The first contingent of the convicts and their guards landed where Sydney stands today, on January 26, 1788. It was the so-called “First Fleet” and these people were called “first fleeters” Now, Australia Day, January 26, commemorates the landing. Gradually more and more people arrived (they were convicts as well as free settlers) and a number of settlements were founded along the southern and eastern coasts. For the first few years, the colonists were almost entirely dependent on food supplies from overseas but gradually the land around the settlements was brought under cultivation. Soils were generally poor and crop yields low, but better agricultural land was soon found near Parramatta, to the west. Exploratory voyages were also made along the east coast. The boldest was that of Captain Matthew Flinders who, in 1802-1803 circumnavigated the continent.
The Stuart monarchs who succeeded Elizabeth try to impose absolutism and to rule by “divine right”. But the English Parliament, asserting its ancient rights and privileges, challenged them. The result was a struggle that lasted through the better part of the seventeenth century, culminating in the victory of Parliament over the kings. In the age when absolutism triumphed almost everywhere, England was the striking exception of the rule. Growing opposition to the Stuarts centered in Parliament. The Stuarts disliked Parliament, but were dependent upon it because only the House of Commons had the right to levy taxes. The Stuarts insisted they had absolute authority to follow whatever policies they chose. The conflict between Parliament and the king came to a climax under Charles I (king 1625-1649). In 1626 Charles found himself at war with both France and Spain. Parliament refused to grant new taxes until it had had “redress of grievances”. Led by Sir John Eliot, the members of Commons finally forced Charles to sign the “Petition of Right” in 1628. This pact guaranteed certain rights of Parliament and of individual Englishmen against their king.
OEGothicDescription; Position; PronunciationExamplesaaShort back vowel; Mainly in open syllables, when the following one contains a back vowel; English cupmacian (to make), habban (to have)бaiLong back [a] vowel; In any kind of syllables; English starstбn (a stone), hбtan (to call)жaShort back vowel; Met mainly in closed syllables, or in open ones, if the next syllable contains a front vowel; English baddжg (a day), wжter (water)ж 'й, бLong back vowel; as Gothic й found only in some verbal forms, as Gothic б is the result of the so - called i - mutation; German za "hlenstж ' lon (stolen), hж ' lan (to cure)ei, ai, aShort front vowel; as Gothic i, ai noticed only in some infinitives, otherwise is result of the mutation of i; English bedsengean (to sing)йуLong front [e] vowel; resulted from the i - mutation of у; German Meerdйman (to judge)ii, ieShort front vowel; can be either stable or unstable, the unstable sound can interchange with ie and y; English stillbindan (to bind), niht - nyht (a night)нieLong front [i] vowel; also stable and unstable (mutating to э); English stealwrнtan (to write), hн - hэ (they)ou, auShort back vowel; English costcoren (chosen)уoLong back [o] vowel; English storescуc (divided)uu, auShort back vowel; used only when the next syllable contains another back vowel; English bookcuron (they chose)ъъLong back [u] vowel; English stoollъcan (to look)yuShort front vowel; i - mutation of u; German fu" nfgylden (golden)эъLong front [y] vowel; i - mutation of ъ, German glu "henmэs (mice)a.oA special short sound met only before nasals in closed syllablesmonn (a man)
Early (Prenormative) Grammars. Until the 17th century the term "grammar" in English was applied only to the study of Latin. This usage was a result of the fact that Latin grammar was the only grammar learned in schools ("grammar" schools) and that until the end of the 16th century there were no grammars of English. One of the earliest and most popular Latin grammars written in English, by William Lily, was published in the first half of the 16th century and went through many editions. This work was very important for English grammar as it set a standard for the arrangement of material and thus Latin paradigms with their English equivalents easily suggested the possibility of presenting English forms in a similar way, using the same terminology as in Latin grammar. A striking example of the two approaches to the description of English is the divergence of views on the problem of English case system. Though Bullokar mentioned 5 cases and in a grammar published in 1749 and reprinted as late as 1819 (Th. Dilworth, A New Guide to the English Tongue) the number of cases both of nouns and adjectives is said to be 6 (as it is in Lily's grammar), in two grammars which appeared during the first half of the 17th century, Ben Jonson's and Ch. Butler's English grammars, the number of cases is two, while in J. Wallis's Grammatica Linguae Anglicanae (1653), which was written in Latin, in spite of the author's intention to break entirely with Latin tradition, the category of case is said to be non-existent and the 's form is defined as a possessive adjective. This view was supported by an early 18th century grammar, attributed to John Brightland. The authors of the second half of the 18th century seemed to prefer the two-case system, which was revived at the end of the 19th century in scientific grammar. In 19th century school grammars a three-case system prevailed.
Celtic tribes crossed the Channel and starting to settle in Britain already in the 7th century BC. The very word "Britain" seems to be the name given by the pre-Celtic inhabitants of the island, accepted by first Indo-Europeans. The Celts quickly spread over the island, and only in the north still existed non-Indo-European peoples which are sometimes called "Picts" (the name given by Romans). Picts lived in Scotland and on Shetland Islands and represented the most ancient population of the Isles, the origin of which is unknown. Picts do not seem to leave any features of their language to Indo-European population of Britain - the famous Irish and Welsh initial mutations of consonants can be the only sign of the substratum left by unknown nations of Britain. At the time the Celts reached Britain they spoke the common language, close to Gaulish in France. But later, when Celtic tribes occupied Ireland, Northern England, Wales, their tongues were divided according to tribal divisions. These languages will later become Welsh, Irish Gaelic, Cornish, but from that time no signs remained, because the Celts did not invent writing yet. Not much is left from Celtic languages in English. Though many place names and names for rivers are surely Celtic (like Usk - from Celtic *usce "water", or Avon - from *awin "river"), the morphology and phonetics are untouched by the Celtic influence. Some linguists state that the word down comes from Celtic *dún "down"; other examples of Celtic influence in place names are tne following:
Although а great deal of rail 1rаffiс in Britain is handled by block trains from point of origin to destination, about onefifth of the originating tonnage is less than a train-load. This means that wagons must be sorted on their journey. In Britain there are about 600 terminal points on a 12,000 mile network whitch is served by over 2500 freight trains made up of varying assortments of 249,000 wagons and 3972 locomotives, of witch 333 are electric. This requires the speed of calculation and the information storage and classification capacity of the modern computer, whitch has to be linked to points dealing with or generating traffic troughout the system.The computer input, witch is by punched cards, covers details of loading or unloading of wagons and their movements in trains, the composition of trains and their departures from and arrivals at yards ,and the whereabouts of locomotives. The computer output includes information on the balanse of locomotives at depots and yards, with particulars of when maintenanse examinations are due, the numbers of empty and loaded wagons, with aggregate weight and brake forse, and wheder their movement is on time, the location of empty wagons and a forecast of those that will become available, and the numbers of trains at any location, with collective train weigts and individual details of the component wagons.
That victory launched the era of congressional Reconstruction (usually called Radical Reconstruction), which lasted 10 years starting with the Reconstruction Acts of 1867. Under that legislation, the 10 remaining Southern states (Tennessee had been readmitted to the Union in 1866) were divided into five military districts; and, under supervision of the U.S. Army, all were readmitted between 1868 and 1870. Each state had to accept the Fourteenth or, if readmitted after its passage, the Fifteenth Constitutional Amendment, intended to ensure civil rights of the freedmen. The newly created state governments were generally Republican in character and were governed by political coalitions of blacks, carpetbaggers (Northerners who had gone into the South), and scalawags (Southerners who collaborated with the blacks and carpetbaggers). The Republican governments of the former Confederate states were seen by most Southern whites as artificial creations imposed from without, and the conservative element in the region remained hostile to them. Southerners particularly resented the activities of the Freedmen's Bureau, which Congress had established to feed, protect, and help educate the newly emancipated blacks. This resentment led to formation of secret terroristic organizations, such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Knights of the White Camelia. The use of fraud, violence, and intimidation helped Southern conservatives regain control of their state governments, and, by the time the last Federal troops had been withdrawn in 1877, the Democratic Party was back in power.
The process of industrialization in England and on the Continent created an enlargement of the middle classes, e.g. the merchants, bankers, etc. Therefore, it became increasingly difficult for the conservative landowning aristocrats and monarchs to retain their power over society. The term liberalism was first used in England in around 1819. Liberal ideas of freedom of trade, freedom of speech etc. were largely shaped by the French Revolution, as were most other political doctrines. Both the advancement of the political doctrine of liberalism and the political ideas themselves were different in every country of Europe. The liberals of Britain and France were the most influential, therefore, I shall focus this essay predominantly on their influence, until the year 1832, on their respective countries in order to answer the question to what extent their influence was different. In the first chapter, I will deal with the political and economical ideologies 'all' liberals have in common. The next chapter will elaborate to what extent those liberalist ideas influenced society in France, until 1830. In the third, I will discuss the influence of liberalism in Britain up to the year 1832. Classical Liberalism: The ideologies of liberalism varied extensively in Europe from country to country, but there were also many similarities in their views of society. Liberals viewed men to be desirous for increasingly more property and respect of others, because liberals believed that the only way to get ahead in life was to gain property and respect, for the more property the better position in society. Liberals recognized that there was a need for some minimum form of government, otherwise there would be the inconvenience of every man having to be his own judge and policeman, but it would not need to be a very strong government. Government was only to restrain occasional transgressors; it was to protect the propertied against the non-propertied. Since the people also needed to be protected from an arbitrary or absolutist government, the government should be under the ultimate control of the propertied. Therefore, there should remain the power to remove or alter the legislative power, when it acts contrary to the trust that was placed in it. In other words, liberals believed in the ability of self-government and self-control, because they considered man to be rational in that man was capable of making independent decisions about his life. However, they did acknowledge the need for a weak government. This government was to be a constitutional monarchy, in which freedom of the press, freedom of speech, free rights of assembly, religion, and freedom to dispose over private property would be preserved in the best possible way. They were convinced that the legislative and the executive branch of government should be separate and that their actions should be mutually restrictive (based on the idea of "checks and balances" by John Locke). As stated previously, they were also convinced of the idea that only male property owners should be allowed to vote, because they had a stake in society. How much property was needed to be eligible to vote was a hot topic of debate amongst liberals all over Europe. Liberals were not democrats in that they supported the idea of universal male suffrage, for they feared the excesses of mob rule. However, they did believe that every adult male should have the opportunity to accumulate property to become eligible to vote and that all men were equal before the law. A liberal slogan was that careers should be open to the talents. None of the liberals in Europe was in favor of the unification of laborers into labor unions for it would be an artificial interference with the natural laws - supply and demand, diminishing returns - of the market. Moreover, liberals advocated an economy of "laissez faire", i.e. free trade; to be achieved by getting rid of or at least lowering the tariffs. They were of the opinion that free trade would be beneficial to all the countries involved, for with free trade, it would be easier to exchange goods. Consequently, each country would produce what it was most suited for, thereby increasing the country's standard of living and general wealth. The doctrine of liberalism was generally supported by men of business, bankers, merchants, the new capitalists ("the cotton lords"), who owed their position to their own hard work and intelligence; they were "self-made" men, who would do anything to increase their property within the means proved by the law, but not beyond. Some progressive landowners that wanted to improve their property joined these mostly 'new' classes in their support of liberalism. Contrary to what one might think, most liberals were, to a certain extent, concerned with the situation of the workers. They created several possibilities for the workers to obtain their own property: "savings banks, mutual benefit societies, and institutions of technical and vocational education" (Sperber; p66). There was one field, however, in which the liberals did favor strong governmental activity: the field of public education. They believed that well organized effective public education would create a strong society of male property owners who had a voice in public affairs. The influence of liberalism in France: In France, problems arose when Charles X became king in 1824. The reforms that were instituted after the constitution of 1814 were reversed. The Catholic clergy started to reclaim their rights to the control of public education. Sacrilegious behavior became increasingly more prohibited by law; e.g. sacrilege in church buildings became punishable by death. A strong opposition began to rise against these extreme actions by the reactionary government. In March 1830, the Chamber of Deputies - led by Lafitte and Casimir-Pйrier - passed a vote of no confidence in the government. The king retorted by proclaiming that new elections were to be held after he had dissolved the Chamber. According to the result of the new elections, previous actions made by the king were to be rejected. On his own authority king Charles, infuriated by this outcome, now issued four decrees, on July 26 1830. The first ordinance contained the order to dissolve the newly elected Chamber immediately, before its first meeting. The second proclaimed the institution of governmental censorship on all forms of press. Another reduced the right to vote in such a way that none of the bourgeois classes retained their suffrage. It concentrated all the political power back into the hands of the conservative aristocrats. The last decree called for new elections on the basis of the previous three decrees. On July 27, 1830, the July Revolution broke out in Paris. It were the republicans, mostly consisting of students, other intelligentsia, and working-class leaders, that undertook action, because they saw their chance to achieve their ideal of universal male suffrage. Strangely, it was not the upper-middle class that acted although they were the ones brutally deprived of their right to vote the day before. For three days, Paris was the stage of popular revolt. Charles X stepped down and fled to England, because he did not want to be taken captive by the angry revolutionists, the army refused to defend him against. After the abdication of Charles X, the liberals still wanted to continue with the existing system of constitutional monarchism, but with a king they could trust, which is completely in line with their view of government of constitutional monarchism, shown in the first chapter. However, they did liberalize it in that there was to be no more absolutism, the Chamber of Peers would be no longer be hereditary, and the Chamber of Deputies would be elected by a doubled electoral body (from 100,000 to 200,000). The Chambers agreed that the new king would be the Duke of Orlйans, proposed by Marquis de Lafayette, who was crowned on August 7, 1830. The upper-bourgeoisie - merchants, bankers, and industrialists - benefited most from the new system. To them, this new system was to be the end of political progress. After the revolution of 1830, liberalism became the governmental doctrine that was only interested to preserve the status quo. Liberalism in Britain: In England the Tory government had already begun to liberalize in the decade preceding the July Revolution in Paris. The Tory party had reduced tariffs and allowed British colonies to trade with countries other than Britain. Skilled workers were now permitted to emigrate and industrial manufacturers could export machinery, thus revealing British industrial secrets. These measures came very close to the liberal ideal of free trade. The Tories did not only liberalize the economy, but they had also started to reform some social aspects of society as well, notably in the direction of freedom of religion. Permitting Protestants to hold and run for public office had extensively reduced the power of the Church of England. From now on Catholics received the same rights as others. The introduction of an official police force, that was to keep protests, angry crowds, and occasional riots under control, was unprecedented in any European country. The main injustice in Britain, at that time, was the unequal distribution of representation of the people in the House of Commons. "It was estimated that in about 1820 less than 500 men, most of them members of the House of Lords, really selected the majority of the House of Commons". As a consequence, of the Industrial Revolution the population was shifting considerably to the north, while the population used to be concentrated predominantly in the south. However, no new boroughs (urban centers having the right to elect members of Parliament) had been created, since 1688, to the displeasure of the northern industrial urban centers. In 1830, probably influenced by the July Revolution in Paris, the issue of reforming the House of Commons was raised again by the minority party, the Whigs. As an answer to the enormous outburst by the Duke of Wellington, in defense of the existing system, a Whig ministry took over the government. Unfortunately, the bill failed to pass the Commons and the ministry resigned. Fearing popular revolt, the Tories refused to form a new government. The Whigs returned and now the bill did pass the House of Commons, but it stranded in the House of Lords. The country was on the eve of a revolution if the bill would not become law. The Whigs went to the king with this argument trying to persuade him to create enough new Lords to change the majority of the House of Lords in favor of the Whigs. The Lords surrendered and they approved the bill. In April 1832, the bill finally became law. The new law was a typical British creation. In stead of adopting the new ideas of the French - that each representative should represent approximately the same number of voters - they preferred to make some alteration in the existing system. The property owners and their principal employees - doctors, lawyers, etc.- would under the new law, elect the members of the House of Commons. The new law came down to the redistribution of votes, not to a substantial enlargement of the electoral body (from 500,000 to about 813,000). Conclusion: In my opinion, the influence of the liberals in France should have been far greater than that of the liberals in England, because the liberals in France had obtained the control over the government. Therefore, it would seem to be easier for them to institute legal measures to benefit their political and economical ideologies. However, they refused to adopt and implement the successful English policies. Consequently, the main difference between the two countries remained that England continued to flourish and easily be the leader of the world economy. In England, the control of government by the Tory party, after 1832, reduced the influence of capitalism on society. Consequently, legislation was passed to somewhat protect the workers against the continuing lust for profit of their employers. This contrary to France where only the most well to do were in control of politics not much was done to relieve the condition of labor. Concluding I believe that, in England, even though the liberals did not have direct influence on the course of politics, English society did come very close to some of the liberal ideals, e.g. constitutional monarchy, emigration of skilled workers, colonies trading with other countries, etc. It is, therefore, fair to say that, although the liberals did not have the direct influence on public policies, the influence exerted by the liberalist ideologies was far greater than in France.
There have been various attempts to sympathize the range of theories which have been put forward to explain the Northern Ireland conflict and to relate these two practical remedies and solutions to the problem. The diversity of the theories which have been put forward have necessarily limited attempts to test them concisely using empirical data. For example, aside from the theories such as religion and class which have been most widely canvassed, explanations as diverse as Freudian social psychology and caste have been put forward. Clearly it is impossible to attempt to test all these theories using survey data, and for the purposes of this analysis, only the major theories are examined. There is a fundamental dichotomy in these theories between those, which are economic in nature and non-economic. Each has particular implications for the future and for the possibility of solving the conflict. From the economic interpretation it logically follows that the conflict is essentially bargainable, and that a change in socioeconomic conditions will after the intensity of the conflict. Better living conditions, more jobs and material affluence will make people less interested in an atomistic conflict centering on religion. By contrast, most non-economic theories imply that it is a non-bargainable, zero- sum conflict: the gains of one side will always be proportional to the losses of the other. These theories are summarized in the words: « the problem is that there is no solution». The Irish, according to popular account are an intensely historically minded people. Present day problems they explain by what seems to others an unnecessary long and involved recital of event so distant as to shade into the gloom of prehistory. History indeed lies at the basis as to shade into propagandist issue of contemporary Ireland: one nation or to? To many radicals, this issue is already an archaism in a world increasingly dominated by transnational capitalism. They prefer to substitute an analysis of « divided class» for an outdated propagandist device adopted to split the workers. The idea of « two nations» occupying the same territory has a long provenance throughout the world.
Between 1934 and 1950, 52nd Street between Fifth and Sixth Avenues was the place for music. The block was jam-packed with monochromatic five-story brownstone buildings in whose drab and cramped street-level interiors there were more clubs, bars and bistros than crates in an overstocked warehouse. 52nd Street started as a showcase for the small-combo Dixieland Jazz of the speakeasy era then added the big-band swing of the New Deal 30s. Before its untimely demise, hastened by changing real estate values, The Street adopted the innovations of bop and cool. So in just a few hours of club hopping, a listener could walk through the history of Jazz on 52nd Street. Favorites included pianist Art Tatum, singer Billie Holiday, tenor saxophonist Coleman Hawkins, Count Basie and his Big Band, trumpeter Roy Eldridge, pianist Errol Garner, trumpeter Dizzy Gillespie and alto saxophonist Charlie Parker.
First, lets estimate the prosecutors (McClure) arguments. Almost undoubtful fact is that Ted Chaplin was in the house of Casserley and saw his death, and he is a very good object for prosecutors attack, especially in the light of his own description of the story. There is a slight chance of mistake in this statement but it is almost neglectible. We can suppose that Percy Casserley was murdered, if he was murdered at all, not by Ted Chaplin but Georgina Casserley, his own wife. Ted Chaplin claimed then that he was the witness of Casserleys death to pull any possible accusations away from Georgina Casserley. If so, he succeeded and Georgina was not really blamed; eleven days of her imprisonment (provided mainly by the social critics of the moral aspect of the love story of her and Ted Chaplin) can not be compared with twelve years for Ted Chaplin.
Robert Cohn was a member, through his father, of one of the richest Jewish families in New York, and through his mother of one of the oldest. At the military school where he prepped for Princeton, and played a very good end on the football team, no one had made him race-conscious. No one had ever made him feel he was a Jew, and hence any different from anybody else, until he went to Princeton. He was a nice boy, a friendly boy, and very shy, and it made him bitter. He took it out in boxing, and he came out of Princeton with painful self-consciousness and the flattened nose, and was married by the first girl who was nice to him. He was married five years, had three children, lost most of the fifty thousand dollars his father left him, the balance of the estate having gone to his mother, hardened into a rather unattractive mould under domestic unhappiness with a rich wife, and just when he had made up his mind to leave his wife she left him and went off with a miniature-painter… We had several fines after the coffee, and I said I must be going. Cohn had been talking about the two of us going off somewhere on a weekend trip. He wanted to get out of town and get in a good walk. I suggested we fly to Strasbourg and walk up to Saint Audile, or somewhere or other in Alsace. “I know a girl in Strasbourg who can show us the town," I said. Somebody kicked me under the table. I thought it was accidental and went on: “Shes been there three years and knows everything there is to know about the town. Shes a swell girl". (Surmelian 25)
Question not idle. The reality all insists on a urgency and extreme importance of all-round consideration of this question both with social - moral, and from the economic points of view more actively. The real rate of unemployment in many conducting capitalist countries, first of all, such as USA, Germany, England, France, Japan and others stably keeps at a level from 6 до10 and more than percents(interests). In the backward countries, such as Russia (received the specified status as a result of disorder of the country and restoration of capitalism in his(its) ugliest form), Turkey, Greece, Pakistan, Afghanistan and others the actual rate of unemployment even above also tends to the further growth, that gets already menacing sizes for economic safety of the political attitudes(relations) in these countries. What economic and moral essence of unemployment how real factor of ability to live of a manpower and population as a whole?, from the economic point of view, the manpower is at all less important factor of economic development, than such natural resources as minerals (first of all petroleum, gas, coal, iron ore both ores of colour and precious metals), which value especially not renewed, constantly grows in process of their improvement, and also created by work of the man the basic industrial and non-productive funds, means of manufacture, factor of which operation comes nearer to the limit. But from among major factors of manufacture the manpower is the main and conducting factor of any industrial and non-productive activity, without which any production in general is impossible. Therefore underestimation of this factor in a national economy or especially his(its) complete ignoring speaks about not professional and simply elementary illiterate approach to economic activity, and public build, admitting essentially incomplete use of a manpower in economic activity doomed on dying off and quite proved replacement by more balanced socio economic attitudes(relations) in a society(community)., as to the population of a planet, the return tendency here is observed, namely - on a background of annually decreasing stocks of natural resources, population everyone 20 years are increased almost twice and to the present time already has exceeded an allowable level of vital resources for our planet. The prediction Malthus comes true that the population will grow constantly faster, than manufacture of products of a feed(meal) for maintenance of his(its) ability to live. The especially actively specified balance began to be broken from the moment of activization of scientific and technical revolution, which ecological consequences have rendered the extremely negative influence on a condition of natural environment(Wednesday). In this connection is reasonably interesting to remind one of bible predictions that come such time, when the people will eat dross of the ability to live, " … as dogs, swallowing waste ". Amazing concurrence to reality of our days.the present time and without that the low level of technical safety of the industrial enterprises, first of all in coal branch of Russia, has conceded the priority to observance of the requirements of economic safety of the coal companies, as independent legal persons, and population of coal regions, which has appeared the hostage of the financial crisis smoothly passing in economic and system crisis of the usual attitudes(relations) in a society(community). To avoid negative consequences proceeding recession in real sector of economy and in financial sphere of activity, despite of significant injections from the earlier saved resources stabilization of fund, will hardly be presented possible(probable) on a lot of the following objective and subjective reasons and their negative consequences., to stop growth of unemployment in branch and in the country as a whole, despite of titanic of effort of administrative structures on management of economic activity at all levels of management of economy, it was not possible, that was obvious right at the beginning recession in real sector. Opposite(on the contrary), during 2009-2011. The quantity(amount) of the unemployeds only on the official data has increased more than on 1500 thousand the man, not considering the considerably increased inflow workers from near foreign countries. The moral consequences it are simply awful. Difficultly even to itself to present, when complete forces the healthy man, the father of one or two children having on the contents the elderly of the parents and young wife, loses for the reasons, independent of him,(it,) work as a unique(sole) source of existence and by virtue of these circumstances is compelled at first to sell the habitation and everything, that in it(him) is, that any time to support the family, and then becomes homeless or criminal, as the unemployment benefit does not suffice even on payment ЖКХ, and on a feed(meal), medicine, the footwear and clothes does not remain practically anything. And such helpless on fault of the new proprietors and state of the people with each year and even quarter becomes ever more and more. Them already legions, exceeding on number army in times. Thus the criminality after growth of unemployment not only grows quantitatively, but she(it) changes also the qualitative structure and social structure. Now criminals become not only hardened repeat offenders, thieves, burglar and other chronically criminal elements, and people with maximum formation(education), workers with the large experience of industrial work, woman (mainly in young age), children and even the invalids.socio economic attitudes(relations) in a society(community) are inadmissible. Hence, on one only to this reason such public build also his(its) elite layers have no any moral right on the further existence and functioning, and clumsy attempts to keep usual of rules(situations) in a society(community) doomed on a failure. If the state be not capable to carry out reforming economic activity from above, naturally and inevitably reforming from below will follow. The historical development not only Russia, but also many other countries of Europe and world repeatedly proved validity of this law of public development of civilizations.state bodies of authorities admitting a high level of unemployment, corruption and other criminality have no any moral right to be and further at authority, therefore owe or accept urgent and resolute measures on liquidation of unemployment and its(her) constant companion - criminality, or to leave in a resignation and to concede these places to anothers, more qualified, ideologically sustained and morally steady experts capable to organize work in the country so that to involve resolutely all basic resources in the country, first of all human, natural, industrial both non-productive basic and circulating capitals for release of commodity production in volumes and quality ensuring need(requirement) of the population of the country. The economists of many countries of the world already for a long time and repeatedly enough is proved asserted(approved), that the presence even of insignificant unemployment speaks about inability and inability of the state to operate economy of the country. The most advanced experts in the field of economy and philosophy confidently both enough is proved and convincingly speak, that if in the country there is even one the not working citizen longer, the government of such country has no any moral, socio economic and even of the legal right and further to operate this country and owes immediately or accept urgent and resolute measures to employment of such citizens, or submit to a resignation, but keep unemployment in the country it does not owe by definition.in it our state is high time and his(its) administrative structures with Olympic calmness look at mass growing disaster of a significant part of the population and prepare the new reports and messages to the people about growing well-being of a nation. That can be even worse, than growing rate of unemployment and poverty of huge weight of a manpower of the country in its(her) base regions ensuring an industry and the population by a heat, light, electrical energy, grain, meat, fish, oil and other strategic goods on a background of such barefaced hypocrisy of the governors who have taken on the responsibility for ostensibly effective development of a national economy and well-being of the people after end of reorganization. In the richest natural resources to the country and huge means of manufacture created per the previous centuries to admit(allow) highest in the world a rate of unemployment is it is necessary to note as outstanding "achievement" in sphere of management of a national economy, and, speaking seriously, as result of inept and illiterate management of the country. Thus it is necessary to remind, that those who has not tested on itself of a rule(situation) of the unemployed, that never will understand of all tragedy of the usual hardest rule(situation) in economy and in social sphere of ability to live of coal and other industrial regions of the country. Thus also there is almost transition, not appreciable on the first sight, from recession of manufacture to recession of a manpower and population - last source of preservation of ability to live in the country. After recession in financial sphere and real sector of economy uncontrollably grows recession in intellectual and spiritual spheres of ability to live, that is less appreciable on the first sight, but much more considerably and inevitably will have an effect already in the near future literally in all spheres of ability to live of the country.it is possible to close eyes and to not see that after growth of unemployment by higher rates the criminality grows, including criminal, mass begging, teenage homelessness, growing addiction of a significant part of the growing up population, alcoholism and seksomaniya in minor age, the mass foul language, tongue-tie and not only among the deputies of State Duma, but also on radio and TV, that in general is inadmissible by definition, together with other displays of aspirations to satisfaction of the most primitive needs(requirements) Simplest by a way. A society(community), in which crime rate and the quantity(amount) of the persons ready to make of a crime exceeds an allowable limit of a parity(ratio) of criminals and ready to their fulfilment with a level of the legislative citizens dooms itself on economic, moral and intellectual collapse.unless such tendency of development spirituality and material rule(situation) in the country is not practical realization of the widely known program of the former director ЦРУ John Foster Dulles, and also in the recent past of the former prime minister of Great Britain Margaret Thatcher and former state secretary of USA Madeleine Albright, number, calling for reduction, of the Russians in Russia by 2050 up to 50 mln. The man, including Russian - up to 15 millions for service of needs(requirements) of the American elite and world(global) Jewish establishment. When the governors of the country resignedly carry out puppet functions domestic oligarchs and their nearest environment, it certainly not only extremely unpleasantly and unworthy. But in any measure is tolerant, but when to this oppression the necessity is added still to carry out the same functions also under pressure foreign oligopsony, such bends becomes simply intolerable for the population of the country, even for its(her) unlucky governors.now our chiefs can not be defined(determined) with that in any way, that now is an overall objective and basic criterion of development of our economy and our society(community).past 20 years of reforming of economy and public life in Russia already in significant volumes the need(requirement) and necessity for declaration has ripened as priority national idea maintenance in the prime order of health, safety and well-being of a nation in a harmonious and close combination to the further development of intelligence (first of all professional trainings) and spirituality of a nation, meaning under spirituality first of all education, preservation and development of such moral qualities as validity, honesty, decency, respect for work (main source of preservation of a nation), and also to the old men, women and children. Already enough has ripened and it is time to realize, to understand and to accept to execution(performance) realization real and already of operative measures on an output(exit) from financial, economic and social - political crisis, so is unexpected (in spheres of management of the country and regions) struck economy of our country, in spite of the fact that there are a lot of domestic economists not from spheres of management, and science convincingly enough and is proved predicted inevitability of approach of crisis in USA and then in other countries, not excluding and Russia. Truly prophets is not present in the fatherland and principle - wanted as better, and has left as always, became the main principle of management of economic safety in the country.the most dangerous factors of the current ability to live in the country are: corruption, mass and regular bribery at all levels of management of socio economic life in the country, merging of business with bureaucratic by the device and first of all with judicial system (already completely corrupt and fenced by bayonets of power structures), inducing complete absorption of moral principles by thirst of a profit passing in the mass order in boundless greed, absorbing the rests of high moral principles of ability to live in the country. Such system of the attitudes(relations) in a society(community) guarantees deadlock prospect of development of a nation and their next outcome by the most barbarous revolutionary way. It is necessary to note, that the main reason of arising problems in a society(community), certainly, is the change of the proprietor of means of manufacture in the beginning 90 years of the last century, that has taken place under influence and pressure as on the part of aggressive circles of USA, and own crooks and swindlers patiently waiting of the moment of easing of state authority and, being covered the democratic slogans and deceiving the population to carry out criminal commercial and social - political plans. The tolerant attitude(relation) to new bourgeoisie still could be kept, if the new owners instead of export stole of the capital abroad would put the investments in development of domestic manufacture and on improvement of a social level of the workers and pensioners, but the passion to a boundless profit can cause only new shocks and new redistribution of the property. unemployment corruption market economy
Pаrt оf Lеnіns grеаtnеss wаs hіs аbіlіty tо sее whеn аnd hоw tо fіght fоr thіs. Hіs аchіеvеmеnt cаn bе gаugеd nоt оnly frоm thе rеvоlutіоn whіch succееdеd іn 1917, but frоm thе оnе thаt fаіlеd іn 1905. Thе Sоvіеts wеrе dеfеаtеd; іn Pеtеrsburg thеіr lеаdеrs wеrе аrrеstеd аt thе bеgіnnіng оf Dеcеmbеr аnd іn Mоscоw аn аttеmptеd іnsurrеctіоn wаs smаshеd by mіlіtаry fоrcе. Іn 1905 thе bulk оf thе аrmy rеmаіnеd lоyаl tо thе Tsаr. But thе Bоlshеvіks hаd plаyеd а lеаdіng rоlе іn thе strugglе, thеy hаd rеcruіtеd tеns оf thоusаnds оf thе bеst wоrkеrs, thеy hаd cоnsіstеntly аrguеd clеаr аnd hаrd аgаіnst thе rеfоrmіsts аnd fоr thе rеvоlutіоnаry оvеrthrоw оf thе аutоcrаcy, аnd thеy hаd lеаrnеd аn еnоrmоus аmоunt іn thе cоursе оf thеsе strugglеs. Thе wоrkіng clаss wаs thоrоughly dеfеаtеd by mіd-1907, but іt wаs nоt dеfеаtеd fоr еvеr. Thе Bоlshеvіks hаd buіlt thе cоrе оf а rеvоlutіоnаry pаrty, whіch, іf іt cоuld survіvе іn thе yеаrs оf rеаctіоn, wоuld bе іn а strоng pоsіtіоn tо lеаd thе wоrkіng clаss tо vіctоry whеn thе clаss rоsе аgаіn.
Wоrkеrs аrе tаught оrgаnіzаtіоn nоt by thеіr supеrіоr іntеllіgеncе оr оutsіdе аgіtаtоrs, but by thе cаpіtаlіsts. Cоncеntrаtеd gеоgrаphіcаlly іn urbаn аrеаs, wоrkеrs аrе furthеr оrgаnіzеd іn fаctоry gаngs, аssеmbly lіnеs, wоrk shіfts, lаbоr tеаms, аnd sо оn - thаt іs, by thе оrgаnіzаtіоn оf thе dіvіsіоn оf lаbоr, tо whіch cаpіtаlіsm hаs cоntrіbutеd sо mіghtіly. Cаpіtаlіsm hаs nо chоіcе аbоut tеаchіng іts wоrkеrs thе wоndеrs оf оrgаnіsаtіоn аnd lаbоr sоlіdаrіty, bеcаusе wіthоut thеsе thе systеm cаnnоt оpеrаtе. Cаpіtаl “аssеmblеs thе bоurgеоіs аnd thе prоlеtаrіаns іn lаrgе cіtіеs, іn whіch іndustry cаn bе cаrrіеd оn mоst prоfіtаbly, аnd by thіs hеrdіng tоgеthеr оf grеаt mаssеs іn оnе spоt mаkеs thе prоlеtаrіаns cоnscіоus оf thеіr pоwеr.” Іt еxpоunds thе nееd fоr dіscіplіnе, аnd аt thе sаmе tіmе іnvоluntаrіly dеmоnstrаtеs thе dеfеcts оf burеаucrаtіc dіscіplіnе. Іt еnfоrcеs cеntrаlіzаtіоn оf еffоrt, аnd glоrіfіеs thе аdvаntаgеs оf cоmbіnеd lаbоr аnd thе subоrdіnаtіоn оf іndіvіduаl sеlf-іntеrеst tо grоup nееds. Іt sоcіаlіzеs mаssеs оf wоrkеrs іn оnе plаcе аnd subjеcts thеm tо sіmultаnеоus rеsеntmеnts. Thе wоrkіng clаss cаn sаy: Thе оrgаnіzаtіоn yоu tеаch mе І wіll еxеcutе, аnd іt shаll gо hаrd but І wіll bеttеr thе іnstructіоn. ”
AFTER the initial stages of consciousness-raising, after the first rage had died down, the Womens Liberation Movement had begun to question, to ask where the oppression had come from, and try to work out the wax forward. Radical in its belief that a new society was necessary, the movement was strongly influenced by the New Left with its emphasis on conscious and experience. The social group of which the New Left was composed white, middle class, students and the intellectually inclined had weighed the «affluent society» in the balance and found it wanting. The housewife epitomised this affluent world of gadgets, and in fact was one herself. As Betty Friedan put it, she found herself with a vague, inexplicable feeling of «Is this all?» Alienation and feelings of powerlessness provided the impetus for the growth of the Womens Liberation Movement.