Presidential Entertainment: A Brief History

In my opinion, the current political arena is portraying an intensely controversial debate. The stunning content of the arguments delivers provocative views that may seem to misrepresent free speech. Don’t get me wrong, I respect honest people and those who are not afraid to express their beliefs; however, I admire those who are able to articulate their thoughts in a humanely fashion. An important feature of a democratic society permits each person the right to hold his or her own opinions and express them freely without legal interference.

            Notions of equality and citizens entitled to natural rights including political rights were different in the 18^th century. Nevertheless, I will begin with the foundations of U.S. government, which rest on solid political principles and carefully designed documents such as the Constitution. The introduction to the Declaration of independence states the purpose of government in terms of social contract theory, that people create government in order to secure their rights. The Bill of Rights is the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. It includes individual rights the government must respect. Moreover, it guarantees the freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of the press.

           

            The Declaration of Independence reflects the social contract principle since the colonists at the time believed that King George III failed in his duty to protect the people and their natural rights. The idea of natural rights comes from the philosopher John Locke, and it says that when government is no longer doing its job of protecting natural rights, people have the right to change the government or get rid of it and start a new one.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

– John Locke

            These are rights individuals are born with, that no government can take away. People have interpreted those words to determine rights that give people protection of their personal selves, their material goods, and the ability to determine their future without interference. Everyone’s right to life is protected by law. We must bear in mind other human rights. It is our individual duty to behave conscientiously in respect of other people’s rights in order to prevent misconduct. To convey an opinion ethically, one must proportionately restrict his or her freedom of expression. Article 10 protects political debates and includes the freedom to hold opinions as well as to receive and impart information.

            In addition, Benjamin Franklin explained the idea of popular sovereignty when he enlightened the idea that people are the source of authority and power in government. Government only exists because the people have willed it or given their consent to certain leaders to rule. Popular sovereignty is the principle that the people themselves, rather than the government, have final authority. A direct democracy upholds this principle because the citizens themselves vote to make decisions. A republic can also reflect this principle because the people give power to those they elect as representatives.

            A government is legitimate only if the people agree with its existence, meaning the government has their consent to rule. Social contract takes this a step further to say that this consent places government under an obligation to fulfill its purpose by protecting the people and their rights. If it does not, the people could withdraw their consent, abolish the government, and form a new one.

            The principles of social contract, popular sovereignty, and natural rights are closely related, and they are evident throughout the Declaration of Independence. Political debates are one of the most anticipated events in a presidential race. They are ‘game changers’ and can attract votes faster and guarantee victory. We have come a long way since the 18^th century, and in today’s world, it is more important than ever to be open minded and at the same time to identify controversial bullies. A controversial bully is the type of person that does not want to discuss a topic, but rather they know they are right and they feel the need to educate you.

            In our normal lives we encounter people with different views that we seriously disagree with, who tempt us to try to change their minds. I believe that the first step is for us to be tolerant to people’s views and seek to understand different visions before trying to change other’s opinions. It takes a lot of patience no matter how wrong the other person is, but it allows us to actually think and contemplate in order to state reasonable arguments. It is imperative to avoid arrogance and stubbornness and most importantly, we have to use respect. Human beings must reciprocate their kindness on respecting and tolerating each other’s opinions before imposing their views.

Maternity Leave is Coming

Women do take maternity leave and is often times unpaid. Moreover, it is through a patchwork system where they use up their vacation time and their sick days. This is not how it should work; mothers should not have to stitch together time to recover from childbirth. There are women who want to get back to work as soon as they can and that is obviously fine, but for many women, the current situation forces them to return well before they want to. What if the pregnancy does not go according to plan and the baby is born prematurely? Then, women are forced to make some truly heart-breaking choices due to financial reasons. As a woman and a taxpayer myself, it is insulting to know that there is no real plan that allows mothers to recover.

The United States have a bad reputation when it comes to taking care of expectant mothers. When it comes to maternity leave, the U.S is one of the worst countries in the developed world: 12 weeks of unpaid leave ties for the shortest time off. According to the United Nations, the United States and Papua New Guinea are the only countries in the world that do not provide any paid time off for new mothers. In the U.S., federal law grants workers just 12 weeks of unpaid leave and the main disadvantage is that this policy is restricted: the expectant mother would have to work for a company with fifty or more employees, she’d have to have been there for over a year, she’d have to be a full-time salaried employee, as in, if she is a freelancer or a contractor, it does not apply to her, which means that 40% of workers are not covered under the federal law.

This unpaid leave system in the United States was proposed back in 1993. I do not see advantages to this U.S. policy and it seems that any legislation that specifically seeks to support women often faces vocal opposition. The government’s current economic status does not allow federal contribution, and I agree. It is the employer who needs to value the employees enough to apply a different policy. Paid leave is perceived as burdensome when in reality, simple changes can be made to the U.S. policy: Partially paid leave can be funded through a small payroll tax as an insurance plan that would cost employers little to nothing. The few companies that have implemented this idea saw no negative effects and their businesses made it work. As a matter of fact, paid parental leave can be beneficial for the parents, the children, society and the companies.

Pre-employment Drug Testing

Recreational drugs are chemical substances that alter the mind and affect the body, and are taken for enjoyment and leisure purposes. While some states are legalizing certain recreational drugs, reducing government costs and raising tax revenues, it is sure to increase substance abuse. There is the notion that use of marijuana can lead people to experiment with harder drugs, and as a business owner, that’s a risk I would not want to take.

There are benefits to drug testing that I take into consideration when I agree with the importance of pre-employment drug testing. Though it brings a wave of debate, the most popular argument against drug testing states time-consumption and costs. It costs about $75 per applicant and the time it takes to put policies in place and conduct extra training is a small price to pay when I compare it with the time it takes Human Resources to bring corrective action against an employee as a result of the types of offenses that become more common when employees are using drugs.

Understandably, it depends on the size of the organization and the type of effort demanded by its employees, nonetheless I do believe that drug testing reduces absenteeism, accidents, workers compensation claims, loss of productivity and employee turnover. Lost time is more costly as it is the scarcest resource and if I take time and spend money to recruit, train and hire new employees, the cost of the drug test is completely justified. Moreover, legislation across all of the U.S protects companies that choose to drug test, as long as drug testing plans are laid out in advance to employees.  

Ironically, the legalization of marijuana might actually hurt most those who depend on it for their current livelihood and support its consumption. Additionally, making people pass a drug test before receiving welfare and government assistance justifies pre-employment drug testing. 

Corporate Social Responsibility

The task of corporate social responsibility is to prevent morally reprehensible practices, which can weaken society, damage companies and hurt employees. More and more companies have realized the relevance of moral practices in the business, even though they have not always sufficiently implemented CSR, yet. Concrete preventative measures are often labeled ‘risk management,’ a term more commonly used for avoiding financial risk and damage to a company’s reputation. Thus, companies define clear rules, so-called ‘compliance’ or ‘value-management’ systems. However, those are only one aspect of corporate social responsibility: CSR is not just about preventing ‘bad practices,’ like corruption and fraud and so on. 

There is no doubt that compliance management could be an efficient control mechanism in organizations, but companies can contribute to a good society through good business practices. CSR is about how companies make profits, not about how they spend them and it demands systemic changes in a market economy. Companies most not only become economic, but also moral actors. It requires an important and strong integrative perspective: Social and ecological criteria must be taken into consideration. We need employees of integrity at all levels of the company, and we also need organizational structures and clear rules. CSR is concerned with both individuals and institutional structure and ethics through questions of justification and implementation. 

Hire a Scrapper: Hire Me!

Why the best hire might not have the perfect resume by Regina Hartley. 

Your company is launching a search for an open position. The applications start rolling in, and the qualified candidates are identified. Now the choosing begins.

·      Person A: Ivy League, 4.0, flawless resume, great recommendations. All the right stuff.

·      Person B: State school, fair amount of job-hopping and odd jobs like cashier and singing waitress.

Both are qualified.

Who are you going to pick?

Terms to describe two distinct categories of candidates:

·      A, ‘the Silver Spoon,’ is the one who clearly had advantages and was destined for success.

·      B, ‘the Scrapper,’ is the one who had to fight against tremendous odds to get to the same point.

            A resume tells a story, and people’s experiences read like a patchwork quilt that makes us stop and fully consider them before tossing their resumes away. A series of off jobs may indicate inconsistency, lack of focus, unpredictability. Or, it may signal a committed struggle against obstacles.

At the very least, the Scrapper deserves an interview.

Getting into and graduating from an elite university takes a lot of hard work and sacrifice. But if your whole life has been engineered toward success, how will you handle the tough times?

On the flip side, what happens when your whole life is destined for failure and you actually succeed? I want to urge you to interview the Scrapper.

As I met successful business people and read profiles of high-powered leaders, I noticed some commonality. Many of them had experienced early hardships, anywhere from poverty, abandonment, death of a parent while young, to learning disabilities, alcoholism and violence. However, during studies of dysfunction, data revealed an unexpected insight: Even the worst circumstances can result in growth and transformation. A remarkable and counterintuitive phenomenon has been discovered, which scientists call Post Traumatic Growth.

Entrepreneurs who experience post-traumatic growth, view disability as a desirable difficulty, which provided them an advantage because they became better listeners and paid greater attention to detail. They don’t think they are who they are in spite of adversity, they know who they are because of adversity. They embrace their trauma and hardships as key elements of who they’ve become, and know that without those experiences, they might not have developed the muscle and grit required to become successful.

Scrappers are propelled by the belief that the only person you have full control over is yourself. When things don’t turn out well, Scrappers ask, ‘What can I do differently to create a better result?’ Scrappers have a sense of purpose that prevents them from giving up on themselves.

Moreover, Scrappers know that humor gets you through the tough times, and laughter helps you change you perspective.

And finally, there are relationships. People who overcome adversity don’t do it alone. Somewhere along the way, they find people who bring out the best in them and who are invested in their success. Having someone you can count on no matter what is essential to overcoming adversity.

Focus on the future and don’t dwell on the past.

Companies that are committed to diversity and inclusive practices tend to support Scrapers and outperform their peers.

Choose the underestimated contender whose secret weapons are passion and purpose. Hire the Scrapper.

Given the choice between a job candidate with a perfect resume and one who has fought through difficulty, human resources executive Regina Hartley always gives the "Scrapper" a chance. As someone who grew up with adversity, Hartley knows that those who flourish in the darkest of spaces are empowered with the grit to persist in an ever-changing workplace.

Fearless Activists: Katharine Hepburn and Harvey Milk

Katharine Hepburn, A woman before her time.

Katharine Hepburn was an icon on screen and an inspiration in real life. Known for her fierce independence and quick wit, stage and screen actress Kate Hepburn was an unconventional movie star who did not keep her views quiet. She was very independent in her thoughts and actions and she holds a special place in American film and popular culture.

            A true artist and an unlikely Hollywood star, Kate Hepburn was born in Hartford, Connecticut on May 12, 1907. She was the second of six children. Her father was a surgeon and her mother was an early feminist: They educated their children about important political and social subjects and they encouraged her to speak out. The Hepburn’s were leaders in radical causes that were not popular in conservative Hartford. Neighbors threw bricks through their windows and the children were frequently forced to defend themselves in fights.

Kate Hepburn acted on and off Broadway before landing a role in the 1932 film A Bill of Divorcement, opposite John Barrymore. She is a theatric veteran and appeared in over 50 motion pictures. The characters Hepburn played were usually wealthy and intelligent, often strong and independent. She liked to play the roles of strong women, yet these tough characters tended to be humbled in some form and revealed to have a hidden vulnerability.

In a career lasting several decades, Katharine was an iconic figure of twentieth century film. Her lifestyle was unconventional for the time and through her acting she helped redefine traditional views of women’s role in society. She was acted in the suffrage movement, leading the Connecticut fight to win voting rights for women. Kathy frequently accompanied her mother passing out brochures and marching in parades. She embodied feminine beauty but also an inner strength and reserve. She was an important cultural icon and a forerunner for women of the 20^th century who lived with greater independence and freedom of action.

Hepburn is one of America's most celebrated actresses, and I had never thought of her as a political person. Turns out, Katherine Hepburn was an extreme liberal, pro abortion and openly atheistic: A mind so clear, opinionated, unafraid, Kathy lived life somewhat reclusively but she lived it the way she wanted. She was truly an American original and one of the most admired women of her time. Hepburn was an icon and I think it’s time that people began to appreciate her political impact.

Hepburn wanted to face the movie industry in her own way, and she was known for being fiercely private and would not talk to fans for much of her career. She often displayed a standoff attitude to the media.  While she was demanding, she retained a sense of humility and humanity: She distanced herself from the celebrity lifestyle; she wore casual clothes that went strongly against convention in era of glamour. She was dismissive toward other female actresses and reluctant to sign autographs or give interviews. She even turned down an offer to run for the US Senate. However, Katharine’s relentless energy and enthusiasm for life with a headstrong independence became key to her celebrity status. She was famously blunt and outspoken and critics either loved or hated her.

In Hollywood today, leading men are permitted to age on screen while their female colleagues are required to keep at least one toe dipped in the fountain of youth, Katharine Hepburn defied sexist ageism. Liberalism is a political philosophy, a worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality for all. Hepburn’s dream for a better tomorrow and her hope for equality, was soon shared by a man who symbolized the freedom to live with authenticity.

At a time when homosexuality was considered a mental disorder, a liberal activist found his voice as a leader. Harvey Milk became the city’s first openly gay officer to be elected to office in the United States. It was a time when being gay was illegal and there was widespread harassment and victimization of homosexuals. Milk influenced our social perceptions and human sensibilities. The story of Harvey Milk represents his struggles as an American gay activist who fought for gay rights. His desire for identifying genuine cultural differences and similarities across difference lines, Milk pointed his supporters in the direction of the desperate young person struggling in isolation with his sexuality.

A visionary civil and human rights leader, Harvey was born on May 22, 1930, in Woodmere, New York. Harvey and his one sibling came from a small middle-class Jewish family. He knew he was gay by the time he attended high school, where he was a popular student with wide-ranging interests. His courage, passion, and sense of justice rocked a country and stirred the very core of a put down and pushed out community, bringing forward new hope and a new vision of freedom. Harvey showed us all what one person, standing up loudly and clearly, against a fierce societal fear and prejudice can accomplish. He created a rich and vivid message of hope and an enduring dream, teaching us how to create our own and leaving them for us to realize.

In the 1970s, people regarded gays and lesbians as very different and dangerous people, and the public and media treated them as a scourge. He suffered intolerance and unfairness, and the fate of a figure like him is destined to be fallen. But Milk was a skilled politician and a kind man: A Simple publicity stunt came to define Milk’s career as a official, not only because he knew how to garner media attention for his cause, but also because it represented his desire to solve everyday problems.

Harvey’s election in 1977 took San Francisco politics by a storm when the groundbreaking leader was elected to the Board of Supervisors. His ability to mobilize gays and straights alike resulted in the defeat of a statewide proposition to severely limit gays’ employment rights. The media labeled Harvey Milk as someone who belongs to a minority group as ‘First gay on board,’ The world’s first openly gay elected officials, and its most visible one, contributed to the freedom to millions of LGBT women and men around the world.

Unfortunately, Harvey served less than a year in public office before his brutal assassination. However, his life profoundly changed a city, state, nation and a global community. His legacy of fighting for gay rights has inspired a new generation of civic activists across the United States, fighting for sexual equality and the expansion of civil liberties for gays and lesbians.

Activism and change come in a variety of venues. Katharine Hepburn and Harvey Milk are among a few fearless people who tried to create social change in areas of sexual discrimination. Anyone can make a difference in this world, whether it’s locally or nationally, it can happen in small everyday actions as well as creative large-scale venues. The media plays a critical role, but the most important steps we can take are simple and can make a big difference.

                                   ‘Hope will never be silent.’ – Harvey Milk