Case For or Against the War on Drugs Research Paper

Case For or Against the War on Drugs - Research Paper Example Despite many apparent set backs, the war on drugs has made tremendous gains in the making of the world a safer place. There have been concerted efforts in the United States over the past 40 years since then serving President Richard Nixon launched the U.S Government’s war on drugs.1 Several steps of progressive have been made against the flourishing of drug use and sale in the U.S. One such stride has been the advocacy for a paradigm shift in the war against drugs. As was expressed by President Obama in a digital town hall meeting, in 2011, there is a need to move from the old approach of the war to a new one. One way of accomplishing this has been looking at ways of shrinking demand for the drugs among the users.2 This represents a shift from looking at this war as primarily a criminal justice problem3. When looking at the war on drugs as a criminal justice problem, the emphasis on tackling it involves arrest, incarceration, and interdiction4. While this has had good results, it has had the unfortunate disadvantage of letting some of the offenders to slip through the cracks. Currently, there is a move towards looking at the war on drugs as a public health problem.5 This means that the government has acted as a guardian of the public interests6. This thus means that the government has managed to win the hearts of the people who advocate for social justice in the country. Another gain in the war on drugs was the Reagan administration’s efforts to take away the drugs from the consumers through efforts to cut down the crop abroad. This effort can be seen in countries like Bolivia. In this country, the efforts to reduce the drug production saw the seizure of twenty-seven tonnes of cocaine in 1986. This was an improvement from just one tone netted in 1981.

Nazi germany Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Nazi germany - Research Paper Example For instance, top administrators communication was answerable to Hitler and pursued his regulations, but they had some significant autonomy. The state was not a controlled, working jointly organ, but instead an assortment of blocs struggling to accumulate power and get support from Fuhrer. At the center of the Great Depression, the Nazi Government reinstated growth and stop mass joblessness by use of heavy military costs alongside mixed economy of central-scheming, as well as free-market practices. Wide carrying out of public works comprising construction of the Autobahns. The restoration of economy offered the regime substantial popularity; for instance, the restraint of all resistance made Hitler’s power largely unconcealed (Heller 243). Racisms, mostly antisemitism that was practiced were the fundamental precept of the Nazi German. German developed largely vibrant demands on the Jews, claiming declaration of war in case such demands were not fulfilled. Nazi German as a move ment that developed among fuming young scholars in early 1920s. The movement declined the Treaty of Versailles (1919), democracy general, as well as the Weimar republic. This group of young veterans call for the restoration of the Aryan race and accused the Jews for Germany’s challenges. ... ovement, it assured its subject of concrete authoritarian power, radical economic rules, civil peace, raised lebensraum for Germanic citizens, creation of the national society depended on racial cleansing and race through the vibrant Jews suppression. In addition, the Nazis pledged cultural as well as national regeneration depending on the Volkisch organization, suggested rearmament, traditionalism, reclamation, as well as the repudiation of reparations of borders lost to the Treaty of Versailles (Tooze 211). How German descend fast to a dictator state When Hitler was elected in January 1933, German state still enjoyed democratic form of government. Germany always had fair elections where no one had the power to be abused while voting. There were multiple political parties where citizens could choose for themselves which party could deliver and provide them with the desired leadership. On the other hand, to pass a law, the Reichstag had to accept to the new law following the bill goi ng through the common procedure of debate, opinions etc. The members of the Reichstag of 1933 comprised of 50% members who were against the Nazi Party. Thus, it would have been highly impossible for Hitler to make pushed into law what he proposed. Most thought of Hitler as a fall-member politician that may have to take responsibility to blame in case things got worse over his rule. Hitler had assured a general election for March 1933 of which this may have been, within his mind, the best chance for him to demonstrate all politicians who differed with him where the actual loyalties stay among the German citizens. A week prior to election was set to occur, the Reichstag building went up in flames. Hitler quickly claimed that it was the symbol for the communist conquers of the county. Hitler