Early American Rule of Puerto Rico :: Puerto Rican History Historical Essays

Early American Rule of Puerto Rico Ideally Puerto Rico was to mold itself into the perfect American product. Politically Puerto Rico was to remain inferior by following American rules and regulations that restricted the liberties of the people. Economically it was expected to provide capitol growth for the United States while neglecting the popular masses. Through the process of Americanization, the hope was to create a second America on the island. Here the people would look to the mainland for inspiration and more importantly guidance. The general intentions and plans for the island, however, backfired in that the actual goals and feelings of the people were never taken into account. Upon the arrival of the Americans, Puerto Ricans, for the most part, rejoiced in hopes of new liberties not found under Spanish colonial rule. Puerto Ricans expected â€Å"under American sovereignty that the wrongs of centuries† would â€Å"be righted.† (Trias-Monge 36) The United States would surely extend its democratic policies to Puerto Rico, as it should to any of its other parts. The U.S., however, did not consider Puerto Rico as part of the mainland. Joseph Foraker, senate member, captured the American sentiment: â€Å"Puerto Rico belongs to the United States, but is not the United States, nor a part of the United States.† (Fernandez 2) The basic assumption that the U.S. would create legislation equal to that of the mainland lasted only a brief period. Puerto Ricans were made clear on the American position. The ultimate authority belonged to the U.S. Government as only they were seen fit to govern the affairs of the island. The American government was open ly adamant in declaring the people inferior and incapable of ruling themselves due to their race as the genetic successors of the Spanish. â€Å"Puerto Ricans were an inferior offspring of an already middle-level race.† (Fernandez 13) More importantly the inhabitants of Puerto Rico were dismissed on the basis on their skin color. As non-white they were compared to small children. â€Å"The Latino was presented as a ‘black child’†. (Fernandez 13), who at that time was at the bottom of the racial hierarchy. With this image in mind the United States continued its fatherly role and created several policies that would have destructive effects on the island. Through the organic acts mainly the Foraker and Jones acts, the liberties of the Puerto Ricans were curtailed. â€Å"Within the legal channels provided by the Foraker act.

Beautiful Boy Application Essay

He kept experimenting with more drugs and finally Crystal Meth. To be honest I think that he may have never developed the full capacity for formal reasoning. He also had a lot of different environmental and cultural influences that had a huge impact on him. Certain things would lead him towards the path of drugs, and he couldn’t reason to himself differently. â€Å"Now I am in my own program to recover from my addiction to [Nic’s addiction]† (p. 305). I feel like that is a good example of how â€Å"logical† his reasoning really is. 2. Apply the concepts of Erikson Theory to Nic’s Development. At age 4 Nic’s parents got divorced. That was during the Preschool stage, where the conflict is Initiative vs. Guilt. In this stage children need to begin asserting control and power over their environment. Nic was doing well in this stage and the school age stage as well. His grades well good, he had friends and was active and involved in sports. His father thought that Nic was coping well because he was doing so well in school and playing sports. â€Å"Nic was excelling in school and I could have been happier. (30) However related to Preschool stage – Nic was able to control his grades, and his activities therefore he was about to successfully show his power. However, at age 12 Nic’s father found pot in Nic’s back pack. This is the adolescence stage where the conflict is Identity vs. Role Confusion. This is where teens need to develop a sense of self and personal identity. Success leads t o an ability to stay true to yourself, while failure leads to role confusion and a weak sense of self. Well Nic was not successful and true to himself because by the age 18 he had experimented with many other drugs and was on looking towards Crystal Meth. At this point, he has lost his true identity and is going off track. Going into his Young Adulthood he was already strong on Meth. He became more and more into the drug; everyday losing more of himself and hurting his family. The vicious cycle never seemed to end. 3. Apply Family Systems theory to the Sheff family. What concepts are evident in their interactions? â€Å"We are dysfunctional†¦I’m not sure if I know any ‘functional’ families, if functional means a family without difficult times and members who don’t have a full range of problems. (14) The Sheff family was dysfunctional, but also considering all the challenged and obstacles they went through with Nic that can cause a strain, which would certainly not result in normal functional family. And I would have to agree with David – I don’t know if I know any â€Å"functional families. † Nic certainly was the most difficult member in the family. Calls to the hospitals and long nights wondering if Nic was OK are things his dad became very familiar with. When Nic was on the street, his dad would drive around looking for him, hoping to find him and get him help. That would cause strain on any family. His father tried to instill family roles and family rules and boundaries; however Nic would always end up on his own path –Crystal Meth. The family roles were very unclear. Did anybody even really know the real Nic? (probably not) Also, there was really never any consistency in the family. I mean the father would try his best but things always would get off track when it came to Nic and Meth. What was consistent was the â€Å"typical behaviors† and â€Å"the way it is† that the family became accustom too. Nic’s lie, stealing, and using. To me it seemed like the family was slowly disconnecting. Families are systems of interconnected and interdependent individuals; none can be understood when isolated from the family. â€Å"(pp) 4. What characteristics of resilience do you see in Nic? * He valued learning and he had excelled at writing. * I believe that he did have positive relationships with caring adults when he was in the right state of mind. * He also d id have problem solving skills. â€Å"Now I am in my own program to recover from my addiction to [Nic’s addiction]† (p. 305). He did not always make the best choice but when not on meth he could. * He did like to help others – especially his family when he was on the right path.

What is sovereignty?

The idea of sovereignty is the idea of someone holding supreme power. For example in the United Kingdom we have parliamentary sovereignty. This means that parliament holds supreme power in the land with no constraints. However sovereignty is affected and controlled by certain things such as public opinion and outside influences including the media etc. That is why although sovereignty gives supreme power to the bearer it can sometimes be restricted by uncontrollable means. However ultimately, if remove all other influences and theories, sovereignty is the word used to describe something that is given to someone or something to hold supreme power, and this power should technically be un-unquestionable, that is the idea of sovereignty. Where is sovereignty located in the UK? The monarch originally always held sovereignty. However in 1649 after the English civil war sovereignty in the UK was handed over to parliament after the execution of Charles I, and the running of the country became a dictatorship under Oliver Cromwell. Ever since then, although the monarch is still head of state, parliament has always held supreme power in the land. The monarch still holds theoretical powers such as the command of the army but in practice these powers belong to the executive and ultimately the Prime Minister. Unlike the American presidential system where the President forms only one third of the three areas of power, the British system relies on a majority to form the government. This can sometimes be a problem as the majority party holds all powers because the house of commons makes legislation and the house of lords can only block legislation for so long. The only person in theory that can stop a law being passed is the queen but this would be very unpopular so in practice is not done. Although the House of Commons and ultimately the executive hold supreme power, whilst we are a part of the European Union we must follow the laws and guidelines set by them. This was shown when be introduced the Human Rights Act after the EU had made it law. So although in theory the UK could leave the EU if it really disagreed with something, in practice this would not be economically or politically viable and so we are bound by their laws. So although sovereignty ultimately rests with the executive, the monarch still has to agree to laws and the monarch still holds military powers but these are never used in practice. The only constraint to sovereignty is the EU that we could technically leave at anytime. So practically sovereignty in the UK is located within the government but in theory the EU can say ‘no' to our legislation. This is where sovereignty is located in the UK. Why has the UK's un-codified constitution been criticised? Over the years the UK's un-written or un-codified constitution has been criticised. This criticism has not only come from countries with a codified constitution but also within the UK as well. Although the UK constitution is un-codified it has however been around longer than any constitution in the entire world. This says that that fact that it has never been fully written down means that it has had a chance to evolve and so last for a long period of time. Some may argue that the American codified constitution was a necessity, as after the American war of independence the Americans needed a quick constitution straight away in order to run the country. There is no way that a country could have been set up without a codified constitution. The advantage of a codified constitution is that all of the information is there and cannot be removed unless two thirds of the government/senate agree. Acts can only be amended. This could also pose as a disadvantage as a law that needed to be passed quickly would take at least a week to go through all of the houses to be added to the constitution. The advantage of an un-codified constitution is that not everything is in black and white. This is where we get conventions and case law. As not everything in the constitution is set in stone, if something were to be ambiguous then it could be taken to court for a ruling. Also we have conventions that are things that we do but are not written down. The advantage of having an un-codified constitution is that in an emergency and act or law can be added pr removed completely within twenty-four hours as no government can bind another government. So basically there are both advantages and disadvantages of both systems. With an un-codified constitution not everything is set in stone so things can be adjusted from case to case and also it is very quick and easy to change. The disadvantage to this is that this gives a lot of power to the executive and in theory they could run a dictatorship with no one to stop them. This is an advantage of a codified constitution because it is not very easily change and so does not give a lot of power to a few people. The disadvantage of this system is that things take a long time to change and can never be completely removed. Despite both the advantages and disadvantages of both of the systems, each system works best for the country that uses it. So all the UK's constitution has been criticised it obviously works because it has lasted for such a long period of time.