Mel Brooks as Jewish Comedian Essay Example for Free

Mel Brooks as Jewish Comedian Essay Mel Brookss membership in the elite club of Jewish comedians is essentially impossible to dispute. The question is whether or not his comedy is atypical. Satirizing Jewish history and klutzy old Jewish men is normal for Jewish comedy. However, Dont be stupid, be a smarty, come and join the Nazi party, is something that you would not expect to hear in typical Jewish comedy (The Producers). Defined broadly, there are two forms which Mel Brookss Jewish humor takes. The first form is to discuss specifically Jewish topics in a funny way. This is evident in The Producers and in the Inquisition scene from History of the World, Part I. The other form is to use certain aspects of Judaism for comedic value. This form, is typically used by Brooks as a means for a quick laugh as opposed to a major source of plot definition, and is most apparent in such scenes as that with the Yiddish-speaking Indian in Blazing Saddles. While exploring Brookss types of Jewish humor, this paper will limit its scope. Only four of Brookss films will be discussed in this paper-The Producers, Blazing Saddles, History of the World, Part I, and To Be or Not To Be. These films were chosen because the quantity of Jewish content in all of them is considerably more than in his other films such as Young Frankenstein or Silent Movie. The four films chosen do an excellent job of portraying the complete range of the types of Jewish-related humor, which Brooks uses. To understand Mel Brooks identity as a specifically Jewish comedian it is important to understand how Jewish he actually was. Melvin Kaminsky was born as the youngest of four brothers in a crowded New York City apartment to Kitty and Max Kaminsky. He grew up in a very Jewish area were on Saturdays, the shops were closed, the pushcarts parked, and Yiddish replaced with Hebrew in over seventy orthodox synagogues. However, Brooks himself spent his Saturdays enjoying matinees at the Marcy Theater. He married a non-Jewish woman and allowed his son, Max, to be baptized only as long as he was allowed to have a bar-mitzvah. When asked by the media if he wanted his wife to convert he replied She dont have to convert. She a star! (Yacowar 10-14). Before discussing the films, it is crucial to identify a recurring theme in Brookss work-Germans and, more specifically, Nazis. He had a brief military career in World War II with very little combat experience, and he actually ended up being the entertainment coordinator for the army. Yacowar analyzes Brooks later feelings towards Germans as subconscious frustration because of his inability to actually fight the Nazis (Yacowar 17). In an interview he was asked about his obsession with Germans, and he replied: Me not like Germans? Why should I not like Germans? Just because theyre arrogant and have fat necks and do anything theyre told as long as it is cruel, and killed millions of Jews in concentration camps and made soap out of their bodies and lamp shades out of their skins? Is that any reason to hate their f-king guts? (Yacowar 32) Brooks has mocked Germans in various works such as in Your Show of Shows and on the Carl Reiner and Mel Brooks at the Cannes film festival audio recording. Regardless, of the origin of his interest with Nazis, if one looks at enough of his work, one cannot help but notice that this theme is an obsession for Brooks (Yacowar 34-35, 48). Mel Brooks made his first feature film, The Producers, in 1967. It is about a Jewish Broadway producer (Max Bialystock) who convinces his Jewish accountant (Leo Bloom) to finance a guaranteed to fail play with the idea that they would take the profits and run to South America. The guaranteed to fail play, Springtime for Hitler turned out to be a huge success. The two main characters both represent completely different Jewish stereotypes and the third area of Jewish interest in the film is the role of Germans both in the play and the ex-Nazi author, Frank Liebkind (Altman 39). Max Bialystock (played by Zero Mostel) is obviously not a first generation American because of his name and his accent. Although he never does anything specifically Jewish, he is still Jewish so it is relevant to look at his relationship to Jewish stereotypes. In his book, Telushkin discusses the tradition of having big and lavish bar mitzvahs, he says that the Jewish tradition has few curbs to halt such excesses(74). It is interesting to see how Bialystock chooses to live in almost poverty. Although he is so poor that he says Look at me now-Im wearing a cardboard belt, he also wears a reasonably nice jacket, has a leather coach, and keeps every old ladys picture in a decent frame. Later in the film, when he gets a lot of money, he spends it on a chauffeured car, a sexy secretary, lavish offices and new clothes, rather then spending it on new office equipment or investing it for future financial security (Telushkin 83). Leo Bloom, the accountant (played by Gene Wilder), represents the opposite stereotype from Bialystock. He represents the meek Jew, the Jew-as-doormat. In the beginning of the movie, he walks in on Max trying to get some money from an investor (he catches them lying on top of each other) and is so surprised and in shock that he has to be told to say oops (The Producers). This fits right into the stereotype of Jews as remorseful and ashamed of their sexual desires (The Poducers). Bialystock fulfills the other stereotype of Jewish men who have been portrayed as sex-hungry animals in many jokes. Blooms choice of career is also known as a Jewish career. In the end, he, like Bialystock, ends up fulfilling one of the most basic stereotypes of Jews-he gives in to his greed (Telushkin 93). There are also many small Jewish references in the film. There is an ignorant, and very gay, director named Roger DeBris, who directs Springtime for Hitler and has a familiar Yiddish term in his name (Telushkin 86-87). Also, in the beginning of the movie Bialystock has a funny dialogue with his landlord and it is the only part of the movie in which religion is involved. Bialystock: Murderer, thief, how can you take the last penny out of a poor mans pocket? Landlord: I have to, Im a landlord. Bialystock: Oh lord, hear my plea: Destroy him, he maketh a blight on the land. Landlord: Dont listen to him-hes crazy (The Producers). When one hears the conversation, with the Landlord speaking in a Jewish accent and Bialystock calling out at the heavens, sounding like an abused Jewish mother, it is a lot funnier and the Jewish element is a lot clearer as well. Brooks message in this movie has been largely debated. Lester D. Freidman thinks, Bialystock and Bloom fail to find their flop because they underestimate their audiences deadened sensibilities (173). Brooks is trying to point out that the shock and horror that everyone should view the holocaust in, is mainly a Jewish mindset. In the movie, he made two perfect Jews, and their perfection caused them two have a mindset that was different from the rest of the American public. Therefore, the movie is about more than a pair of corrupt showmen. It is about the segregation of Jews. Bailystock and Bloom are not yet Americans, they still carry a separate identity. In 1974, Brooks came out with Blazing Saddles which is much less Jewish than The Producers. The movie is about a town with a corrupt Attorney General who wants take over the town. The townspeople get the governor to send a new sheriff to restore order. He sends Sheriff Bart who is a black man with Gucci saddlebags on his horse. The townspeople end up working with the new Sheriff to defeat Hedley Lamarr (the attorney general) and his band of hooligans. Jewish topics are in the film as occasional funny parts and not as major parts of the plot. The funniest and most recognizable part of the movie where Judaism is involved is Sheriff Barts recollection of how his family got to the west. According to the Sheriff, strange Indians attacked their wagon. Brooks, who plays the Indian chief, allows Bart and his family to go, he tells his tribe, Zeit nishe meshugge. Loz em gaien†¦Abee gezint. Which basically means, take off. Some feel this is Brooks trying to get some cheap laughs by using Yiddish, but Friedman points out that it is comically appropriate that the Wests most conspicuous outsider, the Indian, should speak in the tongue of historys traditional outsider, the Jew (77). Other than this reference, Blazing Saddles use of Judaism is really little more than an occasional punch line. When Hedley Lamarr is looking for a way to get the citizens of Rock Ridge to leave, his associate recommends killing the first-born male child in every family, to which Lamarr replies-too Jewish (Blazing Saddles). When Mongo (a gigantic ruffian) comes into the saloon, someone in the background says Gottenew (Oh God! ), another Yiddish term (Yacowar 110). Not surprisingly, Mel Brooks finds a way to squeeze Germans into a movie set in the late 19th Centurys Wild West. In the finale of the movie, Lamarr recruits an army of lowlifes. In the army there is a small group of German soldiers who spend much of the fistfight sitting with a Ms. Lily von Shtupp (a not so talented lounge singer) singing the same war song heard in The Producers (Blazing Saddles). Finally, the Indian on many movie promotional materials (including the video cover) has the Hebrew for kosher for Passover inscribed in his headband. Strangely enough, these relatively small Jewish references got the attention of the Jewish Film Advisory Committee, whose director, Allen Rivkin, spoke to a writer about the offensiveness of the Jewish material. The writers response was, Dad, get with it. This is another century(Doneson 128) Blazing Saddles is a movie of the second type identified. It does not deal with specifically Jewish topics. It does, however, use Jewish topics as a way of forwarding the plot and the comedy. Whether the critics were right that Brooks was just using Yiddish because he found it funny, or if he was using it because he wanted to make a point about racism and exclusion, what is most important is that he actually used Yiddish, instead of something more expected (Yacowar 110). 1981s History of the World, Part I, falls somewhere between The Producers and Blazing Saddles in its level of Jewish content (Freidman 236). The movie, is basically, a quick tour through history going from the discovery of fire to the French Revolution. Within the movie, there are two skits that are specifically of Jewish interest (Moses on Mount Sinai and the Spanish Inquisition. ) In the Old Testament, God identifies himself as the Lord, and asks Moses if he can hear Him. Mel Brooks, in a robe and white beard says Yes. I hear you. I hear you. A deaf man could hear you. When Moses tells the people of the new laws, he says, The Lord, the Lord Jehovah has given onto these 15 [crash] 10, 10 Commandments for all to obey. Although Moses obviously had to be Jewish, one wonders why he had to be so klutzy a comic. In Rome, Gregory Hines, playing Josephus, a slave who is not sold in the auction, attempts to get out of being sent to the Coliseum where he would be lion food. His excuse is that the lions only eat Christians, Christians, and I am a Jew-Jewish person. To prove this, he starts singing Havah Negilah and gets the entire crowd to join him. He even tells the slave trader to call Sammus Davis Jr. (after calling the temple and the rabbi). Eventually, the trader looks down his pants, to prove he is not Jewish (History of the World, Part I). Empress Nympho, Caesars wife, is a strange cross between a J. A. P. and a sex maniac. She has a classic Jewish mother accent and uses Yiddish occasionally-Well shlep him along, for example. Towards the end of the movie, Brooks calls a courtier of Louis XVI a petite putz (History of the World, Part I). This is obviously a strange place to hear Yiddish, unless the intent is comic effect. Finally, though, the most outrageous scene, and the one that some Jews have found quite objectionable is the one about the Spanish Inquisition. It should be noted that Brookss portrayal of the Inquisition as being directed against Jews is historically inaccurate. It was really directed against heretical Christians. Because of this inaccuracy, it is safe to assume that Brooks wanted to put this scene in as a Jewish note into his film, as he did with the other films discussed. The Inquisition scene is filmed in a medieval dungeon. It starts by introducing the Grand Inquisitor Torquemada (Mel Brooks) with Torquemada-do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada-do not beg him for forgiveness†¦. Lets face it, you cant Torquemada [talk him outta] anything, then the music starts. One of the lines in the song is A fact youre ignoring, its better to lose your skullcap with your skull, which is emphasized by two old Jewish men in stocks singing oy oy gevalt. After a few descriptions of the actual torture which individual Jews suffered, he points out that nothing is working, send in the nuns. The nuns perform a synchronized swimming routine in which Jews are sent down a chute into a pool to be dragged under by nuns. At the end of the scene, seven nuns are standing on a menorah with sparklers on their heads, while the chorus, led by Torquemada, sings, Come on you Moslems and you Jews. Weve got big news for all of youse. Youd better change your points of views today. Cause the Inquisitions here, and its here to stay. When Brooks was criticized for this scene he replied: Nothing can burst the balloon of pomposity and dictatorial splendor better than comedy†¦. In a sense, my comedy is serious, and I need a serious background to play against†¦. Poking fun at the Grand Inquisitor, Torquemada, is a wonderful counterpart to the horrors he committed (Friedman 236). This would make History of the World, Part I comparable to The Producers in its satire of Hitler, and makes Blazing Saddles also comparable through its satirical treatment of racism. If one still thought that Brooks made History of the World, Part I with only good intentions, one should also consider the treatment of Jews and Germans in the ending of the film. The promo for History of the World, Part II includes scenes such as Hitler on Ice, and Jews in Space, in which Jews are in a space craft singing Were Jews out in space. Were zooming along protecting the Hebrew race†¦. When Goyim attacks us, well give em a slap. Well smack em right back in the face. It definitely seems that History of the World, Part I is a combination, (just as the others movies discussed are) of exploitation for easy laughs and of exposing the evils of the tyrants who have tormented the Jews throughout history. In To Be or Not To Be, Mel Brooks plays Fredrick Bronski, the head actor in a Polish stage revue, around the time of the Nazi annexation of Poland. His wife, Anna Bronski (Anna Bancroft) falls in love with an Air Force lieutenant working in the Polish platoon of the RAF. The main focus of the movie is how they make fun of, get around, outwit, and ultimately escape the Nazis. This movie is actually a remake of an older film, but it still has a distinctively Mel Brooks feel. The main target of Brookss satire is the head of the Gestapo, Colonel Erhardt (Charles Durning) who is a babbling fool. For example, when on the phone, he says What? Why? Where When? When in doubt, arrest them, arrest them, arrest them! Then shoot them and interrogate them. [pause] Oh you are right, just shoot them. Soon after this, he is led to believe that the shoot first policy led to the deaths of two useful figures and after asking what idiot formed the policy, he got mad at Shultz, his assistant, for reminding him that he made the policy. Later on, he has this exchange with Shultz: Erhardt: What idiot gave the order to close the Bronskis theater? Schultz: You did, sir. Erhardt: Open it up immediately. And once and for all stop blaming everything that goes wrong on me (To Be or Not To Be). After being warned to stop making jokes about Hitler, Erhardt promises, No. Never, never, never again, [emphasis added] strange words to hear from a nazi. Although this movie is not about Jews, there are a few Jewish characters and encounters. Bronski hides a Jewish family in his theaters cellar and during the course of the movie, theyre number increases. At one point, the intelligence agent goes to the theater to find his lover, Bronskis wife. The Jewish women hiding there tells him You know that big house on Posen Street? Well dont go there, its Gestapo headquarters, before actually telling where she was staying (To Be or Not To Be). At the end of the movie, they dress up all the Jews hiding in the cellar (closer to 20 than the 3 who originally hid out in the cellar) as clowns to have them run through the aisle (in the middle of a performance for Hitler) to a truck to safety. One old lady panics in the aisle, surrounded by Nazis. To save the old lady, another clown runs up to them and pins an oversized yellow star, yelling Juden! , this causes an enormous laughter from the Nazi audience. To stall the Gestapo, Brooks dresses up as Hitler, and listens to a Jewish actor perform the Hath not a Jew eyes speech from Merchant of Venice. To Be or Not To Be appears to be Brookss final way of coping with his lack of combat in WWII. While he has The Producers make a play in which they portray the Nazis comically, the ultimate message is that the two Jews in the movie still find them to be patently offensive, and therefore, worthy of some form of respect. In To Be or Not To Be he makes the Nazis into purely comical characters, and this is a step further than Brooks went in The Producers. However, this simply may be because at the point of To Be or Not To Be, Brooks was well into his career as an established moviemaker, so he had more freedom to be offensive. Unfortunately, To Be or Not To Be ended the golden age of Mel Brooks movies, at least from a specifically Jewish point-of-view. His later films make only small mentions of Jewish topics. An example of this is Spaceballs, a parody of Star Wars where the main characters have to save a princess from Planet Druidia (Funny, she doesnt look Druish) from the evil Dark Helmet (Rick Moranis) (Spaceballs). The only Jewish reference in the movie were playing off the theme of the Druish princess and a short scene with Mel Brooks as Yogurt, a reinterpretation of Yoda as an old, Jewish man. Brooks also renamed the Force from Star Wars to something more ethnic-the Schwartz. Although these Jewish references may be equal to the Yiddish-speaking Indian in Blazing Saddles, it is too big of a stretch to link a deeper meaning to them as can be done in his earlier films. In the Big Book of Jewish Humor, Jewish humor is defined as having these five qualities: 1. It is substantive in that it is about some larger topic. 2. It, in many cases, has a point-the appropriate response is not laughter, but rather a bitter nod or a commiserating sign of recognition. 3. It is anti-authoritarian, in that it ridicules grandiosity and self-indulgence, exposes hypocrisy, and†¦. is strongly democratic. 4. It frequently has a critical edge which creates discomfort in making its point. 5. It is unsparing-it satirizes anyone and everyone (Novak and Waldoks xx-xxii). Telushkins definition of a Jewish joke is much simpler. He says it must express a Jewish sensibility (16). To Bernard Saper, a uniquely Jewish joke must contain incongruity, a sudden twist of unexpected elements (76). Christie Davies, points out that people such as Jews, who belong to a minority or peripheral ethnic groups tell jokes both about the majority group and about their own group, and they may tell more ethnic jokes about their own group (and find them funnier) than about the majority(29-30). Are the four films discussed within these definitions? Brooks movies definitely fit the Telushkin test of expressing Jewish sensibility, weather it is through how he attacks the Nazis or the random Yiddish expressions that he uses. A lot of Brooks humor is also incongruous. For example, having a Nazi say never again, fulfills Sapers requirement. Brooks films have a lot of ethnic jokes in them, which deal with Jews or Jewish topics. Brooks probably put these jokes in his movies because he found them funny, therefore fulfilling the Davies test. The definition in The Big Book of Jewish Humor is harder to fit because it is in greater detail. However, the films that were discussed fit them well. Many of Brookss films are substantive in that he deals with racism and Anti-Semitism in almost all of his movies. The point of his films may not be so sharp that when people see them they automatically feel bitterness toward someone, but his movies are definently not pure slapstick which fulfills the second part of the definition. Brooks never attacked Jewish leadership but his films are anti-authoritarian because he clearly attacks government officials such as the Nazis and the Grand Inquisitor. Since there is constant controversy about Brooks films there is always potential for discomfort to arise. Finally, Brooks leaves out nobody from his satire-Nazis, cowboys, and 15th century Spanish Jews are all satirized and made fun of in these films. Even though some of his scenes or individual jokes are not typical Jewish humor, he is a Jewish comedian who, most importantly, makes Jewish jokes. Brookss movies represent the classical paradox in Jewish humor and Jewish experience between: first, the legitimate pride that Jews have taken in their distinctive and learned religious and ethical tradition and in the remarkable intellectual eminence and entrepreneurial and professional achievement of individual members of their community, and second, the anti-Semitic abuse and denigration from hostile outsiders whose malice was fueled by Jewish autonomy and achievement (Davies 42-43). The greatest lesson that Brooks has to teach American Jews of today is the expansion of our boundaries. Through his use of Jewish humor to topics which where previously considered off-limits, he allows his viewers to cope with painful parts of history which they may not have been able to cope with in the past. Brooks describes his role as a comedian by saying, for every ten Jews beating their breasts, God designated one to be crazy and amuse the breast beaters. By the time I was five I knew I was that one (Friedman 171-172). He explains that his comedy derives from the feeling that, as a Jew and as a person, you dont fit the mainstream of American society. It comes from the realization that even though youre better and smarter, youll never belong (Friedman 172). Mel Brookss experience is very similar to that of every American Jew, and his comedy speaks uniquely to the American Jew. So, even Brookss most offensive work is rooted deeply within both typical Jewish Humor and the modern Jewish experience. The greatest lesson that Brooks has to teach American Jews of today is the expansion of our boundaries. Through his use of Jewish humor to topics which where previously considered off-limits, he allows his viewers to cope with painful parts of history which they may not have been able to cope with in the past. Brooks describes his role as a comedian by saying, for every ten Jews beating their breasts, God designated one to be crazy and amuse the breast beaters. By the time I was five I knew I was that one (Friedman 171-172). He explains that his comedy derives from the feeling that, as a Jew and as a person, you dont fit the mainstream of American society. It comes from the realization that even though youre better and smarter, youll never belong (Friedman 172). Mel Brookss experience is very similar to that of every American Jew, and his comedy speaks uniquely to the American Jew. So, even Brookss most offensive work is rooted deeply within both typical Jewish Humor and the modern Jewish experience.

Monetary Policy During The Great Depression Essay -- Economics Economy

Monetary Policy During The Great Depression One of the most important aspects of the Great Depression that stands out in economists’ minds is the surge of bank panics and failures during the depression’s onset (1930-1933). However, an institution created with the intention of preventing such a string of disasters failed to fulfill its obligation as a â€Å"lender of last resort.† This is the Fed, and its failure to prevent the early bank panics of the Great Depression is a very interesting economic issue. So why did the Fed fail to fulfill its duty? The reason for the Fed’s actions (or lack thereof) was a combination of the strict elitist leadership in the Fed and the results of adaptive expectations on immature monetary policy. The Fed had only been created in 1913, and while there were previous experiences with bank panics (1907), the consequences were much less drastic, and so the elitists were unable to foresee the heavy blow to the money supply that would result from the failure of so many small banks. In 1907 the money stock fell by 5% due to bank panics; the Fed had no idea that bank panics would strongly contribute to the 31% decrease in the money supply by 1933(Friedman 156). While it may seem obvious that this might occur when 10,000 banks close, most of the banks that closed were non-members, and since these banks felt the opportunity cost of keeping reserves with the Fed was too great, the Fed returned the sentiment by denying them aid when they closed. Also, many of these banks were very small, and the Fed did not expect these small banks to have such a large effect on the money supply (Friedman). All this is supported by the writings of Milton Friedman, Charles W. Calomaris and Richard H. Timberlak... ...ey were its responsibility. According to Friedman, they saw panics as a result, and not a cause of the depression. The Fed did not know what its responsibilities were, and as a result failed to see the connection between the public’s confidence, banks and the money supply. While the Fed’s monetary policies blew up in their face, it did present them with the undeniable need for deposit insurance. Ultimately the Great Depression shocked the Fed into reality, and because of this future depressions will be averted. Works Cited: Calomiris, Charles W. â€Å"Runs on Banks and the Lessons of the Great Depression† Regulation 22.1: 4-7 Friedman, Milton, and Schwartz, Anna. A Monetary History of the United States 1867-1960. Princeton , N.J.: Princeton University Press. 1963 Timberlake, Richard H. â€Å"The Roots of the Great Depression.† (Interview) Navigator. (2001).

Globalisation and the Nation-State

Emerging nations such as China and India have also allowed companies to reduce production costs and target wider developing consumers. With these opportunities and with many of the other opportunities surrounding globalization economics now look at the economy on a lobar scale as opposed to a national scale which has led to conflicting perspectives on the use of the nation-state.As early as 1969 economics such as Charles Kindergà ¤rtner sparked the perspective that â€Å"the nation state Is Just about through as an economic unit† (Eagleburger 1969: 207) The following essay will look at globalization in terms of the economy and look at two of these businesses currently operating globally to see if the role of the individual nation-state government remains vital despite the trend towards globalization. Firstly one must define what libations actually Is and what type of organizations qualifies as a ‘global company.Researchers suggest that globalization is ‘one of the most misused and one of the most confused words around today (Dickens, 2007). Globalization is a widely used term that has no simple definition; Instead researchers suggest that the word has become a ‘convenient summary term' used by many to ‘bundle together virtually all the goods and bad facing contemporary societies' (Dickens, 2007). There is one definition that most globalizes will agree upon and that's that it is a â€Å"process by which the experience of everyday life, marked by the diffusion of commodities and Ideas, Is becoming standardized around the world. In terms of the economic globalization that essay will be concentrating on, â€Å"Globalization Is a level of economic activity that has outgrown national markets through industrial combinations and commercial groupings that cross national frontiers, and international agreements that allow businesses to operate Internationally† (Hirsh, 1996) Lloyd TTS Is one company that can be defined as a global or ganization. Lloyd TTS Is an International bank that's part of Lloyd banking group. Its head office is in London and it originated in 1745 as a personal banking service with one single office in Birmingham.In the 1 sass Lloyd began to expand offices through Europe, India and South America. In the late sass's Lloyd acquired other International businesses and soon had hundreds of offices in over 50 different countries. McDonald's is a fast food restaurant. It was formed in 1948 in California and is currently the largest fast food restaurant In the world. It currently has 31,000 restaurants in 118 countries. Macdonald has become global as more than 75% of McDonald's restaurants relied are owned as a franchise.Both companies are huge global companies that are as successful as they are as they view the world as one place and not in terms of nation-state governments. Although both companies are similar In the sense that they operate globally they are both very different organizations. Lloy d TTS began in the UK and have bought other companies and diversified to gain its global recognition. McDonald's however, 1 OFF operates In ten T sector Ana stall manly operates alertly In ten A It galena global standing by franchising the brand and the products across the worldThere are also other key differences between the companies. As well as operating in different economic sectors, Researchers suggest that although both organizations operate as transnational organizations their global operations are completely different. Lloyd TTS is a ‘global organization' as its overseas operations are delivery of the same service to Just different consumers, whilst the same researchers would describe McDonald's as a ‘Multinational Organization' as it views much of its overseas operations as a portfolio of independently run businesses (Bartlett, 2000)On both Lloyd TTS and McDonald's there are major influences affecting them as they operate in the globalizes economy. Globalization and international companies arriving in individual national-states have always been met with a mixture of positive and negative opinions due to the instant challenge it brings to the uses and the very existence of the nation-state. There are currently 194 individual nation-states in the world (Rosenberg, 2009). Each state has its own common culture and has its own way of governing its state.With new technologies, transportation and communications and the fact that organizations are now creating a standardized way of living it can be assumed that the power and control once held by the nation-state is being severely reduced. Due to the claims by theorists such as Kindergà ¤rtner (1969) there has been much debate sparked into the existence of the nation-state and the uses of globalization. In the globalization debate there are three conflicting perspectives on the uses of the nation-state.The first perspective is that of the Hyper-Globalizes, who argue that we live in a borderless wo rld and the nation- state is no longer relevant. The Hyper- Globalizes view globalization as a new development and suggest that the world's cultures and experiences are becoming homogeneous through standardized global products. The second opinion is the ‘Skeptical Internationalists' who accept that globalization exists however believe that it's not new and the grounding globalizes who believe that quantitative date is Just as important as qualitative date in the debate.According to Dickens (2007:IPPP) the roles of the nation-state in the contemporary global economy has four key roles; containers of institutions and cultures, regulators of economic activities, competitors with other states and elaborators with other states and when globalization intrudes these roles its often met with a degree of negativity Lloyd TTS and McDonald's are diversifying into these individual nation-states and as a result are sometimes met with this negativity and political concern targeted towards t he hyper-globalizes perspective.These companies and most of the companies that are isolating are often from Western dominated economies and arrive with western values and cultural interests. Hilton (1998) suggests that one of the main negative impacts on these organizations and libations in general is that they are incorporating third world and developing economies into the global economy only as ‘passive consumers of standardized products and nothing more' suggesting that although these companies are operating globally the economic wealth and growth still lives within its original national economy which widens the gap between the rich and poor countries.Omaha (1995) considers the ‘standardization of culture' as a negative impact on globalization. These Uninominal nation-states Tanat companies Like Lloyd Dank Ana c an ass are penetrating have individual cultural values and beliefs. Both companies are bringing their Western cultural values into these individual nations an d creating a standardized culture within. McDonald's for example has a very western cultural style to its food, items on its menu such as ‘French fries' and ‘hamburgers' are very much western orientated foods.The very way in which McDonald's delivers its food in fast food restaurants, through American style diners and drive trough's again reflect the western cultural values which are now being adapted and ‘standardized' around the world. Omaha (1995) suggests that these changes can be seen as negative impacts and are seen as a challenge to the importance and use of a nation-state if the world is starting to live in a standardized way.There are many negative opinions in the role of the nation-state debate and evidence to suggest that we are beginning to live in a homogeneity environment however, there have been many recent events that have shown that despite the trend to globalization the nation-state is still vital and that we do not live in a homogeneity world. On e recent event that's affected nearly everyone is the global recession or the ‘Credit Crunch' the world is currently experiencing.The Credit Crunch can be defined as â€Å"a severe shortage of money or credit† (BBC, BBC NEWS, 2009) and is caused by banks not lending out money. Lloyd TTS is one of many financial institutions affected in the credit crunch due to the very nature of the business and the fact that deregulation in the global financial economy allowed banks to lend money in insecure ‘lax' borrowers, especially in the American mortgage economy Where billions of dollars was invested into mortgages made available to sub-prime borrowers (people with bad credit rating, no Jobs, no repayment amounts) at a low interest rate.When interest rates started to increase people began to default on borrowings which meant the value of these investments plummeted resulting in huge losses for banks globally (Badmouth, 2009), including Lloyd TTS. As a result of this lax len ding Lloyd and many other global banks were forced to write off millions of pounds of debts. Lloyd were ‘left 250 million short' (BBC 2007) which left them at a huge loss and unconfined to lend out more money. As a result of the financial difficulties Lloyd were forced to make over two thousand people redundant and were left to turn to the nation-state for help.In terms of the nation-sate debate it's evident in economic downturns such as the global ‘credit crunch' and the current recession the nation-state is vital for companies such as Lloyd to survive. The British government used tax-payers funds to ‘bail' out the bank by supplying them with over a billion pounds worth of investment. McDonald's, operating in a completely different economic sector completely survived the economic downturn as people looked to them for a cheap source of food and drink.McDonald's made a profit through the economic downturn and look set to do the same this year (McDonald's. Com 2009). Further to the debate that we do not live in a homogeneity world is the fact that states regulate trade, foreign investment and industry and each state takes an individual stance on how they do this. Policies towards imports and exports are individual in every state and McDonald's and Lloyd TTS have to comply with these policies in each individual state.

Racism And Sexism A More Serious Issue Than Sexism

Racism and sexism are terms that have been debatable for centuries. Many argue that there is not a difference between the two. Some feel as though racism is a more serious issue than sexism and vice versa. From my perspective, racism and sexism are different, but have equal relevance in society. One factor that makes the two equal is discrimination. Racism is discrimination based on differences in color while sexism is discrimination based on gender. Racism is the belief that members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to another race to classify them as inferior or superior. Sexism is prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination on the basis of sex, which is typically shown towards women. During the slave era, racism was not the only problem black women faced, they were confronted with sexism as well. Elise McDougald and Frances M. Beale are two activist women who shared their perspective on society’s view of black women. Elise Johnson McDougald was an ed ucator and activist who wrote one of the earliest explorations on how gender influences the experiences of both race and class (McDougald, 1925). In her writing, â€Å"The Struggle of Women for Sex and Race Emancipation†, McDougald said that society is right about black women, just not all black women. It seems as though she loses respect for her own race. She also feels that black women of a lower class act as a disadvantage for the black race. According to McDougald, black women should be separated intoShow MoreRelatedSexism And Racism : Racism And Prejudice Essay1348 Words   |  6 PagesSexism vs Racism Discrimination and prejudice have both been a major problem in our society since the idea of gender and race contacted our brains. Everyone hopes that humankind will change and treat everyone equally and fairly, but this still has yet to happen. Mankind is still treating people as minorities without a second thought. Women are still stereotyped as being too feminine for a â€Å"man’s job†, such as construction or military forces. As well as, men being considered to manly to be ableRead MoreSexism And Racism Essay1301 Words   |  6 PagesAllison Price English 3 12 August 2017 MLA Sexism and Racism within the American Judicial System There is blatant sexism and racism within the American Judicial System shown by a lack of convictions and inconsistent sentencing. Despite many small steps forward towards equality, injustice and systemic racism still find their way into the cases and verdicts we hear on the news every day. The battle for racial and gender equality is a fight that’s been fought diligently for centuries and while stepsRead MoreRacism In Racism790 Words   |  4 Pages What is racism? Racism is the discrimination of a person based on their race and is integrated in institutional systems. Throughout history, people of color have been discriminated. They have been treated as animals. They have been segregated from one another. They have been stereotyped negatively. Racism against minorities have been emphasized through individual actions and institutional systems, such as in the United States policies. These institutional systems involve topics, such as segregationRead MoreRacial Discrimination A nd Discrimination899 Words   |  4 PagesDiscrimination has been in occurrence in our society more definitively in the past few decades, compared to before the sixteenth century, when the ancient world was so small that physical differences of people went unnoticed (Cashmere and Jennings, page #). I intend to analyze discrimination by looking at racism, sexism and genderism in advertisements from Dove, Nivea, and Bristol CityFox Taxi Firm. This advertisement analysis is going to dig into the underlying factors of discrimination – includingRead MoreSexism : Gender And The Oppression Of Women1376 Words   |  6 Pages2016 Sexism In Modern Television We live in an ever-changing world, but many things have stayed the same. Just as racism still exists in various ways today, sexism, ageism, and many other forms of discrimination and injustices persist around us. All of the issues mentioned are found throughout many aspects of society, and they are still reflected in the media and television. Television shows such as â€Å"Family Guy† are a prime example of this with its crude satirical humor that more often than not,Read MoreAge Stratification1183 Words   |  5 Pages1.0 Introduction Social stratification is not a new phenomenon; its roots extends far back into antiquity with some contending that archaeological evidence reveals that social stratification existed in Cro-Magnon society 10,000 or more years ago (Tattersall 1998:178). Social stratification may be based on many attributes; according to Arredondo Biological differences can produce, directly or indirectly, social stratification by factors such as age, gender, race, or socioeconomic status. Age stratificationRead MoreIntel’S Racist Advertisement. . Oppression Is The Root1810 Words   |  8 PagesIntel’s racist advertisement Oppression is the root of most serious, everlasting issues in the world today. Oppression occurs between the government and the people that abide by these authority figures; in the battle of sexes; between employers and employees; indifferences between heterosexuals and homosexuals. As a whole these aspects combine to form the root of oppression, however, many of these issues are rooted within racism and sexism. It effects the way women and African Americans live theirRead MoreBlack Women And The Black Men1345 Words   |  6 Pageswhite women discriminated against them. Also within the Movement, little attention was devoted to class issues that seriously affected black women. Not all the black men nor all the white women with both movements were sexist and racist but enough of those with the highest influences were able to make the lives of the black women in these groups almost intolerable. Black women faced constant sexism within the Black Liberation Movement. The movement, though allegedly for the liberation of the entireRead MoreRacism And Sexism : The Mountain Dew1004 Words   |  5 PagesRacism and sexism are overwhelmingly prevalent in media, but somehow the underlying depth of the theses issues remains under addressed. It is important to become educated on these issues of racism and sexism especially violence against women, and how they systematically affect specific subsets of people. The Mountain Dew commercial is one of three, the very last commercial. It opens with a line-up of men and a goat. The woman is asked by the police officer to point to the assailant. The purpose ofRead MoreSexism And Its Effect On Society2001 Words   |  9 Pages Sexism in the society Sexism is a situation when people hold a belief which supports discrimination against one gender. It is the prejudice held by people who believe that one gender is superior to the other. In some cases, people have a belief that women are not able to fit in certain careers and perform well in certain subjects. Sexism manifests itself in different ways. To illustrate, women in some communities are refrained from politics, military jobs, mathematics, and engineering careers,