"A form of government in which no one owns any land and everyone works towards the greater good." 

Communism is a political and economic system which is characterized by the collective ownership of property (by the proletariat) and, furthermore, by the organization of labor for the common purpose of all members. Communism is similar to socialism, but contrasted with capitalism.

Although people popularly associate communism with the writings of Karl Marx, in fact the basic ideas behind it can be traced back much further. Among the earliest known writings on the subject is the Ancient Greek concept of a "Golden Age," a time of bliss and harmony without private property. Plato's ideal society was also one in which all property was held in common. It seems likely that the very earliest human tribes held much, if not all, property communally. sadly this failed do to the fact that people are greedy and goes against human nature.   

"A form of government in which everyone is independent and works to support there own life style"

Laissez faire capitalism means the complete separation of economy and state, just like the separation of church and state. Capitalism is the social system based upon private ownership of the means of production which entails a completely uncontrolled and unregulated economy where all land is privately owned. But the separation of the state and the economy is not a primary, it is only an aspect of the premise that capitalism is based upon: individual rights. Capitalism is the only politico-economic system based on the doctrine of individual rights. This means that capitalism recognizes that each and every person is the owner of his own life, and has the right to live his life in any manner he chooses as long as he does not violate the rights of others.

In a capitalist, democratic nation such as the U.S., freedom gives us just about everything and anything that the Vietnamese do not have under their communist government. Contrary to what Karl Marx has written in his manifesto, the living people of a capitalist nation (i.e. USA) of today are more independent and possess more individualities than ever. Economic-wise, Americans are the most progressive people in the world. The U.S. government is not directing the flow of its economy, but the individual businesses of its people are. These people have all the rights in the world to improve their businesses, as long as they are conducting them under the legal guidelines of the government. Such freedom in a capitalist society gives the Americans much greater advantages over the Vietnamese in improving economic conditions.

In a communist nation, the judicial system can be very flexible at times. Crimes are rarely committed under such watchful eyes as the Communists, and the result of any crime would also be too harsh to bear. Safety is probably the best thing that the Communists can provide, but it can also be reversed anytime. By reversing, I mean that some people can also be convicted for not doing anything wrong. As long as someone (a local government cadre) possesses some sort of power, that person has all the right to convict you of anything that they want---yes, even without proof. On the other hand, the system also provides some safety to its people. Unlike in the U.S., crimes such as murdering, raping, robbing, and many others rarely or not even ever occur in communist Vietnam. People do not get away with them as easily as they do in America. There is no such thing as death row or parole in communist nations. Crimes are paid for immediately after they are convicted. Prisons do not have installed televisions nor nice beds for criminals. These prisoners have to earn the food that they eat by doing a certain amount of work for the time that they are sentenced to stay. Overall, the Communists1/4 judicial system works very well comparing to the one possessed by the Americans

William Shakespeare

William Shakespeare was an English playwright and poet who lived in the late 1500s and early 1600s (around 400 years ago). His plays are now preformed all over the world in hundreds of languages, and he is known as one of the greatest writers of all time.  The reason that his work is so popular is that William Shakespear e wrote about human nature and how they behave.  That is why although his words may be hard to understand his word are as relevant now as they were four centuries ago.

From 1599 onwards William Shakespeare’s plays were usually preformed in the globe, a huge open air circular theater in Southwark in London.  The theater could hold 3000 people, and there were two performances a day. Along with other members of his theater company the Chamberlin’s men William Shakespeare owned a share in the globe and made a lot of money from it.

The Chamberlain’s men originally used a theater called The Theatre in north London. but they fell out with the land lord and in 1599. The theatre was dismantled and its timers were moved and used to build the globe.  In 1613 a spark .from cannon fired at a performance of Henry VIII set fire to a thatched roof and the globe burned down. (No one was badly hurt.) It was re-built with a tiled roof and stood until 1644, when the puritans tore it down in the Civil War.

The main point of the essay you are about to read is how the book animal farm and the movie the mouse that roared both share the common interest in pointing out the flukes in governments, though they both do it in very different ways.  

In the dystopia book (a dystopia is a society that was taken over and controlled corruptly) animal farm some farm animal’s rebel against the owners of the farm. The animals then take over and run it without any humans. After that the pigs slowly take over the farm society.

In the movie the mouse that roared a small Uruapan country goes bankrupt because there main source of money, a local whine they export to America gets copied. They then a desperate attempt to make money go to war with America with the plan that after they lose they can get rich off of   rehabilitation money.

Here are some things that the book and the movie have in common. They are both about corrupt points of power, they both are about war, and they both are about manipulating people.

Here are some reasons why the book and the movie are different. One is a comedy and the other is a dystopia, in one the main people are animals and in the other they are all humans, the story’s are completely different. 

All in all I think that though they do it in a different way they are both trying to point out messed up stuff in the government.(I say all in all when  I cant be bothered to think of a conclusion-el paragraph) And now I will finish this long hand written essay with the simple yet heart stopping smiley face enjoy :D.

Gulliver’s Travels book review

Jonathan Swift penned his most well-known novel, Gulliver’s Travels, in 1726. Most readers are familiar with the first part of the book – Gulliver’s journey to Lilliput where he is taken captive by the diminutive Lilliputians, and later lives among them for several months. But the full novel is actually written in four parts where Gulliver travels to several other locations, meeting other strange and fascinating creatures.

In part two, he finds himself in danger of being crushed by the huge inhabitants of Brobdinghag whose size is roughly twelve times that of Gulliver. Gulliver is rescued from this community by an eagle, who seizes the traveling box in which Gulliver sleeps, and drops it into the ocean where he is picked up by an English vessel.

Part three introduces the reader to the flying island of Laputa where the inhabitants are thrilled by music and mathematics, but have no practical skills.

Finally (in part four), Gulliver makes his way to the country of the Houyhnhnms who are actually horses who rule the country and the deformed creatures (“Yahoos”) who are, in fact,  human beings in their base form. Gulliver is welcomed into a horse’s household, and eventually rejects humans as merely Yahoos with very little reasoning ability which simply adds to the vices Nature has given them. Eventually Gulliver is expelled from the country as he is seen as a danger to civilization.

Gulliver’s Travels is primarily a satire which pokes fun at European government, and the petty differences between religions. The Lilliputians perhaps are the most petty of all – squabbling over the size of their shoe heels, and going to war with their closest neighbors because of a disagreement over how to eat an egg. The book becomes darker as it progresses, with Gulliver moving from an optimistic and rather innocent character, to one whose view of the world becomes more cynical.

Although I found this novel to be an interesting read, I must admit that some of the long, circular sentences left me skimming at times. This book is full of cultural, political and religious references which might be best explored as part of a book club or in a classroom. For the reader simply looking for an entertaining book, Gulliver’s Travels might be a little too deep.

Despite some of my reservations, Gulliver’s Travels is a good classic novel. As with many people, my favorite section was the first. It is hard not to be delighted with Gulliver’s time spent in Lilliput.

In the movie Gulliver fakes being a travel writer and gets sent to the Bermudian triangle to write a report about it. While Gulliver is in the triangle he gets sucked into a giant spinning pillar of water and faints. When Gulliver wakes up he finds himself covers in tiny people called Lilliputian. The book is deferent from the movie is several ways. The movie is set in modern time where as the book is set in a time where people still use boats to travel the world.  the themes of the book and movie are different because in the book it takes things in society and points out all the wierd problems. In the movie the theme is "there are no small people only small jobs". Now would somebody tell me what that means?  

Macbeth

Macbeth is a great warrior who helps win an important battle for his King, Duncan. The King wishes to reward him by making him Thane (kind of like knighting him). Before he finds this out, on his way back to see the King, Macbeth meets three witches who predict he will be Thane. Macbeth is suspicious of them. They then say he will be one day be King. Macbeth doesn't believe them and thinks them evil. On meeting with the King, he learns he is to be Thane - wow, the witches got it right! But if that's true... is he really going to be King? When he meets with his wife, Lady Macbeth, he tells her all that; lmurdering Duncan and his heirs, who are guests at Macbeth's castle. Macbeth murders the King, and Duncan's sons flee in fear of their lives, leaving the way clear for Macbeth to become King.

To cut a long story short, Duncan's son Malcolm, and other allies, mount a rebellion against King Macbeth, who has become a tyrant and has murdered lots of people to cling on to power. The witches again appear and tell Macbeth not to worry as he can only be killed of a man not born by a woman. The battle commences and Macbeth is fighting well, like a man who believes he cannot be killed (everyone is born of a woman, right?) However, when he meets the warrior Macduff, one of Malcolm's allies, Macduff says that he was born by caesarian section - not born normally, but cut from his mother's womb. Macbeth then knows the game is up. Macduff murders Macbeth and Malcolm, Duncan's son, is crowned the new King.