FRQ 1
As country develops, either from good to bad, or bad to good, there are some people propose how did those countries changed throughout this long period of time. Rostow’s five stages of development model, and Wallenstein’s Three-part world theory are two of the more common economic development models. Even though these two are the most common model, the concepts behind their theory are different. First, Rostow’s five stages of development focus on development of one country only, he starts his theory from one society and slowly transform to a mass consumption country. On the other hand, Wallenstein’s Three-Part world theory does not focuses that much on one’s development, he focuses that one countries development is connected with another country, which for example strong country can effect small LEDCs. Another important thing is that Rostow believes that a country develops by itself, it does not need supply from another place, he believes a country will follow his development theory in all ways. For Wallenstein, he believes that countries works together so improve economy, such as global trading for example. The second difference between these two theories are Rostow’s believes that every single countries goes through a linear process, which this basically means all countries starts from a simple society and moves towards a mass consumption country, but, Wallenstein had a complete different thought, he believes that a country does not necessary have to follow the five stages, a country develops through global trade, or depends on another countries support. For example, after WWII, many countries were created and were supported by the US or other European countries, if those small new born countries did not have the money support from these MEDC, then they probably will not survive. Last but not least, Rostow believes that a country will always start from a agricultural society and moves towards a industrialized country, which eventually means mass consumption. Wallenstein’s idea is a total against to Rostow’s idea; he believes that a country cannot self-sufficient and would need foreign relationship in order to develop.
Rostow’s economic development plan cannot be applied to Brazil, the reason is simple, Brazil was not a country that started from a agricultural then transformed to a mass consumption country. Wallenstein’s theory can be applied to Brazil’s economy development, because at the age of colonialism, Portugal, which first colonized Brazil in the 16th, enforced a colonial pact with Brazil, an imperial mercantile policy, which drove the development of Brazil for three centuries. Wallenstein’s theory can be applied because his theory stated that a country can be supported by another country for its economy development, and in this case, Brazil is a country helped by Portugal, the Portuguese helped the economy boost of Brazil starting from the 16th, so what we can say is that if Portugal did not colonize Brazil, they might not have the economy they have now. Core and Peripheral regions can be also observed in state, for example, in France, the capital Paris is the center where economic is focused, tourist and main restaurants are all clustered there, but Versaille for example, will be like the Peripheral. Paris will be the core of France, simply because they have more Economic development.
Rostow’s economic development plan cannot be applied to Brazil, the reason is simple, Brazil was not a country that started from a agricultural then transformed to a mass consumption country. Wallenstein’s theory can be applied to Brazil’s economy development, because at the age of colonialism, Portugal, which first colonized Brazil in the 16th, enforced a colonial pact with Brazil, an imperial mercantile policy, which drove the development of Brazil for three centuries. Wallenstein’s theory can be applied because his theory stated that a country can be supported by another country for its economy development, and in this case, Brazil is a country helped by Portugal, the Portuguese helped the economy boost of Brazil starting from the 16th, so what we can say is that if Portugal did not colonize Brazil, they might not have the economy they have now. Core and Peripheral regions can be also observed in state, for example, in France, the capital Paris is the center where economic is focused, tourist and main restaurants are all clustered there, but Versaille for example, will be like the Peripheral. Paris will be the core of France, simply because they have more Economic development.
FRQ 2
单击此处进行编辑.
Indo-Pakistani Wars and Conflict
Essential Questions:
–historical development of ethnic diversity (ancient, WWI, recent?)
–degree to which ethnicity and religion have been contributors to conflict
–degree to which border disputes and political power sharing have been contributors to conflict
–historical development of ethnic diversity (ancient, WWI, recent?)
–degree to which ethnicity and religion have been contributors to conflict
–degree to which border disputes and political power sharing have been contributors to conflict
The Kashmir dispute is the first war fought between India and Pakistan, the Kashmir dispute dates from 1947. The partition of the Indian Sub-continent along religious lines led to the formation of India and Pakistan. However, there remained the problem of over 650 states, run by princes, existing within the two independent countries. These princely states had the option of deciding which country to join, or of remaining independent. The people had been fighting for freedom from British rule, and with their struggle about to bear fruit they were not willing to let the princess fill the vacuum. Although many princes wanted to be independent, they had to deal with people's protests which turned violent in many provinces.
Due to Kashmir's sensitive location, Kashmir could choose to join either India or Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, was Hindu while most of his people were Muslim. Since it is very hard to choose a side, Kashmir remained neutral in this conflict. However, this neutral thought did not work very well for Hari Sigh, on October 1947, as Pakistan sent Muslim tribesman to the capital of Kashmir, Hari Singh appealed to the India government for assistance and escaped to India, later he signed Kashmir to India on October 26.
Due to Kashmir's sensitive location, Kashmir could choose to join either India or Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, was Hindu while most of his people were Muslim. Since it is very hard to choose a side, Kashmir remained neutral in this conflict. However, this neutral thought did not work very well for Hari Sigh, on October 1947, as Pakistan sent Muslim tribesman to the capital of Kashmir, Hari Singh appealed to the India government for assistance and escaped to India, later he signed Kashmir to India on October 26.
This conflict involves Religion and land dispute, they are both significantly important, because you can't understand this issue without knowing the religion conflict and background, and you can't understand it if you don't know the background of Kashmir. So first of, religion stands a important role in this conflict, due to the fact that the ruler is a Hindu and his subjects are mostly muslim. There is a very complexity on deciding whether to join India or Pakistan, it is a very conflicting thing to decide either to follow his belief as a leader or to follow people's will. Secondly, land disputes. Land dispute as I mentioned are important but not that much compare to religious reasons, Pakistan and India both claimed the ownership of Kashmir after the partition of British control, they both see religion as the main reason on why Kashmir belong to them.
Arab-Israeli Conflict
Arab -Israeli Conflict refers to the tension between the two political power and military conflict between certain Arab Countries and Israel. The modern conflict of Arab Countries and Israel are bound in the rise of Zionism and Arab nationalism towards the end of 19 century. Territory regarded by the Jewish people as their historical homeland is also regarded by the Pan-Arab movement.
These historic two movements of Arab nationalism and Zionism had been building up significantly since the nineteenth century with the aims of achieving emancipation and self-determination; both evolving around the concepts of identity, nationhood, history, religion and culture. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on for decades and has a number of somewhat complicated causes, but the main issues at the heart of the strife are land and borders. Where one country ends and the other begins -- and whether two independent countries should exist at all -- is a big part of it. Both groups believe that they have a "God-given" right to the territory, and both claim rights based on the pact God made with Abraham in the Bible's Old Testament. The opponents were once part of the same group of people who inhabited what was considered the Promised Land.
Who controls Jerusalem, which is considered by many to be a holy city, issues such as water, problems of force, violence, and terrorism also fueled the conflict, especially in 21 first century.
Who controls Jerusalem, which is considered by many to be a holy city, issues such as water, problems of force, violence, and terrorism also fueled the conflict, especially in 21 first century.
In the 2015, the conflict has become more serious and more sensitive. Israel become more power and used armed force against Palestinian, which causes the problem to become more serious. The two sides focused on fighting against land, in which one side believe they own the land and the other land disagree with them. They tried to reach a agreement but it always somehow fails, and now again, they are seeking for solutions that will make both sides happy.