OSHA Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

OSHA - Case Study Example Highest Priority Standards 1. Division D Manufacturing, 3537 Industrial Trucks, Tractors, Trailers, and Stackers. This standard applies because the company uses lift trucks and similar equipment. 2. Division D Manufacturing, 2865 Cyclic Organic Crudes and Intermediates, and Organic Dyes and Pigments. This standard applies because of the use of paint and other chemicals. 3. Division D Manufacturing, 3563 Air and Gas Compressors. This standard applies because of the use of painting equipment and compressors. 4. Division D Manufacturing, 3541 Machine Tools, Metal Cutting Types. This is necessary because of the materials that are cut. 5. Division D Manufacturing, 3542 Machine Tools, Metal Forming Types. This is necessary because the materials are sheared. 6. Division D Manufacturing, 3547 Rolling Mill Machinery and Equipment. This standard is necessary because a mill is used. 7. Division D Manufacturing, 3546 Power Driven Hand Tools. This Standard is necessary because of the use of offha nd grinders. 8. Division D Manufacturing, 3548 Electric and Gas Welding and Soldering Equipment. This standard is necessary because of the handling and use of welding machines. 9. Division D Manufacturing, 3412Metal Shipping Barrels, Drums, Kegs, and Pails. This standard is important because of the types of items processed. 10. Division E 4783 Packing and Crating. This standard is necessary because of the packaging and shipping of finished products. 11. Division D Manufacturing 3444 Sheet Metal Work. This standard is necessary because sheet metal is handled and used in the establishment. 12. Division D Manufacturing 3441 Fabricated Structural Metal. This standard applies because metal racks are made. 13. Division D Manufacturing 3356 Rolling, Drawing, and Extruding of Nonferrous Metals, Except Copper and Aluminum. This standard applies because cold and hot rolled rods are used. 14. Division D Manufacturing 2655 Fiber Cans, Tubes, Drums, and Similar Products. This is a necessary stan dard because the movement of drums is performed. 15. Division D Manufacturing 3531 Construction Machinery and equipment. This standard is important because an overhead crane is used. Question 2) Name four important written programs this company is required to have (keep in mind that not all standards (e.g. 1910.95 Industrial Noise) require that you develop a written program or SOP of some sort, though many companies develop such SOPs regardless). Explain why you believe they are required to have these written programs. Answer – Many companies are required to have written programs. Bubba’s should have a written fire escape and prevention procedure. This is necessary because the use of welders and chemicals in the same building pose a huge fire hazard. Another written program should list employee uniform requirements. Proper footwear, gloves, and respirators are necessary to prevent accidents from slipping, and chemicals. A third written program should list hazard commun ication. It is important for employees to be informed about different chemicals that are being used and how to handle an emergency. The final written program necessary for Bubbas is for employees to be aware of visits to ensure proper work safety. This can help make the workplace safer. Regardless of what business is being conducted, it is important to meet all rules and regulations set by OSHA. Each business that provides services will have different divisions and categories that must follow the given rules. Following these rules will

Managing under uncertainty Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Managing under uncertainty - Essay Example When she looks at the files concerning the case, she finds that all of them contain medical records giving details of individuals suffering from the same symptoms and conditions. This arouses her suspicions and upon further investigation, she finds that the local energy company has been contaminating the water supply of the client and this has been the cause of all the bad health conditions she has been experiencing (Scharfenaker 20). Erin decided to investigate further and this leads her to the discovery that the presence of chromium in the water supply is responsible for the bad health conditions of many residents living in the same area as her client. To counter this, she convinces these people to go up against the energy company, and in an unprecedented decision, these people are awarded millions of dollars in compensation. This movie is an extremely well made one because it enables those who watch it to explore diverse moral and ethical issues, which would never be normally disc ussed. When making a study of the above film, there are certain people who would look upon it from the position of ethical relativism. This is because of the fact that despite not being a lawyer, and her having no qualification that is related to that profession, Erin Brockovich took it upon herself to represent the people who had been affected by the actions of the energy company. Some would say that it was not her place to take matters into her own hands because despite the fact that she worked at a law firm, she had no qualifications to do so. While she may have won the case for her clients, those opposed to a non-legal person presenting a case in court would say that the best thing that she may have done would have been to hand the case over to one of the lawyers at her firm (Lopate). The fact that she won the case may be considered to have been a fluke, that it was luck, which got her through it, not her professionalism. Since ethical relativism is the viewpoint where morality is dependent on the norms of a culture, which practice it, one would say that Erin might have been right in taking the action that she took. She did what she thought was right and went ahead to defend the people whose health was being placed at risk by those who would otherwise not have thought to take any action by themselves. It is the society which determines whether the actions of individuals is ethically right or wrong, and while some may dispute Erin’s actions as being that of a wannabe lawyer, it is a fact that she did what many lawyers would not have chosen to do, despite its being their duty. She chose to represent and place the case of people who lacked representation in court, hence helping them receive some compensation for the suffering that they had been undergoing. One would therefore say that while it was not her job to represent these people, Erin was ethically bound to do so because she had plenty of knowledge concerning the case, and not to take any action would have been immoral of her. It is the duty of and a requirement for all people working in law firms to maintain the highest standards of ethics when carrying out their duties towards those whom they are concerned with. While doing this, they should always keep in mind that the best interests of their clients are put above

Cultural Identity and Belonging in Muslims

Cultural Identity and Belonging in Muslims Religious conversion, cultural identity and national belonging: The world of Bulgarian Muslims (Pomaks). Introduction It is always interesting to immerse in the mysterious past and to discover how the sense of national identity is created and transformed over the years. Throughout olden times and until now, cultural margins have shrunk or expanded, established nations and minorities within these have interacted with and influenced each other, religious and cultural conversions have frequently taken place and in the melting pot of history new distinctive uniqueness has begun to exist. This is particularly valid when the case of Bulgarian Muslims is discussed. Moreover, it is important to recognise here that the world of Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks has been a subject of endless speculations and ethnic and political claims over the years and it is still very much unknown to the Western European ethnological and historical research literature. Much of the translated work that refers to the Pomaks is from Greek, Serbian, Turkish or Macedonian origin. Therefore it is, fair to say that the story of this Muslim enclave that inhibits mostly Bulgarian territories and speaks Bulgarian language, must be considered from a Bulgarian point of view and this is the main aim here. Consequently, this essay will examine the world of Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks, their religious conversion from Christianity to Islam and the formation and transformation of their cultural identity and sense of national belonging. To accomplish all this, the essay will firstly discuss the religious conversion of the Pomaks, its background, character, mode and outcomes and how it has laid the foundations of Bulgarian Muslims’ cultural identity. In addition, this paper will comment on the transformation of the cultural identity and sense of national belonging of Bulgarian Muslims. Finally, it will conclude with thoughts on self-perception, perception of others and future hopes. Definition of the term Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks Before elaborating further on all abovementioned points, there is a need to establish and define the term Bulgarian Muslims and describe it in Bulgarian context. In order to achieve this, two reliable sources will be cited. Commenting on the issue of cultural belonging and religious identity of Muslims in Bulgaria, Kemal Karpat, a Turkish historian and researcher, states that: The Muslim identity of these populations consisted outwardly of certain objective symbols and acts such as names and ritualsand at their place of origin they tended to identify themselves with Islam in terms of social behaviour, rather than in terms of a political systemand possessed a passive communal Muslim identity (1990, pp. 131-132). In his The hijra from Russia and the Balkans: the process of self-definition in the late Ottoman state, he argues that the largest population group â€Å"in the area that is now Bulgaria†, was the Muslim population group. In terms of spoken language, he endorses that â€Å"they spoke Slavic† (1990, pp.132-134). In his Turkish brutality in Bulgaria and in the Balkan Peninsula (2007, pp. 41-62), the well-known Bulgarian historian, researcher and writer Hristo Krasin, presents a different point of view to that of Kemal Karpat. He argues that all modern Bulgarian population has a strong Bulgarian ethnic origin and comprises of four groups. The first group consists of Bulgarians, who speak Bulgarian language and are Eastern Orthodox Christians. The second one consists of Bulgarians, who recognise themselves as Bulgarian speaking Muslims with Bulgarian or Turkish national identity. The third one consists of Bulgarian speaking Muslims, who recognise themselves as ethnic Turks because their Bulgarian national identity was partially erased over the centuries due to the aggressive assimilation politic of the Turkish Empire. The last group consists of Bulgarian individuals, who speak Bulgarian and Turkish languages. They recognise themselves as ethnic Turks, whose religions are Christianity and Islam and whose Bulgarian national identity was fully erased under centuries of Turkish Islamic brutality in Bulgaria. This classification of ethnic and religious groups only appears to be straightforward. In the context of the tricky ethic and religious relationships in Bulgaria and in the Balkans, nothing is ever simple. Hence, the purpose of this essay is not to involve the reader in a discussion of the suggested categorisation or its validity or reliability but to establish some clarity into the complicated issue of ethnicity and identity of the Bulgarian-speaking Muslims and their ethnic, cultural and national identity and self-perception. Subsequently, this paper will confine itself to the Bulgarian-speaking Muslims, further referred to as Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks. Religious conversion: Pomaks until 1878 As it already beginning to emerge, the case of the Pomaks is complicated and a number of debates around it, display very strong positions and conflicting opinions. In order to appreciate all points of view and in search for the truth, it is imperative to consider the historical background of the issue. The existence of closed Muslim societies in Bulgaria is the direct inheritance of five centuries long Turkish rule over the Balkan Peninsula (Todorova, 1998, p.3). Even though there is no reliable data or figures to inform of population characteristics or major population shifts, some research has been done and there are number of existing theories that explain the size and grouping of Muslim population on the Peninsula. In his Turkish brutality in Bulgaria and in the Balkan Peninsula (2007, p. 23), Hristo Krasin has attempted to assess the character and the effects of these movements. He claims that there were not any significant population transfers from Anatolia to the Balkans between the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries and that the military formation send to take the Peninsula over, comprised only of soldiers and there no women travelling with the army. In her Identity (Trans) Formation among Bulgarian Muslims, Maria Todorova, a researcher from The University of California (1998, p.4) argues that the â€Å"chief historiographical controversy centres on the explanations for the sizeable Muslim population in the Balkans: Colonisation versus Conversion theory†. Furthermore, she suggests that â€Å"by the sixteenth century the settler colonisation process had stopped and yet the percentage of Muslims in the region continued to grow. Thus, the hypothesis offered is that â€Å"there were a great number of personal conversions to Islam among the non-Muslim population of the Balkans, respectively Bulgaria† (Todorova, 1998, p.6). In addition, a whole range of reliable academic research and publications from Bulgarian and Turkish authors, such as Omer Barkan from Istanbul University, Elena Grozdanova from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, the Albanian historian Sami Pulaha (all cited in Todorova, 1998, pp. 2-5), refer to data to evidence rapid Muslim population growth in Bulgaria between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries due either colonisation or conversion. In an attempt to join this debate and in discussion of the concrete but complex case of the Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks, it must be suggested here that although there is evidence to support both theories, the majority of all available sources, also supported by official documents and survived the time registers of the Ottoman empire, shape the idea that religious conversion on a massive scale took place in Bulgaria and respectively in the Balkans (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1982, vol. 3-7). The question is how the conversion from Christianity to Islam was carried out and the answer to this question is directly connected with Pomaks’ self-identification as Muslims and consequently gives some light into their actions and behavioural characteristics as citizens of the Ottoman Empire until the nineteenth century and independent Bulgaria after that. To discuss the mode of the religious conversion of the Pomaks and emphasise its importance for the formation of their cultural identity and national belonging, it must be made clear here that â€Å"conversion may occur in one or more of three ways: through voluntary association, by pressure, and by assimilation. Syncretism and strong cultural resistance can also complicate the conversion process† (The Applied History Research group, 2000, pp.1-3). There is another raging debate in Bulgarian and Balkan historiographical research literature about the mode of Pomaks’ conversion to Islam and the co-existence of Bulgarian Christians and Bulgarian Muslims. On the one hand, there are these, who argue that the conversion was forced upon the Christian population of Bulgaria and over the centuries, and especially the seventeen century, there was a mass conversion to Islam in across the country and especially in the mountain Rodopi region. There is a huge amount of literature, both academic and journalistic, supported with reliable and substantial evidence that the alleged obligatory conversion took place. In his Genocide and Holocaust against Bulgarians (2006, p.63), Bulgarian academic historian and writer Georgi Voinov claims that the systematic and focused compulsory conversion to Islam was one of the favourite methods of control and ruling in the Ottoman Empire, well known for its strong assimilation aspirations in order to promote pan-Turkism. To sustain his assertions, Voinov cites numerous sources, based on authentic literature, written by survivors or witnesses from fourteenth to eighteenth centuries. He also claims that there are official registers of the Ottoman Empire that had also captured those events and give objective information and statistics of all the atrocities that took place in the name of Islam and in order to erase Bulgarian national identity among the Bulgarian population (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1982, vol. 3-7). All abovementioned sources affirm that Islam in Bulgaria was not accepted voluntary but under duress. In the History Reader: The Rodopi mountain through the centuries (1966, p. 78), Bulgarian historian Peter Petrov cites a source from the sixteenth century that talks of 325 thousand young Bulgarian youths forcefully converted to Islam and taken to Anatolia to commence military service in the Turkish army. Only the boy’s number was known, for the girls, no-one has ever known. It is claimed, that conversion took place in 1515 and under the command of Selim Pasha. There are also endless lists from administrative Ottoman registers reporting evidence that Islam was not accepted on voluntary basis. Mass conversions took place in 1620, 1633, 1669, 1705, 1720, 1803, all of those through fire and sword, drowning in blood any resistance from the local Christian population (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1982, vol. 3-7). On the other hand, there are those academic writers and journalists, who for one reason or another and in an attempt to politicise the issue of Bulgarian Muslims, are nowadays trying to reassess historical events. Special attention is given to the religious and cultural conversion in Bulgaria. In the recently published second edition of his book The Mohammedan Bulgarians (2007, pp. 5-12), Bulgarian researcher and writer Stojan Raichevski asserts that change to Islam was forced upon the Christian Bulgarians by the power of the sword to a minimal degree but there were many other, more important reasons and economic factors, that played a key role, such as preferential taxation and trading agreements for Muslims in the Empire, the greed of the Greek Orthodox clergy, the conflict between the Bogomils and the Orthodox Church, etc. In addition, Kemal Karpat comments that at the time when their land was conquered, the Slavic speaking Muslims were under the authority of their local feudal lords and accepted Islam as the new faith as it supposedly was close to their native faith of Bogomilism, a mixture of Christianity, paganism and Manichaeism. In doing so, they hoped to preserve their land holdings and ethnic identity. Furthermore, according to the Applied History Research group of the University of Calgary (2000, p.1), â€Å"although conversion by pressure cannot be termed voluntary, the degree of force and coercion varies greatly. Indeed, military conquest was typically followed by the application of subtler pressures, such as commercial or judicial sanctions, to enforce the requirement of the new rulers†. Economic pressure was just as effective as an unrestrained military subjugation. Thinking objectively and considering all points of view and available data, one does not doubt here that many factors acted as an incentive to mass Islamic conversions in Bulgaria. What is interesting to communicate through this piece of work is that the combination of the different modes of conversion: by voluntary association, by pressure, and by assimilation, was accompanied with syncretism that determined some degree of cultural adaptation. It did, in turn, also provoke fierce cultural resistance and martyrdom from a large part of the Christian population. Hence, here was the historical picture in Bulgaria. On the one hand, those Bulgarians, who surrendered their religion for one reason or another, became Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks. They continued speaking Bulgarian language and the local area dialect, build their houses in Bulgarian architectural traditions, saved some elements of their old dress code, continued to recognise themselves as Bulgarians but built mosques, celebrated Eid and enjoyed preferential treatment from the Ottoman rulers. However, over the centuries they were exposed to the influences of their adopted Islamic religion and the aggressive pan-Turkism promoted in the Ottoman Empire and through blending of various aspects of different cultural customs and religious rituals or syncretism, somewhat new cultural arrangements took place. Bulgarian Muslims adapted culturally to the life in the Empire and although preserving their Slavic language and some sense of Bulgarian national identity, their levels of cultural adaptation reached much greater heights than those among the Christian Bulgarian population. Due to this fact and over the centuries, the Pomaks have tried to self-define themselves in terms of national conciseness and have become vulnerable to influences and an object of hatred or even political struggle. On the other hand, while Bulgarian Muslims were going through the process of cultural assimilation, the larger part of the Bulgarian population withstood the pressure, continued to observe their faith and traditions, regularly rebelled against the Turkish rulers and took part in more than fifty military conquests against the Turks, led by different European rulers. All Bulgarian uprisings against the Ottoman Sultans, fourteen in total in Bulgaria itself (Voinov, 2006, p.26), were drowned in blood. What needs clarification here is one, not very well popularised fact: Bulgarian Muslims took active part in the suppression and crushing of many of the rebellions. This, in turn, raises many questions, with one most imperative. What were the reasons that in the same ethnic population group, some of its members took the way of conversion and cultural adaptation but the others chose cultural resistance, martyrdom and self-martyrdom? How could these two groups live in relative peace under Ottoman rule but when an uprising against the Turks took place, Bulgarian Muslims ferociously and viciously attacked their Christian neighbours and fought on the side of the Turks, committing acts of unheard of cruelty and brutality? Their participation in the crushing of the April uprising of 1876 is notorious and it was described by the American writer and journalist Janarius Aloysius McGahan, who was one of the greatest war correspondents in the nineteenth century. In his American witness (2002, 3rd Ed.), Bulgarian historian Teodor Dimitrov has published McGahan’s notes about the atrocities in Batak, Bulgaria, and they read: â€Å"We spoke with many women, who had been through all stages of torture without the last one, death. The procedure, as it seemed, was the following: the Turks would take a woman, undress her, putting aside her valuables, gang-rape her and the last one, who had her, would kill her or let her go, depending on his mood†. What McGahan does not note here is that the Turks were not alone in the slaughter of the rebels. They are aided by their helpers’, the local Pomak population, Greeks and other small ethnic groups. Thus, Christian Bulgarians fought for freedom, while Muslim Bulgarians took part in the massacre of their uprising. What could have possibly provoked someone to behave in such a way? According to Doinov et al. (2001, p.112), â€Å"the shown cruelty was an outburst of the deep national and religious hatred against the oppressed nationalities in the Ottoman Empire, that has been groomed and encouraged for centuries by the ruling powers†. However, something else was at work there too. Kemal Karpat (1990, p.136) explains that Balkan Muslims, although living in a hostile Christian European world, remained largely apolitical. However, their â€Å"passive cultural-religious consciousness was easily converted to a dynamic Muslim identity when the circumstances required†. Perhaps when Bulgarian Muslims were faced with an unconditional act of resistance in the â€Å"most dramatic form: suicide and self-martyrdom† (2000, p.3), those acted as catalyst and the Pomaks replied with repression and brutality. Ekaterina Peychinova, Director of the Museum of History in Batak describes what drove the oppressors mad: For three days and three nights the people inside the church held together, and the shooting outside did not stop for a minute. At the end of the third day they gave in and opened the gates of the church. But then they had only two options: either become Muslims or die. Every single one of them chose death. (cited in Ivanova, 2008, p.1) The horrific power of those events and the depth of feelings and emotions are overwhelming. Keeping in mind that Bulgarian Christians and Bulgarian Muslims are from the same ethnic origin and the same blood flows in their veins, have religious and cultural conversion, syncretism and assimilation have changed the latter so much that they could commit such acts and have identity switch over, allowing for full degradation of human values? This essay does not have the ambitious goal to answer all those questions. History gives the answers and it will do the same here too. Many years have gone since those ghastly days and Pomaks’ sense of cultural identity and national belonging has evolved and changed again as Bulgarian Muslims themselves were at the receiving end of numerous assimilation governmental campaigns and strategies from 1878 until now. Cultural identity and national belonging of Bulgarian Pomaks Due to the fact that the Bulgarian speaking Muslims took an active part in the suppressing the April uprising of 1876, they did not enjoy friendly treatment from their Christian neighbours. With the advancement of the Russian armies in 1878, retaliation began and a substantial part of the Pomaks immigrated to the Ottoman empire, refusing to live under the rule of the â€Å"giaurs† or infidels. Many others took part in the Rodopi mutiny and lived in the so-called Pomak republic for about eight years until 1886, when the participating villages were included in the Ottoman Empire but only until the Balkan wars (Todorva, 1998, p.9). Furthermore, in the Ottoman Population: 1830-1914 (1985, p.78), Kemal Karpat cites Ottoman statistics, indicating that the total population of the Empire rose by about 40% in the period 1860-1878 due to coercive measures by Russia and Bulgaria. He mentions that among the Balkan migrants there were large groups of Slavic-speaking Bosnians, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins and Pomaks with a negative sense of ethnic identity, as they considered themselves as Muslims but not Osmanlis (Turks). Thus, judging by the actions of the Pomaks, the question that must be asked here is: did the Pomaks have a Turkish or Bulgarian cultural and national identity at the end of the nineteen and beginning of twentieth century and is it possible to differentiate between religious and ethnic belonging? The Pomaks, who immigrated to the Ottoman Empire, had their cultural identity politicised and defined as Muslim and Turkish under the influence of the local political and ethnic culture (Karpat, 1990, p.137). Unfortunately, the Pomaks, who stayed in Bulgaria, did not have the opportunity to decide for themselves freely because during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, they were subjected to a number of keen campaigns to accept and recognise them as part of the Bulgarian nation or â€Å"narod†, starting from 1920-s and continuing until the mid-80-s. In 1942, the first ever mass attempt to change the names of the Bulgarian Muslims to Bulgarian names took place. It was a result of the work of the Pomaks’ own organisation, called â€Å"Rodina† or Motherland. Consisting mainly of teachers, â€Å"Rodina† strove to improve the position of the Pomaks in Bulgarian society and to save them from the growing resentment and marginalisation. In the context of the Third Bulgarian Kingdom (1878 – 1944) and its nationalistic ambitions and assimilative tendencies, it is important to acknowledge here that Motherlands’ actions were justified in terms of seeking a national, cultural and linguistic unity of the Bulgarian society and the difficulties that the Pomaks could have faced, if tried to fit in that society. What is questionable here is the Pomaks desire to fit in. Although the Pomaks have, at that point, lost the very close contact with their original cultural authority, the Ottoman Empire, they were still in favour of their religious affiliation and were not willing to adapt to the fresh, language-based identity actively promoted by the modern Bulgarian state at that time (Todorova, 1998, p. 11). Another problem here is the attitude of the Christian Bulgarians, whose national consciousness was determined by religious and linguistic boundaries. Were they ready to forget the Ottoman rule and April 1876 and to accept the Pomaks as part of the Bulgarian nation and allow assimilation? Could adaptation and adoption take place and the complex issue of national identity, belonging and unity be resolved peacefully and once and for all? What is better: common national identity and national unity or multi-cultural society? During communist rule in the 1960-s, 1970-s and 1980-s, various Bulgarian governments tried to resolve the issue through numerous heavy-handed assimilation campaigns, when all Muslim names were changed to Bulgarian names, an attempt was made to form a united Bulgarian nation in order to neutralise nationalistic ambitions and claims from neighbouring Turkey. After the democratic reforms from 1989, all ethnic and religious groups in Bulgaria gained the freedom to self-identify themselves and promote their national and religious distinctiveness. All Muslim names were restored and seemingly the great effort to create a united Bulgarian national identity had ended. Hence, the national identity and cultural belonging of the Pomaks are somewhat fluid and non-defined, and the coming generations will have the chance to accomplish the process of integration or affiliation as they choose. It is, however, ultimate to accept the lessons of history and to abolish all attempts to forcefully create a single identity with identical religious or national characteristics. Cultural conversion through co-operation and co-existence is frequently welcome by small or big population groups, whilst conversion by pressure, conflict and aggressive assimilation is rejected and leads to confusion, hatred and frequently violent resistance. Conclusion In conclusion, it must be recognised here that the case of Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks is of complex nature and the issue of defining their national identity and cultural belonging is still unresolved. There are many more questions to ask and answer and many more avenues to explore in order to establish which one of the national identity constituents is the most influential and possess the ultimate formative power. Consequently, it is the greatest regret of this work that it is impossible to analyse or develop fully all themes, ideas and debates in connection with the cultural identity, national belonging and self-perception of the Pomaks, when the number of words is restricted and there is lack of the research available. However, one humbly hopes to have offered here, merely an attempt of discussion on the important issues of cultural and religious identity and how they shape the very centre of the human concept of self. Finally, it must be emphasised here that the writing of this essay has been a vast learning experience for the author, an opportunity to study, investigate and explore the world of Bulgarian Muslims and be taught lessons that put historical and contemporary events into perspective. Bibliography Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (1982). History of Bulgaria. Sofia: BAN Press, vol. 3-7. Dimitrov, T. (2002). American witness. 3rd Ed. Geneva: Geneva press. Doinov, D., Jechev, N. Kosev, K. (2001). The April uprising and the fate of the Bulgarian nation. Sofia: Academic Press â€Å"Professor Marin Drinov†. Ivanova, M. (2008). St. Nedelya church in Batak. Available from: http://www.pravoslavieto.com. (Accessed: 12 April 2008). Karpat, K. (1985). Ottoman Population: 1830-1914. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Karpat, K. (1990). The hijra from Russia and the Balkans: the process of self-definition in the late Ottoman state. In: Eickelman, D. Piscatori, J. (Ed.). Muslim Travellers: Pilgrimage, migration, and the religious imagination. Los Angeles: University of California Press, Chapter 7, pp. 131-152. Krasin, H. (2007). Turkish brutality in Bulgaria and in the Balkan Peninsula. (Turskite porazii v Bulgaria i na Balkanskia Poluostrov). Sofia: Svetovit Press. Petrov, P. (1966). History Reader: The Rodopi mountain through the centuries. Sofia: BKP Press. Rajcevski, S. (2004). The Mohammedan Bulgarians (Pomaks). (Balgarite Mohamedani). Sofia: Bulgarian Bestseller Press. The Applied History Research Group. (2000) Old World Contacts. Available from: http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history. (Accessed: 14 April 2008). Todorova, M. (1998). Identity (Trans) Formation among Bulgarian Muslims. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. Voinov, G. (2006). Genocide and Holocaust against Bulgarians. (Genotsidad i Holokostat sreshtu Balgarite.) Sofia: Arateb Press. Cultural Identity and Belonging in Muslims Cultural Identity and Belonging in Muslims Religious conversion, cultural identity and national belonging: The world of Bulgarian Muslims (Pomaks). Introduction It is always interesting to immerse in the mysterious past and to discover how the sense of national identity is created and transformed over the years. Throughout olden times and until now, cultural margins have shrunk or expanded, established nations and minorities within these have interacted with and influenced each other, religious and cultural conversions have frequently taken place and in the melting pot of history new distinctive uniqueness has begun to exist. This is particularly valid when the case of Bulgarian Muslims is discussed. Moreover, it is important to recognise here that the world of Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks has been a subject of endless speculations and ethnic and political claims over the years and it is still very much unknown to the Western European ethnological and historical research literature. Much of the translated work that refers to the Pomaks is from Greek, Serbian, Turkish or Macedonian origin. Therefore it is, fair to say that the story of this Muslim enclave that inhibits mostly Bulgarian territories and speaks Bulgarian language, must be considered from a Bulgarian point of view and this is the main aim here. Consequently, this essay will examine the world of Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks, their religious conversion from Christianity to Islam and the formation and transformation of their cultural identity and sense of national belonging. To accomplish all this, the essay will firstly discuss the religious conversion of the Pomaks, its background, character, mode and outcomes and how it has laid the foundations of Bulgarian Muslims’ cultural identity. In addition, this paper will comment on the transformation of the cultural identity and sense of national belonging of Bulgarian Muslims. Finally, it will conclude with thoughts on self-perception, perception of others and future hopes. Definition of the term Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks Before elaborating further on all abovementioned points, there is a need to establish and define the term Bulgarian Muslims and describe it in Bulgarian context. In order to achieve this, two reliable sources will be cited. Commenting on the issue of cultural belonging and religious identity of Muslims in Bulgaria, Kemal Karpat, a Turkish historian and researcher, states that: The Muslim identity of these populations consisted outwardly of certain objective symbols and acts such as names and ritualsand at their place of origin they tended to identify themselves with Islam in terms of social behaviour, rather than in terms of a political systemand possessed a passive communal Muslim identity (1990, pp. 131-132). In his The hijra from Russia and the Balkans: the process of self-definition in the late Ottoman state, he argues that the largest population group â€Å"in the area that is now Bulgaria†, was the Muslim population group. In terms of spoken language, he endorses that â€Å"they spoke Slavic† (1990, pp.132-134). In his Turkish brutality in Bulgaria and in the Balkan Peninsula (2007, pp. 41-62), the well-known Bulgarian historian, researcher and writer Hristo Krasin, presents a different point of view to that of Kemal Karpat. He argues that all modern Bulgarian population has a strong Bulgarian ethnic origin and comprises of four groups. The first group consists of Bulgarians, who speak Bulgarian language and are Eastern Orthodox Christians. The second one consists of Bulgarians, who recognise themselves as Bulgarian speaking Muslims with Bulgarian or Turkish national identity. The third one consists of Bulgarian speaking Muslims, who recognise themselves as ethnic Turks because their Bulgarian national identity was partially erased over the centuries due to the aggressive assimilation politic of the Turkish Empire. The last group consists of Bulgarian individuals, who speak Bulgarian and Turkish languages. They recognise themselves as ethnic Turks, whose religions are Christianity and Islam and whose Bulgarian national identity was fully erased under centuries of Turkish Islamic brutality in Bulgaria. This classification of ethnic and religious groups only appears to be straightforward. In the context of the tricky ethic and religious relationships in Bulgaria and in the Balkans, nothing is ever simple. Hence, the purpose of this essay is not to involve the reader in a discussion of the suggested categorisation or its validity or reliability but to establish some clarity into the complicated issue of ethnicity and identity of the Bulgarian-speaking Muslims and their ethnic, cultural and national identity and self-perception. Subsequently, this paper will confine itself to the Bulgarian-speaking Muslims, further referred to as Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks. Religious conversion: Pomaks until 1878 As it already beginning to emerge, the case of the Pomaks is complicated and a number of debates around it, display very strong positions and conflicting opinions. In order to appreciate all points of view and in search for the truth, it is imperative to consider the historical background of the issue. The existence of closed Muslim societies in Bulgaria is the direct inheritance of five centuries long Turkish rule over the Balkan Peninsula (Todorova, 1998, p.3). Even though there is no reliable data or figures to inform of population characteristics or major population shifts, some research has been done and there are number of existing theories that explain the size and grouping of Muslim population on the Peninsula. In his Turkish brutality in Bulgaria and in the Balkan Peninsula (2007, p. 23), Hristo Krasin has attempted to assess the character and the effects of these movements. He claims that there were not any significant population transfers from Anatolia to the Balkans between the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries and that the military formation send to take the Peninsula over, comprised only of soldiers and there no women travelling with the army. In her Identity (Trans) Formation among Bulgarian Muslims, Maria Todorova, a researcher from The University of California (1998, p.4) argues that the â€Å"chief historiographical controversy centres on the explanations for the sizeable Muslim population in the Balkans: Colonisation versus Conversion theory†. Furthermore, she suggests that â€Å"by the sixteenth century the settler colonisation process had stopped and yet the percentage of Muslims in the region continued to grow. Thus, the hypothesis offered is that â€Å"there were a great number of personal conversions to Islam among the non-Muslim population of the Balkans, respectively Bulgaria† (Todorova, 1998, p.6). In addition, a whole range of reliable academic research and publications from Bulgarian and Turkish authors, such as Omer Barkan from Istanbul University, Elena Grozdanova from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, the Albanian historian Sami Pulaha (all cited in Todorova, 1998, pp. 2-5), refer to data to evidence rapid Muslim population growth in Bulgaria between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries due either colonisation or conversion. In an attempt to join this debate and in discussion of the concrete but complex case of the Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks, it must be suggested here that although there is evidence to support both theories, the majority of all available sources, also supported by official documents and survived the time registers of the Ottoman empire, shape the idea that religious conversion on a massive scale took place in Bulgaria and respectively in the Balkans (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1982, vol. 3-7). The question is how the conversion from Christianity to Islam was carried out and the answer to this question is directly connected with Pomaks’ self-identification as Muslims and consequently gives some light into their actions and behavioural characteristics as citizens of the Ottoman Empire until the nineteenth century and independent Bulgaria after that. To discuss the mode of the religious conversion of the Pomaks and emphasise its importance for the formation of their cultural identity and national belonging, it must be made clear here that â€Å"conversion may occur in one or more of three ways: through voluntary association, by pressure, and by assimilation. Syncretism and strong cultural resistance can also complicate the conversion process† (The Applied History Research group, 2000, pp.1-3). There is another raging debate in Bulgarian and Balkan historiographical research literature about the mode of Pomaks’ conversion to Islam and the co-existence of Bulgarian Christians and Bulgarian Muslims. On the one hand, there are these, who argue that the conversion was forced upon the Christian population of Bulgaria and over the centuries, and especially the seventeen century, there was a mass conversion to Islam in across the country and especially in the mountain Rodopi region. There is a huge amount of literature, both academic and journalistic, supported with reliable and substantial evidence that the alleged obligatory conversion took place. In his Genocide and Holocaust against Bulgarians (2006, p.63), Bulgarian academic historian and writer Georgi Voinov claims that the systematic and focused compulsory conversion to Islam was one of the favourite methods of control and ruling in the Ottoman Empire, well known for its strong assimilation aspirations in order to promote pan-Turkism. To sustain his assertions, Voinov cites numerous sources, based on authentic literature, written by survivors or witnesses from fourteenth to eighteenth centuries. He also claims that there are official registers of the Ottoman Empire that had also captured those events and give objective information and statistics of all the atrocities that took place in the name of Islam and in order to erase Bulgarian national identity among the Bulgarian population (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1982, vol. 3-7). All abovementioned sources affirm that Islam in Bulgaria was not accepted voluntary but under duress. In the History Reader: The Rodopi mountain through the centuries (1966, p. 78), Bulgarian historian Peter Petrov cites a source from the sixteenth century that talks of 325 thousand young Bulgarian youths forcefully converted to Islam and taken to Anatolia to commence military service in the Turkish army. Only the boy’s number was known, for the girls, no-one has ever known. It is claimed, that conversion took place in 1515 and under the command of Selim Pasha. There are also endless lists from administrative Ottoman registers reporting evidence that Islam was not accepted on voluntary basis. Mass conversions took place in 1620, 1633, 1669, 1705, 1720, 1803, all of those through fire and sword, drowning in blood any resistance from the local Christian population (Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1982, vol. 3-7). On the other hand, there are those academic writers and journalists, who for one reason or another and in an attempt to politicise the issue of Bulgarian Muslims, are nowadays trying to reassess historical events. Special attention is given to the religious and cultural conversion in Bulgaria. In the recently published second edition of his book The Mohammedan Bulgarians (2007, pp. 5-12), Bulgarian researcher and writer Stojan Raichevski asserts that change to Islam was forced upon the Christian Bulgarians by the power of the sword to a minimal degree but there were many other, more important reasons and economic factors, that played a key role, such as preferential taxation and trading agreements for Muslims in the Empire, the greed of the Greek Orthodox clergy, the conflict between the Bogomils and the Orthodox Church, etc. In addition, Kemal Karpat comments that at the time when their land was conquered, the Slavic speaking Muslims were under the authority of their local feudal lords and accepted Islam as the new faith as it supposedly was close to their native faith of Bogomilism, a mixture of Christianity, paganism and Manichaeism. In doing so, they hoped to preserve their land holdings and ethnic identity. Furthermore, according to the Applied History Research group of the University of Calgary (2000, p.1), â€Å"although conversion by pressure cannot be termed voluntary, the degree of force and coercion varies greatly. Indeed, military conquest was typically followed by the application of subtler pressures, such as commercial or judicial sanctions, to enforce the requirement of the new rulers†. Economic pressure was just as effective as an unrestrained military subjugation. Thinking objectively and considering all points of view and available data, one does not doubt here that many factors acted as an incentive to mass Islamic conversions in Bulgaria. What is interesting to communicate through this piece of work is that the combination of the different modes of conversion: by voluntary association, by pressure, and by assimilation, was accompanied with syncretism that determined some degree of cultural adaptation. It did, in turn, also provoke fierce cultural resistance and martyrdom from a large part of the Christian population. Hence, here was the historical picture in Bulgaria. On the one hand, those Bulgarians, who surrendered their religion for one reason or another, became Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks. They continued speaking Bulgarian language and the local area dialect, build their houses in Bulgarian architectural traditions, saved some elements of their old dress code, continued to recognise themselves as Bulgarians but built mosques, celebrated Eid and enjoyed preferential treatment from the Ottoman rulers. However, over the centuries they were exposed to the influences of their adopted Islamic religion and the aggressive pan-Turkism promoted in the Ottoman Empire and through blending of various aspects of different cultural customs and religious rituals or syncretism, somewhat new cultural arrangements took place. Bulgarian Muslims adapted culturally to the life in the Empire and although preserving their Slavic language and some sense of Bulgarian national identity, their levels of cultural adaptation reached much greater heights than those among the Christian Bulgarian population. Due to this fact and over the centuries, the Pomaks have tried to self-define themselves in terms of national conciseness and have become vulnerable to influences and an object of hatred or even political struggle. On the other hand, while Bulgarian Muslims were going through the process of cultural assimilation, the larger part of the Bulgarian population withstood the pressure, continued to observe their faith and traditions, regularly rebelled against the Turkish rulers and took part in more than fifty military conquests against the Turks, led by different European rulers. All Bulgarian uprisings against the Ottoman Sultans, fourteen in total in Bulgaria itself (Voinov, 2006, p.26), were drowned in blood. What needs clarification here is one, not very well popularised fact: Bulgarian Muslims took active part in the suppression and crushing of many of the rebellions. This, in turn, raises many questions, with one most imperative. What were the reasons that in the same ethnic population group, some of its members took the way of conversion and cultural adaptation but the others chose cultural resistance, martyrdom and self-martyrdom? How could these two groups live in relative peace under Ottoman rule but when an uprising against the Turks took place, Bulgarian Muslims ferociously and viciously attacked their Christian neighbours and fought on the side of the Turks, committing acts of unheard of cruelty and brutality? Their participation in the crushing of the April uprising of 1876 is notorious and it was described by the American writer and journalist Janarius Aloysius McGahan, who was one of the greatest war correspondents in the nineteenth century. In his American witness (2002, 3rd Ed.), Bulgarian historian Teodor Dimitrov has published McGahan’s notes about the atrocities in Batak, Bulgaria, and they read: â€Å"We spoke with many women, who had been through all stages of torture without the last one, death. The procedure, as it seemed, was the following: the Turks would take a woman, undress her, putting aside her valuables, gang-rape her and the last one, who had her, would kill her or let her go, depending on his mood†. What McGahan does not note here is that the Turks were not alone in the slaughter of the rebels. They are aided by their helpers’, the local Pomak population, Greeks and other small ethnic groups. Thus, Christian Bulgarians fought for freedom, while Muslim Bulgarians took part in the massacre of their uprising. What could have possibly provoked someone to behave in such a way? According to Doinov et al. (2001, p.112), â€Å"the shown cruelty was an outburst of the deep national and religious hatred against the oppressed nationalities in the Ottoman Empire, that has been groomed and encouraged for centuries by the ruling powers†. However, something else was at work there too. Kemal Karpat (1990, p.136) explains that Balkan Muslims, although living in a hostile Christian European world, remained largely apolitical. However, their â€Å"passive cultural-religious consciousness was easily converted to a dynamic Muslim identity when the circumstances required†. Perhaps when Bulgarian Muslims were faced with an unconditional act of resistance in the â€Å"most dramatic form: suicide and self-martyrdom† (2000, p.3), those acted as catalyst and the Pomaks replied with repression and brutality. Ekaterina Peychinova, Director of the Museum of History in Batak describes what drove the oppressors mad: For three days and three nights the people inside the church held together, and the shooting outside did not stop for a minute. At the end of the third day they gave in and opened the gates of the church. But then they had only two options: either become Muslims or die. Every single one of them chose death. (cited in Ivanova, 2008, p.1) The horrific power of those events and the depth of feelings and emotions are overwhelming. Keeping in mind that Bulgarian Christians and Bulgarian Muslims are from the same ethnic origin and the same blood flows in their veins, have religious and cultural conversion, syncretism and assimilation have changed the latter so much that they could commit such acts and have identity switch over, allowing for full degradation of human values? This essay does not have the ambitious goal to answer all those questions. History gives the answers and it will do the same here too. Many years have gone since those ghastly days and Pomaks’ sense of cultural identity and national belonging has evolved and changed again as Bulgarian Muslims themselves were at the receiving end of numerous assimilation governmental campaigns and strategies from 1878 until now. Cultural identity and national belonging of Bulgarian Pomaks Due to the fact that the Bulgarian speaking Muslims took an active part in the suppressing the April uprising of 1876, they did not enjoy friendly treatment from their Christian neighbours. With the advancement of the Russian armies in 1878, retaliation began and a substantial part of the Pomaks immigrated to the Ottoman empire, refusing to live under the rule of the â€Å"giaurs† or infidels. Many others took part in the Rodopi mutiny and lived in the so-called Pomak republic for about eight years until 1886, when the participating villages were included in the Ottoman Empire but only until the Balkan wars (Todorva, 1998, p.9). Furthermore, in the Ottoman Population: 1830-1914 (1985, p.78), Kemal Karpat cites Ottoman statistics, indicating that the total population of the Empire rose by about 40% in the period 1860-1878 due to coercive measures by Russia and Bulgaria. He mentions that among the Balkan migrants there were large groups of Slavic-speaking Bosnians, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins and Pomaks with a negative sense of ethnic identity, as they considered themselves as Muslims but not Osmanlis (Turks). Thus, judging by the actions of the Pomaks, the question that must be asked here is: did the Pomaks have a Turkish or Bulgarian cultural and national identity at the end of the nineteen and beginning of twentieth century and is it possible to differentiate between religious and ethnic belonging? The Pomaks, who immigrated to the Ottoman Empire, had their cultural identity politicised and defined as Muslim and Turkish under the influence of the local political and ethnic culture (Karpat, 1990, p.137). Unfortunately, the Pomaks, who stayed in Bulgaria, did not have the opportunity to decide for themselves freely because during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, they were subjected to a number of keen campaigns to accept and recognise them as part of the Bulgarian nation or â€Å"narod†, starting from 1920-s and continuing until the mid-80-s. In 1942, the first ever mass attempt to change the names of the Bulgarian Muslims to Bulgarian names took place. It was a result of the work of the Pomaks’ own organisation, called â€Å"Rodina† or Motherland. Consisting mainly of teachers, â€Å"Rodina† strove to improve the position of the Pomaks in Bulgarian society and to save them from the growing resentment and marginalisation. In the context of the Third Bulgarian Kingdom (1878 – 1944) and its nationalistic ambitions and assimilative tendencies, it is important to acknowledge here that Motherlands’ actions were justified in terms of seeking a national, cultural and linguistic unity of the Bulgarian society and the difficulties that the Pomaks could have faced, if tried to fit in that society. What is questionable here is the Pomaks desire to fit in. Although the Pomaks have, at that point, lost the very close contact with their original cultural authority, the Ottoman Empire, they were still in favour of their religious affiliation and were not willing to adapt to the fresh, language-based identity actively promoted by the modern Bulgarian state at that time (Todorova, 1998, p. 11). Another problem here is the attitude of the Christian Bulgarians, whose national consciousness was determined by religious and linguistic boundaries. Were they ready to forget the Ottoman rule and April 1876 and to accept the Pomaks as part of the Bulgarian nation and allow assimilation? Could adaptation and adoption take place and the complex issue of national identity, belonging and unity be resolved peacefully and once and for all? What is better: common national identity and national unity or multi-cultural society? During communist rule in the 1960-s, 1970-s and 1980-s, various Bulgarian governments tried to resolve the issue through numerous heavy-handed assimilation campaigns, when all Muslim names were changed to Bulgarian names, an attempt was made to form a united Bulgarian nation in order to neutralise nationalistic ambitions and claims from neighbouring Turkey. After the democratic reforms from 1989, all ethnic and religious groups in Bulgaria gained the freedom to self-identify themselves and promote their national and religious distinctiveness. All Muslim names were restored and seemingly the great effort to create a united Bulgarian national identity had ended. Hence, the national identity and cultural belonging of the Pomaks are somewhat fluid and non-defined, and the coming generations will have the chance to accomplish the process of integration or affiliation as they choose. It is, however, ultimate to accept the lessons of history and to abolish all attempts to forcefully create a single identity with identical religious or national characteristics. Cultural conversion through co-operation and co-existence is frequently welcome by small or big population groups, whilst conversion by pressure, conflict and aggressive assimilation is rejected and leads to confusion, hatred and frequently violent resistance. Conclusion In conclusion, it must be recognised here that the case of Bulgarian Muslims or Pomaks is of complex nature and the issue of defining their national identity and cultural belonging is still unresolved. There are many more questions to ask and answer and many more avenues to explore in order to establish which one of the national identity constituents is the most influential and possess the ultimate formative power. Consequently, it is the greatest regret of this work that it is impossible to analyse or develop fully all themes, ideas and debates in connection with the cultural identity, national belonging and self-perception of the Pomaks, when the number of words is restricted and there is lack of the research available. However, one humbly hopes to have offered here, merely an attempt of discussion on the important issues of cultural and religious identity and how they shape the very centre of the human concept of self. Finally, it must be emphasised here that the writing of this essay has been a vast learning experience for the author, an opportunity to study, investigate and explore the world of Bulgarian Muslims and be taught lessons that put historical and contemporary events into perspective. Bibliography Bulgarian Academy of Sciences (1982). History of Bulgaria. Sofia: BAN Press, vol. 3-7. Dimitrov, T. (2002). American witness. 3rd Ed. Geneva: Geneva press. Doinov, D., Jechev, N. Kosev, K. (2001). The April uprising and the fate of the Bulgarian nation. Sofia: Academic Press â€Å"Professor Marin Drinov†. Ivanova, M. (2008). St. Nedelya church in Batak. Available from: http://www.pravoslavieto.com. (Accessed: 12 April 2008). Karpat, K. (1985). Ottoman Population: 1830-1914. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Karpat, K. (1990). The hijra from Russia and the Balkans: the process of self-definition in the late Ottoman state. In: Eickelman, D. Piscatori, J. (Ed.). Muslim Travellers: Pilgrimage, migration, and the religious imagination. Los Angeles: University of California Press, Chapter 7, pp. 131-152. Krasin, H. (2007). Turkish brutality in Bulgaria and in the Balkan Peninsula. (Turskite porazii v Bulgaria i na Balkanskia Poluostrov). Sofia: Svetovit Press. Petrov, P. (1966). History Reader: The Rodopi mountain through the centuries. Sofia: BKP Press. Rajcevski, S. (2004). The Mohammedan Bulgarians (Pomaks). (Balgarite Mohamedani). Sofia: Bulgarian Bestseller Press. The Applied History Research Group. (2000) Old World Contacts. Available from: http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history. (Accessed: 14 April 2008). Todorova, M. (1998). Identity (Trans) Formation among Bulgarian Muslims. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. Voinov, G. (2006). Genocide and Holocaust against Bulgarians. (Genotsidad i Holokostat sreshtu Balgarite.) Sofia: Arateb Press.

Tiger for Sony :: essays research papers

If Sony is hinting at OS X and Linux, there's also a good chance they could be developing a proprietary OS. The PS3 will have to support HDMI-HDCP output since the old DVI standard can no longer be implemented. HDMI has definitely been in Sony's interests as it is a huge media vendor with SCEA and Sony Pictures. Yet giving out a game system with HDCP-HDMI output for HDTV gaming while putting an open source operating system like Linux on a single machine is kind of insane. You can't put the 'hacker's OS' on a relatively cheap Blu-Ray/computer/gaming machine and not expect piracy. You can put it on the PS2 with an HDD which would be a relatively cheap DVD/psuedo-computer/gaming machine- but due to the nature of the compatibility of the PS3 spec- it will be much more tempting to commit piracy on a PS3 than a PS2, and a PS3 with Linux than an Xbox360. This implementation of Linux would be asking for easier copyright-protection-overrides than the Xbox currently suffers (a soft-mod here, a network cable there- Linux and Evox in of their illegal game copying glory.) The PS2 made consumers realize the PS wasn't as rare a thing as they'd thought. The PS3 will make consumers realize the PS2 was an introduction into an industry larger than film, and that film-quality games have their very beautiful appeal. Yet Linux would definitely drive sales- a large portion of Windows users hear about Linux' supposed superiority and don't care, but sure wouldn't mind it if a Linux machine fell into their lap with a GUI comprabale to Windows. The PS3 part won't be too shabby either. I'd say they'll have a Linux-like full-fledged proprietary OS with a bunch of root restrictions to make it harder to override it with another OS, learning from MS' mistake on the Xbox. I can possibly see Sony eventually giving consumers ability to put Longhorn on PS3. It would have the competivite/ironic edge consumers would adore. "The MS OS can't run on Xbox360, but it sure can run on PS3." Longhorn will be super-feature-rich in terms of copyright control technologies, avail in Sony's interests. In that scenario, MS could even be forced to follow Sony in putting Longhorn on its Xbox360, but I doubt consumers would forget Sony did it first. Its pretty doubtul, but if Sony elaborated on such an idea with action I think we could expect great things in terms of revenue and support. Tiger for Sony :: essays research papers If Sony is hinting at OS X and Linux, there's also a good chance they could be developing a proprietary OS. The PS3 will have to support HDMI-HDCP output since the old DVI standard can no longer be implemented. HDMI has definitely been in Sony's interests as it is a huge media vendor with SCEA and Sony Pictures. Yet giving out a game system with HDCP-HDMI output for HDTV gaming while putting an open source operating system like Linux on a single machine is kind of insane. You can't put the 'hacker's OS' on a relatively cheap Blu-Ray/computer/gaming machine and not expect piracy. You can put it on the PS2 with an HDD which would be a relatively cheap DVD/psuedo-computer/gaming machine- but due to the nature of the compatibility of the PS3 spec- it will be much more tempting to commit piracy on a PS3 than a PS2, and a PS3 with Linux than an Xbox360. This implementation of Linux would be asking for easier copyright-protection-overrides than the Xbox currently suffers (a soft-mod here, a network cable there- Linux and Evox in of their illegal game copying glory.) The PS2 made consumers realize the PS wasn't as rare a thing as they'd thought. The PS3 will make consumers realize the PS2 was an introduction into an industry larger than film, and that film-quality games have their very beautiful appeal. Yet Linux would definitely drive sales- a large portion of Windows users hear about Linux' supposed superiority and don't care, but sure wouldn't mind it if a Linux machine fell into their lap with a GUI comprabale to Windows. The PS3 part won't be too shabby either. I'd say they'll have a Linux-like full-fledged proprietary OS with a bunch of root restrictions to make it harder to override it with another OS, learning from MS' mistake on the Xbox. I can possibly see Sony eventually giving consumers ability to put Longhorn on PS3. It would have the competivite/ironic edge consumers would adore. "The MS OS can't run on Xbox360, but it sure can run on PS3." Longhorn will be super-feature-rich in terms of copyright control technologies, avail in Sony's interests. In that scenario, MS could even be forced to follow Sony in putting Longhorn on its Xbox360, but I doubt consumers would forget Sony did it first. Its pretty doubtul, but if Sony elaborated on such an idea with action I think we could expect great things in terms of revenue and support.

Management and Sm Essay

Answer : yes its will get long time strategy and its will be from 1 year up 3 year maybe its be long time strategy until the clear and understand about the policy and situation of this SM (m&M) believe in determinism, that is, the choices they make are determined by their internal and external environments, are proactive, shape ideas, and change the way people think about what is desirable, possible, and necessary more willing to invest in innovation, human capital, and creating and maintaining an effective culture to ensure long-term viability focus on tacit knowledge and develop strategies as communal forms of tacit knowledge that promote enactment of a vision, see themselves as conservators and regulators of existing order; sense of who they are depends on their role in organization Note :Recent reports indicate the continued preference of ‘Ramalingam Raju’s’ style of management by the old employees of Satyam and the fact that such employees feel that they are being managed by outsiders. It is also rumored that it is these employees who are now trying to switch their jobs. Of course, the SM management is doing its best to win over such employees and is taking pro-active steps to dissipate such rumors. 2. What HR strategy would you recommend for SM to inculcate a sense of belongingness, loyalty and improved performance of its employees? Answer: * The Sm its very important role is playing for the improve of loyalty of employees and performance of employees, * The SM its master the competence of sm ,which discuses methodologies of tolerating and managing stress one needs to climb which are stress tolerance and impulse controls ,respectively . Focus on corporate strategy, and try to pinpoint at least three goals of the strategy as stated by upper-level management. Create human resource performance indicators that are closely tied to the strategy objectives for the organization. Focus on both short- and long-term strategy objectives. For instance, suppose if its has SM . There’s a strong link between experience and education in terms of employee performance , Figure out how management measures strategy implementation. Connect the human resource performance goals to management’s measurement. The sales staff or the employees that interface directly with customers are usually the easiest to measure in terms of performance. This may be an ideal group to measure. Track the connection between strategic management goals and human resource performance goals, and try to identify trends in human resource actions/strategy and the overall corporate strategy. It is important to be able to link the connection using the same measurement criteria as management to improve the SM . short-term performance of a business and its underlying health—that is, involved in situations and contexts characteristic of day-to-day activities, its ability to sustain and improve performance year after year after year. They also may need to manage their companies differently. view work as an enabling process involving some combination of ideas and people interacting to establish strategies

A Description of the Sumerian Society Essay

?Sumerian society migrated into the Middle East and settled in the Mesopotamian area around 4000 B. C. E. , resulting in the settlement of that civilization. Sumerians contributed the city-states concept, created an essential writing system, strengthened their connection to their religion, and also recorded the world’s oldest story. The addition to Sumer’s city-states idea had a booming affect in their political structure. They were more organized than most political systems in other civilizations. With this, the Sumerian society was able to regulate religion and enforce laws in a better manner. Their concept later became a tradition of regional rule, basically creating an early bureaucracy for other societies to adopt and learn from. After several centuries of Sumer’s settlement, writing, the most significant invention in millennia’s, was introduced into Sumerian society. Although it was very sudden, the addition to such a revolutionary idea made their culture even more prosperous. Things led to another, and soon enough, the Sumerian society had an entire alphabet that was referred to as cuneiform, in the palm of their hands. They began to record their history and culture, later resulting in the world’s oldest story, the Epic of Gilgamesh and much more from their culture. Sumer’s introduction to cuneiform bloomed into an economical boost throughout their entire society. Their invention helped to promote trade and manufacturing. They were able to communicate much more flawlessly, leading to trades as far as India. Not only did it support the trading system, but it did wonders in recording much of Sumerian history. Sumer’s settlement meant many prosperous things. Their ideas and inventions of cuneiform, city-states, ziggurats, job specialization, etc. , led to great achievements that other civilizations adopted and duplicated. A Description of the Sumerian Society Essay ?Sumerian society migrated into the Middle East and settled in the Mesopotamian area around 4000 B. C. E. , resulting in the settlement of that civilization. Sumerians contributed the city-states concept, created an essential writing system, strengthened their connection to their religion, and also recorded the world’s oldest story. The addition to Sumer’s city-states idea had a booming affect in their political structure. They were more organized than most political systems in other civilizations. With this, the Sumerian society was able to regulate religion and enforce laws in a better manner. Their concept later became a tradition of regional rule, basically creating an early bureaucracy for other societies to adopt and learn from. After several centuries of Sumer’s settlement, writing, the most significant invention in millennia’s, was introduced into Sumerian society. See more:Â  Perseverance essay Although it was very sudden, the addition to such a revolutionary idea made their culture even more prosperous. Things led to another, and soon enough, the Sumerian society had an entire alphabet that was referred to as cuneiform, in the palm of their hands. They began to record their history and culture, later resulting in the world’s oldest story, the Epic of Gilgamesh and much more from their culture. Sumer’s introduction to cuneiform bloomed into an economical boost throughout their entire society. Their invention helped to promote trade and manufacturing. They were able to communicate much more flawlessly, leading to trades as far as India. Not only did it support the trading system, but it did wonders in recording much of Sumerian history. Sumer’s settlement meant many prosperous things. Their ideas and inventions of cuneiform, city-states, ziggurats, job specialization, etc. , led to great achievements that other civilizations adopted and duplicated.