Empathize vs. Sympathize

Empathize vs. Sympathize Empathize vs. Sympathize Empathize vs. Sympathize By Maeve Maddox A reader says, Ive always been confused on how to use [the words empathize and sympathize] in proper context. For about 300 years, English speakers didn’t have to choose between sympathize and empathize to express the idea of sharing another’s feelings. Empathize hadn’t been invented yet. The first OED example of sympathize in the sense of â€Å"to share the feelings of another† is dated 1607; the first use of empathize with this meaning dates from 1916.    However, the noun empathy was introduced in 1895 by a psychologist to describe â€Å"a physical property of the nervous system analogous to electrical capacitance, believed to be correlated with feeling.† This definition of empathy did not survive, but the word has found a lasting place in the vocabulary of psychology as the English equivalent of German Einfà ¼hlung: â€Å"sympathetic understanding.† This kind of empathy is â€Å"the ability to understand and appreciate another person’s feelings and experience.† Before the psychological term empathize entered the general vocabulary, speakers did just fine with sympathize when they wished to speak of feeling the joy or pain of others. Now that we have a second word for the same concept, empathize has come to denote a stronger, more personal sense of fellow feeling than sympathize. For example, I may sympathize with the fire victim who has lost her home and all of her possessions, but I cannot empathize with her because, mercifully, I have not experienced that trauma in my own life. On the other hand, because I had to spend a day and a night in a Red Cross emergency shelter during an ice storm, I can empathize with people who must live in shelters for extended periods. The great gift of literature is that it enables readers to empathize with a wide variety of fellow creatures. They don’t even have to be human. When I read Black Beauty, I empathized with a horse. Sympathy and empathy are equally beautiful human characteristics. Sympathize is appropriate in most contexts. Empathizeis best suited to situations that you have experienced yourself, either in the real world or through the power of literature. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Misused Words category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Punctuating â€Å"So† at the Beginning of a SentenceAmong vs. AmongstProverb vs. Adage

Questions Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 12

Questions - Essay Example In the end, the author has provided a plan of actions to overcome the problems. Moreover, the author has given some suggestions to make young people aware of the importance of nursing profession, as well as to encourage them to join this profession. Considering the nature of the second and the third essay, I feel that opening and closing were appropriate because letters and memos do not need anything in the opening and closing paragraphs other than the original motive. I do not see any issue regarding cohesive devises in the essays as all of them have been written professionally. The only issue that I have observed is regarding third essay in which ‘I’d’ could have been replaced by ‘I would’. For example, ‘Division for six years, I’d like to propose†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ could have been replaced by ‘Division for six years, I would like to propose†¦Ã¢â‚¬â„¢. Every other thing, such as, connective words, transitional sentences, and paragraphs seem to be

Credit Cards - Phase 2 - ip Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Credit Cards - Phase 2 - ip - Essay Example While we know that you have now become a responsible adult, I would nevertheless, like to tell you something about the most crucial factor of one’s life. The management of money, especially the use of credit card is an important aspect of life and becomes all the more critical for the freshman because they not only need to know the advantages of the credit cards but also the pitfalls of its mismanagement. This is the one type of paper currency that gives you instant access to goods and services without actually having it in hard cash so it is easy to forget the value of money. Judicious use of money and credit cards shows responsible behavior and inculcates habits that would never let you fail in life. As you know, the credit cards have great advantages. One of the most important is that it helps you to meet emergency situations with ease and confidence. You do not have to carry large amount of cash while on traveling or shopping. They make it easy to buy goods and protect your purchases in case of theft or loss thus considerably increasing your purchasing power. Sometimes, credit card purchases may also give additional benefits of extra discounts. But the most important advantage of credit card is that they help you to establish credibility in the market which you would be a huge help when you require money for important matters of your life. Good credit card credibility is a great asset for securing loans from financial institutes, facilitates rental application and sometimes even jobs. You can acquire good credit history by making prompt payments of all your bills without resorting to part or installment based scheme of payment schedules. The biggest pitfall of credit cards is that it gives you indiscriminate power of spending and encourages people to spend money that one does not possess! This often leads to debts that keep accruing because as a

Speech Outline Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Speech Outline - Essay Example A. Main point 1: I was confronted with the reality of the tough economic conditions that were unfortunately vital form my survival. 1. Subordinate point: In order to survive in college, every student needs sufficient tuition fees, accommodation funds and upkeep money. a) Support: However, the cost of these three things doesn’t come cheap. My humble family background did not guarantee me sufficient funds to keep up. (Transition: All of a sudden I was forced to rethink my education priority and evaluate adaptive solutions that would help me survive the tough campus life.) B. Main Point 2: It was time for me to undertake a significant course of action that would not undermine my education objective but rather supplement it. 1. Subordinate point: I chose to undertake a part time job after study hours. a) Support: I figured out that the part-time job was necessary in boosting my financial obligations in college. 2. Subordinate point: I equally decided to increase my private study time during the weekends after works. a) Support: This was in account of the fact that I had to recover the private study hours lost at work over the week. (Transition: With time, I grew increasingly appreciative of money and was at times tempted to abandon my studies and join the labour force. However, I came to realise that both employment and education were independent of each other.)

Applying Political Theories to US Politics

Applying Political Theories to US Politics Collin Laguzza Dr. Jividen Tocqueville argued that Puritanism was almost as much a political theory as a religious doctrine. Puritan’s were influenced by Christianity and deeply applied that to their life style. Their main beliefs were based on the justice and perseverance of God. Since the Puritans believed in God’s grace and salvation, they were also led to self-government. The main element of their life style was based on the approach of the covenant where all relationships within the Puritans were established under the terms of a covenant. A political theory values justice and power and the Puritans justice and power were based on God. This is why Tocqueville claims that Puritan politics and their religious beliefs intertwine. Tocqueville and Locke suggest that there is an important distinction between liberty and license. Liberty is having freedom within the laws of nature but also recognizes consequences. License is the freedom to do as you please. This is where the distinction between liberty and license is argued. This is because one doesn’t have the right to kill oneself or another. Therefore, one must preserve themselves and mankind. However, the contradiction mostly lies in where the boundaries lie of having the right to enforce natural law against those who violate their rights, and the punishments of their violators. Locke expresses that the State of Nature is not a State of License. Overall, law provides freedom to do as what one wants. However, one’s freedom lies within the boundaries of that law. Tocqueville argues that America was able to combine the spirit of two things thought to be in perpetual tension. These two things are religion and liberty. Tocqueville expresses that religion is responsible for human capability while liberty perceives religion and most importantly the security of laws. These work together because liberty pertains to the freedom of one and their choice of beliefs. This results in every individual to have their own distinctive beliefs without violating law and secures their equality. Locke’s definition of political power is: The right to make laws for protection and regulation of property. In my understanding, Locke feels as if laws only work because they are accepted by people and have a positive effect on the public. In the State of nature, an individual claims his private property that was something that was originally held common when that individual uses his or her own labor to come into possession of something. Locke states that one can only accommodate as many things that are in reasonable use. Land has become scarce because nature offers necessities and the more mankind can make use of it, less land will be available. Locke believes that war is caused when one human’s action makes a menace attempt towards another human. In the State of Nature, there are certain inconveniences. The State of Nature grants the right to punish any violator. To solve inconveniences within the State of Nature, Locke answers by anticipating a right of revolution. This grants the people the right to change or over throw government if the government fails to protect natural rights of the people. The majority of the people decide whether the government is protecting the rights of the people. Rights are unalienable when they cannot be taken away. All humans possess unalienable rights at birth. These rights cannot be given to another being, or surrendered with the exception of the holder of those rights. According the John Adams, tyrants sought to discourage the people from learning. They did by ordering the people to do simply do as they say because the tyrants oppressed the people. In my opinion, general enlightenment is crucial to free government because each individual should have knowledge of their government and what laws they are to abide by. According to Hamilton, morality is sown into human nature. He expresses that their maker, gives them reason to acquire the natural rights that are built into their nature. Hamilton explains his difference of the State of Nature with Thomas Hobbes’ State of Nature is that humans are born with rights, whereas Hobbes argues that humans are given rights until they are born within a formed government. Hobbes states that morality bonds with politics and that our moral actions are only performed for our survival knowing that a government can punish us for violating such laws. James Otis claims that sovereignty is ultimately derived from the people. His statement of â€Å" the government is founded on the necessity of our natures,† means that our government was formed to allow humans to freely think, feel, or act naturally and independently. This also means that the government is to protect natural rights in order to maintain equality amongst the people. According to the Declaration of Independence, the statement â€Å" all men are created equal,† means that human being are all born and will remain equal in the eyes of law. Governments are instituted among men to secure natural rights and whenever government does not secure the peoples natural rights, the people have the right to alter government and develop a new government. Essay A. 625 words Traditional American politics suggest that man is endowed at birth with inalienable rights. The origin of inalienable rights influenced America’s founding fathers who sought to protect people from conflict by providing law and order. These rights are incapable of being taking away or given up. The government of the United States was founded on the principle of that all human beings are naturally and equally endowed with inalienable rights. Inalienable rights have impacted several aspects of America’s government which originated from several enlightenment thinkers. John Locke, an English Philosopher, argued that rights are given to man that cannot be taken or given away. These rights are known as natural rights. The formulations of these rights are life, liberty, and property. In his book Two Treatise of Government, Locke intertwines the idea of natural law, equality, and the state of nature. Natural law holds humans subject to morality. Morality is essentially human’s duty to abide to natural laws. Mankind’s right is basically moral fact leading to the sole purpose of government. That is to safeguard the rights of mankind. Locke highlights the state of nature, claiming that men are free, equal, and at liberty to do what they want. However, mankind’s action’s must be done within the boundaries of the law of nature. This supports that natural equality of inalienable rights serve as the moral and theoretical basis of government by consent of the governed. Since humanity acquires natural and unalienable rights at birth, humankind must enter a society that accepts those rights, and protects them. Before government is formed, man lives in a state of nature. In this state of nature, man is guided by God’s intentions of the laws of nature. Locke’s Second Treatise of Government highlights the importance of equality in which forms from the state of nature. Man is free and equal according to the state of nature. Locke feels that man will be assured that he is free and equal when he enters a society making equality the driving force of Locke’s political argument. Equality is key to the establishment of government as long as government holds responsibility of maintaining a safe and stable society that protects natural rights. Man is born free but gives up some freedom in order to establish government to maintain social order. Thomas Jefferson stated that unalienable rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Locke highly influenced Jefferson as Jefferson used Locke’ s concepts of how rulers only rule through the consent of the governed. This mirrors Locke’s political documents. Locke’s works however, had some inconveniences. If the government violates the people’s rights of life, liberty and property, then then people have the right to alter or abolish their government and create a new one that suits their needs. For example, a government may grow tyrannical and no longer represents the people taking away their freedom and rights. In solution, Locke claims that the people have the right to dissent against government. Natural equality and inalienable rights also serve as the basis of limited government. Limited government is based on consent where the people’s rights may not be violated. Locke thought that this proper role of government would allow humanity to blossom because of their God given ability of reason. Overall, government solely exists for the people’s well being. If a government fails to protect rights, then the people have the right to over throw and replace. Governments are only factors that contribute to humanities morality. Because of humankind’s morality, human beings are naturally and equality endowed with inalienable rights that have influenced America’s way of government. John Locke and Thomas Jefferson were two men who sought to create leadership that worked with the people, not an individual who had total control of the people. Essay B. 279 Puritanism is felt across American because the Puritans were the first settlers who spread their ideas and values throughout the land. Alex de Tocqueville considered the Puritans as America’s founders. This is because of their influence on America’s character. John Adams also supports that the Puritans had great contribution to the development of America. The Puritans settled in American and where English protestants who became unhappy with the church of England. They felt as if to much power rested with priests, bishops, and cardinals who were the highest officials in the church. The Puritans stressed Bible readings and wanted religious community members to be directly involved with church. According to Tocqueville and Adams, the Puritan value affected American society in a positive way. They developed the concept of limited government as they believed that no single person or group of people should be trusted to run the government. They had a highly emphasized education which led to American school systems and we have also adopted their ethics of honesty, and work. I agree with Tocqueville and Adams who state that the Puritans were the stepping stoles of American democracy. The fact that the Puritans believed that government should be limited and not ran by a single individual reflects in several enlightenment thinkers whose works h ave highly influenced our government. For example, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Deceleration of Independence using John Locke’s philosophy. Without the Puritans, American Democracy could be altered in several ways. The Puritans are important in the development of American democracy because they have instilled many features upon our government. Culturally they have influenced self-reliance and a strong emphasis on education.

The Ecstasy Debate: Weighing The Good And The Bad :: Biology Essays Research Papers

The Ecstasy Debate: Weighing The Good And The Bad Ever since its first synthesis 80 years ago, the seemingly harmless nature of the drug ecstasy has been the subject of much debate. While many scientists are convinced that there is a darker side to the euphoria-inducing pill than meets the eye, the millions of users insist that no such danger exists. In fact, while I conducted my research on the subject, I discovered that to some extent, the users' concept is true - ecstasy does seem to be far less harmful than any of the other popularized drugs of the century. But why, then, in 1985 was this limitlessly pleasurable drug outlawed (1), with such a weak case against it? Is the scientific world's overly cautious attitude preventing us from experiencing a limitless pleasure unlike anything we have ever known? These were the questions I sought to have answered. 3,4 - Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, or MDMA as it has come to be called, is a psychoactive drug with a chemical structure similar to the stimulant methamphetamine and the hallucinogen mescaline, and demonstrates both psychedelic and stimulant effects (3). It was first synthesized by a German company in 1912 to be used to help develop more advanced therapeutic drugs (1). In the 1970s, MDMA was used to facilitate psychotherapy by a group of therapists in the United States (5). Not until the 1980s and early 1990s did the drug gain worldwide popularity as the illicit "ecstasy" (5), the drug that would eventually stir a wave of excitement among young people everywhere. Ecstasy use, which saw its roots in the hippie generation of the 1970s, has since grown exponentially. Ecstasy tablets confiscated by the Drug Enforcement Administration increased from 13,342 in 1996 to 950,000 in 2000 (4). According to a study conducted by the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research in 1998, 4.3 percent of 8th graders, 7.3 percent of 10th graders, and 11 percent of 12th graders reported they had used MDMA at some point (4). However, by far the age group with the heaviest use (1.4 million Americans) of the drug was reported for those between 18 and 25 years of age (4). So much ecstasy is entering our country at present that the Customs Service has developed an ecstasy command center and is training dogs to sniff out the drug (2). What is it that lures so many people to "experiment" with ecstasy and tantalizes them to want more?

About role of the United Nations in the changing World Essay

Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations†. Those are words from Preamble of Charter of the United Nations. The Charter of the United Nations was signed on 26 June 1945, in San Francisco, at the conclusion of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, and came into existence on 24 October 1945. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the Charter. The day is now celebrated each year around the world as United Nations Day. The purpose of the United Nations is to bring all nations of the world together to work for peace and development, based on the principles of justice, human dignity and the well-being of all people. It affords the opportunity for countries to balance global interdependence and national interests when addressing international problems. There are currently 191 Members of the United Nations. See more: Satirical essay about drugs They meet in the General Assembly, which is the closest thing to a world parliament. Each country, large or small, rich or poor, has a single vote; however, none of the decisions taken by the Assembly are binding. Nevertheless, the Assembly’s decisions become resolutions that carry the weight of world government opinion. The United Nations Headquarters is in New York City but the land and buildings are international territory. The United Nations has its own flag, its own post office and its own postage stamps. Six official languages are used at the United Nations – Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The UN European Headquarters is in the Palais des Nations, Geneva, Switzerland. It has offices in Vienna, Austria and Economic Commissions in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia, Amman in Jordan, Bangkok in Thailand and Santiago in Chile. The senior officer of the United Nations Secretariat is the Secretary-General. The Aims of the United Nations: *To keep peace throughout the world. *To develop friendly relations between nations. *To work together to help people live better lives. * to eliminate poverty, disease and illiteracy in the world. * to stop environmental destruction. * to encourage respect for each other’s rights and freedoms. *To be a centre for helping nations achieve these aims. The Principles of the United Nations: *All Member States have sovereign equality. *All Member States must obey the Charter. *Countries must try to settle their differences by peaceful means. *Countries must avoid using force or threatening to use force. *The UN may not interfere in the domestic affairs of any country. All countries should try to assist the United Nations. Now some information about the UN system: The basic structure of the United Nations is outlined in an organizational chart. What the structure does not show is that decision-making within the UN system is not as easy as in many other organizations. The UN is not an independent, homogeneous organization; it is made up of states, so actions by the UN depend on the will of Member States, to accept, fund or carry them out. Especially in matters of peace-keeping and international politics, it requires a complex, often slow, process of consensus-building that must take into account national sovereignty as well as global needs. The Specialized Agencies, while part of the UN system, are separate, autonomous intergovernmental organizations which work with the UN and with each other. The agencies carry out work relating to specific fields such as trade, communications, air and maritime transport, agriculture and development. Although they have more autonomy, their work within a country or between countries is always carried out in partnership with those countries. They also depend on funds from Member States to achieve their goals. Recently, international conferences organized by the UN have gained significance. UN conferences have been held since the 1960s, but with the Conference on Environment and Development, known as the Earth Summit, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992, they turned into real fora for deciding on national and international policy regarding issues that affect everyone such as the environment, human rights and economic development. Since the Earth Summit, UN conferences have turned into forums in which non-governmental organizations (NGOs) can voice their concerns alongside those of governments. Such conferences focus world attention on these issues and place them squarely on the global agenda. Yet, once the international agreements produced by these conferences are signed, it is still up to each individual country to carry them out. With the moral weight of international conferences and the pressures of media and NGOs, Member States are more likely to endorse the agreements and put them into effect. I also would like to ad some basic information about structure and budget, to make brief of UN more visible. The six principal organs of the United Nations are the: General Assembly, Security Council, Economic and Social Council, Trusteeship Council, International Court of Justice and Secretariat. The United Nations family, however, is much larger, encompassing 15 agencies and several programmes and bodies. When it comes to a budget, the budget for the two years 2000-2001 was $2,535 million. The main source of funds is the contributions of Member States, which are assessed on a scale approved by the General Assembly. The fundamental criterion on which the scale of assessments is based is the capacity of  countries to pay. This is determined by considering their relative shares of total gross national product, adjusted to take into account a number of factors, including their per capita incomes. In addition, countries are assessed for the costs of peacekeeping operations. What is the role of the UN nations in the changing World? I already gave some simply answers at the beginning of this assignment. I will try to answer this question in depth in the following part of my work. The UN has been effective, even indispensable, in post-conflict development in Mozambique, Guatemala, Afghanistan, the Balkans and elsewhere. It also has guided and monitored political change (democracy and governance) in Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor and Georgia. The UN has been involved in the conflict in Abkhazia since Georgian forces stormed the Abkhaz parliament in Sukhumi in August 1992, triggering a war that remains unresolved today. In 1993, the UN and the CSCE (Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe) agreed that the international lead on the conflict in Abkhazia should be taken by the UN. In the same year the UN, faced with urgent requests from the government of Georgia to deploy a peacekeeping force to Abkhazia, decided to establish an observer mission for Georgia (UNOMIG) to monitor implementation of the July ceasefire agreement between the two sides which had been mediated and guaranteed by the Russian Federation. The decision to send an observer force rather than a fully fledged peacekeeping force reflected the desire of the Russian Federation to take the lead in the management of conflict in the ‘former Soviet space’, and the unwillingness of the other permanent members of the Security Council to challenge Russian prerogatives. There was also a general concern that the peacekeeping apparatus of the UN was overloaded, and disagreement among the parties as to what the mandate of a more substantial force would be. The UN Secretary-General also designated Swiss diplomat Eduard Brunner as Special Envoy for the conflict. He served until 1997 when Liviu Bota, a Romanian diplomat, was appointed Special Representative (SRSG) for the Abkhaz conflict. Both were responsible for the mediation of a process of negotiation leading to a political settlement of  the conflict. Bota has had a more or less permanent presence in the conflict zone, whereas Brunner was only delegated to visit intermittently. Russia’s special status in this process was recognized in its designation as ‘facilitator’ of the talks. In the early years of negotiation matters were not helped by the passive attitude taken by the Special Envoy to mediation of the conflict. The UN’s failure to take a more engaged approach was one factor among several contributing to the obvious lack of movement towards a political settlement in 1994-96. The fact that the more proactive approach adopted by Liviu Bota has also not produced a settlement would suggest, however, that the extent of UN activism is not the determining factor in conflict resolution. While the first personnel of UNOMIG were being deployed, the ceasefire collapsed and hostilities resumed. The UN Security Council condemned the renewal of conflict and associated displacement of population and demanded that the parties cease fighting. They also decided to extend the mandate of UNOMIG pending clarification of the situation. Traditionally, the UN has had a similar approach to its work since its conception in 1947. Gradually it became more and more involved; adding different organelles, agencies, and addressing more issues that weren’t necessarily new as it grew in size and scope. The International Court of Justice, the Economic and Social Council, and agencies like the International Maritime Organization were created to solve problems in these areas. It grew out of the General Assembly and the Security Council; to an organization with thousands of employees worldwide doing hundreds of completely different things. To put it simply, and to generalize, it has gotten bigger, and more involved. The Secretary General NOW has the ability to change the way a leader runs his country, make two warring countries sign a peace treaty, and even route money through areas in the world that would have never gotten any before. The Secretary has assumed power or the power of influence, he or she does not have any written or given power, Still however, this clearly shows how much more the UN has gotten involved and grown, even more like the feared â€Å"world government† that it vows to never become. It is a little misleading to speak of the role of the UN. The UN is nearly  powerless as an abstract entity or even as a representative of the world’s nations. It can act, instead, only insofar as it is given authorization by the great powers, which means primarily the United States. The UN has no standing peacekeeping force and thus is dependent on finding countries willing to contribute troops for any particular mission. The organization suffers as well from an extreme shortage of funds because of the continual U.S. refusal to pay its dues. Any peacekeepers sent to East Timor will probably not be a UN force because the U.S. Congress has required that there be a 15-day delay before the U.S. government can approve any UN peacekeeping operation and has forbidden Washington from paying its authorized share of the costs of any such operation. U.S. influence is greatest in the Security Council, but some organs of the UN, such as the General Assembly or bodies dealing with economic and social issues have had a Third World majority ever since the era of decolonization. Accordingly, U.S. policy has been to undermine and marginalize the UN. The United Nations should have an important role in world affairs, but U.S. policy and the policies of other leading states, severely limit the international organization. From the point of view of U.S. policymakers, however, there is one crucial role played by the UN: it serves as a convenient scapegoat when something goes wrong. For example, the current catastrophe in East Timor is directly attributable to the refusal of the United States and other Western powers to deter the atrocities there over a period of a quarter century, yet the UN will probably take the blame. So as we can see, we can look for the subject of my assignment from the different point of view. Another UN’s role: The Asian crisis, has become a global crisis, was by no means a purely financial matter. It had disastrous consequences for millions of people in their everyday lives. Moreover, it was the poor who are hardest hit. In Indonesia, almost 15,000 workers lost their jobs in 1998. And poverty came with its usual sorry retinue: hunger, social unrest, violence, abuse of human rights. The least developed countries, the ones least able to influence world priorities and policies, were penalized. So the human dimension was at the heart of the response (including debt relief)to this  first major crisis of globalization. Of course, the role of the seven major industrial powers, and of the world’s finance ministers and central bankers, remained crucial. But they could not undertake this task alone. All parts of the international system came together. President Clinton has suggested wide-ranging discussions on the new world â€Å"financial architecture.† Some would say that this was none of the U.N.’s business. There are other international bodies, more specialized and perhaps more competent to deal with economic problems: the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization, the Bank for International Settlements. But the U.N. is the one truly global institution we all belong to. It must have a seat at the table. Economic and financial strategies will succeed only if they are applied within a clear political framework. That framework will command much wider support if, through the U.N., all affected countries have played a part in working it out. Over the long term, globalization will be positive. It draws us closer together and enables us to produce more efficiently, to control our environment, to improve our quality of life. But such benefits are not felt equally by all. For many people, â€Å"long term† is too far off to be meaningful. Millions on this planet still live in isolation, on the margins of the world economy. Millions more are experiencing globalization not as a great new opportunity but as a profoundly disruptive force that attacks both their material living standards and their culture. Some of those who had benefited most from open markets and capital flows were feeling the greatest pain. The temptation to retreat into nationalism or populism is strong. But, fortunately, in most developing countries, those false solutions are being rejected. Each country’s crisis has its own local features and causes. Each country has to address its own specific problems and shortcomings. But many countries need help, for these are not just financial or macro-economic problems. They have grave social and political consequences, and some of their causes are to be found in political and social systems. The U.N. has a responsibility, as the universal institution, to insist on the need for worldwide solutions based on rules that are fair to all. It is the UN job to ensure that nations do not react to crisis by turning their backs on universal values. In such crises, the UN must come together to find solutions based on the founding  principles which all their member states have in common: those of the U.N. Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In particular, the UN has a special responsibility to speak up for the victims or potential victims. The UN cannot forget the countries in Africa and elsewhere whose debt burdens the crisis has made even more unsustainable. Debt relief is often resisted on grounds of â€Å"moral hazard,† that it rewards the reckless and penalizes the prudent. But were not the lenders often just as reckless and irresponsible as the borrowers? Can it really be moral for them to insist on full interest and full repayment if the result is that children not yet born when the debts were contracted are denied even a subsistence diet or an elementary education? Many nations feel their interests are ignored or neglected in specialized economic bodies, where the strongest voices, for quite understandable reasons, tend to be those of countries which have already achieved economic success. But the U.N. provides a forum for informed debate among all those affected by the crisis. It has to represent all stakeholders in the global economy. The U.N. must play its part in the search for solutions that preserve the benefits of globalization while protecting those who have suffered or who have been left out. UN has kept women’s issues and interests on the agenda of change when they risked being set aside for a â€Å"later† that would never come in Afghanistan, Kosovo and East Timor. It has protected children in conflict and in post-conflict stress. The UN is bringing justice post-conflict to the repressed through ICTY (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia), ICTR (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda), and the nascent Sierra Leone court. In each case, the role and the centrality of the UN have been different. The United Nations is an organization that has always been based on respect for nation’s sovereignties, peace, and judicial cooperation regarding topics which are salient to the current time period. As the entire world moves further into the â€Å"technological age†, and with the turn of the century coming (which is really only symbolic of a new era), new issues are bound to develop. The world will gradually change, and the UN ne eds to address these needs by evaluating its current state along with what it can do to change for the better. The increasingly global economy, the European Community, and the development of the sagging Asian market (with  the rest of the world in a recession also) show action needs to be taken economically. Hostility remains in the Middle East, human rights are being violated every day around the globe, and people everywhere are disgruntled with their current governmental situation. How will the UN curb nuclear terrorism, help the homeless and uneducated, and still maintain and outside role in political matters? Or should they maintain an outside role? These are merely a few of the hundreds of issues addressing the world today, and the UN must prepare for the coming decade with open minded foresight. As Secretary General Kofi A. Annan said, every conflict is different, every post-conflict is different, and each model of intervention by the international community is different. In Iraq, we have an immediate post-conflict humanitarian and reconstruction challenge in front of us. It is in eve ryone’s interests, especially in the Iraqi people’s interest, to ensure that Iraq becomes an economically functional, politically stable and self-governing state that is respectful of the rule of law, of democratic principles and of international norms. The coalition nations currently controlling Iraqi territory have distinct responsibilities as occupying powers to maintain public order and safety, to protect civilians and to provide essential services. The wider international community, especially the United Nations, also have indispensable roles to play. While systems are in place for humanitarian assistance, a framework is needed to facilitate greater engagement and support in the stabilization and reconstruction of Iraq. The United Nations has extensive expertise that can and should be brought to bear. The UN and its agencies have been heavily involved in Iraq since the first Gulf War, and have an in-depth understanding of the circumstances, and the challenges. The UN is fully engaged through its agencies and has resources on the ground in Iraq, providing much-needed assistance to the Iraqi people. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), The United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the WFP (World Food Programme)- they all know Iraq. Countries need to build on the strength of the engagement of these and other UN agencies in Iraq, and determine how best they can make further use of this experience and expertise. In Iraq, as in all post-conflict situations, common over-arching goals must be to meet the needs of the people, and to support them in their course towards stability, recovery and reconstruction. After Kosovo, many thought NATO would become let say â€Å"Globocop† that the G-8 would supplant the Security Council, that the UN would be sidelined. But, in fact, the UN picked up the pieces in Kosovo, mandated the intervention in East Timor and has helped Afghanistan put itself back together. What about issues that should to be addressed in a Resolution? As for what should be addressed, there almost are more topics than one is able to think about. Should there be more staff running relief efforts in Zaire? Is the International Court of Justice really necessary, or is it wasting money and time that could be spent on other things. Analyzing this, you could say that since nations only sue each other, and no real action is taken, and the courts have no real power to enforce anything, what is the use? Possibly the funding used for this could go towards building schools in Africa. This may seem fairly ludicrous, but one needs to have the foresight to see these things, and there i s only a certain amount of money around for things like this. Possibly the UN relief troops should be allowed to use loaded weapons and fire at hostile parties, for their own safety and to help curb violence more. Maybe the Secretary General should be stripped of all his power, and put all diplomacy matters in the hands of the General Assembly or Security Council. The Secretary could have increased power that would force nations to comply with his decisions. A UN that is much like a world government could possibly work as long as there was representatives from every nation. Because the world is more complex, if the UN was simplified it might make things smoother. Instead of having an agency for every little issue, such as the ACC Sub-Committee on Nutrition, or the UN office for Outer Space affairs. Are these REALLY necessary? They may be, but it is the decision of the delegates. The UN’s image with â€Å"Security Council† and a Court System might look bad to some conservative minded citizens of a nation. Economically, are the proper funds being allocated to areas and agencies in need? Should a worldwide mandatory educational requirement be put into effect? What exactly is the most pressing area right now that needs the fiscal help the UN can offer? Again, in the past 50 years help has been going to the same places, while the Secretariat grew larger and larger, and the entire UN gradually began becoming a complex political bureaucracy, and began to focus less on its original mission as stated in the charter, to  promote peaceful relations between the nations of the world. This doesn’t seem to be working anymore, possibly because the current UN is obsolete. In summation, United Nations reform is a daunting task. As a member of UN, Poland should remember to use foresight, think of what kind of world we will live in next century, what new things will happen, and how the UN should evolve to meet these needs with vigor. The UN is still only an organization, not a government, and it is based itself on precedent. That is, actions of the past determine future decisions. If precedent is broken, we should remember what has been built for all of us for the past 51 years. Bibliography: www.alertnet.org www.globalpolicy.org www.undp.org www.globalissues.com/Geopolitics/EastTimor www.un.org/ www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/chapter1.html United Nations: 50 Years of Peace and War, University of California Press, John Taylor, Phd. 1998 United Nations Published Charter The History of The United Nations, Paladin Press, Jonathon Kingsley. 1994