French revolution

French revolution To what extent were the ideas of the French philosophes and Enlightenment thinking a precondition to the French Revolution in 1789 were the social and economic crises of the time not sufficient in causing the Revolution themselves? The extent to which the philosophy of the 18th century impacted the French Revolution has occupied the historian ever since the days of the Revolution itself. It has proved to be immensely complex; many historians have written on the subject of the Revolution many choosing to see it purely as a sequence of events culminating in Revolution. The intellectual origins of the Revolution take root initially in the ideas of Sixteenth Century writers. The constant development of these ideas led into the great period of the Eighteenth Century, where philosophers sought to develop new ways of thinking that would allow man to better himself, and to free him from old ways of thinking and superstitions that had engrained themselves in the world. The generations that had grown up in the intellectual environment of the time and the way they were affected by these revolutionary ideas was an essential part of the Revolution. Trained historians have tended to play down the role of played by the philo sophes; instead they focus on the historical causes of the Revolution, on the facts such as the financial crisis or the inefficacy of the tax system. However, it is fundamental in understanding the cause of the revolution to appreciate the undercurrent of the development of new ideas over time this gradual occurrence does not necessarily warrant as much attention as events that happen abruptly, which may have caused the influence of enlightenment thinking to be cast aside somewhat. So how can the extent to which the ideas and writings of the philosophes influenced the general population be measured? To what extent were the revolutionaries influenced by the philosophes and perhaps most importantly did the revolutionaries mould their own philosophies around the circumstances in which they found themselves? The idea of volontà © nationale was a fundamental concept that needed to be considered by many Enlightenment thinkers. What was meant by volontà © nationale? It could be interpreted as volontà © de la majorità ©, but how could the will of the masses be gauged? The will of the people needed to manifest itself in some form in order for a people to become revolutionary. To understand how the Enlightenment affected the everyday individual in France is to fully appreciate the question at hand il faudra chercher a connaà ®tre là ©tat despirit des hommes à   là ©poque, à   nous rendre compte de ce quà ©prouvait alors lindividu par rapport à   la masse dont il fasait partie.[1] The Philosophes and Enlightenment thinking in the 18th Century Voltaire was one of the key figures in terms of his revolutionary thinking during the Eighteenth Century. He believed that laws were outdated and needed to be changed because they had been created at a different time, haphazardly and the existing laws were basà ©es sur lignorance et la superstition.[2] In a letter he wrote to Catherine II Voltaire declared les lois sont faites aprà ¨s coup, comme on calfate des vaisseux qui ont voies deau; elles sont innombrables, parce quelles sont faites sur des besoins toujours renaissants; elles sont condradictoires, attendu que ces besoins ont toujours changà ©. Voltaire was convinced that laws needed to be changed in order to allow the society to become enlightened.   For Voltaire religion also holds man back from becoming enlightened. In terms of morals, he compares the religious morals with philosophical morals. Voltaires belief that the philosophical morality is no different from religious morality is clearly explained by Groethuysen: L es philosophes ont tous des idà ©es diffà ©rentes sur les principes des choses, mais ils enseignent tout la mà ªme parole.[3] All religions thus have a harmonising and moralising aspect, however Voltaire criticises the way in which religion is based upon so many superstitions and obscure cult practices. These outdated superstitions have led to war and destruction les gens se sont disputes sur les dogmes, ils sont fait la guerre; des nations en ont detruit dautres parce queelles croyaient en Jesus-Christ et non en Mahoment.[4] Laws and religion are not necessary in order to allow man to know the difference between right and wrong reason is independent of law and religion. Man has been corrupted by the irrational aspects of religion. He does not use his sense of reasoning to understand the world and commits act of destruction and violence solely in the name of religion. Voltaire wanted man to be freed from its inability to reason, much alike Kants belief in Was ist Aufklarung that Aufklà ¤rung ist der Ausweg des Menschen aus seiner selbstverschuldeten Unmà ¼ndigkeit. Sapere aude! In answering the question as to how a law of reason can be established Voltaire proposes une loi fondamentale [qui] agit sur toutes les nations que nous conaissons.[5] The principle behind this law is first and foremost to distinguish between what is right and what is not. But Voltaire sees this law as secondary in terms of human judgement and reason every man has an inner instinct that allows them to know what is right, un sens de lequite commun a tous les hommes. For Voltaire ideas of morality are of the utmost importantce; knowledge of all other ideas must come second to morality: seules les idees morales peuvent nous server a conduire notre vie de facon a la mener en commun avec les autres hommes. A new philosophy of morality was necessary to create the new modern man; this was Voltaires main objective; he wrote in a letter to Frederic Guillaume in October 1737 that lhumanite est le principe de toutes mes pensees. Man has to look only to the goodness within him and his own instinctive moral principles pour que sa raison trouve en lui une egalite universelle dominant toutes les legislations particulieres. This in turn would lay down the foundations for a moral law. As Voltaire grew older he increasingly focused his thoughts against religion and the Church. In a letter written to Frederic II in 1767 he declared depuis dix-sept cents ans, la secte chretienne na jamais fait que du mal. He called on all philosophers of his time to rise up with him in his fight against the Church. Voltaire declared that sooner or later the time would come in France when people would be able to see the conspiracy and lunacy of religion people were raising des mains invisibles pour percer le fanatisme dun bout de lEurope a lature avec les fleches de la verite. He became very excited about the prospect of the coming revolution through the Enlightenment and could foresee the coming of the age of reason. In 1761 he wrote to dAlembert, je suis tetu. Jusqua mon dernier souffle, je repeterai mon caeterum censo: Ecrasez lInfame. Cest une grande lutte, la lutte de tous les etres pensants contre les etres non-pensantstous les etres pensants doivent etre tendrement uniscontre les fanatiques, les hypocrites, egalement persecuteurs. However, Voltaire was particularly critical of other philosophers of his time, toutes les philosophes sont trop tiedes; ils se contentent de rire des erreurs des hommes, au lieu de les ecraser.[6] Voltaire wanted all the philosophes to join together to cause change in the world and to help the population become enlightenened, he did not wanted the other philosophes to want to enlighten the world and not just see the mistakes in the existing one; les missionaries courent la terre et les mers, il faut au moins que les philosophes courent les rues, il faut quils aillent semer le bon grain de maisons en maisons.[7] This use of particularly strong language by Voltaire shows the extent to which he believed in the Enlightenment and how much he wanted it to be realised in the world. Voltaire, in writing to Alembert vehemently calls those leaders who prevent their citizens from becoming enlightened as monstres persecuteurs, quon me donn e seulement sept ou huit personnes que je puisse conduire et je vous exterminerai.[8] He declared that eventually reason will prevail but bemoans the fact that he will not be alive to see this beau changement of lEglise de la sagesse, dans laquelle les philosophes seront les precepteurs du genre humain. He calls on the philosophes to see the fruit of the trees that they themselves had planted. As regards the division of France into three estates Voltaire is very clear that the existing system needs to be abolished. Representez vous le tier etat. Mais ce sont les paysans sur leur champsles millions dhommes qui travaillent, a cote des deux cent mille members du clerge ou de la noblesse qui ne travaillent pas.[9] This inequality is a major problem for Voltaire for, in his eyes, all men are born equally on the Earth and this inequality from birth poses a major problem in allowing the Third Estate to become enlightened. Le tiers etat a lui seul est dà ©jà   toute la nation[10] Voltaire calls on the revolutionary masses of 1789 to look deeper and more closely at things and to question everything around them. Fiez-vous donc a votre raisonnement, substituez toujours le concret, le defini aux affirmations indecises ou generales. He explains how not every man is born with the ability to be a philosophe but that every man is able to become enlightened; la faculte critique est quelq ue chose de positif en lhomme. Cest la joie detre libre de prejudges, de savoir que la raison est souverain en tout homme.[11] Voltaire wants every man to win the fight against superstition and false beliefs. Voltaire praises the other philosophes, for despite their differences, they are honnetes gensqui ne savent point ce qui est, mais qui savent fort bien ce qui nest pas.[12] They have called the world into question and although they do not have answers to much of it they have created the foundations upon which the Enlightenment can be built. Although Voltaires philosophy may be interpreted as somewhat pessimistic in terms of   the insignificance of man in terms of the universe, he is also optimistic in that man does have the capacity to think about things outside his world there is la misere de la condition humaine but also les grandes pensees, le ciel etoile dans sa legalite invariable, leternite dont lhomem essaye de surprendre le secret pendant le court instant dure sa pauv re existence instable.[13] The philosophes need to join together and give their mutual support to one another in order to win the fight against the enemy that seeks to continue its domination over unenlightened man. But by what means could Voltaires notion of an enlightened nation be achieved? In a letter to the Marquis dArgence de Dirac in 1764 he declares il ne faut pas disputer avec les gens entetesjamais la dispute na convaincu personne; on peut ramener les hommes en les faisant penser par eux memes, en paraisant douter avec eux, en les conduisant, comme par la main, sans quiils sen apercoivent. For Voltaire if all the philosophes were united in their philosophies and it worked its way peacefully through the masses then la plus belle à ©poque de lhistoire de lespirit humain would be born. From the advent of Christianity Voltaire believes that history has only been formed through errors and mistakes. In opposition to Montesquieu, he proposes all existing laws to be forgotten so that humanity can be re-rooted in reason and enlightened thinking. For Voltaire there is nothing to be learnt from history la critique historique decouvre partout la deraison dont temoignent les actes et les lois faites par les hommes, depuis que lEglise a fat regner la superstition dans le monde.[14] Man needs to be enlightened from this absurd world, created by generations of mans mistakes. Although on the face of it Voltaires analysis of the current situation could be interpreted as pessimistic he trusts that reason will prevail in allowing a new order to be created, as Groethuysen explains: la raison conduira la passionla passion devenue raison, la passion de la raison va posseder les hommes de la revolution francaise.[15] Montesquieu and Jean-Jacques Rousseau were also arguably among some of the most important Enlightenment thinkers contributing to the French Revolution. In terms of laws Montesquieu believed that all men should conform to laws and that they must begin by working to create worthy people.[16] Justice, for Montesquieu was a harmonious relationship which really exists between two things. This relationship never varies; whether it is viewed from the perspective of God, an angel, or of maneven if God did exist, we ought always to love justicejustice is eternal and nowise dependant on human conventions.[17] Justice was an absolute standard and laws must exist because they are just. Montesquieu saw man as a product of his environment and felt that man should adapt himself as best he could within this environment. Unlike Voltaire, Montesquieu did not see the need to rid the world of all its existing laws; instead he declares it is sometimes necessary to change certain laws, but such occasions are rare and when they arise one should only touch laws with a trembling hand.[18] This approach to the tampering with laws is not particularly revolutionary; however, he wanted all political societies to be judged on his absolute principles of justice and liberty. For Montesquieu the idea form of government took shape in a moderate government, however, he states that moderate governments are a masterpiece of legislation that chance produces very rarely and men rarely allow prudence to create[19] In de lEsprit des Lois, published in 1748 Montesquieu discusses the legality of laws and how to judge whether a law exists for the good of man. He believes that laws should be made in order to better mankind and to transform the existing system. All laws need to be judged as to whether they correspond or contradict the rights of man. For Montesquieu every law needs to be based on moral principles and should guide man towards morality. Cest dans les principes du droit que noud devons chercher la norme absolue qui nous permettra de construire une collectivite.[20] Montesquieu saw the intellectual world as a group of collectivites. The life of every individual is fundamentally conditioned by the community in which they live. A world of collectivites would create a new, happy people and man would achieve happiness in such a collectivite. It could be interpreted that Montesquieu sees France as a collectivite. Cest la nation qui seule peut se donner la loi.[21] Montesquieu wanted to see a change in the law-citizen relationship; he wanted it to change from man being the object of laws to man becoming the subject of legislative power. Montesquieu wanted human reason to be applied to the reality in which people lived. However, Montesquieus philosophy does not sit well with the French Revolution because his ideals of universal and absolute reason are only applicable to the world at large and which must govern the world at large. As a result, if these laws were to be implemented, one would only be implementing ideas based upon legality within nature. Montesquieu believed that the legislative and executive powers needed to be separate so that the citizens could not be oppressed and would remain free. For Montesquieu the main purpose of religion was to make better citizens; he believed that religious beliefs were a product of the environments in which people lived. Despite the fact that he believed that all religions strengthened the morality of the followers Montesquieu believed Christianity to be the most favourable in creating good citizens. Montesquieus de lEsprit des Lois put forward the notion of liberalism in which liberty could only be secured through a contrived equilibrium between the competing interests within society[22] Although Montesquieus message is not always clear within de lEsprit des Lois he does not waver from his belief that governments should act in the needs of the people, as opposed to being the means to change a society, that institutions and beliefs are the result of the environment and the actions of generations in the past and that there are moral imperatives that transcend time and which bind all men together. Fundamentally Montesquieu and Rousseau had conflicting concepts of freedom. As previously stated Montesquieu believed that freedom could be achieved in collectivites. Governments needed to respect the independence of these collectivites and vote in favour of the esprit general. On the other hand, Rousseaus notion of political freedom consisted of allowing man to achieve all he wanted, which was obviously in the best interest of the community at large. This would be achieved through the liberation of man from his state of ignorance by abolishing all existing institutions and denaturing man. One legislator would ensure this denaturing and change his existence through changing the society in which he lived. Despite Montesquieus belief that governments should let people pursue their own interests, he wanted the governments to pursue both freedom and justice it would be wrong to say to say that Montesquieu was not urging political action. Rousseau was urging for a regeneration of the cur rent system, and as Hampson explains this concept of regeneration was to become one of the most abused words of 1789.[23] Both Rousseau and Montesquieu had devoted a great deal of their time to political issues and had begun to challenge the existing political situation, however more writers needed to challenge the existing order but the influence of these philosophes in allowing revolutionary thinking and ideas to come into being cannot be understated. Montesquieu and Rousseaus impact in the years leading up to the Revolution took shape in numerous forms. There was constant reference to Montesquieu in the many pamphlets of literature of 1788 in support of the parlements challenge to the royal family. Lawyers were constantly referencing Montesquieu and De lesprit des lois. Furthermore, Rousseaus influence was also present with references to du Contrat social the state of monarchy is only useful for corrupted nations.[24] Other pamphlets draw on Rousseau to an even greater extent; man is born free, laws are acts of the general will, government is the agent of the general will and not a part to the social contract.[25] As Hampson further explains all the pamphlets shared a common vocabularythe subjects of the kingdom had been replaced by the citizens of the nation. Those of whom the writers approved were the enfants de la patrie and their opponents agents of ministerial despotism'[26] This is a clear demonstration of the influence of Rousseaus philosophy and his success in shaping revolutionary ideas through the use of this republican language. Billaud Varenne, was particularly influenced by the ideas of Rousseau and expressed his admiration for the fine works of Rousseau, who describes so well the power of the Supreme Being[27] In Varennes Despotisme des ministres de France Varenne echoes many of Rousseaus sentiments; superior by our knowledge, our industry and our force, to every nation in the universe, when we could be second Romans, betrayed by our generals, strangled by our ministers, every day we risk being subjugated to foreign domination or becoming wholly enslaved to our own[28] Moreover, Montesquieus philosophy was also put forward by Varenne in this three-volume work great agitation within a state should always be avoided as much as possible.[29] It is clear that the work of the philosophes had a major impact on the revolutionaries and fundamentally provided the intellectual stimulus upon which the re volutionaries could propose concrete changes contributing to the revolution of 1789. The expression of the philosophes ideals in the French Revolution Many modern day historians continue to argue that the link between Enlightenment thought and the French Revolution long pre-dated the revolution itself, claiming that many anti-philosophes were convinced that the philosophes were attempting to undermine and destabilise the already established order. Nonetheless, the revolutionaries claimed that the Revolution was a direct consequence of Enlightenment thinking; as Brissot boasted in 1791 Our revolution is not the fruit of an insurrection. It is the work of a half century of enlightenment. As Roland N. Stromberg explains Those who tried to guide the Revolution never ceased to legitimize or rationalize their actions by appealing to the words of Voltaire, Rousseau ,Montesquieu, Diderot, and other intellectual heroes of the Enlightenment, though they might do so selectively and erratically[30] Most damming in seeing the Revolution as the result of the Enlightenment is the fact that the majority of the remaining philosophes of the time did not agree with the Revolution. From the Holbach coterie, which included Raynal, Marmontel, Morellet and Grimm. With the onset of revolution, Raynal, who had written perhaps the most influential revolutionary piece of the 1770s, fled Paris. Morellet also declared that the French Revolution had created a state of anarchy and also left Paris. Further, Marmontel saw a dangerous fanaticism and the spirit of licence, faction and anarchy. Grimm, who had served a secretary of sorts to the philosophe movement also fled the country and returned to his native Germany and left his riches to be seized by the revolutionary government.   Alan Kors had named this group as the radical enlightenment group and argues that their opposition to the Revolution held true to their own Enlightenment views. The fact that the French Revolution had taken such an ir rational and anarchic course went against their beliefs in rational order and scientific method.[31] The philosophes favoured a far more gradual progression of the Revolution through reform and allowing the leaders and the population of France to come to understand the ideas of the Enlightenment. The Marquis de Condorcet, whose pure philosophy contributed a great deal to the Revolution still, on the Eve of the Revolution, believed that France could only solve its social and economic crises through the slow diffusion of Enlightenment ideas. His friend The Abbe Sieyes in the Societe de 1789, who essentially symbolised the Revolution of the Third Estate in 1789, also withdrew from politics in 1790 due to his disapproval of the path the Revolution had taken.  Ã‚   Of the philosophes still alive in 1789 the Cercle Social still made attempts to allow the ideas of the past be realised in modern day France. The Cercle Social was later to become the Girondist faction of the Revolution. The group had its own printing press, published journals and placed major emphasis on education of the ideas of the philosophes. Condorcet and Brissot were key members of this group and were determined to make Enlightenment ideals become part of the new emerging world. They wanted to spread the ideas of the Enlightenment and create a rational political institutions based on the ideas of the Enlightenment.[32] They believed that a sudden and aggressive move from one form of government to the next was not the way Revolution should be carried out, rather ideas needed to be understood by the everyday man so that his attitudes could be changed. The point that changes needed to take place on all levels of society is aptly explained by Foucault; nothing in society will be c hanged if the mechanisms of power that function outside, below and alongside the State apparatuses on a much more minute and everyday level are not also changed.[33] It was believed by these revolutionaries that France would become a nation devoted to the Revolution, in which Rousseau du Contrat Socials civil religion would become the new moral cement. Many of the revolutionaries began to see themselves as the priests of this new religion. These Girondists also believed that education could change human nature an idea derived from John Locke and put forward by Condillac in France. The Girondists were adamant that this could be achieved if the philosophes and revolutionaries were able to gain control of education they could mold a new species of mankind.[34] The Jacobins were even more extreme in their views on education as they wanted to take children away from their parents and indoctrinate them in new Enlightenment ideas. As Stromberg explains the philosophes had addressed only an elite, the next task was to expand this charmed circle to embrace the whole nation. However, Gary Kates argues that the Girondists were not a bourgeois party but a party of those who had come to understand the Enlightenment. Despite their will to see the ideas of the philosophes realised within the Revolution they proved to be ineffective politicians and thus were defeated by the Montagnards. Robespierrists felt that their enemies were far more educated than they were and attempted to confuse the masses with their complicated ideas of philosophy. Saint-Just declared that these enemies tried to fool people with complicated intellectual arguments. Robespierre himself was not an advocate of theory and declared it is not necessary to search in the books of political writers, who did not at all foresee the Revolution. Many historians have also questioned the extent to which Robespierre really was influenced by the philosophes given his suspiciousness of their ideas and many argue that he did not even have a very great knowledge of Rousseau, of whom he declared himself to have been greatly influenced. Brissot once called Robespierres speeches unintelligibility posing as profundity. The down with the philosophes slogan of the Jacobins is further evidence in proving the lack of respect that they had for the Enlightenment ideas of the 18th century. At this point it is clear that t he ideas of the philosophes were no longer attached to the Revolution the Jacobins were far more interested in politics than with the ideas of the Enlightenment and thus the Revolution broke away from the Enlightenment.[35] The Bourgeoisie and the Revolution The bourgeoisie and the educated classes played a major role in the French Revolution through the summoning of the Assembly. Between November 1788 and the meeting of the Estates General over 2,500 pamphlets were published. The ideas of the philosophes which were now being forwarded through the revolutionaries became of great interest to the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie began to focus on how the current system could be changed and how their desires might become a reality. The system of government had been attacked and criticised for decades prior to the Revolution the introduction of new ideas change to the existing constitutional and political situation had enlightened the bourgeoisie and fuelled their desire for change. 2 [1] BernardGroethuysen, Philosophie de la Rà ©volution Franà §aise, Page 82 [2] Ibid, Page 133 [3] Ibid, Page 135 [4] Ibid [5] Ibid, page 136 [6] Lettre de Voltaire a dAlembert, 26-XII en 1767 [7] Lettre de Voltaire a dAlembert, 26-VI en 1766 [8] Lettre de Voltaire a dAlembert, 26-VIII en 1766 [9] Page 155, Groethuysen [10] Ibid [11] [12] Letter page 158 [13] Page 161 [14] Philosophie de la Revolution Francaise, page 166 [15] Ibid, page 167 [16] Cahiers, I/393 Grasset, page 119 [17] Lettres Persanes, LXXXIII [18] Ibid CXXIX [19] De lespirit des lois, V/14 [20] Philosophie de la Revolution Francaise, page 128 [21] Philosophie de la Revolution Francaise, page 130 [22] Will and Circumstance, Norman Hampton, Page 24 [23] Will and Circumstance, Norman Hampton, Page 58 [24] Will and Circumstance, Norman Hampton, Page 60 [25] Ibid, page 61 [26] Ibid [27] Le dernier coup porte aux prejuges et a la superstition, London, 1789, page 348 [28] Despotisme des ministres de France, Amsterdam, 1789, 3rd Volume, Page 209 [29] Ibid, Page 243 [30] The Philosophes and the French Revolution, Some Reflections on recent research, Roland N. Stromberg, Page 323

Ethics for a Criminal Justice Career Essay

For someone who chooses to become a law enforcement officer he or she must understand the importance of having moral ethics standards in order to do the job effectively and professionally. Police officers are held by the public to a higher standard of morality and are expected to be above reproach. Sadly, we see in the news all to often police officers that have exhibited unethical conduct both on the job and in their private lives. When an officer commits an improper act of some type it impacts the entire law enforcement profession, in some cases it makes it hard for other officers to do their job without ridicule. Unfortunately, the public does not differentiate between officers, departments, or uniforms when a scandalous act occurs. The purpose for anyone pursuing a law enforcement career to study ethics is essential to keep the integrity and the trust of the public. A look into how and why officer should make ethical decisions, to examine the motives for the choices they make and see what is the influence that guides them to make the choices they do. The Denver Police Department for example has the recruits in the police academy recite the police code of ethics every morning along with the pledge of allegiance. This tradition has carried on because of a police scandal that took place in 1961 that involved a number of officers who were committing burglaries, 47 officers were stripped of their badges and then went to prison. That year became known as the city of Denver’s year of shame, in a reprint of the original article in the Denver Post in February of 2010, the question was asked, How did it happen? â€Å"The department made it easy for us,† the leading police-burglars said. They pointed to a breakdown in departmental discipline and supervision that made it possible for them to double as safecrackers. As the year ended, steps were being taken to repair that breakdown. The International Assn. of Chiefs of Police was undertaking a departmental reorganization program, which is expected to make sweeping changes in pol ice  command policy, and, possibly, in command personnel. Some observers argue that only a thorough shakeup can restore public confidence in the scandal-ridden department. The answer the officers gave was insufficient because they were blaming the police department’s lack of supervision and breakdown in discipline as a reason for their crimes. Police officers need to have their own built in reasons for choosing the most ethical way, because even with increased supervision and discipline officers spend most of their shifts without supervisors around them. An officer must develop a decision making process that will be based on a standard that causes them to make the ethical decision immediately when faced with a moral dilemma. There are four major perspective theories of ethics that influence the decision making process for making choices, they are the Moral Virtue perspective, the Deontological/Formalism perspective, the Utilitarianism perspective, and the Biblical perspective. The moral virtue perspective is based largely on Plato and Aristotle theories, in (Sam Souryal’s book, Ethics in Criminal Justice, 2007) he points out that Aristotl e argued, â€Å"that because no one is born ethical (or unethical), people must spend their entire lives actualizing their potential in pursuit of happiness. This lifelong endeavor should be regarded not only as a means, but also as an end, desirable in itself.†(p.14) Aristotle believed that virtue ethics are learned through habit; therefore the application of virtuous behavior is brought about only through practice. Law enforcement agencies when recruiting candidates do extensive background investigations that include going to the schools they attended growing up and interviewing their teachers and friends. A polygraph test is given and psychological profiles are done all with the intention to determine those who demonstrate strong moral values before they are hired. In an FBI Bulletin article that focuses law enforcement ethics shows that in the pursuit of finding those who exhibit virtue ethics they say: Police departments’ best efforts will not prevent instances of police misconduct. Proponents of virtue ethics argue that certain officers misbehave because they lack character. These â€Å"bad apples† managed to â€Å"slip through the cracks† despite their unethical values. They argue that police abuse occurs in isolated incidents and involves a few immoral opportunists who were corrupt before they became officers. Unfortunately, this interpretation fails to explain how otherwise  exemplary officers with no prior history of wrongdoing, many of whom are sterling role models in their families, churches, and communities, can become involved in misconduct. (www.fbi.gov) In police academies across the nation are training police officers in ethics, it has become part of the curriculum in order to prevent a scandalous situation. In an online article at PoliceOne.com makes a very interesting point concerning virtue ethics development in a person: It is unlikely that an increase in ethics training alone will lead to more ethical policing. You can’t t rain ethics in the same way as other skills. It’s not a definable ability but is instead the result of education comprised of peer discussions, formal and informal training, and thoughtful reflection. (www.policeone.com) There needs to be more than just virtue ethics which morality is an overall concept to of people wanting to make their lives better. A problem that arises is who determines what things can be done to accomplish this, a choice to do something to live a better life could hurt someone else’s quality of life. Now a look into what is called the Utilitarianism theory as defined in a book on Criminal Justice Ethics by (Cyndi Banks, 2009) which states that consequentialist theories contend that the right thing to do always depends on the goodness of consequences. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist moral doctrine because, for the utilitarian, morality is solely a matter of consequences. (p.280) There is an appeal of utilitarianism to people because as (Rae, 2009) points out, â€Å"All one must do is weigh the anticipated good consequences of an action against its anticipated harmful ones – the bottom line produces a greater balance of benefits. If it produces greater benefits, then it is the most moral course of action† (p.74) The police officers in Denver that were committing the burglaries could have and may have used this theory as a justification for their illegal acts. It was said that their pay was not sufficient and they needed to do this in order to provide for their families, the benefit of that would outweigh the crime. Rea also shows how utilitarianism could justify obvious injustices, â€Å"such as contriving evidence against an innocent person to prevent widespread social unrest that would result in loss of life and substantial property damage.† (p.75) This theory if used in the law enforcement profession could cause incredible harm to their community and could justify immoral choices. This cannot be a theory that should be used by police officers to guide them in  making ethical choices because the end does not justify the means. The Deontological theory according to (Banks, 2009) Is in contrast with the utilitarianism theory because it takes the view that to act rightly, persons must first of all refrain from doing thins that can be said to be wrong before the fact; these wrong acts are defined by what are variously called rules, laws and constraints. The Deontological theorists claim that the rightness or wrongness of an act depends entirely upon the kind of act that has occurred and not upon its consequences. (p.p. 280-281) For law enforcement officers the deontological perspective would be a much better theory to follow because the decision would be based on the act itself. If the act a police officer would chooses is wrong, he or she should not even consider doing it for no other reason than it is wrong. This would be inline with the police code of ethics that sets out strict guidelines for officers to do, no matter what the circumstances are. â€Å"The Christian will tend to be more deontologically oriented because of the emphasis on Christian Ethics on the commands of God as moral absolutes and guiding principles.† (Rae, 2009 p. 17) After becoming a Christian while on the police force the difference in the work ethic was obvious to the command staff. The power of the Holy Spirit was transforming in giving the ability to follow God’s law and to understand that whatever decision was made, is for the glory of God. The Biblical perspective is the guiding force for a Christian officer; it does not automatically prevent ethical struggles, the same issues and temptations are still out there such as the high rate of divorce, alcoholism and suicide. They all could succumb to the same problems as any police officer such as anger, lust and promiscuity, greed, hatred and bitterness in the face of their daily challenges. It is easy sometimes in this field to forget obedience and submission to God’s authority, while possessing the authority given to them as police officers. They must always remember that they are slaves of God and he gives all authority in heaven and on earth. It is difficult to understand how any officer without Christ can function and remain pure given the environment they work in. An officer with a Biblical perspective should not be as prone to giving in to unethical decisions when facing dilemmas A police officer’s perspective will determine the way he or she handles the ethical dilemmas  that occur on the job. The verse found in Colossians 2:8 should be the guide for a Christian police officer to follow the Biblical perspective and not the perspectives the world offers, â€Å"See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.† (NKJV) References Banks, C. (2009). Criminal Justice Ethics, Theory and Practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc. Eldridge, L. (2011, June 16). Situational ethics and the moral chaos of modern policing. In issues/articles/3804919-Situational-ethics-and-the-moral-chaos-of-modern-policing/ PoliceOne.com. Retrieved May 3, 2014, from http://www.policeone.com/patrol- issues/articles/3804919-Situational-ethics-and-the-moral-chaos-of-modern-policing/ Fitch, B. D. (2011, October). Focus on Ethics Rethinking Ethics in Law Enforcement. In The FBI- Federal Bureau of Investigation, Bulletin . Retrieved May 2, 2014, from http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/october- 2011/focus-on-ethics Holy Bible: New King James Version. (1982). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. Rae, S. B. (2009). Moral Choices, An Introduction to Ethics (3rd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Souryal, S. S. (2007). Ethics in Criminal Justice, In Search of Truth (4th ed.). Newark, NJ: Matthew Bender & Company Inc. Whearley, B. (2010, February 15). Exposà © of Police Burglaries Marked City’s ‘Year of Shame’ [Electronic version]. The Denver Post.

Celebrating Black History Month

While the accomplishments of African-Americans should be celebrated all year long, February is the month when we focus on their contributions to American society. Why We Celebrate Black History Month The roots of Black History month can be traced to the early part of the 20th century. In 1925, Carter G. Woodson, an educator and historian, began campaigning among schools, journals and black newspapers calling for a Negro History Week to be celebrated. This would honor the importance of black achievement and contribution in the United States. He was able to institute this Negro History Week in 1926 during the second week of February. This time was chosen because Abraham Lincolns and Frederick Douglass birthdays occurred then. Woodson was awarded the Springarn Medal from the NAACP for his accomplishment. In 1976, Negro History Week turned into Black History Month which we celebrate today. African Origins It is important for students not only to understand recent history concerning African-Americans, but also to understand their past. Before Great Britain made it illegal for the colonists to be involved in the slave trade, between 600,000 and 650,000 Africans were forcibly brought to America. They were transported across the Atlantic and sold into forced labor for the rest of their lives, leaving family and home behind. As teachers, we should not only teach about the horrors of slavery, but also about the African origin of the African-Americans who live in America today. Slavery has existed throughout the world since ancient times. However, one big difference between slavery in many cultures and the slavery that was experienced in America was that while slaves in other cultures could gain freedom and become part of society, African-Americans did not have that luxury. Because almost all of the Africans on American soil were slaves, it was extremely hard for any black person who had gained freedom to be accepted into society. Even after slavery was abolished following the Civil War, black Americans had a difficult time of being accepted into society. Here are some resources to use with students: SlaveryAfricaCivil WarCivil War Photos Civil Rights Movement The barriers facing African-Americans after the Civil War were numerous, especially in the South. Jim Crow Laws such as Literacy Tests and Grandfather Clauses kept them from voting in many southern states. Further, the Supreme Court ruled that separate was equal and therefore blacks could legally be forced to ride in separate rail cars and attend different schools than whites. It was impossible for blacks to achieve equality in this atmosphere, especially in the South. Eventually, the hardships that African-Americans faced became overwhelming and led to the Civil Rights Movement. Despite the efforts of individuals such as Martin Luther King, Jr., racism still exists today in America. As teachers, we need to fight against this with the best tool we have, education. We can enhance students views of African-Americans by stressing the numerous contributions they have given to American society. Civil Rights MovementMartin Luther King, Jr. Biography Contributions of African-Americans African-Americans have affected the culture and history of the United States in innumerable ways. We can teach our students about these contributions in many areas including: Music - e.g., Billy Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald, Duke Ellington, Jazz, Rhythm and BluesArt - e.g., Sargent Johnson, Palmer Hayden, Aaron DouglassLiterature - e.g., Ralph Ellison, Maya Angelou, Richard WrightScience - e.g., George Washington Carver, Granville T. Woods, Garrett Morgan The Harlem Renaissance of the 1920s is ripe for exploration. Students could create a museum of the accomplishments to increase awareness for the rest of the school and community. Online Activites One way to get your students interested in learning more about African-Americans, their history and culture is to utilize the many great online activities that are available. You can find web quests, online field trips, interactive quizzes and more here. Check out Integrating Technology Into the Classroom to get tips on how to get the most out of technology today.

Community Organization and Social Change in Rural Haiti Free Essay Example, 2250 words

In the wake of the French revolution, the grands blancs called for elections at a general assembly in 1791. The gens de couleur were excluded and the petit Blancs as well since only large owners of property that is not a minimum of 20 slaves were involved. The grands blancs went on to defy the colonial authorities in France as well as the constituent assembly. As a mark of their revolt, the grands blancs wore a red band and earned the name pompons rouges. King also asserts that the French authorities enlisted the help of the petits Blancs who in turn wore red bands and referred to as pompons Blancs. The petits Blancs were in favor of a colony that still maintained ties with France. However, they remained in the pro-slavery camp and did not want to there with free coloreds as they viewed them as competitors in the social and economic ladder. With the help of the gens de couleur, the grands blancs revolt was crippled and the general assembly ceased to exist. In retaliation, the guards blancs looted and pillaged the homes of mulattoes who had assisted to crush their rebellion. We will write a custom essay sample on Community Organization and Social Change in Rural Haiti or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now This revolt saw the rise of Vincent Oge and Chavannes who had returned from France to try to secure the rights of the gens de couleur. With the help of the Amis Des Noirs (Friends of the Blacks) organization, Vincent Oge influenced the passing of a law in the newly formed National assembly that allowed voting rights for all people above the age of 25 with income. However, the French government left the decision on allowing the free coloreds to vote in the hands of the colonial assembly. Since the assembly was controlled by the guards Blancs, they decidedly refused to allow the free coloreds to vote. Demanding that the mulattoes acquire the right to vote, Vincent Oge issued a decree that he was the protector of the colored people. He joined with Jean Baptiste Chavannes and threatened to use force if the white farmers failed to recognize the stipulations in the Code Noir. Unfortunately, for him, his troop of 300 men was small in number and no match fo r the French militia (Bryan, p16).