Gandhi: Charasmatic Leadership In Termoil

Gandhi: Charasmatic Leadership In Termoil INTRODUCTION Charismatic leader with high ethics and objective have the strength to inspire and transform the followers they lead. The Country or Nation runs successfully when the leader is skilful and influent. Charismatic leader have magical ability that attract followers and motivate them but without showing their authority or external power, it is not the only thing that leaders can do. A great leader can structure the country in the way he wants and they know how to achieve their goal. Most of the leaders use ample range of strategy to manage their image but Gandhi ji was a charismatic leader people follow them because they have charm, dint of personality and self-confidence. Max Weber classifies leader as a charismatic leader and in 1978 James Macgregor Burns define yet another categories of leadership: Transactional and Transformational leaders. Charismatic leadership is similar to Transformational leadership style. WHAT IS LEADERSHIP? John Garden describe that the leadership is the process of persuasion or example by which an individual (or a leadership team) induces a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his or her followers (Philip Sadler, 2003). WHAT IS CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP? The term Charisma will be applied to a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader. (Roe, Kavins Notices weak 7) According to Weber charismatic leaders have some unique qualities which give him the ability in leading and convince the people by his judgement and prepared them follow him. The charismatic leader did not learn these characteristics from his social, economic, or from political status and from his education but from his personal traits. The main aim of the charismatic leader is to help either people or his country or anyone around him. But in negative way some of the leader who misguides the people for their own interest by convincing them with illusory or fake promises. Most of the countries got freedom when a charismatic person leads the people of their country. There are lots of charismatic leader who fought for their country and for their followers such as Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus Christ, Z.A Bhutto. All those charismatic persons use their charisma to collect the people around them to gain the independence for their country. According to Weber Mahatma Gandhi ji was a charismatic lea der because charismatic can not taught or learned so it could not be the symbol of bureaucratic managerial system because charisma is not bureaucracy it is totally different charismatic leaders do not order the peoples to follow them so that why Gandhi ji was a charismatic leader he did not force people to follow them. People follow them because they like the way of Gandhi ji life by using nationality clothes. One of the principles of the Weber also shoes that charismatic leader do not have governmental powers or weapons but they defined that he is the biggest power in the country; they can fight with the army without any weapons and could win. METHODS OF CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP The process of Charismatic leadership is seen as a mixed product of three factors such as the leader and his characteristics, the circumstances which wants for such a leader and the communication between leader and the lead. The Four steps of the charismatic leadership process and indentify Mahatma Gandhi ji with his leadership in Indias non-violent freedom movement: 1) RECOGNITION In recognition the aspiring leader is on the social prospect; the followers of that leader are suffering and they want someone who will resolve their problems and one who recognize themselves. At this level the social situation getting worsened gradually. The social situation is gradually getting worsened at this level. This is the time when the leader recognized their strength, their power and their ability. Before returning to India from South Africa in 1915 Gandhi jihad started a movement for public rights in South Africa, because once he was travelling in the first class compartment of the train which was reserved for whites only was thrown out from train because he was not white. The movement was successful and that incidence was also famous in India and when he returned to India, Indian peoples welcomed him as a hero and then he became a leader of Indian national congress at that time Gandhi ji realise their ability and the charismatic quality was just started showing its colou rs. 2) ACTIVITY STIMULATION In this stage followers become the part of revolution because the leader provokes them. In this situation the people who are just follower and just admire the leader now they become supporter of the leader. The longer this period ends the longer is duration of the charismatic leadership. In the case of Gandhi ji this step ended from 1920 till 1930. In 1921 the non-cooperation movement by Gandhi ji was a clear example of activity stimulation period, in this period whole country was awakened and was against the British rule. 3) COMMITMENT In this stage the charismatic leader is confident about their decision and they make lots of commitment with their followers. Charismatic leadership is on peak at this stage and they also can start losing his charisma at this level because this is the time when the leader make lots of commitment with there followers but in the end some of them achieve their desire goal and some are not, those who achieve success they become more famous but who failed they loose their followers. The charismatic leader make commitment with followers to achieve their goal and the followers do the same commitment with them. In this stage the charismatic leader have to sacrifice for their commitment or some time that commitments should become dangerous for the leader but this sacrifice and danger creates the good image of the leader in the eyes of their followers as the leader is dedicated to their goal and he have courage also to face the problems easily. There are many leaders who make a fallacy commitm ent with the followers for their own benefits such kind of leaders kwon as pompous and hypocrite. The leader is divided in two categories personalized and social leadership. The personalized leaders are authoritarian and exploitative like Hitler was a dictator he was authoritarian. The second type socialized leaders are more democratic and they believe in sharing power and responsibility with others such as Mahatma Gandhi. In 1930 to 1935 the commitment stage for Gandhi ji. The salt Satyagraha can be consider as the high level of Gandhi ji charisma and the conference of round table was a symbol of disappointment because that conference was a political failure. 4) DISAPPOINTMENT This stage is unavoidable on the part of the leader. The social structure carries the disenchantment stage many times. Routinisation creates the fear in the mind of the followers and some time they feel of loss of goal. This stage loses some of the important followers of the leader. Some time leader seems to be failing in this stage because of the situation. From 1933 to 9138 is the period of disenchantment for Gandhi ji because he lost his strongest followers like Subhas Chandra Bose. This is the phrase where disappointment seemed to have taken place clearly. ATTRIBUTES OF CHRISMATIC LEADERS It is clear from the above discussion that what is charismatic leadership and the attributes that a charismatic leader posses. Now this section will describe the trait that make a person a potential leader. There are some characteristic which are shown by a person from his childhood or adolescence which create a person potential charismatic leader. At their adolescence charismatic leaders do show some specific type of behaviour. TRAIT OF CHARISMATIC LEADER 1) SELF-MOTIVATION It is a vital part of charismatic leadership. The social scenario motivates the leaders without being prompted about it. The charismatic leader can talk to his followers energetically when he is self-motivated. The leaders who are self-motivated they have the capacity to transform this self-actualisation to their followers as well. They actually raise the level of their followers. 2) SELF-MONITORING In self-monitoring the leader watch them because they know that the followers are watching them so it is import ant for the leader to make a good picture of themselves for their followers. The charismatic leader are born out for the need of the followers and social situations, it become crucial for the leaders to continually recognize themselves with the need of the followers and social scenario. 3) MOTVE TO ACHIEVE POWER The charismatic leader does not want any conventional power. They are not looking for any official post or position, they want only social power. They want respect from their followers and see them as their rescuer. They want to make a special place in the hearts of their followers. With the values and beliefs of their followers the leader can identify themselves. They can convince their followers because that leader is high rated on their social skills and appeal them to their hearts. With this power the leader is popular for long time. 4) SELF-ENHANCEMENT The charismatic leaders having self-correcting nature and they are well known for that. They try to improve themselves and judge themselves. The superiority of the leaders makes them different from their followers. Eventually when the charismatic leader will bring their followers to their level of superiority and they believe that if the follower achieves that level then the leader should have gone one step above and remain their leader. 5) OPENNESS TO CHANGE The charismatic leader represents change and only charismatic leader prove many time that they are the only one who bring changes. Charismatic leaders are most powerful in the situation which demands the changes and they are open to changes. Gandhi ji bring the change, when the Indians were slave under British people and they dont have complete freedom and rights like British people have, so Gandhi ji fought for their rights, after long struggle they got same rights like British people have, with this change Indians become more liberal and democratic. OUTCOMES OF CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP We discussed the process of charismatic leader and their attributes of the leader in which they posses and the outcome are unavoidable of charismatic leadership. Most of the researchers show that the charismatic leader as positive force which yields desirable results and some scholar focused on negative aspect of the leader but we will see negative as well as positive aspect of the charismatic leadership. Charismatic leaders motivate their followers and inspire them to give extra output and the leaders help their followers to achieve self-actualisation in themselves. Gandhi ji motivate their followers to fight for their freedom and with that motivation they achieve their desirable goal. CONCLUSION To conclude charismatic leadership Gandhi ji was a charismatic leader they have the quality to lead followers in the right direction. As we known that the charismatic leader has a magnetic quality which attracts the followers, the followers listen to them and obeys what the charismatic leader said. The charismatic leader has to recognise them selves that they have the potential to lead, when Gandhi ji started movement in South Africa then they come to know they have the charismatic quality. Above discussion show that with charismatic quality of Gandhi ji India got freedom from the British People and without using any weapon they fought with them, only charismatic leader will fight without weapons. Over all we can say that Gandhi ji was a heroic charisma and he was a great man.

Nigger

Nigger is a derogatory term used to refer to individuals whose skin color is dark. Most of these people are of African descent. For centuries, the term nigger holds a negative implication, and in contemporary period is taken as a racial insult in most circumstances. Modern slang uses takes in a synonym for a person and an attempt to retrieve the word for black people, which continues to be a contentious subject. Former variations like â€Å"neger† or â€Å"negar† originated from the Spanish term Negro which literally means black, and in all probability also the French word nà ¨gre, which has also been used negatively, however it was also used in a positive manner such as in Negritude. Negritude originated from the term Negro. In French, they commonly use the term â€Å"noir† for black. â€Å"Negro† and â€Å"noir† alike (and consequently the terms â€Å"nà ¨gre† and nigger) eventually came from â€Å"nigrum†, the accusative form of the Latin term â€Å"niger† which means black. In Colonial America, the term â€Å"negars† was utilized in the year of 1619 by John Rolfe, illustrating the slaves which are being transported to the colony of Virginia, â€Å"neger† or â€Å"neggar† also exists in Northern New York as well as on Philadelphia. For an instance there is an African cemetery in New York which was initially known as â€Å"Begraafplaats van de Neger† which could be translated as â€Å"Cemetery of the negro† (Pearson, 2003). In US, the term â€Å"nigger† was not always believed to be offensive; rather the term is used by some people simply as a connotative of a black or dark complexion. In 19th century literature, the term nigger had been used in many instances without intending to use it in a negative manner. Charles Dickens and Joseph Conrad for one, authors of Nigger of the Narcissus† made use of the term nigger without having any bigoted intention. Mark Twain, another example, often uses the term in most of his works with Southern characters, white and black alike. However, he did not use the term when discoursing in his own voice in his autobiographical work, â€Å"Life on the Mississippi†. In UK, the term nigger was usually used to refer to individuals of individuals with Pakistani or Indian ancestors. They also uses it to denote the dark skinned foreigners generally. In 1926 â€Å"Modern English Usage† H. W. Fowler scrutinized that when the term was used to other people who is not a full blooded negro, they take the term as ome kind of an affront to their person. In 1800s, as the term nigger started to gain the derogatory implication it now have today, the term â€Å"colored† attained recognition as a better alternative to the term nigger and other related terms. Southern vernacular in most areas in US modifies the articulation of the term â€Å"negro† to â€Å"nigra† which is used in particular by Lyndon B. Johnson, a well-known advocate of civil rights. In North American English, the evolution from â€Å"negro† to â€Å"nigger† symbolized a previously prevalent sound change, in fact in the first editions of Noah’s Webster’s dictionary; he proposed the new spellings of â€Å"neger† for Negro. â€Å"Black† happened to be the favored term in English in the late 1960’s, and this prevails up to now. In US this has been replaced to some degree by African American, in any case in politically acceptable practice; this bears a resemblance to the term Afro-American that was in trend in the early years of 1970. Nonetheless, â€Å"black† remains to be in prevalent use as a racial description in US and is seldom considered as insulting. Nowadays, the term is often spelled as â€Å"nigga† or â€Å"niggah†, in simulation of the way in which some articulate it, there are also other variations of the term, intended to duck the term itself, this includes â€Å"nookah†, â€Å"nukka†, â€Å"nagger† and probably the most popular of them all â€Å"jigger†. However, â€Å"Nigger†, according to Professor Randall Kennedy is debatably the most significant racial affront in United States history, although, all together, it is a term that is reminiscent of the paradoxes and problems, catastrophes and splendors of the American experience. In fact, his work â€Å"Nigger: The Strange Career of a Troublesome Word† is at the middle of debates because of its controversial issues. It tackles questions among an assorted audiences of students and scholars of all cultural and national milieus in its search to discover how and why the term should or should not be used in today’s time (Kennedy, 2002). A large number of black Americans claim that the term â€Å"nigger† invokes within them certain hatred, resentment, aggression, repression, as well as a very appalling and ill-fated part of the US history. The word represents the perpetual sequences of individuals afflicted with abhorrence and bondage merely because of the color of their skin. Amongst black people, â€Å"nigger† is the most derogatory term in the English lingo. Even when contrasted to other racial insults such as â€Å"kike, â€Å"cracker†, â€Å"white trash† and the like, nigger is illustrated as the most horrible affront in the English lingo. The term â€Å"nigger† implies that black people are second class citizens, ignorant, and not as human as the whites are. Although many blacks and whites concur that the term should not be repressed from the English language, it definitely should not be used again by every people due to its historical importance. For an instance, black militants suppose whites ought not to use the term â€Å"nigger†. Conversely, the term â€Å"nigger† has been â€Å"domesticated† by black youths predominantly in the hip-hop culture. These contemporary adolescents maintain that it is merely a word and that people give words meaning and not the other way around. If such is indeed the case, the term â€Å"nigger† could be changed once in a while. In other words, youth in the hip-hop culture are maintaining that situation is the determinant of the meaning of the term â€Å"nigger†. Kennedy states the same line of reasoning regarding the use of the term â€Å"nigger†. He maintains that everyone, regardless of the color of ones skin, may use the word â€Å"nigger†, provided that the framework or the way it was used is apparent and proper (Kennedy, 2002). On the other hand, the historical importance of the term â€Å"nigger† is greatly rooted in American History. For an instance, Kennedy’s book illustrates historical examples of â€Å"nigger† in its derogatory milieu. Examples of these were when Michael Jordan was suspended from his school because a white girl called him a nigger and â€Å"Tiger Woods was tied up in kindergarten by his older schoolmates who called him nigger† (Kennedy 2002) and it is specifically due to this history that a large number of African Americans are supports the vetoing of the term from the English language. Even though the historical importance of the term â€Å"nigger† frequently sets off deep-seated antagonism in the African Americans, it has also gradually developed into an expression of endearment in today’s African American society. Accordingly, a fine line exists between the past and the present descriptions of the term that heralds the prospect of misunderstanding and the likelihood of further injury. Should the term â€Å"nigger† then be used as a way to express of endearment? Kennedy asserts that the term â€Å"nigger† should be used by everyone on the condition that no one be injured. According to Kennedy nothing is wrong with the use of the term nigger no matter what color your skin is. According to him, what should be of importance is the milieu in which the term is being used. Kennedy maintains that the context could influence how nigger is used, and to regard the word otherwise would change the term â€Å"nigger† into some kind of an obsession. On the other hand, Kennedy’s contention that everyone could use the term â€Å"nigger† is easily challenged because although the term is some kind of an obsession, it is still an obsession with no reason whatsoever. The term â€Å"nigger† produces a fixation for people because of its historical connotation. In other words, if the history of the term stigmatizes it, then how could the ordinary use of the term, even by those individuals who ring about its historical significance, produce a new meaning? Kennedy’s insinuation of individual’s using the word only with good intents illustrates his setting aside of the background of its past. Kennedy also asserts that background determines the meaning of the term â€Å"nigger†, nigger, according to him could signify numerous things, all depending upon, amid other things, intonation, the site of interaction, as well as the connection between the speaker and the one to which the term is being addressed. Kennedy, among other thinkers, maintain that African Americans use the term themselves, the fact that the term â€Å"nigger† has been and remains to be used by the African Americans themselves makes up a logical fallacy on the part of the African Americans because for them to believe that they could use the term undamagingly without question whatsoever while others could not use it is nothing short of illogical (Kennedy, 2002). In fact, Vernon Davis on his work, â€Å"The Sense and sensibilities of Using the N Word† stated that only when African Americans unite and insist that their society stops the use of the term in any milieu could they have the moral power to contend that the term not be used in any place or by anyone at all (Davis, 1999). This standpoint on the contention implies that the blacks, and not the whites, stopped thinking about their own history. There could be contentions claiming that rappers such as Jay-Z and comedian Alex Thomas, that the blacks took possession of the term and thus they are did not really stopped from thinking about their own culture, rather they are merely rewriting some part of it. In juxtaposition with the hip-hop culture, Kennedy asserts that the blacks are regaining the term and redefining it in so as to disrobe the term nigger of its initial meaning (Kennedy, 2002). For example, a performance on Black Entertainment Television, a cable system meant for black Americans, illustrated the term â€Å"nigger† as a â€Å"term of endearment, Davis also stated that in the African American society, the term â€Å"nigga† (not the term nigger) elicits a feeling of pride. The term, here, calls to mind a sense of community and oneness among Black Americans (Davis, 1999). A large number of teenagers I have talked with believe that the term does not mean anything or could not hurt a person when it is being used by a friend. However, when it is used by white people the word suddenly changes its definition or meaning. Alex Thomas could be noted saying that he does not want the whites calling him a nigger. This philosophy is in a way self-defeating. If only black people are making use of the term â€Å"nigger† and they are doing so in so as to achieve a conversion of power, the endeavor is useless because the hurt which accompanies the term has not yet been stopped. The whites, for an instance, still could not utter the term â€Å"nigger† without inducing some kind of an antagonistic response. If blacks have effectively transformed or domesticated or repossessed the term, than everyone then anyone would be open to use the term without concerning one’s self with matters of race, class, or perspective. And while this may actually be the final objective of redefining the term â€Å"nigger†, it is evidently not the case at today’s time. It is mainly due to this that Kennedy proposes that everyone should be allowed to use the term, in so as to avoid people from being held back from the use of particular terms, which would be a kind of suppression (Kennedy, 2002). However, historical importance looks like it weigh heavily on the mind of a large number of black people. For example, Shani Saxon (music editor of VIBE magazine) could be noted saying that white people makes use of the term in an insulting manner and she also stated that this is primarily the reason why they should not be permitted to use the said term, since it is insulting and it brings about unpleasant memories (Saxon, 2002). However, it is for certain that words do evolve, however history could never change the way words could. In today’s time, I found through my research and close examination that â€Å"nigger† is not an acknowledged word. Jay-Z among other artists makes use of the term in their music in order amuse their audiences, however, their use of the term does not necessarily mean that the term no longer holds any kind of power to hurt. Take into consideration Jay-Z’s song â€Å"Jigga my Nigga† or Eve’s â€Å"What y’all Nigga’s want?†, the said songs may appear harmless since they make use of the term in a milieu of amity and friendship, however, it could be maintained that while milieu could alter the meaning of the term, contexts or milieu itself could never modify history. Kennedy states that the term on speech or literature, while Kennedy may have a point on his assertion, one could not just pay no heed to history. The term â€Å"nigger† is very much stigmatized that redefining it entails that slavery and oppression never occurred, in spite of the fact and many other things which point that it did. Try to examine an account given by Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia, â€Å"The word Nigger carries with it much of the hatred and repulsion directed toward Africans and African Americans. Historically, nigger defined, limited, and mocked African Americans. It was a term of exclusion, verbal justification for discrimination. Whether used as a noun, verb, or adjective, it reinforced the stereotype of the lazy, stupid, dirty, worthless parasite† (Pilgrim, 2002). Truth is the present use of the term â€Å"nigger† could never be wiped away, changed, eliminated, or effectively redefines its authentic and appalling description. In truth, if the persistent use of the term â€Å"nigger† could eliminate it of its original meaning then by now it would be alright for a white person to call black people a â€Å"nigger†. However, a white person could never do that because of the deep-rooted history associated with the term. It is then very important that people come to an understanding that using the term in numerous instances does not alter or take the sting out of its original meaning, because, as already mentioned earlier, although words may change, its history could never be altered. In addition, this new use of the term does give â€Å"nigger† another connotation; probably the notion that language is the same could disprove the argument that history overrides the modern usage of the term. Even though there are several long standpoints which surround the controversy of the usage of the term, there actually is no right or wrong answer for using the term â€Å"nigger†. Works Cited Davis, Vernon. â€Å"The Sense and Sensibilities of Using the â€Å"N Word.†Ã¢â‚¬  Journal of National Association of Black Journalist. Fall 1999 (1999). Kennedy, Randall. Nigger: The Strange Career of a Troublesome Word.† New York: Pantheon Books, 2002. Pearson, Kim. â€Å"Nigger.† (2003). Pilgrim, David. â€Å"Jim crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia.† Fall 2002 (2002). Saxon, Shani. VIBE Magazine 2002.

Globalization and the Asian Financial Crisis

Globalization and the Asian Financial Crisis The Asian financial crisis is a prime example of an economic meltdown and it exemplifies the effects globalization has during times of widespread economic downturn. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, globalization is â€Å"the integration of national economies into the international economy through trade, foreign direct investment (FDI), capital flows, migration and the spread of technology. † The global economy is becoming further inter-twined and therefore it is very difficult to stop the effects of an economic crisis. The Asian financial crisis was a major economic crisis that spread throughout several Asian countries. The beginning of the Asian financial crisis can be traced back to July 2, 1997, with many believing the start of the crisis was triggered in Thailand (King 439). On this day, the Thai government floated their currency, the Thai Baht, and it also went to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for â€Å"technical assistance. † One by one, South-East Asian countries such as Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea and Japan saw their economies crash in the wake of heavy foreign investment. An economic boom had made the region an attractive investment proposition for investors for much of the 1990s. From 1990 to 1997, the private capital flow to developing countries rose more than fivefold, from US $42 billion in 1990 to US $256 billion in 1997 (King 441). However, in the summer of 1997, the economic climate changed, on July 2, 1997, the Thai Baht fell around 20% against the US Dollar (King 441). This was seen as the trigger for the crisis, as investors grew nervous, which led to disinvestments on the Baht, resulting into domestic production and development stalling. The reason why this was happening was because many corporations depended on foreign investment and when they dried up, the businesses could not meet their debt repayments, leading to many firms folding across Asia. Within a week of that day in July, the Philippines and Malaysian governments were heavily intervening to defend their currencies. Soon other East Asian countries became involved; Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and others to varying degrees. As global integration was spreading and growing rapidly, the markets were opening up and becoming more liberalized. This enabled these countries to get a huge influx of foreign capital. These countries were targeted by investors because they were classified as â€Å"emerging markets,† meaning that they had rapid growth and industrialization (Hanieh 65). Hence, they seemed to be ideal for investors as they sought after high profits and yields. It must be emphasized that most of the inflows that came were for short term portfolio investment purposes. Private capital inflows coming into the â€Å"emerging markets† were $42 billion, which increased to a gigantic $256 billion in 1997 (Hanieh 70). Ironically, that peak was the same year as the markets crashed. As mentioned previously, most of the inflows were for portfolio purposes; therefore, the stock markets were experiencing high booms and estate prices were also on the rise. Most of the countries had their currency pegging loosely against the US dollar in the run up to the crisis. The informal pegs to the US dollar encouraged capital inflows due to the large interest rate differential. This though, attracted problems too, due to the predictable nominal rates, it encouraged unhedged external borrowing. This asset boom continued to grow and the flow of credit continued to increase. This resulted into Japan, who was already suffering from their lost-decade, into depreciating their currency (Hanieh 74). As a result, this made their currency weaker and doing so, it made the exports of the South-Eastern countries uncompetitive. This was damaging to the rest of the countries to integrate on a global scale. Most of the functions that these countries undertake are producing parts of a production that would be later assembled and completed in countries like Japan or China. As stated earlier, these tiger-economies operated in a fixed exchange rate system; therefore, their central banks needed to keep enough reserves so that they could support the Baht at the fixed exchange rate. As the central banks ploughed money in to support their currency to maintain the exchange rate, business confidence was shattered and spread across other countries. The effect of this was further felt as their exports were much dearer since Japan devalued their currency. The knock-on effect was that foreign investors started to take their money out. Thailand was the major casualty of this and it quickly passed onto its neighbours; thus, the start of the Asian financial crisis. The financial crisis heavily affected three main emerging economies in the global market; Thailand, Indonesia and South Korea (Hanieh 64). These were the hot-bed for foreign investors who sought high returns on their investments. As the fixed currency fell, the more the investors pulled out; thus, worsening the currency further. The central banks tried in vain to hold the exchange rates as the Thai government spent $23 billion buying the Baht to maintain to US dollar peg (King 440). Investors sank money into these economies without knowing the full extent of policies involved; therefore, as the mounting hidden information of the Thai economy came to surface, it resulted in many speculative attacks on the Thai Baht, which finally forced the central bank of Thailand to float the Baht as it was no longer able to defend the itself against the US Dollar. It can be argued that the uncertainty, which is the absence of quality information on which to base investment decisions had increased the investment risk. This resulted in a contagion effect to other Asian countries. Much of the instability in the economy of Thailand was brought about by heavy short-term borrowing that required debt maintenance. The Thai government attempted to shore up shaky investor confidence by officially backing the financial institutions that were heavily indebted aboard. By October 27, 1997 the crisis had spread worldwide and had an impact on a global scale (Prakash 127). On that day, it provoked a substantial response from Wall Street with the Dow Jones falling by 554. 26 points (or 7. 18%), its biggest point fall in history, causing stock exchange officials to suspend trading (Prakash 128). There are several thoughts as to why the Asian financial crisis occurred. One of the clearest problems that can be seen is that of their financial systems. It has been evident that because the sudden influx of capital flows, the financial systems were not capable of handling the vast amounts. The weak financial systems led to poor investments and excessive risks. Negligent oversight of corporations caused consequences in economic downturns that were not a concern in the mid-nineties boom. The macroeconomic policies of the South-East Asian countries made their economies vulnerable to the uncertain confidence of their foreign investors. However, many economists argue that market overreaction and herding caused the plunge of exchange rates, asset prices and economic activity to be more severe than warranted by the initial weak economic conditions. Also, the deeper roots of the economic crisis went back to the early 1990s. Throughout the 1990s, growth in South-East Asia attracted huge capital flows. The account deficit of Thailand had grown from 5. 7% in 1993 to 8. 5% in 1996 (Khan, Islam, Ahmed 177). This was worsened as the domestic production slowed as the account deficit represented an even greater percentage. Much of the instability in the Thailand economy was caused by heavy short term borrowing and as previously stated; the government spent a lot of their reserves to maintain the exchange rate. This created a false sense of security in pretending the economy was stable. However, this support of the highly leveraged private sector by the Thai government lent the appearance of stability towards an unstable system and attracted even more foreign loans. In February 1997, the Thai company Somprasong was unable to make maintenance payments on its high levels of foreign debt. In the face of such instability, Finance One, the largest finance company in Thailand, failed at the end of May (Khan, Islam, Ahmed 182). Most of the lending by the company was made up of risky loans for real estate and stock market margin investment. This political instability resulted in the resignation of the Thai Finance Minister; thus, worsening the situation. The speculative attacks on the Baht forced Thailand to let the currency float on July 2, 1997, a key date in the Asian financial crisis. As an after effect, the currency depreciated further devastated the Thai economy. This forced the Thai government to call on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for economic help. In August 1997, Thailand was the first country to seek help and the IMF approved a loan for $3. 9 billion (Glassman 126). However, the IMF gave stipulations that the government had to follow. These were maintaining a level of government reserves, increasing the VAT, government cuts and a reorganisation of the financial sector. As the Baht declined sharply, a second bail-out was approved. Indonesia and South Korea also approached the IMF for financial assistance. Another key element that caused the crisis was that in a lot of East Asian countries the capital account was liberalized for inward and outward flows for foreign investors; however, domestic investors could not invest aboard and this meant they could not diversify their risks. Throughout these countries, financial institutions were inadequate. They had poor prudential management of currency risks, credit evaluation and public financial reporting. Rising global credit and liquidity fed vast amounts of capital to badly regulated institutions. Those had limited transparency and poor due diligence from foreign lenders. The poor macroeconomic policies failed to manage these problems and left the countries vulnerable to shocks in many ways. Firstly, widening current account deficits, financed by short-term debt, exposed the economies to sudden reversals in capital flows. Secondly, weaknesses in the under-regulated financial sector fuelled risky lending. A further problem with exacerbated the crisis was the tendency for the government to intervene and bail out floundering companies. These guarantees put further pressure on the global market as the level of debt kept escalating. Together with the depreciating of the currency meant foreign debt proved to be too much of a burden. A further domino effect was evident between the economies. As the currency of the country depreciated, this had a negative effect on the competitiveness of other countries. Therefore, as the Thai Baht was tumbling, their goods became competitive and had a negative effect on other currencies, such as the Rupiah of Indonesia and the Ringgit of Malaysia (Glassman 129). After the Baht was put on the floating exchange rate, the economy of Thailand started to recover and was able to alleviate their debt earlier than they thought in 2003 (King 459). South Korea did manage to recuperate despite its weak financial system. However, Indonesia was especially hurt by firms going bankrupt and the devaluation of the Rupiah made it harder for them to recover. Monetary and Fiscal policies were tightened as countries fought to cope with the financial panic. The countries also raised interest rates in order to attract foreign currency and increase the price of domestic assets. On the other hand, higher rates meant higher repayments and many could not survive their debts. Following the Asian financial crisis, Russia, Mexico and Argentina all suffered economic collapses (King 61). Another factor that is thought to be one of the reasons for the crisis, the Asian currencies appreciated to levels that were too high leading to a crash in the markets. The IMF gave these countries support during these times and in return they wanted the countries to follow three key elements; large official financing packages, structural reforms, and macroeconomic policies that intended to counter the crisis itself (King 463). Structural reforms were seen as the root causes of the crisis. They intervened to shore up institutions and more importantly, improved the financial supervision and regulation. Thus, reducing the likelihood of a crisis reoccurring. Other structures were also altered to help the economies in the long run; they strengthened competition laws and increased transparency. This would help reduce eradicate corruption. Macro policies were harder to implement due to the turbulent market conditions; though, after some initial hesitations, nominal and real interest rates fell to pre-crisis levels. However, Indonesia’s policies steered them off course for a while before it was brought under control in late 1998 (King 464). The Asian financial crisis raised certain important issues that need to be taken into account for the international financial system. It is very important to prevent a crisis from occurring in the first place, because the short term flow of capital can be moved within seconds; therefore, prevention is the best sought achievement/target. Transparency is also important to crisis prevention. At the height of the Asian financial crisis, some unpleasant information was revealed, in particular, on the weaknesses of central banks international reserve positions. The IMF pointed this out as an integral part as closer monitoring of the finance sector could give alerts to any such problems in the future. Another issue that needed to be analyzed after the crisis was that of capital controls. As the countries liberalized the capital accounts, they left many short falls in the regulation of them. Tighter restriction and closer monitoring of the capital flows would have helped the financial institutions to keep greater control. An additional issue that should be noted is what policies the governments used and which ones seemed to be successful in such a crisis. Looking back at the Asian financial crisis, it seems that monetary policy worked. A period of high interest rates and the market pressures eased and interest rates soon fell below pre-crisis levels. In theory, if monetary policies were implemented earlier, it might have contrasted the spread of the crisis. However, the higher interest rates meant that debt repayments were higher and led to widespread insolvencies. These macroeconomic policies are crucial as they can be implemented to the changing economic conditions. The Asian financial crisis has brought a new way of thinking in the world of global finance. There are lessons that were harshly learnt by a few countries; however, the overall effect was a global one. In the contemporary world, one country does not stand by itself, global integration has meant that countries are connected and interlinked. Therefore, as we witnessed from the Asian financial crisis, the end result of poor management of financial institutions can have a drastic impact on the world economy. In the current climate, we are facing a global recession, an expected drop in world trade, all this as a result of a credit boom. The government and regulators must learn from the Asian financial crisis and hopefully they will be able to contain the latest economic crisis. Works Cited Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press 2010. Web. 18 March 2011. McNally, David. Another World is Possible: Globalization & Anti-Capitalism. Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada: Arbeiter Ring Publishing. Print. Adam Hanieh. â€Å"Forum of Hierarchies of a Global Market: The South and the Economic Crisis. † Studies in Political Economy Volume 83. (2009): 61 – 81. Print. Michael R. King. â€Å"Who Triggered the Asian Financial Crisis? Review of International Political Economy Volume 8. Issue 3 (2001): 438 – 466. Print. Aseem Prakash. â€Å"The East Asian Crisis and the Globalization Discourse. † Review of International Political Economy Volume 8. Issue 1 (2001): 119 – 146. Print. Saleheen Khan, Faridul Islam, Syed Ahmed. â€Å"The Asian Crisis: An Economic Analysis of the Causes. † The J ournal of Developing Areas Volume 39. Issue 1 (2005): 169 – 190. Print. Jim Glassman. â€Å"Economic Crisis in Asia: The Case of Thailand. † Economic Geography Volume 77. Issue 2 (2001): 122 – 147. Print.

Saving Childrens From Losing Their Innocence in Catcher in the Rye - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 2 Words: 684 Downloads: 8 Date added: 2019/05/16 Category Literature Essay Level High school Tags: Catcher in The Rye Essay Did you like this example? The catcher in the rye means to save children from losing their innocence. That is what Holden believed that catcher in the rye meant. The main character who is confused and disillusioned searches for truth and rails against the phoniness of the adult world. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Saving Childrens From Losing Their Innocence in Catcher in the Rye" essay for you Create order He felt that adult behavior was phony. Holden would fantasize of himself being a hero like a lot of young children do, he would fantasize about saving children playing in a field of rye by keeping the from falling off a cliff and descending into the world of adults. He felt that this world was not a world of growth but was a world of loss disappointment and hypocrisy. This book portrays the large fear of growing up and is unsettling to read. The book is read by mostly teenagers and can be confusing because it goes between adolescence and adulthood and it was assigned to kids in school because of its optimistic ending. Witch was taught to teach adolescent readers that pushing people away is a phase. In the book holden has the mindset of an adult and is quick to become emotional. Holden the main character did not intend for the novel to be seen as his life story. He recalled what happened to him that previous Christmas that is how the story became the basis for his narrative. Holden is actually irresponsible and immature and cannot keep his grads up and ends up falling out of several classes. Holden sees childhood as the ideal state of being and believes that adulthood is full of corrupt people and believes the only way we can win in the adult world is if the cards are stacked in our favor. Children do not think much of appearance but in the adult world n order to be respected you must always, look, think, talk, act and dress your best. In the novel as long as he felt good about himself he did not care what other people think which in todayrs world I dont see where thatrs all together a bad thing. A long time ago men, women and children were expected to do specific things and act certain ways. The father went out and worked he mother stayed home and the children went to school and came straight home. They did chores helped with dinner and other things of that nature. There wasnt much time for play between chores dinner and homework. As the years went on children would move through their childhood with not a care and didnt waste a second enjoying it. Before long parents started pushing children to be more adult like wanting them to figure out what an accomplishments they were looking for in life. They have to start figuring out what career path they want to take, do they want a family maybe go to the service, and their childhood at that point starts fading, they are no longer care free and worry free. A whole new world starts to present its self. Children today are raised a lot different than back then so in some ways itrs hard to pick the book apart and to define its meaning as a whole. Children should be worry free and care free and they should remain innocent and I think thatrs why Holden felt the way he did children should not be forced to grow up any faster than theyre supposed to the should be worry free and be kids as long as they can and Holden had a better perspective of that than most kids his own age. Some parents do have an off the wall mindset when it comes to their children. They push them too hard, sometimes into being something they dont want to be. Children should be given the chance to be children and grow into the people they want to be and do the things they want to do and make their own decisions as they grow up. Not every child wants to follow in their parents footsteps choosing the same profession or same style of clothes or acquiring the same mindset.