longer are on good terms.

Most important of all, take the new Adidas motto, “Impossible is Nothing”. How many people believed the United States was unbreakable before September 11th? How many people believed the Red Sox would be forever cursed? How many people thought that Nortel would be a Blue Chip and not go into a sudden nose dive? Impossible simply means that a solution has not been successfully implemented yet. Use the resources at your disposal, be it colleagues, friends, web tools, whatever, and put together your plan in a way that will turn your boss’ head and earn his approval. If you know that your boss will not be receptive to your plans in advance, then plan for it it a non-confrontational way. Set up a meeting after you have gathered all your supporters. Try and get other people at his level that believe in the benefits of your objectives and get a meeting all together. Propose your plans in a team setting so that it does not just pit you against your boss.

Make it happen.

How can the everyday negro (or lower level manager) take advantage? The easiest way is by following the old adage, “Necessity is the mother of invention”. I can’t tell you how many positions and even whole departments have been created based on creative folks jumping in to take on gapped responsibilities that other teams have shirked due to lack of funding or inadequate training. If managed properly, stepping up to meet corporate deficiencies can lead to influencing corporate decisions. How so? Advertising works! Never step up to addressing a problem without due recognition for it once it has been resolved. A great example would be to send out a broadcast email congratulating everyone for a great effort resolving the issue. Identify which actions were taken by what group, and what the resulting positive impacts where in terms of improved financial numbers, lowered costs of doing business and/or increased employee/customer satisfaction. Make sure to not only send this out to all the people within your organisation that were involved, but to their bosses as well. You would now have succeeded in improving your own image by enhancing those around you that is subtle enough to get score you points, and keeps folks happy about working with you at the same time.

Opportunities are easy to come by. They are stated at meetings, identified in corporate memo’s, or spoken about in various work related social gatherings. Follow up a complaint from a colleague with more questions as to the details of the issue. Find out their take on the source of the problem, who or what is the cause, and what measures they have implemented as a work around. History about the issue(s) can also be learned by asking casual questions as to how many other departments or customers are affected, and for how long, as well as finding out who has been implicated in the past. Take the information learned back into your own team and try and find solutions that are mutually advantageous. Some teams may feel like you are stepping into ‘their’ territory, but that can usually be countered with the simple argument that taking away problem issues will lead to improved efficiencies in their remaining tasks. You must always remain in partnership with the departments with which you are working. The business world has been getting smaller and smaller. Cases were Executives have lost and taken back over specific teams multiple times over the course of only a few years is becoming a common occurrence. If you try to start empire building, you had better succeed, otherwise you will be forever branded, and no one will help you. It is not a good deal in the long run. People used to be able to jump companies and start again, but acquisitions, take-overs and turn-over rates can put you back in reporting position to someone with which you are no longer are on good terms.

Most important of all, take the new Adidas motto, “Impossible is Nothing”. How many people believed the United States was unbreakable before September 11th? How many people believed the Red Sox would be forever cursed? How many people thought that Nortel would be a Blue Chip and not go into a sudden nose dive? Impossible simply means that a solution has not been successfully implemented yet. Use the resources at your disposal, be it colleagues, friends, web tools, whatever, and put together your plan in a way that will turn your boss’ head and earn his approval. If you know that your boss will not be receptive to your plans in advance, then plan for it it a non-confrontational way. Set up a meeting after you have gathered all your supporters. Try and get other people at his level that believe in the benefits of your objectives and get a meeting all together. Propose your plans in a team setting so that it does not just pit you against your boss.

Politics Needs Enthusiasm, Not Power

We live in a day and age where doing what is right is no longer right. Politicians are now driven by popularity rather than compassion. It has led to a decline in political enthusiasm. Young people have no desire to vote, better yet pay attention to politics in the news.

Every time you near an election year you can taste the bitterness in the air. So where do we go from here? We must bring excitement back into the political arena. We must draw back the claws and move forward. The only way to do this is have love for politics. I see that in certain politicians (Notice I say certain and not most).

To harbor a love for politics is to devoted to those you serve. This is unlike the majority of politicians who aggressive, who are quick to point the finger, and who love power more than service. I believe we have found a politician who speaks his mind rather than does what is popular. We have found a politician who cares for his fellow mankind. We have found a politician who even when others are cautious about his desires still follows through to do what is right.

This politician of whom I speak is not hidden from the media. He is not living in small town America. He is not your neighbor who attends community meetings and PTO's. He is in fact the President of the United States. George Bush has done everything in his power to help those who need help. He has helped liberated more than fifty million people in Afghanistan and Iraq. He has passed the largest education AND medicare bill in our nation's history. This proves his compassion and loyalty to different ethnicities, children, and the elderly. We must unite in order to have this devotion in politics again.

Venezuela: Politics and History

Venezuela is situated in South America next to Colombia, Brazil and Guyana and was originally inhabited by Carib, Arawak and Chibcha peoples who farmed and hunted along the coast, the Andean mountain range and the Orinoco River. The first permanent Spanish settlement was established in 1522 and Venezuela became a Spanish colony until independence in 1811 as part of Gran Colombia, from which it later seceded.

Venezuela was governed by a series of military dictatorships until 1958 when Romulo Betancourt won the first democratic presidential election. The 1970s oil crisis brought windfall profits to Venezuela’s oil industry but created further social tensions due to unequal wealth distribution. Unrest grew during the 1980s, when oil prices fell and social programmes were cut, and resulted in an historic agreement between government, business and trades unions.

Further economic problems were exacerbated by an International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan and drastic austerity programme that led to riots, a general strike, martial law and many fatalities. Carlos Andres Perez was elected president in 1989 and survived two military coups in 1992, before being ousted and imprisoned seven years later for embezzlement and corruption.

In 1998 Hugo Chavez, who lead the first coup against Perez, was elected and introduced a new constitution. Hugo Chavez was re-elected in 2000 for a further six years, on a radical reform mandate covering the land and oil industries known as the Bolivarian revolution after the independence hero Simon Bolivar. Reforms in the oil industry prompted a national strike and management lockout in 2002 which led to a 48 hour military coup. A popular uprising followed and a referendum held in August 2004 returned a victory for Chavez and his reform programme.

The last election results returned a clear victory for the Fifth Republic Movement (MVR) headed by Hugo Chavez Frias who received 59% of the vote. The next presidential election is scheduled for 3 December 2006. Other influential political organisations include the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce (Federación de Cámaras y Asociaciones de Comercio y Producción de Venezuela) also known as Fedecámaras. This organisation represents the interests of twelve industry sectors: banking, agriculture, commerce, construction, energy, manufacturing, media, mining, ranching, insurance, transportation and tourism.

Fedecámaras sets wages and working conditions within these sectors and enforces these through management strikes and lock outs. It was heavily involved in the failed coup attempt in 2002 and its leader, Pedro Carmona, briefly assumed the presidency before seeking sanctuary in Colombia. In 2002 the president appointed a new Board of Directors at Petroleos de Venezuela, the national oil company. This move was deeply unpopular with oil company executives, right wing media interests, the Fedecámaras business group, and opposition trade unions.

A national strike and lockout was called which lasted nine weeks. The military leadership sided with the strikers and took the president into military custody. However, Hugo Chavez resumed his presidency when the interim dictatorship collapsed after two days. Amidst a background of growing popular opposition to the forces attempting to depose the president, the Organisation of American States (OAS) brokered a deal with the government and opposition forces to hold a referendum on the continuation of the presidency. Millions signed two petitions demanding that the referendum be held, and finally the interim government agreed.

Finally in August 2004 the referendum was called to decide whether Hugo Chavez should continue his presidency or leave office immediately. The result was 58% in support of the president, 42% against. This represented a convincing public endorsement of the reform programme and five months later Hugo Chavez signed a land decree intended to break up large estates and redistribute them to the landless. Support for the reform programme translated into electoral success in 2005, and a boycott of the elections by opposition groups led to a national assembly filled with Chavez supporters.

The Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (Confederación de Trabajadores de Venezuela) (CTV) and National Workers' Union of Venezuela (Unión Nacional de Trabajadores de Venezuela) (UNT) are the two main rival trade union federations. Historically, CTV actively fought against military coups and represented a symbol of democracy. However it has become increasingly dominated by members supportive of Democratic Action (AD) and sympathetic to the interests of the oil industry and the media.

CTV called the general strike in April 2002 in protest against the president and in collaboration with the lock out organised by Fedecámaras. Subsequently many trade unions broke away from CTV and set up UNT. This new federation supports the reform programme and leadership style of the president.

Venezuelan society remains deeply divided on the reform agenda and further non democratic attempts to depose the president are possible. Powerful domestic and foreign interests are deeply opposed to the reform programme and supporters will need to see real results in alleviating poverty and inequality in Venezuela if they are to continue voting for Hugo Chavez and MVR. In the meantime oil revenues are being used to finance domestic social programmes aimed at poverty reduction and foreign policy initiatives.

Burgers, Fries and Ignorant Politics

Burgers, Fries and Ignorant Politics: Does Democracy Need an Overhaul?
America has become a confusing place for many people who are trying to decipher through the mess of politics that is inherent in a huge country that touts democracy. The Critical Review’s (No. 1 Vol. 19) article Ignorance as a Starting Point: From Modest Epistemology to Realistic Political Theory states that a new elitist political paternalism may be necessary to counter the general ignorance of the population. In other words, brighter minds need to make decisions for people.

The concept of political elite makes some sense but in reality this is already the case. We have in the U.S. a pseudo-democracy in the sense that all of the candidates are known but few, except the elite, know what the candidates stand for. Democracy, in its early American terms, meant that politics was done on a local basis. People knew who the runners were, shook their hands, asked them questions, etc… This is one of the reasons why many politicians still travel the country.

At one time in history it meant something to be part of a party. However, as these parties matured (Democrats & Republicans) the lines of difference in their ideologies have changed. People seem to float near the center and it is almost impossible to determine their party simply based on the way they vote. Some are liberal and some are conservative but parties have become only a path to politics; not an ideological difference.

The fact that candidates and parties have become confusing, the average person has become confused as to what the issues really are. For example, people might not know what all of the candidates stand for and may possibly vote on race issues, locality, and appearance instead of actual political ideology. In other words, issues of importance are no longer the issues of politics.

When people are faced with making a decision without adequate information or with confusing information they will choose what they know. If someone appears to be honest or they speak in a tone or manner that makes sense then they will vote for that candidate. In some cases people will simply vote for a candidate because they remember their name. This means the process is breaking down.

Currently, the country is run by political elites. This is the group of people who have the highest level of income and education. They are the ones that contribute to campaigns, read their newspaper on a regular basis, and view politics as a method of maintaining wealth. For example, the Israeli lobby as the countries largest lobby even though it is a foreign entity. Where are the domestic issues in relation to this issue?

Thus, the article Ignorance as a Starting Point: From Modest Epistemology to Realistic Political Theory premises that a paternalistic political elite need to be developed in order to steer people into the right candidates is already in existence. It isn’t a formal method or system as outlined in the system but that those who control the labor control the country. The farther you move up the wealthy scale the tighter knit the group.

America's Economy and Politics

Introduction

Religion is a persons believe or faith, regarding to the existence and divinity of God or gods. There are several different religions practiced in the Unites States of which the majority consists of Christians, with a minority of Jews, Buddhists, Atheists and Muslims.

How is Politics Affected

According to the first amendments of the U.S constitution, the establishment of religion by the government is restricted and it also constitutes religious freedom for practices and rituals. The reason for that is basically the issue of human rights, and the freedom and democracy that America is proud of.

The question is that how does religion which is completely separate from the government and politics affect the way of politics as well as the economy?

In America the people are the ones that supposedly control the fate of the country, and they are the ones that elect the government and it has been seen for the past two elections that the Republicans who support the interests of the religious individuals and cater to the needs of the people who think that practices such as gay marriage and abortion should be abolished. It has been argued that these are the factors that are the reasons for election and re-election of the republican candidates. The first and most crucial political effect that can be said to be related to religion is the selection of the government that runs America.

Effects on Economy

Secondly religious issues such as the abolition of abortion and the local laws such as the prohibition of selling alcoholic beverages on Sundays which are "religious" days effects the economy on the micro level by decreasing the amount of business that people make, definitely the sales of a bar will be decreased if it is prohibited to sell its products on one day out of seven.

On the other hand religious issues can be a cause of protest which might cost the government especially if the time of the government officials is taken as a valued entity, as at least for the time being the attention of the officials will be diverted to solving that issue. Also religious factors and issues might need amendments to the constitution, which might affect the economy of the country on the Marco level.

This might also be viewed in a positive ways as some issues might contribute to the economy.

Conclusion

Every body has some beliefs and all follow a certain religion, if Atheism is also considered a religion, people make the country and thus the behavior of people need to be catered at least in a democratic country such as America. This could be used as positive which might be called "politics", but this does not mean religious issues cannot damage the country as a whole. In conclusion religion and politics cannot be separated.