Are you interested in what you can do improve relations between the cops and the community?
You are right the truth is the truth, and its obvious that you feel wronged by the police in some way. I agree about having an accountability system, but why make them opposing forces or groups, why not get people who are interested in what the police are doing and build a partnership. A good Police or Sheriff's department would welcome this approach. There should be anything to hide, but don't start off as if there are more wrong than right being done. I would incourage people to get to know what their local law enforcement department is doing by getting involved as volunteers and asking about Citizen Police academies. Because if you just get a "watch" group and they don't know anything good or bad about what the police are supposed to do then everyone will be counter-productive. A CITIZEN's Advisory group is what Law Enforcement needs. A group that can give their point of view. The police are here to serve, and what better way to provide service than to ask the people who are the customers. Law Enforcement is the only profession designed to put its self out of business, but do you think this will happen? Unfortunately no. I say get involved and stop passing the buck and hoping someone else will take up the slack.
Is learning to speak Latin a waste of time?
If those are your only two options, or the only two that you are considering, then I would probably work on improving your Spanish over taking Latin. Yes, it is a demanding language to learn, and no, it will not help you obtain employment in your field. I do not generally recommend learning Latin as a starting point to learning other Romance languages, as its grammar is much harder than any of its modern derivatives and it takes a lot more effort to get the basics down. I believe that learning Latin is an end in itself; I recommend learning Latin for no other reason than that I find it enjoyable, and I believe that many others that are linguistically inclined would, too. But since you plan on continuing in Spanish anyways, and you are looking at it as an aid for obtaining a job in your field, then I think it would be better for you to become fluent in that. Being truly bilingual in English and Spanish will be more helpful to you career wise than having a lesser ability in Spanish, with 2 or 3 years of Latin added in. I have seen many places wanting to hire people who are fluent in Spanish; I have never seen any asking for fluency in Latin.
Classical realism refers to writings by Thucydides, Machieavelli, Carl von Clausewitz and Hans J. Morgenthau - they are concerned with order, justice and change at the domestic and international level and their analysis is similar for both - they stress similarities, not differences, between domestic and international politics, and the role of ethics and community in promoting stability. They tend to have a “tragic” outlook - that history repeats itself, and that hubris leads to war… in their view, communal bonds are fragile and easily undermined by those seeking unilateral advantage by either individuals or states.A key difference between classical realists and structural realists lies in the motivation to power. The two schools view that question differently. Classical realists say that the will to power is linked to human nature, and that’s why their analysis of individuals and states is similar. Everyone is born with a will to power hardwired into their brain, and therefore nothing can really be done to improve that situation, for which reason war seems inevitable. There will always appear some asshole who wants to dominate others.For structural realists, human nature has little to do with why states want power. Rather, the architecture of the international system forces states to pursue power… it is simply rational for every state to acquire sufficient power to defend itself in the event that it is attacked. In such a system, states are forced to compete if they wish to survive. Structural realists ignore cultural differences among states and regime type because the international system creates the same incentives for all great powers. For structuralists, unlike for classical realists, who is in power is not that important, so classical realists put more emphasis on human actors/human agency.Another question shows the differences between the two: How much power is enough? Defensive realists (also structuralists) like Kenneth Waltz say it is unwise for states to acquire too much power because the system will punish them. Offensive realists like John Mearsheimer argue that it makes strategic sense for states to acquire as much power as possible, and even to pursue hegemony.For classical realists, power is an end in itself, a function of human nature, but for structural realists, power is a means to an end, and the ultimate end is survival.
What are teen's views on American Leadership & future.?
Teens, you know as well as I that you are the next leading generation of America. What are your views on leadership? What can you do to help our country? Answers I'm looking for. 1.) Political leadership 2.) International relations & affairs 3.) Environmental 4.) Economy 5.) Crime & Law I'm only asking because I would like to know the young people's views. We need the youth to get more involved in taking leadership roles. Education is a must, and not only that, but knowing what your doing. (There's no slip ups in taking care of a nation.) For the purpose that the U.S, and the world, will live on strong and prosperous.
Can you explain the ways in which hitler changed Germany from a democracy into a dictatorship?
presently after Hitler got here to capability in January 1933, the Riechsteg fireplace befell. This became blamed on a communist youthful people and Hitler enacted emergency powers giving him total administration of the rustic. After removing the communist celebration, he enforced standards to connect the national Socialist celebration or be excommunicated from society and positioned out of enterprise.Theres alot greater too it, yet it fairly is a short synopsis.
Don't be afraid. You can and should relax. We're not facing a doomsday scenario.I'll explain why but first let me say stop reading/watching the news and go for a hike, bike ride, take a friend to lunch, go surfing; anything healthy, social, outdoors, fun etc. Your mind is too wrapped up in Trump news right now. Political scientists don't call activist news ‘agitation’ for nothing :)Take two full weeks off of the news and any debating with friends or whoever. Walk away and go live. You'll feel much better.Trump has only four years and no mandate from the people. He's widely disliked. The United States is a system of institutions. The state department, pentagon, CIA and dozens of departments (as well as state and local governments) are already resisting him. Presidents are not Caesars or Pharaohs. Trump’s authority has limits.American citizens don’t realize that the departments view each president as an interlocutor. The state department for example has agendas, experience, expertise and relationships abroad that extend far beyond that of each president and the cabinet secretary he appoints. State Department professionals operate with the knowledge that the president will soon be gone and they'll still be on the job.They know he's a foolish man and they're already strategizing and maneuvering against him. The National Parks Service publicly embarrassed him on his first day…This is going to be more clown-show and less evil-autocracy than Trump’s detractors realize. As time rolls forward the idiocy and dishonesty will build and build. More and more people will get sick of Trump.He's no longer being evaluated relative to Hillary. He's being evaluated in absolute terms. He can't look good for very long while basking in the light of his own deranged narcissism.Worst case scenario: should Trump order a preemptive nuclear strike he will be cajoled, stalled, resisted - the fact of his order will be leaked - he may be physically restrained while the order is defied and reported to congress - Trump might even be shot dead by a member of the pentagon brass.Trump is a raging fool. Most of the people around him and under him are rooted in reality; they are professionals. Some are ideologues. But that's nothing new.
Do you think countries, borders are needed?
I mean...as you know, countries are just tools of the elites in the government, opinions of small people dont really matter. I mean comon, you may vote them in, you may say that democracy can monitor them. But, is that really the case? For example, the Bush gang may declare their "war on terror" but what do you stand to gain and do you really want to support them? I suppose as seen recently, Bush's supporting rate is so frigging low, and almost no one really supports his actions anymore, yet it seems that he doesnt care. I just have this idea, in the future, countries should not function anymore, why not everyone just unite and make the world a better place. Why should a few countries get richer and richer and become tools for even fewer elites to control the world, while vast majority lives in poverty. Any opinions on this?