Any form of punishment that is effective in maintaining law and order is justified. Do you agree?

I feel that it is not justifiable that any effective punishment in maintaining law and order should be allowed. In my opinion, many less developed or rural areas which are left out from the rapid globalization are more prone to have occurrences of unorthodox justice practices.

Take for example in Togo, West Africa, a village there believes that using a hot pot of boiling oil is effective in determining the criminal. Majority of villagers there are farmers, they depend on yam for their livelihood. There was once when one of the farmers discovered that some of his harvest went missing and suspected another fellow villager to be guilty of the crime. The practice of using the boiling oil was carried out and ultimately solved the case. In another part of the world, in Albania, where there is an ineffective justice system, people take the law into their own hands which resulted in blood feud for generations.

In the eyes of people in these places, the form of punishment administered is justifiable as it is effective. However, there are other considerations such as whether the punishment is ethical and appropriate for that particular crime committed. I view the use of a hot pot of boiling oil as merely a test of pain endurance, so the suspect may have been forced to confess because he could not endure the pain of placing has hands in the boiling pot of oil. The blood feud in Albania has deprived numerous children of education and a bright future due to the fear of being murdered by their enemies.

Therefore, it is crucial that the relevant authority should intervene to attempt to change the mindsets of these people; although it would take a long time for these people to correct their beliefs. It would also mean to work with governments in these countries to provide basic education for the young. Education would empower people with knowledge, a correct set of beliefs and has the ability to put an end to these unorthodox practices.

What are the effects of an ageing population?

It is estimated that by the year 2050, as many as two-thirds of the world’s population of people over 60 would age in poverty. This is a result of an ageing population where there is comparatively smaller population of young and able people in the workforce.

The economy in the region would be adversely affected. Fewer young and able people would cause the shrinking of the workforce available. An example would be Japan, where birth rates are low due to their hectic lifestyles and high standards of living. In addition, ‘ethnic homogeneity” is a very sensitive issue; Japanese are usually not in favour of large-scale immigration. However, a recent UN Report recently forecast that Japan would need 17 million new immigrants to sustain the economy by 2050.

Another effect of ageing population would be that the younger generation would have to care for a greater number of elderly and have to pay higher taxes. This is due to the fact that the government of the country would have to increase the amount of tax per working adult in the future so as to raise the same amount of revenue collected. Some European countries practicing welfare systems would also have to make certain adjustments to their systems. It is inevitable that as people age, many health complications would arise. With an ageing population, it would mean that the government would require more money to subsidies a larger number of elderly. This would contribute to the fact that the younger generation would have a greater financial burden in the future.

It is thus crucial to take the necessary measures to solve the problem. Firstly, on the national level, countries could take a two-pronged approach, by providing cash incentives to the people to encourage them to have children and also to care for the elderly such as the provision of healthcare for the elderly. Secondly, the upper working classes have to take initiative to have children, and then many others would follow their footsteps and would be an effective way to increase birth rates. For example, if the boss of the multinational company takes the lead by having children and have incentives for employees willing to have children, many would be more willing to do so. However, the company would also have to consider that there have be sufficient people to run the company, so that productivity would not be compromised.

What are the effects of Americanisation?

There is a difference between Americanisation and Globalisation; I feel that the American culture is part of the many other cultures that make up globalisation.

In a busy weekend mall, packed fast food joints, young people in a baggy combat pants and slang and people talking on Motorola cell phones about the latest Hollywood films is a standard American scene, however, such a scene is evident in many other cities round the globe. This shows the impact of Americanisation, influential, popular and persuasive.
It shows that people view America in the form of a role model and a leader in influencing other countries and have their culture blended in.

However, it can be argued that the American culture domination poses a threat to culture diversity. Ranging from Hollywood, popular music, fast food to Disney cartoons, the world in which we live in would be imbued with less local colour. Unique festivals and rites celebrated by people of different culture round the world which filled the world with vibrancy are on the verge of extinction.

In addition, americanisation can also have other downsides. The popularity of American culture can possibly lead to the consolidation of the communications industry to a few major American firms. This means that information generated for global consumption would nearly always be one from an American perspective.

I feel that americanisation have brought about the increase in the number of abortion rates, illegitimate children and the surge in the number of single parents in Asian societies. Traditionally, Asian societies were very conservative and the abovementioned problems were uncommon and condemned. This shows that the American culture has indirectly affected the mentality of Asians; although people generally disapprove of single parenting and abortion, the statistics prove otherwise.
Therefore, it is important that countries all around the world have to make a conscious effort to preserve and promote their culture. This would ensure that cultural roots would remain to bond people belonging to different cultures and ethnic groups. It would also serve to ensure that our world would continue to be colourful and vibrant.

Is the use of euthanasia justified?

The use of euthanasia is a controversial issue due to conflicting moral feelings both for the individual and between different cultures, ethnicities and religions, therefore in some countries, it is justified whereas it is criminalized in others.

I personally feel that the use of euthanasia may or may not be justified, depending on one’s values and interpretation of such an action and the situation. It is very much like an ideology in the way that neither side would ever be satisfied. There will always be two conflicting views. One would be that euthanasia is an infringement of human rights, the other would be that euthanasia is liberating the patient from a much worse fate.

It can be argued that such a form of mercy killing is not justified. Anti-euthanasia people treat it as a form of murder and voluntary euthanasia as a form of suicide. It can also be argued that these patients in such conditions can no longer make a decision of whether to accept euthanasia; it is usually the next of kin who would make such a decision. In some religion, the sanctity of life is used as justification, as it is believed that no one has the right to take away one’s own life.

However, it can be justified by the fact that if a patient is suffering in pain and have very slim or no chances at all of surviving, euthanasia can be seen as means to reduce the suffering of the person. Pro-euthanasia people are justifying their cause with the reason of pushing for the greater good, and that instead of allowing patients to continue live a life which is not a life at all. A coma patient is a good example of this argument. How much of a life is a coma patient living, stranded unconscious on a bed?

There will never be an end to this argument. Both sides are constantly reinforcing their own beliefs, but not ruling out each other’s. Whether euthanasia is acceptable relies totally on one’s individual perception of the matter.

Can corruption be totally prevented?

Corruption is a dysfunction in the political system whereby public officials seek illegitimate personal gain. It is possible to minimize but not totally eliminate it in any country. Take for example, in Singapore; known to be corrupt-free, had a case of corruption. The NKF issue is an example of corruption; however it is the way the government deals with the issue that distinguishes us from our Asian counterparts.
The backbone of the country is the government; corruption must not invade and spread within the government. If that occurs, then the whole government would not be able to function efficiently. As a result, the people would suffer. Corruption can be prevented through the following ways.

Corruption usually arises from greed of a high-ranking official or even the leader of the country. In such a case, the subordinates of these officials would also follow suit. This is due to the fact corruption in a government could be seen as a domino effect when a trigger would lead to the fall of many others. For example, if a key government official or even the President were to pocket state funds, many others would follow suit, this would even lead to immigration officers extorting money from returning countrymen.

A solution would be to set the minimum pay for ministers to be a reasonable sum to recognise the work and effort they put in to lead the country, in such a way, they are less likely to turn to corruption to obtain money they feel they deserve. It also crucial to attract talented people to be trained as future leaders of the country, as they would have the capability to lead the country to greater heights. However, many would consider the pay as to whether it sufficient to lead a comfortable life with the pay they draw. One such reason is that holding a key position in a multi-national corporation could provide the same person more earnings as compared to the job as a minister.

Is the use of torture ever justified in dealing with criminals and terrorists?

I personally feel that torture cannot be justified under any circumstances in dealing with criminals and terrorists. Criminals and terrorists are also humans, even if one may argue that the crimes they have committed are inhumane. Punishment definitely has to be mete out but it should not be torture.

Firstly, there is no guarantee that criminals would be forced to provide vital information through the use of torture. It is mentioned in the article that what if they pull out one of the terrorist's fingernails and he doesn't say anything, do they find and torture his child instead? This shows that neither is it effective in dealing with criminals nor is it justifiable. If authorities were to employ such a method, they are no different from the terrorists.

Secondly, torture is morally prohibited and it's also against national laws. Therefore, it shows that it is a common understanding by all countries round the globe that torture, in any case, is not justifiable. In such a case, no countries should have any excuse on the use of torture.

Thirdly, it has been reported that there is no concrete evidence in proving that torturing one of the captured terrorists could be linked to the capture of subsequent ones. Although difficult, the authority has to restrain from using violence, in this case, torture against criminals and terrorists.

The best way to deal with criminals and terrorists would be to form an alliance by countries around the world. This is due to the fact that terrorist operations are now extensive and a country alone would experience great difficulty in dealing with such a problem. In such a way, countries with information of the whereabouts of the terrorists would relay the information to the relevant authorities for further action. It is also important to correct the mindsets of these criminals and terrorists to feel guilty of their crimes so that they would be less likely to pose a threat to peace and security.

New Media – Power to the people or threat to stability?

In this day and age, information and news can spread very rapidly due to the advancement of technology. New media can both act to serve as a threat to stability and power to the people. Terrorism is a main concern in the world and terrorists are taking advantage of the new media to spread their ideas across the globe. Take for example, the al-Qaeda extremist movements, many of these militants have poisoned Muslim’s public view of the West, creating conflicts between the Western and Islamic world. Therefore, in order to curb such actions by the terrorists, countries around the world should co-operate to change such perception and hostility, since we all live in this world. Due to advancements in technology over the years, in this present world, the most basic form of media, the television is accessible to many poor countries, thus we should not underestimate the influence of media. The first step to countering the terrorists is to correct the wrong perception that the Islamic world has on the West. This requires the work of Islamic governments and western countries to portray good relationships between the West and the Islamic world.. For example, when the media focused on America’s commitment to aid them in the case of a natural disaster, they had changed views and attitudes of America. This evidently shows the power of media.

The media provides power to the people in such a way that it provides governments with views of how the public thinks of them and the areas for improvement that would be beneficial for the country. With blogging gaining popularity, people could write comments about what they feel about the policies of the government and any possible areas of improvement in their current living conditions. This is especially useful in large countries like Indonesia and China, where it is difficult to reach out to its entire population, blogs and related media sources would prove to be vital sources where the government can obtain feedback from the people. This is a healthy way of interaction between the people and the government.

I personally feel that in countries where there is internet censorship, it would not benefit the people. This is due to the fact that the people are unaware of the impression and ideas others have and this could lead to some misunderstandings. However, in order to gain the trust and confidence of these governments to do away with censorship, it requires the each and every individual to be responsible when making comments or suggestions.