Company- Samsung Electronics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Company- Samsung Electronics - Essay Example 2. BRIEF HISTORY Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. was established in 1969. It was one of the top divisions of the Samsung Group which was founded by Byung-Chull Lee. The name Samsung meant in Korea as "three stars." His first line of business was sugar refinery. Then few years later, Lee entered the manufacturing business. He also built other lines of businesses in 1960s such as insurance, broadcasting, securities and department stores. On late 1960s, Samsung Electronics began its operations with the help of some American, European, and Japanese manufacturers. As the company entered into the world of electronics, they made a huge investment to train their employees about the technologies used at the same time partnered with several overseas companies to make it possible (Funding Universe, n.d.). The 1970s period marked the beginning of Samsung's competitive vision to be the world's top contender in manufacturing electronics. The company's pride was the development of various electronics items which include semiconductors, computers, telecommunications hardware and finished consumer electronics products (Samsungn.d.a). In 1980s, the company expanded their business in the form of exports and partnering with other big companies and other suppliers of technology from other countries. They made huge sales and profits from export. In 1990s, the company experienced crisis in which it rooted from the crisis that the Korean government went through during the 1997 International Monetary Fund crisis. However, the company made a full stand during the crisis by adopting a series of restructuring as a form of rescue operation. The company was successful on their risky move. In the new millenium, the company spread even more their vision as they proclaimed to the world their plan of becoming the world's top producer and exporter of digital electronics. 3. SCOPE OF ITS INTERNATIONAL MARKETING 3.1 GOVERNMENT VS. INDUSTRY â€Å"Industrial transformation is the process in which an industry changes its production technology, market distribution, product scope, and location† (Shin & Ho, 1997). Government policies are among the factors that affect the transformation (Shin & Ho, 1997). On January 28, 1969, the Electronics Industry Promotion Law was enacted by the Korean government. This law was to promote major electronics export industry by developing new technology products and increase sales activities outside the country (Amsden, 1989). On that year also, development and training with tax incentives, low-cost loans and direct subsidies promotion were provided by the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI). Samsung, as one of the chaebols (domestic conglomerates), was one of the companies who received these benefits from the government (Dedrick & Kraemer, 1998). 3.2 DEVELOPMENTS WITH JOINT VENTURES AND COLLABORATIONS 3.2.1 SAMSUNG’S ENTRY TO ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY - 1970s. After the SEC was established, the company was able to form a joint venture agre ement with foreign companies. First was Sanyo and Sumitomo Trading with 40% and 10% respectively as well as with NEC and Sumitomo Trading. The Samsung-NEC employees went to training in Japan for couple of months to learn the simple products assembly and with the technical assistance agreement; those employees will undergo training annually by NEC's technical experts. Futhermore, with the emergence of Samsung-Sanyo Parts in March 1973, the company was able to produce television parts with tuners, deflection yokes, transformers and

Song of Myself Essay Example for Free

Song of Myself Essay Walt Whitman’s poetry often relies on lists to convey multiple aspects of the world. Indeed, through the catalogues of people, places and things that he uses in his poetry, Whitman is able to display and touch on a breadth of aspects of life that make his poetry applicable to more people and also demonstrate his commitment to showcasing different perspectives. Because he’s able to include so many different things, cataloguing becomes important in not limiting the scope of his poems, and it also provides a unique rhythm to Whitman’s poems that few poets effectively replicate. This cataloguing system is significantly present in his â€Å"Song of Myself,† which features numerous lists and tackles significant themes such as individuality and how people navigate living in the world. Because the nature of the cataloguing poetic device allows the speaker to use multiple things to explain a phenomenon, lists in â€Å"Song of Myself† allow Whitman to explore the complexity of identity and how individuals are formed from social forces and from within. Indeed, the list that I will explore demonstrates that both the body and the soul are important factors for identity development, and that any â€Å"Song of Myself† relies on a variety of things to truly demonstrate identity: influences from others, physicality, spirituality, and a holistic collection of factors from all aspects of the world. It is quite common for Whitman to use the listing poetic device, and he uses it effectively to demonstrate a breadth of subject. For example, in his poem â€Å"I Hear America Singing,† he discusses the â€Å"varied carols I hear; / Those of mechanics – each one singing his, as it should be, blithe and strong; / The carpenter singing his, as he measures his plank or beam / The mason singing his, as he makes ready for work, or leaves off work† (lines 1-4). The poem goes on to include the shoemaker, the mother, and other people who live in America and how exactly each one sings. Indeed, in this poem, Whitman lists numerous different experiences that different faces of the American workforce might have, using their job titles and the common theme of music to illuminate different aspects of American life. Whitman demonstrates how â€Å"Each [is] singing what belongs to her, and to none else; / The day what belongs to the day—At night, the party of young fellows, robust, friendly, / Singing, with open mouths, their strong melodious songs† (lines 8-10), showing that everyone in this list of people each has their own stake on identity and their own voice in the song of America, allowing this list to demonstrate a multifaceted perspective on what identity means and what the actual makeup of a community is. Indeed, this poem is the perfect representation of the Whitman list: not only does it use this list of individuals to make a point about America and individuality at the same time, but the poem relies on the repetitive but varied rhythm that the list provides through its consistent use of a pattern of listing people. This rhythm demonstrates the broader purpose of the list – it provides a consistency and pattern for the poem to base itself off of, thereby showing the interconnectedness of the people discussed in the poem, but also allows each person a large amount of individuality through the poem as well. In particular, Whitman’s â€Å"Song of Myself† is emblematic both of his work in general, especially his most famous Leaves of Grass, and the way in which he uses lists as a poetic device. â€Å"Song of Myself† explores individuality simply through its title, and looks at the numerous ways in which an individual is able to define oneself. Obviously, one can pick oneself apart as an individual and start there: â€Å"My tongue, every atom of my blood, formd from this soil, this air, / Born here of parents born here from parents the same, and their parents the same, / I, now thirty-seven years old in perfect health begin, / Hoping to cease not till death† (Section I). Here, we see the atoms of the speaker of this poem, their origins, and their age, clearly placing an individual at the center of the identity of this speaker. Other forces are at play in this poem, however: Whitman also uses lists to show other forces on identity. He states, â€Å"Trippers and askers surround me, / People I meet, the effect upon me of my early life or the ward and city I live in, or the nation, / The latest dates, discoveries, inventions, societies, authors old and new, / My dinner, dress, associates, looks, compliments, dues, / The real or fancied indifference of some man or woman I love,† (Section IV), demonstrating how a variety of others have also impacted the speaker’s identity and show that any â€Å"Song of Myself† also necessarily includes the voices of others. This poem embodies why Whitman uses lists because it allows him to send a variety of messages that all point back to the individuality of the speaker, even though the lists themselves may or may not be about him. Because of this, Whitman is able to demonstrate a more complicated perspective on identity and also show a number of different factors that can affect it. Indeed, the lists in â€Å"Song of Myself† demonstrate a broad interpretation of identity and the depth of which different identities are connected to one another. Section five of the poem explores the speaker’s relationship with his soul, saying, â€Å"I believe in you my soul, the other I am must not abase itself to you, / And you must not be abased to the other† (Section V). This section of the poem deals directly with the self’s relationship with the soul, and how this aspect of identity is closely related to a larger spiritual realm. The speaker asks the other to â€Å"Swiftly arose and spread around me the peace and knowledge that pass all the argument of the earth,† demonstrating a much broader connection to the world through the soul. Indeed, as the rest of the poem has shown, identity is connected to many different factors such as other people and internal thoughts, but in this section of the poem, Whitman clearly separates the soul from the body and demonstrates that identity is connected to both. The lists in â€Å"Song of Myself† and other Whitman poems allow the poet to depict the interconnectedness of various aspects of identity and life, and also the complexity with which identity is formed. The list itself in Section V also shows how complex the relationship between the body and the soul. Whitman states that the speaker knows â€Å"that the hand of God is the promise of my own, / And I know that the spirit of God is the brother of my own, / And that all the men ever born are also my brothers, and the women my sisters and lovers, / And that a kelson of the creation is love,† (Section V), showing that identity is wrapped up in many different forces. Indeed, the soul is clearly a part of identity, as well as the hand and spirit of God, â€Å"all the men and women ever† are to be considered siblings, and that creation as a larger concept is essential to this speaker and his identity. The list itself continues to compound upon these complexities as the speaker states, â€Å"And limitless are leaves stiff or drooping in the fields, / And brown ants in the little wells beneath them, / And mossy scabs of the worm fence, heapd stones, elder, mullein and poke-weed† (Section V). This natural imagery demonstrates yet another complex relationship with the self’s identity: here, the conversation that the self has with the soul is complicated through its connection with the physical earth and nature, showing yet another aspect of identity that the speaker and â€Å"Song of Myself† must grapple with. This list shows the essential mind/body disconnect present in identity, and also the widespread influences that the world and other people have on oneself. In addition to this one, many of the lists in this poem show how complex identity can be and show how many things constantly affect it. For example, the speaker states, â€Å"The big doors of the country barn stand open and ready, / The dried grass of the harvest-time loads the slow-drawn wagon, / The clear light plays on the brown gray and green intertinged, / The armfuls are packd to the sagging mow. / I am there,† (Section IX), again showing a broad connection to the world and the self’s constant and close relationship with the earth. Not only does this show the world’s relationship with the self, but also the self’s relationship with the natural and the soul. Again, though, it’s not simply spiritual and personal selfhood that dominates the speaker’s mind. Whitman shows other members of society, stating, â€Å"The married and unmarried children ride home to their Thanksgiving dinner, / The pilot seizes the king-pin, he heaves down with a strong arm, / The mate stands braced in the whale-boat, lance and harpoon are ready, / The duck-shooter walks by silent and cautious stretches, / The deacons are ordaind with crossd hands at the altar,† (Section XV), showcasing other ordinary members of society’s interaction with the world. Lists in â€Å"Song of Myself† consistently demonstrate the multiple communities that individuals are involved with. Walt Whitman uses the poetic device of cataloguing consistently in his poetry to demonstrate the multifaceted forces that influence identity formation and the complicated realities of life in the real world. Indeed, throughout all of his different poems, Whitman uses the list to show different perspectives on the world, different types of people, and the many different things that can affect a person’s self. In his â€Å"Song of Myself,† Whitman demonstrates just how complicated a person’s identity is, and how it interacts with the rest of society. Through his lists, he reinforces exactly this: by being able to give notice to many different people, places, things and ideas, Whitman is able to more aptly describe the complexity of the world and, moreover, the difficulty in pinning down identity. These lists show just how difficult it can be to â€Å"sing oneself,† and just how much can go into it – not only do other people, one’s own soul, a connection to nature and the more psychological aspects of selfhood affect someone’s identity, but the holistic aspects of the world and its interactions with people further complicate the speaker’s identity in this poem. Indeed, in a poem all about identity and one’s interactions with the world, lists serve a great role to shed light on the complexities of identity and the ways in which multiple factors influence people.

From Galileo To Hubble Philosophy Essay

From Galileo To Hubble Philosophy Essay The 16th century provided the world with scholars such as Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus, and Lagrange, all of whom helped to advance the scientific phenomenon of space exploration through telescopes with the results of their many experiments. Although over 500 years have passed since these scholars walked the Earth, their discoveries and inventions are still very much used today, and will continue to be used well into the future. From Galileo to Hubble is a great leap in technological advancement. If it were not for Galileo, society would not have todays level of technology used in space exploration. Everything NASA foresees for future projects is always influenced by past research up to four centuries ago. How the does the discoveries from the 16th century influence tomorrows telescopes? Galileo was not the first person to question whether the Earth was truly at the center of the universe. Nicholas Copernicus first wrote about his theory that the sun was the center of the universe in his book, De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Orbs). However, the book was written simply as a hypothetical mathematical problem. Copernicuss theory proposed that the sun was at the center of the universe and the Earth revolved around it. Copernicus did not continue to explore his theory because, it is speculated, he was distracted by trying to follow Aristotles requirement for the law of motion. This law of motion was considered the uniform circular motion of all celestial bodies, which led Copernicus to believe that his theory could only be proven if he went from a geocentric model to a heliocentric model. Galileo then took the Copernican theory and explored it as being the truth. Galileos ideas that Earth was not the center of the universe truly sp arked the scientific revolution. The people of the time were ready for some real answers, although they never spoke of this because of their loyalty to the Church. The idea that the sun was actually the center of the universe went against many Biblical passages. Galileo pointed out that scripture teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go. (The Galileo Project). Before the 16th century, society believed that the earth was at the very center of the universe. Anyone who believed otherwise was condemned by the church and, consequently, society as well. Due to the lack of scientific research, religious ideas were the only ways that people could view the world. They had no scientific evidence to back up any sort of explanations. While there were ideas and theories about the solar system that had yet to be proven, no one at the time had the tool to back up this theory. During the scientific revolution in the 16th century, a scientist named Johannes Kepler proposed three laws of planetary motion. Kepler went on to explain that these accurate descriptions of the motion of any planet and any satellite nearly 400 years ago, and are still by NASA today. Kepler described five different fixed stationary orbits. If it were not for Kelper, society probably would not have the Lagrange points, which are used to give accurate locations of fixed loop hoop orbi ts in-between the earth and the moon. Technology then had to catch up with the theory. An early 16th century scientist came up with a tool that would literally change the outlook of how society perceived the world and later, even the universe. Spectacle maker Hans Lippershey is accredited with the earliest record design of the optical telescope. When word actually got out about this new innovative tool, Galileo Galilei made a name for it. Galileo took the telescope and did what no one else thought of, he courageously pointed it towards the heavens. His theory caused a ripple effect in the scientific community. His unending devotion and determination for discovery led to a better understanding of the universe. He gave other scientists, artists, and philosophers of centuries to come something they can build on. A telescope perfected from Hans Lippershey invention by the simple arrangement of two lenses in a long, narrow tube allowed Galileo to see objects ten times more clearly. With his primitive telescope, Galileo was able to make a number of remarkable discoveries. At the time, people believed the surface of the moon was smooth and flat. However, Galileo found mountains, valleys, and craters on the surface. Not only was Galileo the first man to see the craters of the moon, but he also went on to discover sunspots, the four large moons of Jupiter, and the rings of Saturn. This fire of ideas that Galileo created through his discoveries inspired scientists to create telescopes of increasing size and complexity. With the ever-changing shape and form of telescopes, astronomers have been able to see ever farther into the universe with increased clarity. Although telescopes have revealed much over their nearly 400-year history, they are still limited in what they can show us from Earth. Light pollution, cloud cover and the Earths turbulent atmosphere constantly interfere with telescope views from Earth. No telescope, to date, has been able to overcome these problems. To conquer these problems, scientists decided that a telescope must be placed above the atmosphere, in orbit around the Earth. That is where the Hubble telescope was born. The Hubble telescope, launched in 1990, marks the most significant advance in astronomy since Galileos telescope. This telescope was the first to be launched into orbit and is therefore at the ultimate mountaintop for viewing the universe. Above the distortion of the atmosphere, above rain clouds and light pollution, Hubble has an unobstructed view of the universe. So what did the new telescope discover? Scientists claim that they have used Hubble to observe the most distant stars and galaxies as well as the planets in our solar system. Even twenty years after its launch, Hubble is still in working order. However, the time has come to improve this situation and create something that will go beyond the Hubbles view. It is also important to have something that we are able to do regular maintenance on. By placing a permanent telescope on the moon, we can explore the universe in even greater capacity than the Hubble telescope did. Even today Galileos influence is being felt in the develo pment of telescopes and their increasing ability to explore space. This opportunity to place future space telescopes in superior environments would create a situation where Moon-based crews can easily visit them. It is promising enough that NASA should now begin brainstorming options and opportunities that I will recommend towards them. Telescopes on the Moon, especially instruments capable of feats well beyond the Hubble and Webb, but how can someone demonstrate how to overcome the cons over the pros? Placing telescopes on the moon telescopes could be considered a more stable environment than a telescope in orbit. Thus, placing telescopes within the service range of lunar outposts will have the effect of firming up the future for those outposts, and also receive funding necessary to keep them operational and growing. The biggest question is can you improve on the next telescope by creating one ultimate telescope or developing many with variety of task giving all while keeping within a practical budget? Galileos Influence on the Scientific Community Lance K. Erickson Ph. D., a professor of applied aviation sciences and space studies at Embry Riddle Aeronautical University, agrees that Galileo had a strong influence on the scientific community. However, in our interview on DATE, Dr. Erickson added that even if Galileo had not lived, society would not be that far behind where it is now in space exploration. In addition to Galileo, many other scientists in history were developing their own telescopes. Leonard Digges, for example, invented the reflecting and refracting telescopes, but never capitalized on his invention. Another professor, however, emphasizes Galileos importance. In an interview with Dr. Alan R. Pratt, professor of humanities at Embry Riddle Aeronautical University, he stated that if it were not for Galileo, many artists and philosophers would not have been so greatly influenced on the imagination of the universe. Dr. Pratt, stated: In terms of any other changes that happened in past centuries regarding science, I really do not think [that] any philosopher or artist could have had a bigger impact than Galileo did. In a matter of a few months, Galileo was able to alter the development of science so deeply as those months between the end of 1609 and the beginning of 1610. He now was at the crown rewriting the book of laws, which consisted of raw facts with evidence to back it up. He literally changed physics, which, in turn changed cosmology, and again that changed the way future philosophers and artists imagined the universe. This influenced many poets, mostly because they were stimulated on a sense of anxiety, that Galileo discovered that society is in fact on a small planet. According to Dr. Pratt, this change in science introduces a big change in religion and anthropology. Figure 1 portrays Galileo trying to convince the Church. Figure 1: Galileo and his Discoverieshttp://www.chrismadden.co.uk/moon/galileo-telescope-church.gif . Unlike many revolutions, the scientific revolution changed peoples minds, rather than the way society acted. People began to seek scientific answers to things that they before accepted as truth without question. Figure 1, shows that Galileo had a lot of explaining to do, but that it was not easy convincing the church of his discoveries. His theory was very much against religion, and Galileo knew this would change everything. As a result of Galileos influence, science and mathematics began to be more widely accepted than philosophy when used to explain phenomenon. Today, it is hard for anyone to comprehend that there was a time where claims were not researched scientifically. Galileo developed a more modern concept of researching which scientist still use today. Sir Isaac Newton Taking Telescopes to the Next Level Following Galileo, English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, alchemist, and theologian, Sir Isaac Newton is considered by many scholars and members of the general public to be one of the more influential people in human history. In 1661, the scientific revolution was at its peak, and many works of basic to modern science had appeared. Astronomers from Copernicus to Kepler had elaborated the heliocentric system of the universe. Galileo had proposed the foundations of a new mechanics built on the principle of inertia. Led by Descartes, philosophers had begun to formulate a new conception of nature as an intricate, impersonal, and inert machine. Newton was about to change the laws of the universe that were backed up by mathematically proven certainty. These laws were physical by nature but were neither sporadic nor limited locally. According to Newton in Principia, laws were universal. There were three laws that would describe universal gravitation. The only lim it of these laws of motion was that they could not be applied to the atomic level or on some conditions that would include the speed of light (Cambridge). Newtons Telescope In addition to these theories, Newton followed where Galileo left off and made a bigger and better telescope that would yet again change the way the public would view the universe. Figure 2 shows one of Newtons many drawings of his telescope. Figure 2: Newtons Drawing of a Telescope . The drawing represents the time when Newton began formulating the idea of optic lenses. An optic lens bends light in order to refract and, therefore, magnify the image. Newton went on to develop what is known as the theory of optics. Theory of Optics The theory of optics utilizes a concave mirror to develop a refracting telescope. Newton was able to utilize the visible light spectrum and show that bending it would create a magnifying effect. Understanding refracting telescopes did play a big role in the development of future telescopes. In 1704, Newton published Opticks, which resulted in his victory in the debate of the nature of light. In his publication, he questioned the theories of light, defraction, and the visible spectrum. He developed experiments to test these questions which he reviewed in Opticks. While this controversial debate over the nature of light was tested by many scientists, Newtons theory of optics became generally accepted. This theory led into the law of superposition, consisting of a wave-like property. Superposition opened a new door in physical optics. It wasnt until Sir Isaac Newton developed the next upgrade to the telescope, which he called the reflecting telescope, and later renamed as the Newtonian Reflector. This new optic lens would be revolutionary in terms of seeing deeper into space. Figure 3 depicts one of Newtons large telescopes with a structure to reach the eyepiece. These huge telescopes were the first of their time and were the first to use a pitch lap, a polished optical surface that acts as a mirror. Newton claimed that this reflector would be the heart of the design of the Newtonian telescope. Thus, the optic lens that Newton perfected within his telescope is still used today in the Hubble Space Telescope. Newtons development of the optic lens proved to be the next important step in space exploration. His upgraded development in the telescope was indeed the influence needed to keep the evolution of telescopes going. Figure 3: A large Newtonian Reflector . The Hubble Space Telescope Science has come a long way since the first telescopes were imagined in the minds of their creators. The complexity can range from a ten dollar telescope to multi-million dollar telescopes developed by todays space explorers. The most well-known of todays telescopes is the Hubble space telescope, which is used to capture images of space from Earths orbit. Long before the Hubble telescope was launched into orbit in 1990, scientists were developing ideas of sending telescopes into space. In 1946 Lyman Spitzer, a researcher from Yale University, wrote a paper entitled Astronomical Advantages of an Extra-Terrestrial Observatory, in which he discusses how Earths atmosphere affects the visibility of stars and planets in space. Through his research and development, Spitzer began collaborating with scientists and professionals to move his plan into action. In the 1960s, NASA began to discuss the feasibility of such a project, and in 1971, it was granted permission to further discuss the blueprint for the project. The largest obstacle in the creation of the Hubble telescope was acquiring the funds for the project, which was estimated to cost $400 to $500 million. After revising parts of the telescope to make it more cost-effective, Congress finally the proposal for funding at $200 million and established the Large Space Telescope project fundi ng in 1977. NASA had planned for the telescope to be launched in 1983; however, assembly of the Hubble was delayed through 1985, when it was finally completed. Figure 4 shows the various control systems of the Hubble as it is in orbit. The planned launch had finally been set for October 1986. This launch was interrupted in January, when tragedy struck the Challenger space shuttle as it ascended into the atmosphere and exploded above the Florida skyline. NASA officials began to question whether the telescope would make it safely into orbit. One year later, shuttle launches resumed, but it was not until April 24, 1990 that space shuttle Discovery finally carried the Hubble into orbit. Figure 4: Important Features of the Hubble Space Telescope . Most would consider the launch of the Hubble a success; however, one mission of the launch was to gain spectacular images of the cosmos. Within a few weeks of being launched, the images that were sent back to NASA headquarters appeared blurry and out of focus. According to the NASA History Division, An investigation revealed a spherical aberration in the primary mirror, due to a miscalibrated measuring instrument that caused the edges of the mirror to be ground slightly too flat (NASA). In December 1993, the first servicing mission was performed with five back-to-back spacewalks, fixing the aberration as well as performing routine maintenance. When the images finally developed into sharp, clear pictures of space, NASA considered the maintenance mission a success. With sustained servicing missions, Hubble has continued to explore the universe from Earths orbit for the past twenty years. Additional Telescopes Although the Hubble space telescope is not the only telescope in orbit, it has remained the only one to operate on visible light wavelengths. Other telescopes, such as the Spitzer space telescope detect infrared radiation, or heat radiation. In addition, Chandra is a telescope that measures X-rays from high-energy regions of the universe, such as exploded stars, according to the Chandra X-ray observatory. Another telescope, the Swift, measures gamma rays. NASA headquarters explains that, Swifts primary goal is to unravel the mystery of gamma ray bursts. The bursts are random and fleeting explosions, second only to the Big Bang in total energy output. Gamma rays are a type of light millions of times more energetic than light human eyes can detect. Gamma ray bursts last only from a few milliseconds to about one minute. Each burst likely signals the birth of a black hole. (NASA). As one can see, there are multiple uses for telescopes in space, ranging from visible explorations, to X-ray, to gamma ray, and beyond. As science evolves, so will the applications of telescopes in space. James Webb Space Telescope The future of telescopes is rapidly evolving. Within a few years, the Hubble will no longer be the main operating telescope in orbit. In 2014, NASA plans to launch the next telescope into orbit: the James Webb Space Telescope. This large infrared telescope will consist of a 6.5 meter primary mirror and measure parts of the universe that have never been documented before. As seen in Figure 5, the James Webb Space Telescopes mirror is nearly three times the size of the Hubble mirror. With its four measuring instruments: the Near InfraRed Camera, Near InfraRed Spectograph, Mid-InfraRed Instrument, and the Fine Guidance Sensor Tunable Filter Camera, the Webb will measure infrared waves with some visible range. Figure 6 shows the different parts of the James Webb Telescope and where it will be placed in orbit. According to NASA, The Webb has four main science themes: The End of the Dark Ages: First Light and Reionization, The Assembly of Galaxies, The Birth of Stars and Protoplanetary Sys tems, and Planetary Systems and the Origins of Life. (NASA). It will explore the development of the first galaxies, and how they have connected to ours. Figure 5: Mirror Comparison between JWST and Hubble (BBC News) . Figure 6: The James Webb Space Telescope (BBC News) . Telescopes and the Moon The moon is often brought up in forums on the NASA website regarding the possibilities of placing telescopes on the lunar surface. In order to even consider how to fulfill the four Ws of curiosity (what, where, when, and why), scientists must find a valid reason for leaving the practical environment of the Lower Earth Orbit (LEO). The LEO is an ideal place for telescopes to be in the reach of astronauts for routine maintenance. This is an important issue to explore for the future of telescopes. In an interview with Dr. Lance Erickson, he stated that the idea of placing a telescope on surface of the moon is just not practical. The reason for that is simply because the rocket-power to transport the telescope onto the lunar surface is not there. Dr. Erickson explained that even if NASA decided to assemble the telescope on the surface of the moon rather than transporting it, they would have to do so on the far side of the moon. This would result in requiring a lunar outpost for routine m aintenance. Even though the idea of scientists placing telescopes on the moon sounds like an ideal project for future exploration, Dr. Erickson stated that the amount of money needed to budget a project of that magnitude would be beyond practical. Furthermore, having a variety of telescopes rather than one big expensive telescope could be a more feasible way to do research. Dr. Erickson explains that having a backup plan before the actual plan is exactly how achieve efficiency. With a backup plan, the probability of having a successful outcome for research doubles. NASA Space Center will not look into any suggested projects that do not have a valid contingency plan, insuring that research and development will help with funding. This way if a mistake is made between the launch of the plan and the actual space flight, scientists have something to fall back on. The greatest barrier of getting an idea to machine is having a logical way of overcoming hurtles that scientist have to adapt to. For example, it is necessary to satisfy the needs of the project within the limits of the funds available in order to justify the research with the public. Having the taxpayers agree on research is huge because much of the funding may come from taxpayers wallets. In coming up with a logical proposal to NASA about having a lunar-based telescope, which, in-turn would have to be submitted to congress, there are a mix of pros and cons regarding the project. Dr. Erickson pointed out the cons of placing a telescope on the lunar surface, there are some feasible advantages in fulfilling this idea. Paul Gilster, an author, looks at peer-reviewed research on deep space exploration, with an eye toward interstellar possibilities on his website. For the past five years, this site has coordinated its efforts with the Tau Zero Foundation, and now serves as the Foundations news forum. Paul Gilster states: Putting an enormous radio telescope on the far side of the Moon has so many advantages that its hard to imagine not doing it, once our technology makes such ventures possible. Whatever the time frame, imagine an attenuation of radio noise from Earth many orders of magnitude over what is possible anywhere on the near side, much less on Earth itself. (Tau Zero Foundation) Due to the dusty environment of the moon, the best type of telescope to utilize would be a radio telescope. Objects on Earth and in space also emit other types of electromagnetic radiation that cannot be seen by the human eye, such as radio waves. The full range of radiation emitted by an object is called its electromagnetic spectrum. This radio astronomy is also known as the study of celestial objects that emit radio waves. Scientists can study astronomical phenomena that are often invisible in other portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. Thus, placing this type of telescope would be a benefit to the environment on the moon for the one big problem not mentioned through NASA website forums on how to deal with the lunar dust. The Apollo astronauts found that no matter how careful one was, the dust went everywhere. Having dust on the mirror or the hardware is not what one wants. With the Construction of a large based mirrored telescope on the lunar surface it would be particularly a problem during construction. Since radio waves penetrate dust, scientists can use radio astronomy techniques to study regions that cannot be seen in visible light, such as the dust-shrouded environments, which are the locations where you find the birth of stars and planets. Filling the Medium with Future Telescopes Today, NASAs budget will not be able to cover telescopes with cost running over in the trillions just in maintaining a lunar outpost. Being able to justify the cost of an improved telescope, while keeping it in the Unites States budget, will require filling the medium between the LEO and the Moon. So in filling this medium so instead of building on joint task telescope, NASA should implement a variety of telescopes at all of the Lagrange points. Lagrange points are The Lagrangian points (also Lagrange points, L-points, or libration points), the five positions in an orbital configuration where a small object affected only by gravity can theoretically be stationary relative to two larger objects (such as a satellite with respect to the Earth and Moon) (Web Definitions). According to Dr. Erickson, he suggested that there are three justified Lagrange points that can be used effectively for telescopes that can be designed for different task. In order to figure out what Lagrange point will fit a given telescope the job the best, you must consider the locations of each point. Furthermore, its important to point out that these Lagrange points follow under what is called the Keplers laws The three laws of planetary motion are briefly described below (Physics Classroom): The path of the planets about the sun is elliptical in shape, with the center of the sun being located at one focus. (The Law of Ellipses) An imaginary line drawn from the center of the sun to the center of the planet will sweep out equal areas in equal intervals of time. (The Law of Equal Areas) The ratio of the squares of the periods of any two planets is equal to the ratio of the cubes of their average distances from the sun. (The Law of Harmonies) With these laws in place, there is a chance of finding a loophole, and thats exactly what the five Lagrange points are. For example, with the L1 point, and given the proper distance of a spacecraft, which is maintained between the earth and the sun so long as it is about a hundredth of the distance to the sun (ESA). The spacecraft will take about one year to go around the Sun. With that, this point can used for monitoring the sun for its in the direct line between the sun and earth. In the interim, L1 is very unstable, so any spacecraft here will require their own rocket engines. Though, its a useful point for observing the sun (Dr. Erickson), the antennas which track it from Earth are also aimed at the Sun, which causes the disruptions with radio waves. Corrections are needed regularly (ESA). So the research will be limited to the sun. The next useful point will be Lagrange point 2. This point is located roughly around 1.5 million kilometers behind the earth (as viewed from the sun). To give a physical reference, it is estimated to be about four times the distance of the moon and earth (Figure 7). Figure 7: Lagrange Point 1 http://www.unexplainable.net/brainbox/uploads/1/21.jpg According to Dr. Erickson, this point will be the best for observing the larger universe which is observing deep space. The telescope would be free from the earths shadow, which distorts the observing views of the telescope mostly from the heat changes (correlation between day and night) (ESA). Most importantly, this point will be more stable than L1 and provide a more stable viewpoint. Figure 8: Lagrange Point 2 (Scientific Web) http://www.scientific-web.com/en/Astronomy/CelestialMechanics/images/LagrangePoints03.jpg Furthermore, L3 Lagrange point is the best for observing the galaxy according to Dr. Erickson. This Lagrange point lies behind the Sun, and any objects which may be orbiting there cannot be seen from Earth. The orbiting speed would equal earth and place the telescope just outside the orbital period of earth and as well the telescope would be on the opposite side of the sun which would block out sun light pollution (ESA). The reason Lagrange point 4 and 5 could not be used is mostly because of debris. Debris gathers at these locations interferes with the stability of these points as well as the resistance to gravitational perturbations lets objects such as small asteroids and a lot of dust to gather around these locations (ESA). In recognizing the best locations for future telescopes, it is important to understand the future designs for each task that the telescope will be fulfilling beyond all telescopes land based or present space telescopes. Scientists must find the medium of fulfilling both areas of the given mission. Finding the balance between fixed orbit positions within any lagrange points is not rounding off to what scientists think is the closest position for the fix in orbit, but rather being precise within feet of accuracy. These loopholes are very temperamental. That one of the major flaws with dealing with fixed orbits beyond human control. Gravity, like anything else in space, either works strongly in the favor of positive results for research as well as negative outcomes. The success of the mission for the space telescope will be greatly affected by where the telescope is located. Scientists will be faced with the greatest challenge of placing these telescopes not just in these point orbits b ut maintaining these telescopes in the point orbits. Conclusions While it may seem like a simple history lesson about Galileo and Newton but if it wasnt for their influence in the science community, society would not be where it is now in regards to space exploration. From Galileo to Hubble, much of the tools that helped Newton are still helping us today with telescopes. From retaining the laws of Kepler, to the Lagrange points, everything used in NASA has something to represent scientist of the 16th century today. Only a few settings are ideal for space telescopes. The best telescope design will resemble the Hubble. Like Galileo to Newton, the telescope of tomorrow will be perfected and increased in size and complexity as scientists learn from past mistakes. The James Webb telescope will be the next generation, but even though it is the most modern telescope, scientists are still looking beyond the Webb on what and where to place the next telescope. The future of telescopes will be satellite based on Lagrange points 1, 2 and 3. With a given purpose for each point, the observation will be different from one another; this will open up a variety of experiments for NASA. The best place to observe the Sun will be at Lagrange point 1, for it is in the direct line between the Sun and the Earth. Though it falls in the criteria of being in a loop hole, being a fix orbit is exactly what a satellite telescope needs. It will require some rocket power to maintain its position in orbit. Given the circumstances of it position, it will only be able to observe the Sun, which scientist are still learning about today. With the only flaw of this point being the radio interference because of the Sun, there is still much to learn from the L1 point that a telescope will be an asset to better this research. The next best position for future telescopes would be L2, as it is an ideal place to observe the larger Universe, which is observing deep space. The reason for this is because the telescope would be free of the Earths shadow. This is very important when it come to exploring space in the means of using a telescope. Every astronomer knows that light is a major influence on telescope imagery. Light is what creates an imbalance in heat in space. Out of all the Lagrange points, L2 is the best. It is the most stable of the three points and it can increase the distance we can explore into deep sp

The Causes of the Showa Restoration :: Historical Periods Showa Restoration Essays

The Causes of the Showa Restoration Sonno joi, "Restore the Emperor and expel the Barbarians," was the battle cry that ushered in the Showa Restoration in Japan during the 1930's.Footnote1 The Showa Restoration was a combination of Japanese nationalism, Japanese expansionism, and Japanese militarism all carried out in the name of the Showa Emperor, Hirohito. Unlike the Meiji Restoration, the Showa Restoration was not a resurrection of the Emperor's powerFootnote2, instead it was aimed at restoring Japan's prestige. During the 1920's, Japan appeared to be developing a democratic and peaceful government. It had a quasi-democratic governmental body, the Diet,Footnote3 and voting rights were extended to all male citizens.Footnote4 Yet, underneath this seemingly placid surface, lurked momentous problems that lead to the Showa Restoration. The transition that Japan made from its parliamentary government of the 1920's to the Showa Restoration and military dictatorship of the late 1930s was not a sudden transformation. Liberal forces were not toppled by a coup overnight. Instead, it was gradual, feed by a complex combination of internal and external factors. The history that links the constitutional settlement of 1889 to the Showa Restoration in the 1930s is not an easy story to relate. The transformation in Japan's governmental structure involved; the historical period between 1868 and 1912 that preceded the Showa Restoration. This period of democratic reforms was an underlying cause of the militarist reaction that lead to the Showa Restoration. The transformation was also feed by several immediate causes; such as, the downturn in the global economy in 1929Footnote5 and the invasion of Manchuria in 1931.Footnote6 It was the convergence of these external, internal, underlying and immediate causes that lead to the military dictatorship in the 1930's. The historical period before the Showa Restoration, 1868-1912, shaped the political climate in which Japan could transform itself from a democracy to a militaristic state. This period is known as the Meiji Restoration.Footnote7 The Meiji Restoration of 1868 completely dismantled the Tokugawa political order and replaced it with a centralized system of government headed by the Emperor who served as a figure head.Footnote8 However, the Emperor instead of being a source of power for the Meiji Government, became its undoing. The Emperor was placed in the mystic position of demi-god by the leaders of the Meiji Restoration. Parliamentarians justified the new quasi-democratic government of Japan, as being the "Emperor's Will." The ultra-nationalist and militaristic groups took advantage of the Emperor's status and claimed to speak for the Emperor.Footnote9 These then groups turned the tables on the parliamentarians by claiming that they, not the civil government, represented the "Imperial Will." The parliamentarians, confronted with this perversion of their own policy,

Immanuel Kant Essay

Morality is an important concept that has always generated interest when dealing with business organizations. Some of the business organizations argue that morality in business is important as it ensures that the needs of the customers are fully satisfied. However, with the increased focus on profitability, morality the concepts of morality is no longer considered in most organizations. According to the descriptive sense, morality refers to personal or cultural values, norms or codes of conduct while the normative sense refers to anything that may be right or wrong depending on values of a particular culture (Harris, 2010). The paper this discusses the concepts of morality and its application in business in order to identify its relevance. Utilitarianism: Conduct should be for the purpose of promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons. Categorical Imperatives: Evaluating motivations for actions. Process Philosophy: Metaphysical reality with change and dynamism. Moral relativism: Similarities in terms of the moral concepts. Moral absolutism: Human conduct is right or wrong in any context. Ethical relativism: Nothing is objectively right or wrong due to the differences in terms of the moral judgments across cultures. Moral objectivism: What is morally wrong or right depends on what someone thinks. Deontological ethics: Duty of obligations based on ethics. Teleological ethics: Moral obligation from what is desirable as an end to be achieved. In any given time and place, morality is what appeals to most people while immorality is abhorred. This is mainly based on the concepts of right and wrong. Businesses on the other hand can have moral standards although they are not moral agents because the businesses are more focused on profitability and sometimes the issues of morality are overlooked for the sake of making profits. However, it is not true that the bottom line of business is profit and profit alone. Businesses have to benefit the society and create opportunities to improve the social lives of the people. Serving the customers and ensuring that they are satisfied is an important aspect of business as focus on profitability alone will end up being exploitative to the customers (Churchland, 2011). Other tangible goals are also present in a business as opposed to profitability alone. Meeting the demands of the customers and impacting positively on the society is also a goal of a business. As individuals, it is important to be moral for the purpose of doing the right thing. Doing what is right will always be beneficial to the entire society. A corporation or organization should be moral for the purpose of ensuring that it impacts positively on the lives of the people. Morality will also ensure that the corporation is sensitive to the needs of the employees and hence avoiding exploitations which is oppressive to the employees. On the other hand, morality will ensure that the corporation is not only focused on profit making but also environmental issues, compensation and pension packages of the employees. In the first formulation, Kant argues that is important to act only in that maxim whereby at the same time you can will that it should become a universal law without contradiction (Rachels, 2011). The first formulation also brings a bout the concepts of perfect and imperfect duty. This can be applicable in business as it is aimed at ensuring that the business people are able to act in a way that they cannot be blamed for deliberately failing to perform their duties. In the business environment, it is important to ensure that the focus is not only in profit as this may lead to actions that are not moral. The executive compensation should not be too high as it will impact negatively on the payment of the other employees. The services offered to the customers should also be of high quality and standard. Cheating or misleading the customers for the purpose of benefiting the profits should also be avoided. According to the deontological ethics concepts the businesses should ensure that that they fulfill their duties through observing the ethical issue as opposed to profit making alone. The business people should also ensure that the means and the end are desirable which will prevent them from using immoral means to achieve profits. This is in accordance with the concepts of teleological ethics. In terms of moral objectivism, the business should be conducted in a manner that is moral and ethical. The concepts of tolerance should also be embraced in business due to the diversity in cultures in terms of defining what is right and what is wrong. This is in accordance with the theory of moral relativism. It is thus important to ensue that concepts of morality ate incorporated in a business for the purpose of ensuring that the customers are satisfied and the business is beneficial to the society (Shane, 2010). In conclusion, it is evident that the concepts of morality are for the purpose of ensuring that the right things are always done. In business, morality is essential in terms of promoting the right practices which is aimed at benefiting the customers and the society. References Harris, S. (2010). The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values. New York: Free Press. Churchland, P. (2011). Braintrust: What Neuroscience Tells Us about Morality. Princeton, N. J. : Princeton University Press. Rachels, S. (2011). The Elements of Moral Philosophy (7 ed. ). New York: McGraw-Hill. Shane, M. (2010). â€Å"A functional imaging investigation of moral deliberation and moral intuition†. Neuroimage 49: 2707–2716.

Khrushchev was the most successful leader of Russia Essays

Khrushchev was the most successful leader of Russia Essays Khrushchev was the most successful leader of Russia Paper Khrushchev was the most successful leader of Russia Paper Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev was and remains Russia’s most conscientious leader, who correctly identified problems within Russia and the first to initiate fundamental change, which would bring about sustained prosperity and stability within all aspects of Russia. In order to implement this, Khrushchev had either rejected previous policies for their failure or weaknesses to adequately work, in order to replace them with ones more functional at grassroots level, or to first produce policies that would allow initial growth to occur. It is these policies which have remained fundamental to Russia; though later leaders may have furthered or readjusted them, their initial purpose remained at the core of many later policies. Reforms were intended to produce an improvement in all elements of Russia’s state functioning collectively; with the intension of such policies providing the groundwork for their further development by later leaders and this is precisely what is noticed in succeeding offices, which saw an elaboration of certain elements of Khrushchev’s initial policies. It is these initial policies which laid the basis for further reform, which allow me to deem Khrushchev the most successful leader; as it was reformations implemented on his behalf, which provided the framework for further sustained successful development. An example of Khrushchev’s rejection of previous policies to function sufficiently and replace them with adequate ones, is the 20th party conference in 1956. Khrushchev spoke of a â€Å"new political thinking†, in which he made visible, that previous attempts to successfully implement â€Å"socialism† were ineffective. If Russia was to transgress from its current position economic, political and social instability it had to part with former ways in order to accomplish this. Khrushchev acknowledged that transgression to economic and social prosperity had to come at a price. Khrushchev largely knew that the Russian political spectrum had been manufactured and dictated by the sole decisions-making of one individual: Stalin. As A. J. P. Taylor writes: â€Å"Stalin alone made every great decision [2] Russia’s stagnation was confound, to the political momentum in which Stalin was the sole instigator. The concept of Stalinisation was one in which all elements of Russian diplomatic and civil expression where entranced in absolute totalitarian control by one man. Transgression in any direction was indentured, by that individuals own perception of development – be it even if it was or wasn’t justifiable or applicable; as-long as they deemed it just. As Khrushchev stated at the 20th party conference: â€Å"Stalin acted not through persuasion nd cooperation with people, but by demanding absolute submission to his opinion. †[3] It is therefore to no surprise, that the implementation of de-Stalinisation was pivotal in permitting development in Russia. De-Stalinisation was a political tool which permitted the political domain of Russia to freely express new political initiatives, without being restricted by fear of opposing the totalitarian regime. The infrastructure was not reformed by this process, rather re-opened: it was now liable to change. It is this fundamental principle which became immensely pivotal for the development of Russia. De-Stalinisation fragmented previous policies which were deem unbeneficial, so their reconstruction for a more prosperous one in which sustained abrupt industrial, agricultural, civil and diplomatic advances where sufficiently developed and maintained- could be achieved. The rejection of previous failings is an intellectual concept pioneered by Khrushchev and adopted by every successor of his; for its practical advantages. It allowed the person in power to reform certain elements of the state; by initially focusing of on the weaknesses of the current system, than providing an alternative structure, which was in direct comparison to the sole failures of the previous one, obviously superior though whether or not these advantages where correctly comprehended by such individuals, is a different matter all together. [4] The â€Å"thaw† was the first attempt by a communist leader, to alleviate tensions between ideological and social demands, with John Keen claims: â€Å"His [Khrushchev’s] greatest accomplishment was to end the reign of fear [5] Such policies are testimony of Khrushchev’s implementation of combating Long-term problems confronting Russia, as Khrushchev claimed: â€Å"we must help people to live well. You cannot put theory into your soup or Marxism into your clothes. †[6] The â€Å"thaw† was a reformation of the ideological constraints, that communism had previously put on the Russian people. Previous rule restricted the development of civil reform: working conditions and general civil liberty remained severely undeveloped. The constant shrift between restricted and relaxed censorship was a long-term problem persistent throughout Russian history. Previous attempts of totalitarian rule had proved to be of little benefit to the state; in certain instances it furthered dissidents towards the government by the populace. As repression of censorship was bound to frustrate the Russian people, who were continuously placed in direct comparison with the west, yet in reality societal functioning differed greatly between the two: especially in terms of freedoms. What we see here, is Khrushchev’s realisation that reformation of any aspect of Russia, goes hand-in-hand with each other. It is of little significance if industrial reforms take place for economic growth, if social reforms which accommodate those who take on such policies are poor: one is bound to affect the other, as they are not of equal standards. Such tactics are similar to that of Witte and Stolypin; who both saw economic growth accompanied by social reform. We see here Khrushchev being the first (within communism), to create the basis for civil reformation; in order for it to accompany other reforms, which go hand-in-hand with overall prosperity. Therefore Vladimir Putin, who indicates a return to authoritarian rule, whereby media production is censored and suppression of regional provinces (such as Dagestan and Chechnya’s) right to self-governing bodies, may indicate a leadership were comprehension of the consequences of totalitarian rule verses increased civil liberty, are not correctly identified. As Sakwa states, Putin’s Russian society is characteristic of a centralised â€Å"Soviet-style bureaucracy†: similar to Stalin. [7] However, a conclusion on Putin’s office is not comprehensive, as his government remains; still reforming elements of society. The â€Å"thaw† is a clear demonstration of the importance of state prosperity (economic growth), being interlinked with general reforms. The sole expansion of one aspect of the state (e. g. the economy), cannot adequately develop, as the overall environment of the state would still be lacking behind. These general reforms can be seen as the long-term problems of Russia: agricultural and social reforms. The major mistake of leaders is to solely focus on the economic aspect of Russia, while ignoring the possible social elements; consequently drifting attention away from the ameliorated conditions of one aspect, to poorer ones. This is precisely what Khrushchev – along with Witte and Stolypin – emphasised; if all aspects of Russia are not reformed equally, disdain for a condition which is improved, is displaced onto another condition that is less developed: consequently leading to possible anarchy. These persistent long-term problems had to be assessed equally with other pivotal reforms, in order for the state to progress; this is apparent in the rule of Nicholas II. Industrial growth was prioritised, with industrial output increasing from 810 in 1908, to 1165 in 1913; showing signs of stability. [8] Yet what remained prominent, was the fundamental issue of poor social conditions. [9] Consequently leading to upheaval and opposition: such as the Lena Goldfields Massacre (1912) and Bloody Sunday (1905). These were all expressions of discontent with the conditions at hand. [10] These matters were further ignored, to point were upheaval against poor conditions was common place in 1917; which saw the Petrograd protest leading to a string of events, that brought about the collapse of the Tsar. [11] Khrushchev’s point is further empathised here; possibly the Tsarist regime would have been better equipped, if it had improved such persisting issues equally: continuity of industrial, agriculture and social development. Historians Koenker and Von Laue concur with this view, claiming that Nicholas’ incompetence in meeting social and industrial demands, further intensified the already fragile situation. [12] If long-term matters were equally addressed, possibly the collapse of the tsarist regime could have been prevented. The tenure of Khrushchev saw the greatest attempt at reforming the economic system, into one which would pose the most benefit: such are the policies of democratisation and decentralisation. [13] Such policies were compelled by mid-1957. Between 1954-55 approximately 11,000 enterprises moved from central to independent control, May 1955 major planning and financial decisions were removed from state Moscow control, to republican hold: Russia had become decentralised. [14] Proportions of industry were also subject to the effects of decentralisation; with Moscow-based ministries replaced with sovnarkhozy: independent organisations, free to regulate industrial activity within their provenance. In turn, greater autonomy was given to the industrial spectrum. The purposes of these policies were not to transform the economic structure into a western one, but rather allow beneficial advancements to be made. Prior to Khrushchev, the economic system created by Stalin, meant that the majority of state revenue was derived from the exportation of grain and with state farms operating at a loss, an alternative was â€Å"necessary. †[15] Yet the economic system was so entrenched in collectivisation, that no other alternative was deemed possible. Decentralisation and democratisation were proposed alternatives by Khrushchev. These policies provided Russia with the basis for possible further economic reform: it initially reopened the economic system, by making it more flexibly in areas of production and management. The fact that Khrushchev’s relatively short tenure did not permit sustained development of the vast amount of his policies, may indicate why these policies did not produce substantial industrial growth initially. Rather if time was permitted, these policies could have been further developed and produced possible growth. Thus if Brezhnev’s tenure had experienced prosperity at the beginning of his office, it may be due to an elaboration of Khrushchev’s policies; with later stagnation resulting from a reversal of these policies. Statistics show an initial increase in production: such as iron output increasing by 56 percent during 1965-75 and then decreasing to less than 7 percent from 1975-85. [16] Furthered by Brezhnev’s later crippled economic output, prior industrial growth stagnated in 1970-80, falling to less than 2. 6 percent. Similarly the Soviet Union’s GNP had fallen from 5. 2 percent in 1970, to 2. percent in 1980. [17] It appears that the effects of decentralisation were beneficial and a reversal of such policies would therefore counter-track production: which is seen under the centralised economy of Brezhnev. [18] The fact that Khrushchev’s policies were contributing to industrial growth, was an indicator of its successfulness. Therefore what was the necessity of their reversal? Thereby allowing us to stratify Brezhnev’s tenure into two categories: continuity of success due to the Khrushchev era and poor economic leadership by Brezhnev; causing further economic stagnation. Likewise, Stalin’s Collectivisation process had failed to produce an economic structure of continuity, with state farms operating at a loss, since procurement prices which were set by the state, had hardly been increased since 1928. [19] Stalin was indeed conscious of this, stating to the party that they had become â€Å"dizzy with success†; however no economic alternative was proposed. [20] If centralisation proved economically ineffective, why were decision not taken to alter the cause of direction – similar to Khrushchev? Perhaps these are largely signs of a poor economic leadership, on behalf of Brezhnev and Stalin. Gorbachev’s office shows that Khrushchev’s policies were later adopted and furthered by his successors. Though these policies were not initially adopted, when Gorbachev acknowledged that the state was in a point of crisis, these policies were then re-implemented. This initial misconception, is seen in Gorbachev’s foremost policies, which akin to the predecessors of Khrushchev, perceived stability solely through economic expansion; as he stated in the Central Committee meeting: economic growth was â€Å"the key to all our problems [21] Though unaware that economic growth demanded general reformation, expected growth bore no noticeable gain and thus lead Gorbachev to recognise the necessity of Khrushchev’s earlier policies; that general reform accompanied economic expansion. Therefore the later office of Gorbachev saw a continuity and elaboration of Khrushchev’s primary policies. He re- engaged in the process of denunciation, stating at the 27th Party Congress: â€Å"readjustment of the economic mechanisms begins with a rejection Peaceful co-existence was revisited; seen in the agreement with the US, to destroy intermediate-range nuclear weapons and the approval of the dismantling of the Berlin wall. Moreover, the civil and economic reforms of glasnost and perestroika, were but a build up of Khrushchev’s initial policies of reforming communism and decentralisation. Though McCauley argues Gorbachev’s reforms were pivotal to the creation of a civil state, the question is whether these policies would have been perused, if Khrushchev would have not laid the framework for their development? Likewise to Gorbachev’s initial perspective, Yeltsin perceived stability to be through economic might. [22] Yeltsin provided state initiatives (vouchers), with the purpose of creating a new entrepreneurial class (oligarchs), which would increase privately owned corporations; in turn pose similar benefits as Kulaks. Such a class would evolve into the dominant force to allow the economic structure of Russia to transform to one similar to western lines; as Yeltsin stated: the vouchers were â€Å"a short ticket to the free market. The oligarchs creation, meant the majority of the state’s economic resources were tied within the oligarchs; yet they redirected their own resources in international investments, rather than Russia’s. The result was a misjudgement of the oligarchs function, as they produce no abrupt economic growth as hoped. Rather they stimulated the growth of a corrupt black market. Though these policies were unsuccessful, the fact remains that the previ ous failing economic structure was redeveloped to the point, were transgression to a new system which could be further developed, was conceivable. An identical question to Gorbachev is posed: would any change have been permitted, if Khrushchev did not lay the foundation for their development, as they were continuations of Khrushchev’s decentralisation policies? T. A. Morris and Alan Wood, hold a conventional view that soviet agricultural growth was the consequence of Stalin, though such a perceptive can be challenged [23] Khrushchev’s initial policies of â€Å"Thaw† fragmented the Russian infrastructure, thus allowing reformation to take form: in this context, agriculture. During the near end of the Stalinist era, collective farms were operating at a substantial loss; agricultural functioning was in need of redevelopment. [24] Khrushchev’s methods of agricultural melioration were not merely intended for economic gain; they posed the first signs of agricultural and social advances. Taxes and compulsory state quotas was reduced, private plot was reintroduced, wages amounted, surplus labour was rewarded not demanded and Stalin’s practically insufficient â€Å"collective farms†, were lessened of their power. 25] Such policies were furthered by the 1954 Virgin Lands Scheme: its primary concern being the pre-occupation of uncultivated lands within the state. [26] Between 1954-60, 41. 8million hectares of â€Å"virgin land† had been ploughed. [27] Agricultural production was officially augmented by 3 per cent in 1954, with state procurement of grain rising by 50 per cent annually during 1954-63: predominantly from the virgin lands scheme. 28] The significance is thus, agricultural production may not have experienced a boom like that of Stalin’s, yet for the first time in soviet history, it did not stagnate nor fluctuate: it stabilised throughout the whole of Khrushchev’s tenure – largely unparalleled with pervious or later leaders Stalin had told party delegates of â€Å"a new policy of eliminating the Kulaks † as they were perceived to be the reason for Russia’s agricultural Laxness. [29] It is these actions, which form the basis for Khrushchev’s argument in the de-Stalinisation speech. Were the Kulaks not of economical benefit, during and before the tenure of Stalin? The primary creation of the Kulaks by Stolypin, was for economic growth. [30] Khrushchev’s criticism was not on the idea of producing grain on a grand scale to export for an economic capital, in turn redirecting the capital to industrial expansion, rather the way it was implemented. Was it utterly â€Å"necessary†, to liquidate the most prosperous and agriculturally beneficial class in Russia? Where there no other alternatives, which would show the same output as collectivisation and yet keep this class? The Virgin Lands Scheme was the alternative solution pioneered by Khrushchev, yet the alternative agricultural strategy was always available. Collectivisation under Stalin, involved the mass consolidation of grain; under state control. In order to hasten the rate of state grain procurement, forceful measures had to be implemented; involving the genocide of Russia’s most prized agricultural labourers: Kulaks. The Virgin Lands Scheme removed the need for state interference in order to raise state grain procurement. The necessity of collectivisation is once again questioned, with Getty viewing it as a necessity and those such as Perry, believing it to be â€Å"a tragedy for Russia †[32] Khrushchev was once again at the forefront of deconstructing inadequate policies, in order to replace them with ones more beneficial; thereby allowing these newer policies to be of greater economic advantage, as they remove the weaknesses of previous policies (i. e. annihilation of the Kulaks). If Stalin’s own direct predecessor acknowledged such a scheme prior to taking the post of general secretary, why didn’t Stalin? Its benefits are evident: grain production would have increased and without the removal of the Kulaks, it could have further stimulated production. This could rather be a sign of not only Stalin’s but all Russian leaders’ ignorance, of Russia’s own economic and agricultural potential. Does not the fact that Khrushchev clearly realised this, indicate his superior economic strategising and leadership? The creations of Khrushchev’s policies of Detente and Peaceful co-existence, steamed from Khrushchev’s tenure into that of every succeeding leader: for the sheer benefits which these policies brought. Prior to Khrushchev, poor foreign relations between Russia, the west and America, confound Russia in continuous international conflicts; bringing a halt to economic and social development of the state. We only have to examine the predecessors of Khrushchev to understand this. Within the tenure of Lenin, social stability was prevented, as the state remained in constant battle with international forces, consequently bring about civil war. Moreover, John Griggs states, Lenin’s government never saw effective attempts at ameliorating the state’s improvised economic situation. The fact remains, that involvement in war prohibited development. A state in international conflict had to redirect its resources, from industrial expansion and/or social development, to defence departments; Stalin’s tenure is testimony to this. Though at the beginning priority was given to economic matters, during the later part (1939 onwards), all economic resources were redirected into military expansion and development, in preparation for war. Furthermore, tensions between the USSR and other western democratises during the office of Stalin, became so ripe it lead to the greater development of the Cold War. As Churchill claimed: â€Å"an iron curtain† was drawn between the USSR and the rest of the world. 33] It’s the removal of this â€Å"iron curtain† which remained fundamental to Khrushchev’s foreign policies: constant poor international relations had prohibited positive development in the USSR and if such relations continued, the Cold War itself would evolve into one that would bring the same demise as previous wars. Khrushchev installed Detente and peaceful co-existence, because of its necessity; Russia could not continue nor economically afford perpetual involvement in War. Thus leading to relations with America, Europe and even China, being reaffirmed rather in the case of China, begin development on a positive note. Consequently In 1963, after a bad harvest, grain was imported from America – later becoming a regular occurrence and feature of the improved Soviet-US relationship. [35] However, this is not to say that the Soviet Union was not subject to international tensions: like the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. [36] It can be argued that the Crisis was a contradiction of Khrushchev’s policies of Peaceful co-existence, as is posed the possible outbreak of nuclear war and an increase in international tensions. However, attention should be drawn to the outcome of the matter. After an initial warning by President Kennedy, Khrushchev agreed on the removal of nuclear missiles within Cuba and a S. A. L. T. [37] What is seen here is a pursuit for international peace, rather than an expansion on nuclear defences; which would prevent a similar occurrence in the future. Khrushchev’s development of positive foreign policies – or rather his approach as a peace maker are what gave Russia the framework to remain a superpower and allow development to occur; as if these policies were not initiated, the USSR would have seen a continuity in war which would have brought her to her knee’s sooner, rather than later. What does not allow us to solely focus on the tenure of Khrushchev to draw a comprehensive conclusion, is the relatively short period he remained in office. What remains problematic is the fact that policies which Khrushchev had implemented, were merely initiated in his tenure and developed in the that of others, and those that remained underdeveloped (such as the Virgin Lands Scheme), is the consequence of the lack of time, which Khrushchev had to firmly implement them. Moreover, Khrushchev’s policies did not cease at the end of his tenure, but were further developed in that of his successors. Examination of later economic, diplomatic and civil reformations by latter leaders, shows evidence of Khrushchev policies being further developed, not abandoned, in order to bring about change or maintenance of an aspect of Russia. Nowhere is this more evident, than in the tenure of Gorbachev; which saw an utter elaboration of Khrushchev’s economic and civil policies. I believe the continuity of the vast amount of Khrushchev’s policies into the office of later leaders, as self acclaimed success: they were adopted by leaders not because there was no alternative, rather because they were necessary policies. Therefore the one who first initiated these policies (Khrushchev), allows me to deem them, the most successful leader during 1905 -2005.