Computer Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Computer - Essay Example The main reason I would not save my digital photos on Internet storage after reading Coates’ article is the inference Internet storage can be more beneficial to businesses than individuals. If I only considered this argument, then I would take the AOL route. However, I continued my research. I took a look at http://www.drivehq.com/secure/signup.aspx?refID=28050 which is Drive Headquarters. This storage system allowed for 1GB Free, 1GB + 1GB Free for $2.99/Month or $29.99/Year, 2GB + 1GB Free for $4.99/Month or $49.99, 5GB +1GB Free for $7.99/Month or $79.99/Year, 10GB for $12.99/Month or $129.99/Year, or 20GB for $19.99/Month or $199.99/Year. This option allowed for a registration with a name, email, and TOS agreement. Individuals signing up must have a valid email address which would require validation. The second website I researched was https://www.box.net/signup/g which is the location of Box.net. This Internet storage site has three options for storage; Individual, Professional, and Business. All options have a fourteen day free trial. After the free trial Individuals pay $9.95, Professionals pay $19.95, and Businesses pay $15.00 per month. Individuals get 5GB, Professionals receive 15GB, and Business receive 30GB+. The registration requires a name, email address, and phone number. There is also an space for a promo code. This service also provides live customer support. Drive Headquarters is cheaper, but does not have the support Box.net. I would also choose Box.net because it is more generated toward individuals. Online storage advantageous by freeing up computer hard drive space. The disadvantages include high costs and possible hacking by a third party. I would not advise a friend to use Internet storage due to the whole concept is more business friendly. For digital pictures and important files, I will continue to email them to my email address saving them as I go. Bayerische Asphalt-Mischwerke is a German

Othello (How Is He Lead to His Demise) Essay Example for Free

Othello (How Is He Lead to His Demise) Essay Shakespearean writing are ones of which, with a few strokes of a pen, can achieve more than novelists can achieve in a full length novel. Shakespeare’s writing is complex and includes great measures of love, hatred, loyalty, deception and betrayal. These traits of his texts are all evident in Othello. In Act 1, Othello is perceived as a noble moor. With Shakespeare’s invention of the manipulating and cunning Iago, the multi-layered use of Othello’s mothers handkerchief, and Othello’s past military training being resurfaced due to Iago’s lies, all lead Othello to his demise. Deception and betrayal are two of Iago’s worst traits when he is outranked by Cassio. Iago’s capacity for cruelty appears limitless, and no motivation he gives for his actions seems enough to explain the incredible destruction he wreaks on the lives of the people he knows best. His bitterness in not succeeding on becoming lieutenant is not a sufficient enough reason to match his countless acts of evil machinations. Iago uses a subtle approach when provoking Othello to become untrustworthy of Desdemona. He is able to hurt Othello successfully because he understands him so much. He grows closer to Othello as the plot progresses. In Act 2, scene 1 Iago states, â€Å"The moor, howbeit that I endure him not, is of constant, loving, noble nature†. These 3 adjectives indicate his awareness of Othello’s character. As Iago therefore continues to explain that he knows the noble moor would be a deserving husband of his wife, but then uses this knowledge to his power to play with Othello’s thoughts, using his strong love for Desdemona as a portal to self-destruction for all of those he knows best. He makes this statement in soliloquy after Othello and the entire company land on Cyprus. He is able to acknowledge that Othello is a worthy noble man, however, Iago reveals how evil and manipulating he can be, by wanting to utterly destroy Othello’s life and reputation. He is subbed when Othello gives the lieutenant’s position to Cassio. In return he makes ridiculous excuses that Othello slept with his wife Emilia, as another reason for revenge. It is all because of Iago’s cunning and evil power that he ruins these lives for his own sadistic pleasure. The noble moor is led to become the enraged murder when manipulative Iago tells Othello that Desdemona has given his mother’s handkerchief to Cassio. Act 3 Scene 3 is the beginning of Othello’s â€Å"handkerchief plot†, a seemingly insignificant event that becomes the means in which Othello, Desdemona, Cassio, Roderigo, Emilia and even Iago himself are completely undone. The handkerchief symbolizes love and with the manipulation of Iago, great depths of anger and untrustworthiness. Othello tells Desdemona that an Egyptian witch gave it to his mother, and it serves as a love charm. â€Å"Make it a darling like your precious eye. To lose’t or to give’t away were such a prediction as nothing else could match† Othello tells Desdemona. Othello’s simile here is an alarming one as it is evident that if Desdemona was to be unfaithful, the superstitious purposes can be equated in value for a precious bodily organ. Shakespeare cleverly allows this item to move amongst characters in the novel before Othello demands evidence of his wife’s disloyalty to him. Iago has already planned out his scheme before confronting Othello. Tell me but this, have you not sometimes seen a handkerchief, spotted with strawberries in your wifes hand? Iago uses this rhetorical question as a persuasive technique to make his point more believable. He explains to Othello that earlier that day he seen Cassio wipe his mouth with the handkerchief. We know that Cassio has not seen the item, and it is in Iago’s pocket whilst he asks this question. Othello is so blinded by jealousy that he accepts Iago’s lie as the strongest possible evidence. Although he forgets Desdemona tried to bind his head with it at dinner. Through this imagery and plot device we see that the importance of the handkerchief assists the noble moor in becoming the enraged murderer in scene 5. Scene 5 sees the story unfold and the main characters undone. Othello enters the room as he hovers over Desdemona whilst he tries to prepare himself to kill her. â€Å"It is the cause; it is the cause, my soul, let me not name it to you, you chaste stars! It is the cause†. This use of repetition implies Othello’s constant thought process and how he knows in his mind she has done wrong. He feels as though he must put an end to her betrayal and disloyalty, if not for himself, but for future men she may do it to. His past military training makes the killing of his wife second nature, a routine manoeuvre that’s sees the horrible deed carried out far easier than the circumstances should have allowed. â€Å"Out, strumpet! Weep’st thou for him to my face?† Desdemona is questioned by Othello, asking if she is calling for Cassio right to his face. â€Å"Down, strumpet!†. Othello proceeds to call Desdemona a whore on numerous occasions. This dramatic visualization enforces the idea that Othello has been greatly manipulated. Iago’s words have pushed him to the extent that he can no longer see Desdemona the way he once used too. His second nature of killing and military training is evident when he does not give Desdemona that chance to say a last prayer. He tells her, â€Å"It is too late†, as he smoothers her with the pillow they once both lay on together. This cruel and unfair treatment comes from what he knows best. If in danger, you must protect yourself. Although he was not in physical harm, his heart was in a much deeper pain. He used his unique skills as his defence mechanism to kill. Othello has been considered one of the most painful of Shakespeares tragedies. It explores the collapse of a proud, honourable man, the killing of a beautiful, dedicated woman, and the unreasoning hate of a â€Å"motiveless† villain. The text has evoked terror and pity in audiences throughout the centuries. Othello however holds a power that is perhaps more abrupt and strongly felt for operating on the personal, human plane.

General Kornilovs Attempt to Seize Power in 1917

General Kornilovs Attempt to Seize Power in 1917 Why had General Kornilovs attempt to seize power in 1917 not been successful? The Prelude to Bolshevism: The Kornilov Rebellion[1] is the title of one of the books written by Alexander Fyodorovich Kerensky. From the title alone it shows Kornilovs view which are shared by many others that the Kornilov affair has accelerated the Bolshevik seizure of power[2]. The Kornilov affair officially started on 27th August / 09th September 1917, when the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Army, General Lavr Georgiyevich Kornilov, brought a troops to Petrograd although he had been dismissed by Alexander Kerensky, the head of the Provisional Government at the time[3]. The Kornilov Affair is regarded by many historians as one of the turning points in the rise of Bolshevik Party after a short slump after July Days and consequently towards the event in October 1917. After the Kornilov affair, the Bolshevik Party aligned with various members of society and gaining their supports in assisting to toppling the already crippled Provisional Government. Despite its importance, the affair (which also referred as a coup detat or a revolt) is historically unclear different interpretations but with no concrete evidences. The accounts contradicted with each other and this led to historical debates which were dominantly discussed the different arguments brought up by Abraham Ascher and Lenoid Strakhovsky. Ascher is highly critical on Kornilov, stating that he conspired to take the power as part of his ambitious plan; whereas Strakhovsky challenged this by arguing that Kerensky had staged this whole affair and betrayed Kornilovs goodwill to prevent Bolshevism from taking root.[4] Both have used Kornilovs dismissal by Kerensky as a justification for their action the former argues that by refusing to accept the dismissal it was a proof to Kerenskys suspicion[5]. The latter, on the other hand, sympathises Kornilovs assumption that Kerensky had been influenced by the Soviet and it was his duty to protect Russia.[6] Aside from these two, a so mewhat completely different from the previous two, where they are not the main actor: it stemmed out from a misunderstanding with the former Procurator of the Holy Synod, V.N. Lvovs involvement[7], Kornilov claimed that Kerensky through Lvov offered choices of who should be in power[8], whereas Lvov claimed that Kornilov ordered him to tell Kerensky his demand for military dictatorship[9]. Lvovs real involvement is still debated. The more balanced interpretation by Harvey Asher, suggests that Kornilov was convinced that the government supported his march after several people had visited him including Lvov. Moreover, Asher suggests that they conspired together to restore peoples trust towards the government, although Kerensky later pulled out.[10] These debates show partly the existing tension and division between the two actors which led to the failure of the coup. These tensions were an open opportunity for the Bolshevik Party could exploit especially when Kerensky appealed to the Petrograd Soviet to defend the capital. This led to the physical reason for this failure: the quick mass mobilisation by the Bolshevik Party. It could be regarded as a mistake made by Kerensky as the rearmament of the Bolshevik Military Organisation would led to his and the Provisional Government downfall later in October. His fear of being overthrown by Kornilov a person who he had been having quarrel with[11] and a right-wing[12] and his will to elevate Provisional Governments reputation[13] might have clouded his judgement. The lack of trust and doubt amongst each other Kerenskys failure to read the mood of the situation he was in and overestimating his and general disorganisation were also the reasons for the coups failure. Despite being favo ured as the victor[14], Kornilov lost and subsequently met his death when he participated in the Civil War against the Bolsheviks. The Kornilov Affair was triggered when Lvov came to Kerensky and demanded for the transfer of power to Kornilov. The whole narration is long, which partly has been mentioned previously, however, it shows the general mechanism in the government and their personalities. Miscommunication, distribution of power, lack of confidence and distrust with each other and different groups supporting different people for their own ambitions are all highlighted. First, the miscommunication. Just after hearing from Lvov that he was suited to be a military dictator, Kerensky quickly announced Kornilov for a military coup against the government for fear that he might be removed from the power[15]. Kornilov claimed to be acting on Kerenskys instruction; Kerensky painted Kornilov as a counter-revolutionary who wanted to a dictator. Although, there is some evidence stating that Kerensky regretted his dismissals and hesitate to brand Kornilov as a traitor. In fact, there was an attempt to try to negotiate with Kornilov, albeit he was under pressure. However, unknown to them, Nekrasov had dispatched the message and it was too late for them when they realised about this.[16] These misunderstandings and lack of cohesion certainly shows existing fractures in the Provisional Government which led to the downfall of both sides. Nekrasovs action, albeit there was an attempt to delay the declaration, removed any chance for reconciliation. Lack of further co mmunication, whether it was for confirmation or negotiation, were noticeable. For example, instead of asking Kornilov after Alekseev sent him the note, Krymov went directly to Kerensky and stopped the troop from advancing. There was also the telecommunication between Kerensky and Kornilov over Hughes Apparatus where the conversation appears to be vague and no direct confrontation.[17] Some historians believed that Kerensky was trying to remove Kornilov quietly.[18] Instead of working together and worked their differences, they were more focus on removing each other. This might have been due to their prior clash in regards to capital and corporal punishment in the army to name a few[19]. In regards to Lvov, it seems unlikely that Kerensky explicitly instructed Kornilov to march troops into Petrograd and given him the choices: where one of them was that Kornilov would be a dictator[20]. Although it seems to be benefited Kerensky, he was probably no more trusting of Kornilov than others. Bringing in Kornilovs army into Petrograd would risk of military counter-revolution. It is still unclear how Lvovs and Kornilovs claims differed from each other. As mentioned earlier, nearing the peak of the affair in the end of August, people were positive that Kornilovs troop would win: his generals, landowners[21], large officers union, the Cossacks and the increase in Stock Exchange.[22] Considering that majority of the High Command sympathised with Kornilov[23] and his previous meetings with different people giving supports, it is not surprising when Kornilov was confident that his march would be a successful coup. However, not all of these groups were supportive of his plan. Earlier on, there was already opposition against Kornilov. Moscow Military District, Colonel Verkhovsky, expressed his support towards the government and distanced himself from Kornilov. There was also wariness amongst people in Stavka where they saw little chance in his march into Petrograd.[24] Only some of the professional soldiers believed in this advance, but many were not dedicated in trying to assist Kornilov. Moreover, with the denunciation calling Kornilov as a traitor made by Kerensky had further convince them to distance themselves from the affair avoiding from being purged together with Kornilov if the affair had gone to different turn.[25] Kornilovs deliberate military plan collapsed. Between the 30th and 31st, the Third Cavalry Corps which was supposed to crush the soviets[26] did not arrive. Kerensky ordered General Alekseev to send a note to General Krymov that there was no Bolshevik uprising as predicted by Kornilov and consequently, he halted their advance into the capital. The generals of the troops General Krymov and Denikin were also cornered by their own troops and reluctantly had to surrender with the former shot himself[27]. Similarly, the troops also deserted after hearing that there was no uprising. The generals and Kornilov kept the soldiers in the dark in what they were actually fighting for only be told that they were there to fight against the Bolsheviks[28] which led to further decline in supports. The foundation of the coup was still not concrete and arguably the timing was a miss. Kornilov had failed to see the mood and the political situation at the time. The troops saw Kornilov as someone who reintroduced capital punishment death penalty and attempted to counter the revolution. Thus, after hearing that there were no Bolshevik uprisings and Kerenskys declaration of Kornilov as a traitor, mutinies soon broke out with some divisions pledged themselves to the cause of revolution the Bolsheviks. They helped other workers and prevented the remaining troops from marching and arrested anyone who was in favour of Kornilov.[29] These miscalculations and disorganised troops are highly dissimilar from the mass mobilisation by the Bolsheviks and the workers. Although, mass mobilisation against Kornilov by the Bolsheviks had been debated whether it was spontaneous or a completely organised deployment, this mobilisation had completely stumped Kornilovs effort. Kerensky appealed to Petrograd Soviet to stop Kornilov and defend the city (at the same time shows a weakness of the Provisional Government) led to the rearmament of Military Organisation which were both consisted of Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. Mass meetings were also conducted to discuss their plan against Kornilov in addition to a demand for the release of July Days Bolshevik prisoners. The demand was conceded and prisoners including Trotsky was free. These would be important later a couple month after. A committee was set up to defend the city, Committee for the Peoples Struggle against Counter Revolution[30]. This includes erecting fortifications around the city and barbed wires[31]. The Soviet was also involved in coordinating the distribution of weaponry and conducted searches a nd arrested anyone who was suspected to be counter-revolutionaries. Committees at province level were also created. This was to set up networks of communication between provinces[32]. Red Guards were created of mainly of left SR sympathisers and Bolsheviks and armed with many were trained by the [33]Military Organisations from a possible assault. These two organisations were overseen by Inter-District Conference of Petrograd Local Soviets. As shown, in comparison to the lacklustre that of Kornilovs military troops, the Soviets gradually created a working strings of groups. Moreover, agitators managed to infiltrate Kornilovs troops and persuaded them to desert the advance, coupled with Kerenskys declaration. They also cooperated with the telegraph and railway workers[34] which further disorganised Kornilovs effort. On the communication side, any suspicious telegraphs were supposed to be redirected whereas on the transportation side, they were instructed to make chaos. They destroyed railway tracks and sabotage communications. As results, the troops were moving on the wrong roads, arrived at wrong places, only some of the units got dispatched and many of the soldiers were separated from their commanders, and loss of communications with their units in short, confusion and disorder.[35] With these confusion, the movement had collapsed. The Red Guards managed to disable the coup without firing a single bullet and bloodshed; except for few murder of counter-revolutionaries[36]. Thus, shedding positive light onto the Bolshevik Party as the saviours and the p rotectors of the revolution. Consequently, this resulted in a large increase of support. Kornilov and other thirty army officers which were believed to conspire together, were incarcerated in the Bykhov Fortress. After the October event, Kornilov managed to escape and establish the Volunteer Army which later fought against the Bolsheviks during the Civil War; where he was killed. Although Kerensky did not contribute and directly involved, Kerensky still insisted of being a protector of Revolution.[37] Kornilov did not gain anything from this whole affair, more people supported the Left, he was removed and the Right was shaken.[38] The main problem with his advance was the miscommunication between everyone involved that was later could be exploited by their common enemy. The victor of this whole but short affair was the Bolsheviks. The party revived and strengthened amidst the political chaos and distrust. On the other hand, Kerensky lost the military support. Although there are officer corps refused to join Kornilovs mutiny, they abhorred Kerenskys attitude towards their generals and growing distrust towards officer corps amongst the common soldiers. Thus increasing division between these two groups.[39] The revolt had radicalised the masses. The Soviet Press began with their propaganda and due to their policy of being a fighter against Kornilov but no association with the Provisional Government, they became popular. Therefore, coupled with the increasing support and gaining control over the Petrograd Soviet, the Provisional Government was further weakened and in October/November 1917, the Bolshevik Party seized the power off from the Provisional Government as the champion for the Soviets. Bibliography: Ascher, Abraham, The Kornilov Affair, The Russian Review, Vol. 12:4, (1953) Asher, Harvey, The Kornilov Affair: A Reinterpretation, The Russian Review, Vol. 29:3, (1970) Kerensky, Alexander, The Prelude to the Bolshevism: The Kornilov Rebellion, (London, 1919) Munck, Jorgen Larsen, Translated by Torben Keller, Schmidt, The Kornilov Revolt (Denmark, 1987) Strakhovsky, Leonoid, Was There a Kornilov Rebellion A Reapraisal of the Evidence, Slavonic and East European Review, vol. XXXIII:81 (1955) Sukhanov, Nikolai, Translated by Joel Carmichael, The Russian Revolution 1917, (London, 1955) White, James D, The Russian Revolution 1917-1920: A Short History, (New York, 1994) August 1917: Kornilovs Coup Fails http://www.socialistalternative.org/russian-revolution-1917/august-1917-kornilovs-coup-fails/ Socialist Alternatives http://www.socialistalternative.org/, Accessed on 01 December 2016 The Causes of the October Revolution http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/history/russia/october/revision/3/ BBC Higher Bitesize UK http://www.bbc.co.uk/ Accessed on 23 November 2016 [1] Alexander Kerensky, The Prelude to the Bolshevism: The Kornilov Rebellion, (London, 1919) [2] Abraham, Ascher, The Kornilov Affair, The Russian Review, Vol. 12:4, (1953) p. 235; Nikolai, Sukhanov, Translated by Joel Carmichael, Russian Revolution, (London, 1955) pp. 522-523; Harvey Asher, The Kornilov Affair: A Reinterpretation, The Russian Review, Vol. 29:3, (1970), p. 300 [3] Ibid, p. 235 [4] Ascher, The Kornilov Affair pp. 235-52; Leonoid, Strakhovsky, Was There a Kornilov Rebellion A Reapraisal of the Evidence, Slavonic and East European Review, vol. XXXIII:81 (1955), pp. 372-95, p. 372; Also mentioned in Jorgen Larsen, Munck, Translated by Torben Keller, Schmidt, The Kornilov Revolt (Denmark, 1987) pp. 11-13 [5] Ascher, The Kornilov Affair, pp. 247-28 [6] Asher, p. 287 [7] Munck, The Kornilov Affair, pp. 106-109 [8] Lukomskii, pp. 238-39; Munck, p. 107 [9] RD, pp. 428, 442; Munck, p. 108 [10] Asher, pp. 299-300 [11] James D, White, The Russian Revolution 1917-1920: A Short History, (New York, 1994), pp. 139-141 [12] Asher, p. 300 [13] Asher, p. 300 [14] Munck, p. 114 [15] Asher, p. 297 [16] Asher, The Kornilov Affair, p. 298 [17] Ibid, p. 296 [18] Asher, p. 297; Rabinowitch, pp. 124-5; Katkov, pp. 86-87 mentioned in Munck, p. 111 [19] White, p. 134 [20] Munck, p. 107 [21] The Kornilov Affair, p. 244-245 [22] Munck, p. 114 [23] Munck, p. 114; Kerensky, pp. 184-5 [24] White, The Russian Revolution, p. 147; Asher, p. 300 [25] White, The Russian Revolution, p. 147 [26] Ascher, The Kornilov Affair, p. 241 [27] The Kornilov Affair, p. 250 [28] Ibid, p. 250 [29] White, The Russian Revolution, p. 148; A. Wildman, Officers of the general staff and the Kornilov movement, in E.R. Frankel et. Al., eds., Revolution in Russia: Reassessments of 1917 (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 95-99 [30] White, The Russian Revolution, p. 149 [31]August 1917: Kornilovs Coup Fails http://www.socialistalternative.org/russian-revolution-1917/august-1917-kornilovs-coup-fails/ Socialist Alternatives http://www.socialistalternative.org/, Accessed on 01 December 2016 [32] White, The Russian Revolution, p. 149 [33] Munck, p. 117 [34] Ibid, p. 148; The Causes of the October Revolution http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/history/russia/october/revision/3/ BBC Higher Bitesize UK http://www.bbc.co.uk/ Accessed on 23 November 2016; Munck, p. 118 [35] White, The Russian Revolution, p. 147 [36] Munck, p. 115 [37] Munck, p. 119 [38] Munck, p. 121 [39] White, The Russian Revolution, p. 150; Munck, p. 121

Sunset Blvd. Essay -- essays research papers

The Thematic Intentions of Sunset Boulevard   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The film Sunset Boulevard directed by Billy Wilder and staring the main characters of Norma Desmond, Joe Gillis, and Max Von Mayerling is ideal example of how important film making techniques help depict a movie’s core theme intentions with vivid clarity. Classic Hollywood is the first thing that comes to mind when one speaks about this film’s style. This signature category combined with the visual style of realism and it’s continuity editing; detailed mise-en-scene and all of its characteristics; and lastly the use of reoccurring motifs with formalistic qualities make the audience grasp the central theme of just how vicious the actual motion industry can be to the individuals that keep its alive. I hope to convey all of this through a detailed explanation involving and about specific scenes included in the film and a direct tie-in of how the precise attributes above play such an important role in expressing that theme. The first scene that will be analyzed is that of opening credits and just how exactly this begins to set the stage for the main theme. In the very first frame, which also becomes the establishing shot, we come to a high angle shot that is zoomed in close on the words â€Å"Sunset Blvd† painted on a street curb as the image is also flooded with dramatic nondiegetic music. This becomes very important because the curb is also the gutter. Here, not even ten seconds into the movie, do we get our first glimpse of what the film is about; the mise-en-scene here involving a symbolic visual correlation to the central theme an this gutter frame is depicted through this entire establishing shot. Along with this we get more connection through the voice over actually describing, in an almost a sarcastic manner which should not be the case at all, about a murder on this high class, high status block. It’s almost as if this is a clear depiction of the true chaos tied in with how this H ollywood life can and will be to the people involved with it. As the film zooms out to a long shot of Sunset, we see the police brigade come and wiz by through a very quick pan shot. The next thing is a cross cut to the actual mansion where more commotion is viewed at an obvious murder scene. Bottom line is that the mise-en-scene involved here does an excellent job setting up the movie’s thematic intentions.... ... truly thinks is going to be another film. The whole scene in its’ entirety depicts that once again the â€Å"dream† can be destroyed just as her life has done the same. The final integration of this motif comes in the very last frame as the movie fades out; only this is not a normal fade out. Instead Wilder chooses to blur the fade into an eerie white, which gives us a sense that the dream is now finally over. In conclusion I hoped to have demonstrated just how the all the specific film making techniques used throughout the film help to define the central theme as it is intertwined with the action. As I have conveyed, realism is just one of the very important aspects that help the production of this film come to the close of its’ solid final cut. I think that this being the ultimate visual style of the picture it is what made this movie so great. It got the point across and it definitely had an influence on the way films were shot after it. In a way, it becomes sort of ironic. A film created in Hollywood that molds a horrid model of how messed up its own surroundings can be, actually end up shaping the industry it finds itself in. That in my opinion is, in itself, supreme filmmaking.

Corporate Social Responsibilities of Maruti Suzuki in Terms of Employment

MUMBAI: Maruti Suzuki India, the country's largest carmaker, is extending some of its corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to associates on the shop-floor in a bid to make it more inclusive and increase their identification with the company. So far, these programmes were only for managers and engineers. As part of the initiative called e-parivartan, the company helps employees contribute to various social causes. The initiative is run in partnership with local voluntary organisations. Ads by Google LIC Life Insurance PlansInvest Rs. 543/Month & Get Rs. Cr. Life Cover+Medical Benefit. Buy Now LIC. TermInsuranceIndia. co. in Reliance Job Openings2500+ New Jobs For Exp: 5-15 Years. Upload Resume. Apply to Reliance Now TimesJobs. com/Reliance-Openings The company's CSR department facilitates volunteering activity as a link between employees and the community. â€Å"Encouraged by their enthusiasm for social work, we would like to take the employee volunteering programme to th e shop floor,† says SY Siddiqui, chief operating officer in charge of administration (HR, finance, IT and COSL) at Maruti Suzuki India. Some of the focus areas for next year include counselling Class 10 and 12 students at local government schools for higher studies and vocational courses, and support to the environment. â€Å"This community interaction gives extreme satisfaction to the employees. With such associations, their involvement and liking for the company also goes up,† says Siddiqui. The e-parivartan programme was started about four years ago when a group of young employees, in a communication meeting, expressed their desire to meaningfully associate with a social cause. Starting with 40 employees in 2008-09, the programme now involves about 2,200 staffers. From this year, the company has made volunteering an integral part of new employees' induction programme. For instance, new employees like graduate engineer trainees (GET) undergo a full day of community service. This year, a group of GETs participated in an anti-malaria and dengue campaign in Gurgaon that was organised by Maruti in partnership with the government health department. Such exposure helps us shape them as rounded professionals so they are able to contribute not just to the company but also to society,† says a company spokesperson. Underlining the fact that a renewed focus on employee involvement and engagement is very critical for the company, Siddiqui says: â€Å"HR should be able to support all, blue-collared or white-collared. Maruti is refocusing on building bridges between the whiteand blue-collared. † E-parivartan has so far shown tremendous results with white- col lared employees,

Why Did the League of Nations Fail to Stop Italy Invading Abyssinia

The League of Nations failed to stop Italy invading Abyssinia because of many reasons. These reasons include Italy being a threat to the rest of the world, having an alliance with Italy, Abyssinia meant nothing to the League of Nations and the League couldn’t afford to help Abyssinia. Italy was a very powerful country in the 1930’s and the League of Nations failed to stop them invading. Italy was a major threat to the rest of the world because of all its power. There were many countries that were frightened of Italy. Among these countries were France and Britain. Italy’s navy army was overrated and with Britain thinking it was better than it was made them scared. They didn’t want to risk their own Navy, it was too important to them. France saw Italy as a threat because they thought Italy might join forces with Germany, and destroy the rest of the world. Which is why France and Britain’s votes were with Italy invading Abyssinia. Secondly, all the countries in the League of Nations wanted Italy on their side if Hitler planned an attack again. Throughout World War One Italy switched sides of the two alliances numerous times, so if Germany was to invade the League, they wanted to make sure they had Italy on their side. Which is another reason they didn’t stop Italy invading Abyssinia. Thirdly, Abyssinia is a small African country that meant little to the League of Nations. The Abyssinian Emperor – Haile Selassie – went to the League to appeal for help, but it did nothing. The League was too frightened that they thought it was safer to give up Abyssinia so Italy would join their forces. The League became defenceless, weak and no help to Abyssinia. Lastly, once Italy had invaded Abyssinia, the League of Nations didn’t want to send army’s over to defend because of the tragic ending in WWI. The end of the war left many countries helpless, even with the Treaty of Versailles. The League thought that if they sent army’s over to defend the Abyssinia there was a chance that the same horrific outcomes could happen just like in WWI. So they didn’t offer to help Abyssinia, instead they silently agreed that Italy could take over Abyssinia and they would do nothing about it. To conclude, Italy invaded Abyssinia without any problems from the League of Nations. The league was scared of Italy, they were scared of Germany attacking again and they were scared of the outcomes of WWI. The League became vulnerable and feeble being unable to do anything. Which is why the League of Nations failed to stop Italy invading Abyssinia.