American Heritage Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 2

American Heritage - Essay Example employed to determine and govern the way that each of these aforementioned three actors can and should behave with relation to the tasks they were responsible for fulfilling and with regards to the level of cross jurisdictional activity that was allowed to occur between the two. It should be noted that although a powerful judiciary and/or legislature were feared as well, the ultimate fear that the founders had was with regards to the growth and over abundance of power that a strong executive might carve out for himself/herself. In this way, a secondary benefit of the separation of power can be seen to have an ancillary benefit of ensuring that none of the three becomes too powerful; however, the ultimate goal that was originally intended to ensure that the executive branch was not able to exact total control over the system. This was primarily born out of the fear that was a result of the means by which the colonists had experienced the full might and whimsical wrath of King George III. After having a far less than pleasant experience with the way in which a total monarch (the ultimate executive) could exhibit control over each and every aspect of life, the colonists and the framers wanted to ensure that they could create a system of governance that did not exhibit this particular flaw. By refusing the power of the legislature to enact law, by refusing the power of the executive to pass legislation, and by refusing the judicial power the powers associated with either the legislative or executive branches, the framers were able to create a system that most effectively represented the means by which checks and balances could be ensured between all three branches. By not making any one entity or individual ultimately responsible, the framers sought to create a medium of governance that would not perish by nature of its very inability to provide rapid and/or radical changes based upon the whims or personal interests of a single individual or a cabal of self

International business paper exam Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

International business paper exam - Essay Example It is a capitalist world-economy because the accumulation of private capital, through exploitation in production and sale for profit in a market, is its driving force; it is "a system that operates on the primacy of the endless accumulation of capital via the eventual commodification of everything" (Wallerstein, 1998). A polity is a "system of creating value through the collective conferral of authority" (Meyer, 1980). Nation-states are, of course, the invention of early modern times, institutions produced by the rise of capitalism. Capitalism required a jettisoning of the feudal regime with its patchwork of autonomous sovereignty. Difference was absorbed into the homogeneity of the nation-state, producing a unified legal code that protected private property and the investment of the capitalist and allowed for the circulation of a single currency. This economic act was, of course, represented as the creation of a harmonious community of people with a common language and a coherent culture and worldview. World culture theory is a label for a particular interpretation of globalization that focuses on the way in which participants in the process become conscious of and give meaning to living in the world as a single place. In this account, globalization "refers both to the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole"; in other words, it covers the acceleration in concrete global interdependence and in consciousness of the global whole (Robertson, 1992). From economic point of view globalization theories are devided into two theories: neoclassical and Marxist. Reassessing economic theories of globalization. Attention to the economic processes that shape positionality alters our ideas about the spatial dynamics of globalization. Much of the received wisdom of how markets work, both in neoclassical and Marxist economic theory was developed under the assumption that economies have no spatial extent. This received wisdom can be questioned, however, because the production of positionality challenges some key theoretical claims emanating from economics: the stability of market-based equilibria, the possibility of regional economic equality, the social benefits of free trade or land markets, the likelihood that rational choices lead to expected outcomes, the stability of class alliances, and the theory of value (Harvey 1982; Sheppard and Barnes 1990). It follows that the contrasting grand narratives about globalization associated with these two economic theories, of globalization as modernization and globalization as polarization, respectively, are also questionable. The global capitalist economy is better conceived of as an out- of -equilibrium, complex and contested spatiotemporal system whose long-term outcomes are unknowable. 2. Differences in national business systems Initially differences in national business systems (NBS) could be explained by institutional differences. In order to be effective, business firms would not only have to behave rationally toward the market and be technologically efficient as organizations, they would simultaneously have to behave effectively toward the institutional context in which they operated. Thus, if the different European states constitute different formations of institutions, business firms will in effect organize differently