Is ethnic conflict the most important cause of civil wars Essay

Is ethnic conflict the most important cause of civil wars - Essay Example All governments in the world attempt to attain and maintain a monopoly over organized violence within its borders. When they lose the monopoly to the emergence of a rebel group, a civil war erupts. Reducing global incidence of civil wars is highly feasible and is hugely valuable to international peace and stability in the globe. All in all, ethnic difference has been quoted by many as the most important cause of many civil wars being experienced around the globe. To Collier, P & Hoeffler, A (2005), civil wars are now more common compared to international conflict. According to them, of the 15 main armed conflicts which are listed by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) for 2001, majority are internal conflicts which can be categorized as civil wars. To start with, unequal distribution of government resources forces people to come together once they notice that, the distribution is done in the lines of ethnicity. A saying goes that, if in a seat of power, you should always do well and particularly to your tribes’ men. To Fearon, J. et al. (2006), this is a negative score if a country is to have the required cohesion among the tribes if it is to achieve any thing higher. The neglected tribes often come up to attack the ruling elites together with the tribes were they come from. According to Fearon, J. et al. (2006), this is the starting point. Also, government positions are allocated to the politically correct individuals; from the tribe of the ruling class. This practice of segregating some individuals due to his/her tribe leads to civil war in many instances. Further, in countries which were colonized by foreign powers, the first citizen to rule that country determines the future of the country. When a person ascends to power and starts rewarding his/her ethnic group then a problem crops up. For example in Kenya after the general elections last year, an internal conflict ensued which could have deteriorated into a civil war

Comparing the novel of 'jesus's son' by Denis Johnson with the movie Essay

Comparing the novel of 'jesus's son' by Denis Johnson with the movie of 'jesus's son' - Essay Example He tries to explain in the connection of the short stories, through the different aspects of the drug connection the author articulate a different take on drug abuse. On the other had the movie is a compilation of the short stories with parts of the book edited to fit the characters. The book is detailed, which gives the reader a chance to make images of descriptions articulated in the book. The main issue is that the main character is involved in a flow. The movie borrows Johnson’s ideas on the stories of the characters. The contemporary fiction is made in the 70s fashion of the hippies and junkies. Some will protest that the scenes in the movie push too freely against one another citing it as a description of a squashy narrative in which the guns go wrong and the cars lack have brakes in some people’s perspective. I believe the short stories are accurate for an account concerning druggies. Their lives are too sporadic, the good times, lows settle out into detached esc apades and story, estranged by emptiness, and pass outs. The movie is not as indulging as the books since people have different opinions on what they see more compared to the things they read. The book and the move have several differences, which are going to be tackled. The first difference in the movie that the book does not depict is the character ambiguity. The main character does not resemble the books character. The movie is strongly presented in the fashion of the 70s where it was a clear directionless time and the characters take the audience spinning from the moments of hilarity to the heartbreak. The book is geared to making the people to change the drug trends into respectability. The author takes the reader into the dungeons of drug use and hopelessness with the aim to give the reader the extent of drug abuse in the society. The movie has a different take n the drugs. It does not condemn or appraise the use of drugs but gives the reader the point of view of a survivor. T he lives of the characters are framed so episodically to add up to the novels depictions of the stories these difference makes the book more interactive and fluid compared to the movie. With disconnects depicted in the movie, characters come out to give the audience the feelings of desperations they have. The author coined the book depicting the Para-realities of the characters as they aspire to walk in the tattered cruelties that they bring on themselves and the deplorable treacheries. The movie lacks the oomph the author put in the expression of the Para-realities. For instance, the unlovely trauma that the narrator’s girlfriend has that eh author explains with no excuses or apology. The lies in the relationships and the constant reliance on the company of their fellow drug users is more clear in the book as compared to the novel where it is faded. The imagery of the title is not given more emphasis in the movie. Rather the producer gave the movie a velvet underground in it s entirety. Another clear character difference is the lack of plot in the film where the producer did not have one. The movie is told in complete flashbacks watering the books purpose that the author had on the flow of the events of the druggies depicted in the book. The swearing in the movie characters dilutes the articulation of the books information. The characters have several arguments where they have they