Friday, February 4, 2011
Current events in Egypt - what should Obama do?
In my opinion, the United States and Obama should not get involved in what is going on in Egypt right now, as it could be potentially disastrous regardless of what we could do. The United States has supported Mubarak because he has maintained peaceful policies toward Israel, so if the United States were to be on the side of those protesting, it might (in an indirect manner) more quickly put another leader in charge that is more favorable with the Egyptians that might not actually maintain peaceful policies with Israel, and since Egypt is the largest and most populous Arab country, if any Arab could destroy Israel single-handed it would probably be Egypt. On the other hand, if the United States decides to support Mubarak, it will alienate the majority of the Egyptian people and when Mubarak is finally not in power, it is likely that the next Egyptian leader would not want to cooperate with us and it could provoke future conflicts, be it a lack of economic cooperation or even war. It is just safer for the United States to stay out of the conflicts in Egypt right now, since we already are at war and don't need to make any more enemies. I think that it is not the business of the United States to interfere with peaceful protests and if the protests intensify, it is not our responsibility to stop it.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Adenauer Questions, 1/31/11
1. Adenauer's greatest achievements;
-he reestablished German democracy following the Nazis, (Verdict A)
-he oversaw the beginning of an economic miracle, secured a place for West Germany in the international community, brought economic prosperity, material wealth, political stability, and relative security. (Verdict B)
-brought Germany out of the abyss Hitler caused, tied West Germany into Western Europe and brought them closer (Verdict C)
2. Criticisms of Adenauer are not justified because although some said that he completely neglected the concerns of East Germany, it seems to me that he just did not want to do anything risky such as reunite the country so long as the Soviet Union was so closely tied in with East Germany, as there was no predicting what might have happened otherwise. However, it is true that he did not keep his promise of focusing on German reunification.
-he reestablished German democracy following the Nazis, (Verdict A)
-he oversaw the beginning of an economic miracle, secured a place for West Germany in the international community, brought economic prosperity, material wealth, political stability, and relative security. (Verdict B)
-brought Germany out of the abyss Hitler caused, tied West Germany into Western Europe and brought them closer (Verdict C)
2. Criticisms of Adenauer are not justified because although some said that he completely neglected the concerns of East Germany, it seems to me that he just did not want to do anything risky such as reunite the country so long as the Soviet Union was so closely tied in with East Germany, as there was no predicting what might have happened otherwise. However, it is true that he did not keep his promise of focusing on German reunification.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
IRL - European Union. 1/25/10.
URL; https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ee.html
The European Union today, according to the CIA fact book, has done a lot in Europe, including the abolishment of trade barriers (which is consistent with the idea of European economic cooperation that began in the 1950s and 1960s), has adopted a common currency (the Euro), and is striving toward convergence of living standards. The only limitation to this is that due to differences in average income in various countries as well as the standard of living which varies, it will be difficult to standardize the quality of living and work toward one common European economy.
This is significant to what we have learned in class because it demonstrates that the countries of Europe are cooperating in order to level out their standards of living and make opportunities greater for all European countries who are part of the European Union. This is definitely a continuation of the past attempts to unite Europe economically and move past the divisions due to wars which created rivalries and significant economic gaps from one country to another. Also, statistics demonstrate that this is working, as the unemployment rate of the EU is only 9% compared to the rest of the world which is slightly higher, and that the EU is very technologically advanced compared to most of the world and home to a number of industries (metal, coal, cement, electronics and communication, etc.).
What I find most significant is that the European Union covers a wide range of European regions that were once previously separated culturally and economically, for instance all of Western Europe minus Switzerland, but also Eastern European countries such as Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, etc . are also members, and they were on the other side of the "Iron Curtain", but now seem to be showing interest in cooperating with the rest of Europe, which shows definite progress. There are currently 27 member states of the European Union, which is more than half of all Europe.
The European Union today, according to the CIA fact book, has done a lot in Europe, including the abolishment of trade barriers (which is consistent with the idea of European economic cooperation that began in the 1950s and 1960s), has adopted a common currency (the Euro), and is striving toward convergence of living standards. The only limitation to this is that due to differences in average income in various countries as well as the standard of living which varies, it will be difficult to standardize the quality of living and work toward one common European economy.
This is significant to what we have learned in class because it demonstrates that the countries of Europe are cooperating in order to level out their standards of living and make opportunities greater for all European countries who are part of the European Union. This is definitely a continuation of the past attempts to unite Europe economically and move past the divisions due to wars which created rivalries and significant economic gaps from one country to another. Also, statistics demonstrate that this is working, as the unemployment rate of the EU is only 9% compared to the rest of the world which is slightly higher, and that the EU is very technologically advanced compared to most of the world and home to a number of industries (metal, coal, cement, electronics and communication, etc.).
What I find most significant is that the European Union covers a wide range of European regions that were once previously separated culturally and economically, for instance all of Western Europe minus Switzerland, but also Eastern European countries such as Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, etc . are also members, and they were on the other side of the "Iron Curtain", but now seem to be showing interest in cooperating with the rest of Europe, which shows definite progress. There are currently 27 member states of the European Union, which is more than half of all Europe.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Spain Chapter 5.5 Questions, January 6, 2011
1. Successes Spain experienced in international relations in the 1950s included the $62 million dollar loan from the US as part of the European Co-Operation Adminstration, the 1952 decision to allow Spain membership of UNESCO, and in 1955 full membership of the United Nations.
2. Economic troubles Spain faced included the per capita meat consumption that was in 1950 only half of what it was in 1926, bread consumption being only half of what it was in 1936, and shortages and corruption that forced people to buy goods at black market prices double those in the shops.
3. A technocrat is a technical expert put in a position of power or control. Opus Dei was an organization within the Catholic Church that believed that economic development lead to the spread of liberal ideas and therefore, anti-Catholic thought.
4. Desarrollo means Spanish Miracle. The Stabilization Plan of 1957 was made up of cutting public spending, wages were frozen, credit restricted, and the peseta (the Spanish currency) was devalued. The goal of this was to tackle inflation and the balance of payments deficit and in the longer term to break with the Falangist policy of autarky, which had restricted the possibility of economic growth.
5. The Spanish economy was boosted in the 1960s because foreign investment was attracted by the low cost of labour and the lack of civil rights the authoritarian regime guaranteed, and Northern Europe's expanding middle class started to take holidays on the rapidly developing Spanish costas. Spanish people working in the service sector abroad sent home one third of their earnings to family left behind, and by 1973 there were 750,000 Spanish working in Germany and France.
6. Three examples of the economic improvement experienced by the Spaniards during the 1960s include the fact that they ceased to be on the list of UN-designated "Developing Nations", and when the Desarrollo ended with the world oil crisis of 1973, Spain was the world's ninth biggest industrial power. Additionally, average incomes nearly tripled during the 1960s.
7. Types of media that came to dominate Spanish culture during the 1960s were television, and Television Espanola (TVE) was established as a state monopoly in 1956. By 1970, 90% of the Spanish owned a television. Also, the cinema was another media, as it had more seats per capita than in any other European country. Football also offered a similar means of escape and was fully exploited by the nation.
8. Three ways that economic growth in Spain undermined the social structure that helped create Franco's regime were the fact that Falangists had glorified the peasant farmer and traditional class structure of southern Spain, but the urbanization of the Desarrollo did much to destroy this. Also Falangist propaganda denigrated the moral turpitude of the liberal democracies but Spain's economic revival depended on the remittances of Spaniards living in these democracies. Also, the Spanish brought home with them liberal ideas when they returned.
9. The "anti-democratic" legacy of the Franco regime is the fact that the state and laws were fundamentally unchanged from the system established at the end of the civil war, and in 1975 when Franco died, Spain stood alone in Western Europe as the only remaining authoritarian regime that owed its origins to pre-war fascism. Also, Spain was still overwhelmingly focused on the Cortes representing not political parties but interest groups drawn from the monarchists, army, church, and Falange.
10. The "institutionalized discrimination against married women" in Spain in the 1970s because women were in Franco's Spain considered second class citizens, the basis of the relationship between men and women was the idea of permiso marital (permission of marriage), where without the husband's permission, a wife could not take job, open a bank account or even travel any significant distance. Married women didn't have rights to property and had to pass everything to their husbands, and although adultery was a crime punishable 6 years in prison, it was only a crime for men if the affair became public knowledge, and there was no divorce and contraception was illegal. Basically, women had no choices.
11. Nationalist minority groups in Spain during the 1960s and 1970s such as the Catalans and Basques protested the suppression of regionalism. In Catalonia the protests were expressed peacefully through cultural means but in the Basque country, the protest became associated with the terrorist group ETA which became caught up in a spiral of retaliatory violence which continues today.
2. Economic troubles Spain faced included the per capita meat consumption that was in 1950 only half of what it was in 1926, bread consumption being only half of what it was in 1936, and shortages and corruption that forced people to buy goods at black market prices double those in the shops.
3. A technocrat is a technical expert put in a position of power or control. Opus Dei was an organization within the Catholic Church that believed that economic development lead to the spread of liberal ideas and therefore, anti-Catholic thought.
4. Desarrollo means Spanish Miracle. The Stabilization Plan of 1957 was made up of cutting public spending, wages were frozen, credit restricted, and the peseta (the Spanish currency) was devalued. The goal of this was to tackle inflation and the balance of payments deficit and in the longer term to break with the Falangist policy of autarky, which had restricted the possibility of economic growth.
5. The Spanish economy was boosted in the 1960s because foreign investment was attracted by the low cost of labour and the lack of civil rights the authoritarian regime guaranteed, and Northern Europe's expanding middle class started to take holidays on the rapidly developing Spanish costas. Spanish people working in the service sector abroad sent home one third of their earnings to family left behind, and by 1973 there were 750,000 Spanish working in Germany and France.
6. Three examples of the economic improvement experienced by the Spaniards during the 1960s include the fact that they ceased to be on the list of UN-designated "Developing Nations", and when the Desarrollo ended with the world oil crisis of 1973, Spain was the world's ninth biggest industrial power. Additionally, average incomes nearly tripled during the 1960s.
7. Types of media that came to dominate Spanish culture during the 1960s were television, and Television Espanola (TVE) was established as a state monopoly in 1956. By 1970, 90% of the Spanish owned a television. Also, the cinema was another media, as it had more seats per capita than in any other European country. Football also offered a similar means of escape and was fully exploited by the nation.
8. Three ways that economic growth in Spain undermined the social structure that helped create Franco's regime were the fact that Falangists had glorified the peasant farmer and traditional class structure of southern Spain, but the urbanization of the Desarrollo did much to destroy this. Also Falangist propaganda denigrated the moral turpitude of the liberal democracies but Spain's economic revival depended on the remittances of Spaniards living in these democracies. Also, the Spanish brought home with them liberal ideas when they returned.
9. The "anti-democratic" legacy of the Franco regime is the fact that the state and laws were fundamentally unchanged from the system established at the end of the civil war, and in 1975 when Franco died, Spain stood alone in Western Europe as the only remaining authoritarian regime that owed its origins to pre-war fascism. Also, Spain was still overwhelmingly focused on the Cortes representing not political parties but interest groups drawn from the monarchists, army, church, and Falange.
10. The "institutionalized discrimination against married women" in Spain in the 1970s because women were in Franco's Spain considered second class citizens, the basis of the relationship between men and women was the idea of permiso marital (permission of marriage), where without the husband's permission, a wife could not take job, open a bank account or even travel any significant distance. Married women didn't have rights to property and had to pass everything to their husbands, and although adultery was a crime punishable 6 years in prison, it was only a crime for men if the affair became public knowledge, and there was no divorce and contraception was illegal. Basically, women had no choices.
11. Nationalist minority groups in Spain during the 1960s and 1970s such as the Catalans and Basques protested the suppression of regionalism. In Catalonia the protests were expressed peacefully through cultural means but in the Basque country, the protest became associated with the terrorist group ETA which became caught up in a spiral of retaliatory violence which continues today.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Franco questions, January 4, 2010
1. Compare and contrast the views of Paul Preston and Filipe Ribeiro de Meneses on Franco. To what extent do they disagree with one another?
To a significant extent they disagree with each other, because the underlying thought behind what they have stated is contrasting - de Meneses believes that Franco was not a fascist because fascists want to provoke a change in society, but he says that Franco tried to preserve Spain from change, which is contrary to what fascism is - while on the other hand, Preston states that the only way it can be justified to state that Franco was not a fascist is if fascism is made synonymous with Nazism, since Mussolini's Italy is in many ways comparable to Spain under Franco.
2. Franco ruled Spain for nearly 40 years. Why does this make it more difficult to conclude whether he was a fascist or not?
Due to the different circumstances that Franco would have had to face and the influence of several leaders of other countries and the sharing of ideas between them (Franco, Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) and the fact that Spain under Franco, according to Source G on this paper, had "Fascist trimmings in the early years" but later on was rather modified over time and never became a totalitarian state, it is difficult to determine if Franco is fascist or not since the nature of his regime might have shifted focus for one reason or another.
3. In 1944 the English writer George Orwell wrote that the word fascism was "entirely meaningless". Does the word have any meaning or use in today's world?
From my experience I have only heard it used in reference to leaders who have existed in the past, mainly Hitler and Mussolini, but in today's world it is taught that fascism is the 'extreme right' on the political spectrum, thus it seems that someone with extreme right-wing views, if going all the way to the extreme with them, could be considered a fascist if they put these views into practice and ruled their country similarly to how established fascist leaders (Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) did. I have not heard any modern leaders referred to as fascist although this might be due to my limited experience.
4. List the characteristics of a fascist state. How does Franco's rule conform to these definitions?
- Right-wing views
- Brutality and a desire for war
- One political party exists
- Totalitarian
- Desire to create change in the society
Franco's rule conforms to the definitions of right-wing, brutal/war desiring, but not totalitarian or the existence of only one political party (since the Falangists only existed for a period of time before Franco diminished their importance and eventually they ceased to exist or be significant). The main difference is that Franco was said to have tried to preserve Spain from change, which is seen as un-fascist, as opposed to trying to create radical change the way someone like Hitler and Mussolini did.
To a significant extent they disagree with each other, because the underlying thought behind what they have stated is contrasting - de Meneses believes that Franco was not a fascist because fascists want to provoke a change in society, but he says that Franco tried to preserve Spain from change, which is contrary to what fascism is - while on the other hand, Preston states that the only way it can be justified to state that Franco was not a fascist is if fascism is made synonymous with Nazism, since Mussolini's Italy is in many ways comparable to Spain under Franco.
2. Franco ruled Spain for nearly 40 years. Why does this make it more difficult to conclude whether he was a fascist or not?
Due to the different circumstances that Franco would have had to face and the influence of several leaders of other countries and the sharing of ideas between them (Franco, Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) and the fact that Spain under Franco, according to Source G on this paper, had "Fascist trimmings in the early years" but later on was rather modified over time and never became a totalitarian state, it is difficult to determine if Franco is fascist or not since the nature of his regime might have shifted focus for one reason or another.
3. In 1944 the English writer George Orwell wrote that the word fascism was "entirely meaningless". Does the word have any meaning or use in today's world?
From my experience I have only heard it used in reference to leaders who have existed in the past, mainly Hitler and Mussolini, but in today's world it is taught that fascism is the 'extreme right' on the political spectrum, thus it seems that someone with extreme right-wing views, if going all the way to the extreme with them, could be considered a fascist if they put these views into practice and ruled their country similarly to how established fascist leaders (Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) did. I have not heard any modern leaders referred to as fascist although this might be due to my limited experience.
4. List the characteristics of a fascist state. How does Franco's rule conform to these definitions?
- Right-wing views
- Brutality and a desire for war
- One political party exists
- Totalitarian
- Desire to create change in the society
Franco's rule conforms to the definitions of right-wing, brutal/war desiring, but not totalitarian or the existence of only one political party (since the Falangists only existed for a period of time before Franco diminished their importance and eventually they ceased to exist or be significant). The main difference is that Franco was said to have tried to preserve Spain from change, which is seen as un-fascist, as opposed to trying to create radical change the way someone like Hitler and Mussolini did.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
TOK Questions, December 15, 2010.
1. Identify the arguments for and against the actions of Bomber Command.
For;
-It shortened the war by six months and saved thousands from the gas chambers.
-It destroyed Hitler and those who sustained his war.
- It helped to powerfully bring about the post-war conversion to peaceful democracy for Germany.
Against;
- It was a moral crime and could be considered a mass murder of civilians.
- It was an example of brutality in war.
One side of the argument is that the bombing brought an end to the war and put a stop to Hitler and the Nazis and was the beginning of the conversion to a peaceful democracy for Germany. Thus it can be argued that although bombing, which kills a large number of people, is in and of itself a negative, it yielded positive long term results in this instance. The other side of the argument is that many innocent civilians lost their lives in a very brutal manner.
2. Explain President Herzog's comment that "history must be unified". Is it possible to unify history?
It is possible to "unify" history, meaning that one version of history is presented to all, in every country, independent of what each country feels that they did well. It is known through the viewing of textbooks in different countries, when seeing what is taught to students from around the world, that various events are told differently around the world, even though in reality, there was only one course of events. The perspective is what changes, with a country's biases coming into play when presenting history, that is to say that if a war took place, a country might present their actions as less destructive to the other side than they really were in order to make themselves look less like perpetrators. However it is unlikely that every country would agree to teach and identify with one standardized version/description of an event, so while it is indeed possible it is very unlikely that this will ever happen.
3. In your opinion was the bombing of German cities justified? How did the Allied bombing campaign support the Just War Theory? Do further research on the background to this theory.
In my opinion, the bombing of German cities was justified. Without the bombing it would have been far more difficult to bring Hitler and the Nazi's actions to a stop with regards to the atrocities they had committed. While bombing is destructive and takes the innocent lives of many people, the Nazis were also taking the lives of many innocent people by sending them to the gas chambers and killing them there. The bombings helped to shorten the war and bring these atrocities to a stop, so in my opinion the innocent lives that were lost, were not lost in vain.
Also, I think the Allied bombing campaign did support the Just War Theory. The criteria "Just cause" states that innocent life must be in imminent danger, and it was. The Nazis relocated many innocent people to gas chambers and were also a threat to the rest of Western Europe. Innocent lives were in danger at the Nazis expense.
Circumstances in which it is right to fight a war;
- Innocent life in danger
- A serious threat to a nation's security
- All other means of putting an end to some threat would be impractical or ineffective
- There are prospects of success.
- The use of arms must not produce more evil than the evils that are to be eliminated by using those arms.
Justifiable conduct during a war;
- Using the appropriate amount of force necessary to put a stop to unjustifiable evils.
- Defending innocent lives
- Putting an end to threats to innocent lives/nations.
For;
-It shortened the war by six months and saved thousands from the gas chambers.
-It destroyed Hitler and those who sustained his war.
- It helped to powerfully bring about the post-war conversion to peaceful democracy for Germany.
Against;
- It was a moral crime and could be considered a mass murder of civilians.
- It was an example of brutality in war.
One side of the argument is that the bombing brought an end to the war and put a stop to Hitler and the Nazis and was the beginning of the conversion to a peaceful democracy for Germany. Thus it can be argued that although bombing, which kills a large number of people, is in and of itself a negative, it yielded positive long term results in this instance. The other side of the argument is that many innocent civilians lost their lives in a very brutal manner.
2. Explain President Herzog's comment that "history must be unified". Is it possible to unify history?
It is possible to "unify" history, meaning that one version of history is presented to all, in every country, independent of what each country feels that they did well. It is known through the viewing of textbooks in different countries, when seeing what is taught to students from around the world, that various events are told differently around the world, even though in reality, there was only one course of events. The perspective is what changes, with a country's biases coming into play when presenting history, that is to say that if a war took place, a country might present their actions as less destructive to the other side than they really were in order to make themselves look less like perpetrators. However it is unlikely that every country would agree to teach and identify with one standardized version/description of an event, so while it is indeed possible it is very unlikely that this will ever happen.
3. In your opinion was the bombing of German cities justified? How did the Allied bombing campaign support the Just War Theory? Do further research on the background to this theory.
In my opinion, the bombing of German cities was justified. Without the bombing it would have been far more difficult to bring Hitler and the Nazi's actions to a stop with regards to the atrocities they had committed. While bombing is destructive and takes the innocent lives of many people, the Nazis were also taking the lives of many innocent people by sending them to the gas chambers and killing them there. The bombings helped to shorten the war and bring these atrocities to a stop, so in my opinion the innocent lives that were lost, were not lost in vain.
Also, I think the Allied bombing campaign did support the Just War Theory. The criteria "Just cause" states that innocent life must be in imminent danger, and it was. The Nazis relocated many innocent people to gas chambers and were also a threat to the rest of Western Europe. Innocent lives were in danger at the Nazis expense.
Circumstances in which it is right to fight a war;
- Innocent life in danger
- A serious threat to a nation's security
- All other means of putting an end to some threat would be impractical or ineffective
- There are prospects of success.
- The use of arms must not produce more evil than the evils that are to be eliminated by using those arms.
Justifiable conduct during a war;
- Using the appropriate amount of force necessary to put a stop to unjustifiable evils.
- Defending innocent lives
- Putting an end to threats to innocent lives/nations.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
IRL - Women's rights in China today, 12/1/10.
URL; http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1451439/womens_rights_in_china_today.html
Women's rights in China today are not entirely well known to the rest of the world, because much of the information is classified as secret and not shared with the rest of the world. As a totalitarian state even today, where the Communist Party is the only political entity allowed to exist, this information isn't revealed. Since the 1980s it can be seen that China (given its increasing economy) has brought many people, including women, out of horrible conditions but not all women seemed to have benefitted.
Women's rights in China today, by law, sound good on paper; women have equality in marriage, education, rights and freedoms but in some rural areas these laws are ignored, and it is here that trafficking of women and children (especially girls) is a regular occurrence, as well as domestic abuse. Many of these cases are not dealt with either, so while women technically have all of the same rights as men, not all of them are able to enjoy these rights. Also, the One Child Policy affects women as well - baby girls are not valued the same way baby boys are and female newborns are often killed or abandoned, showing that there is not practiced equality between males and females. The One Child Policy also affects women further because to adhere to this policy, women are often forced to submit to abortions or sterilization, even if against their will.
This is related to what we have been studying in class in that in Mao's day and now, women technically did have rights and it would seem that they were treated equally; that is to say, on paper, men and women were equal, however in practice it is not always so. This is evident in the bias against daughters, the forcing of women to have abortions to adhere to the One Child Policy, and most horrifyingly, the trafficking of women and female children into the sex trade. The sexual aspect of this is actually carried over from the past, when brothels were set up by the CCP. It's horrifying but it's true.
This information is valuable because it demonstrates a clear continuity between the past and the present in China, and how women have rights that are often ignored and not carried out, and they are not truly treated as equal despite what the law says. However, since it does not include statistics and precise numerical data (which is ultimately a result of the fact that it is not released), this is a limitation to the reader's understanding, as we cannot get a clear picture of the extent of domestic abuse and human trafficking.
Women's rights in China today are not entirely well known to the rest of the world, because much of the information is classified as secret and not shared with the rest of the world. As a totalitarian state even today, where the Communist Party is the only political entity allowed to exist, this information isn't revealed. Since the 1980s it can be seen that China (given its increasing economy) has brought many people, including women, out of horrible conditions but not all women seemed to have benefitted.
Women's rights in China today, by law, sound good on paper; women have equality in marriage, education, rights and freedoms but in some rural areas these laws are ignored, and it is here that trafficking of women and children (especially girls) is a regular occurrence, as well as domestic abuse. Many of these cases are not dealt with either, so while women technically have all of the same rights as men, not all of them are able to enjoy these rights. Also, the One Child Policy affects women as well - baby girls are not valued the same way baby boys are and female newborns are often killed or abandoned, showing that there is not practiced equality between males and females. The One Child Policy also affects women further because to adhere to this policy, women are often forced to submit to abortions or sterilization, even if against their will.
This is related to what we have been studying in class in that in Mao's day and now, women technically did have rights and it would seem that they were treated equally; that is to say, on paper, men and women were equal, however in practice it is not always so. This is evident in the bias against daughters, the forcing of women to have abortions to adhere to the One Child Policy, and most horrifyingly, the trafficking of women and female children into the sex trade. The sexual aspect of this is actually carried over from the past, when brothels were set up by the CCP. It's horrifying but it's true.
This information is valuable because it demonstrates a clear continuity between the past and the present in China, and how women have rights that are often ignored and not carried out, and they are not truly treated as equal despite what the law says. However, since it does not include statistics and precise numerical data (which is ultimately a result of the fact that it is not released), this is a limitation to the reader's understanding, as we cannot get a clear picture of the extent of domestic abuse and human trafficking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)