Lareau’s “unequal Childhood” Paper AnalysisLareau’s “unequal Childhood” Paper AnalysisBefore critically discussing Lareau’s Unequal childhood’s paper, it is important to briefly mention a few conceptual terms in order to get the gist of what Lareau was trying to convey to her readers.
First, according to Macionis (2004) the term family is defined as a social institution found in all societies that unite people in cooperative groups to oversee the bearing and raising of children. Same author also discusses several theoretical approaches have been identified that identifies the family as a form of social institution and how the family unit interconnect with other social institutions within any given society. According to the Structural-Functional Analysis for example, the family serves as a unit that perform many vital tasks which include socialization, regulation of sexual activity (reproduction), social placement and emotional support. According to the Social-Conflict Analysis, the family unit contributes to the perpetuation in inequality solely based on race, class, gender, gender and ethnicity. Finally, Symbolic-Interaction Analysis focuses on the changing dynamics of any family structure and how it evolves over the life course of an individual.
[Page 2]
http://www.bibdsl.co.uk/w10-images/lhs/MM00274052.jpg]
[Page 3]
http://www.businessinsider.com/20150609-the-biggest-crisis-newly-developed-and-best-case-middle-east-news/?p>
A study by John St. George and colleagues in the early 1990s determined that the “new Arab Spring” caused a sharp break with the traditional Arab identity that had been at the foundation of the European culture, political system, social order, and the state – the basis for the “cultural revolution.”
[Page 4]
http://www.newstipulations.com/2009/05/13/markel-storrs-and-the-crisis-and-the-crisis-to-mise-reign.html#comment-15281554.
Germans have long been fascinated by a simple and elegant explanation of what happened in Libya on 11 May 2008. The narrative of that day is a key element of our understanding of the situation in Libya and Libya, the two countries where Libya broke away from Egypt in 2006. This account is based on long-established research in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Tunisia, and its accompanying information was compiled by experts from around the world, together with an intensive, cross-country review for publication in several European papers as well as published articles by eminent scholars. In brief, these are the facts that have shaped our understanding of the role of the family in society in terms of their role in shaping society and life in Libya. These are also the facts that have established Libya’s role in the recent conflicts between the Free and the Government of Libya under the leadership of the new leader Khalifa Haftar.
[Page 5]
The family is an integral part of any social organisation, social organisation, or political body within the society it exists in. The family was first important as a political and social institution – a political force which developed in the post-imperial epoch in the role that the state, in the absence of its social functions was to protect the private spheres in which the family was created. It continues to be a key member of society until it is forgotten or replaced with the political family.
[Page 6]
This is especially salient in terms of political life within the family because the family is the primary member of the body that is governing the state. The state is the governing body for the entire state, including the military and the police, to ensure the safety and security of society, to provide food, clothing, medical assistance to the needy and to protect the interests of the citizens. In the absence of political power, the security of the state does not protect the rights and interests of all its citizens. It is therefore critical that the families and the political parties within the state be organized into a single body under the leadership of its leaders and which, on a strictly practical, ethical, constitutional and legal basis and without direct interference of the political parties within its society, establish the framework of peace and security in Libya.
However, it is important that the leadership of the political parties form a single body within which those parties can have collective power and to ensure that the party body or body becomes an independent, non-political entity from the outside, namely, state. In that way, it becomes more effective to avoid the dangers posed by the state by providing a national system for all society when taking a policy stance without any interference by the political parties. The Libyan constitution explicitly guarantees the right to self-determination without interference of political parties by law. The new state structure is based upon the basic principle that any independent political party has the right to carry out the democratic assembly which entails the participation of the whole community in decision-making by a government body of law-makers.
However, in order for non-governmental organizations and the political parties within the state to form a functioning government, it must include the right to establish an effective government under the new form. The transitional constitution is based on the principle that members of the new state should not have political power. Under this form of government, a number of actors must be made to undertake an autonomous role for the community in which they operate and which is also in the interests of the people. However, each participating role must recognize and contribute to the collective sovereignty of all its members. It is of importance that parties not taking this role should work with the rest of the community to ensure that the political parties in the form of the new state take their rightful place. As the new state has already made this arrangement as far as their participation is concerned, the political parties should work in agreement to achieve their commitments under the new constitution and also within this framework to make a commitment to their political party members. This commitment is especially important since it will open up a mechanism of coordination for the political parties, a mechanism for the public service in particular in the form of electoral participation.
There are however specific conditions that are being imposed upon the new state. In order for the political parties outside the country, which are involved in the electoral process, to take control over the new state structure and achieve their commitments under the new constitution and the law, that the political parties must undertake to implement specific obligations in conjunction with the existing democratic process and not take their position on political and financial matters outside the country in violation of these conditions.
While the new constitution is a document of strong democratic institutions, it does not provide legal guarantees for the political parties outside the country. These are also not required for the political parties to carry out elections to the parliamentary or legislative bodies of the Libyan state. By not signing up for the new constitution, political parties should also have to work out how to integrate their electoral strategy in the system that they serve under under the new constitution.
This means that political parties need to make a commitment to support independent elections and to make sure the government election process is in accord with the demands that the people of Libya have for their democracy and their political process.
Moreover, political parties with political experience must also work together with other parties to make the electoral process fairer and more transparent. This means that we can bring about a process by which the population of Libya, as well as the citizens of the country, have less control over the government structure and the decision-making process because of national sovereignty. Such a process can even open the doors of the existing political parties to other political movements like national liberation movements but without having to fight them in the streets. Moreover, these movement
The Libyan state is defined as a State of the people organized and controlled by the constitution. Its basic tenets are that all people have the right-to-life and individual rights and freedoms, which were enshrined in an old Declaration of the Rights of Man. It is a state founded upon the belief that all people – including the body politic, the police, the national armed forces and all other civil servants – have the same right-to-life, freedom and dignity, and will enjoy freedom, dignity and security through the protection of their freedom and the exercise of their rights under the constitution, without discrimination according to their national, racial, religious or ethnic identity. In international law and international institutions, the rights and freedoms that are enshrined in the law of the people shall be recognized and respected, no matter which of their national origins. These rights and freedoms are based in the rule of law; the rule of law is based in the will of the people, not by decree, which is based on a political ideology or, as in the case of the Libyan constitution, the will of the people. The rule of law should be based on equal treatment of members of the civil community, the principle of right of the people and the protection of individuals. It is the law of equality between men and women and of equal respect for the rights and dignity of all individuals. The rule of law protects the people and does not prevent the right of the individual to live and work according to his will rather than the national aspirations of different people, and thus allows the right to pursue economic, political and social life. It is a fundamental part of our national identity and should be the basis of any future State.
In the case of Libya, all of the freedoms described are not absolute as to their rights or duties. Each individual has to be treated with respect and dignity, especially when they seek to achieve their goals, including their personal and international aspirations and for the good of Libya. It is these fundamental rights which are relevant for the future, not the political aspirations of people but the fundamental interests of all people. Those who seek to destroy Libya will lose both their sovereignty over this country and their political independence; it is in this regard that I have long believed that the fundamental right of each of our people to live, work and play is the fundamental right of each to achieve their lives and that the rights enshrined in this Declaration and in the international obligations have an obvious and universal value. When these fundamental rights and freedoms are infringed, the resulting violence and instability in Libya and throughout the Middle East in general are a grave human wrong. In essence, the Libya that has been ravaged by the destruction of Libya has become a land of lies – not of weapons but of lies. Libya is not alone. The global humanitarian crisis in the Middle East has been worsened by the destabilising global economic and political environment, from Libya to the Gaza Strip to Lebanon to Iran and Iraq to Yemen. Libya is also the home of a region that’s been divided into two warring states; the Saudi Arabian kingdom and Iran and the Arab world and of countries which don’t recognize the government of President Hassan Rouhani. As President Mubarak failed to deliver, the Middle East is now a very dangerous place, and the West has sought a return to the Arab Spring and the post-revolutionary period in Arab lands. Those who are advocating for war in Libya may hope that Gaddafi and the West will go back and have a better understanding of their future relationship with the international community. A Libya that is a safe place that has remained secure for
The Libyan state is defined as a State of the people organized and controlled by the constitution. Its basic tenets are that all people have the right-to-life and individual rights and freedoms, which were enshrined in an old Declaration of the Rights of Man. It is a state founded upon the belief that all people – including the body politic, the police, the national armed forces and all other civil servants – have the same right-to-life, freedom and dignity, and will enjoy freedom, dignity and security through the protection of their freedom and the exercise of their rights under the constitution, without discrimination according to their national, racial, religious or ethnic identity. In international law and international institutions, the rights and freedoms that are enshrined in the law of the people shall be recognized and respected, no matter which of their national origins. These rights and freedoms are based in the rule of law; the rule of law is based in the will of the people, not by decree, which is based on a political ideology or, as in the case of the Libyan constitution, the will of the people. The rule of law should be based on equal treatment of members of the civil community, the principle of right of the people and the protection of individuals. It is the law of equality between men and women and of equal respect for the rights and dignity of all individuals. The rule of law protects the people and does not prevent the right of the individual to live and work according to his will rather than the national aspirations of different people, and thus allows the right to pursue economic, political and social life. It is a fundamental part of our national identity and should be the basis of any future State.
In the case of Libya, all of the freedoms described are not absolute as to their rights or duties. Each individual has to be treated with respect and dignity, especially when they seek to achieve their goals, including their personal and international aspirations and for the good of Libya. It is these fundamental rights which are relevant for the future, not the political aspirations of people but the fundamental interests of all people. Those who seek to destroy Libya will lose both their sovereignty over this country and their political independence; it is in this regard that I have long believed that the fundamental right of each of our people to live, work and play is the fundamental right of each to achieve their lives and that the rights enshrined in this Declaration and in the international obligations have an obvious and universal value. When these fundamental rights and freedoms are infringed, the resulting violence and instability in Libya and throughout the Middle East in general are a grave human wrong. In essence, the Libya that has been ravaged by the destruction of Libya has become a land of lies – not of weapons but of lies. Libya is not alone. The global humanitarian crisis in the Middle East has been worsened by the destabilising global economic and political environment, from Libya to the Gaza Strip to Lebanon to Iran and Iraq to Yemen. Libya is also the home of a region that’s been divided into two warring states; the Saudi Arabian kingdom and Iran and the Arab world and of countries which don’t recognize the government of President Hassan Rouhani. As President Mubarak failed to deliver, the Middle East is now a very dangerous place, and the West has sought a return to the Arab Spring and the post-revolutionary period in Arab lands. Those who are advocating for war in Libya may hope that Gaddafi and the West will go back and have a better understanding of their future relationship with the international community. A Libya that is a safe place that has remained secure for
[Page 7]
The family is the embodiment of unity, interdependence and development of the state, a body in control of the whole environment and of the entire society to protect the social and economic institutions in which the family was created. This is especially important in terms of its role in the conflict between the Islamist groups inside and outside the government that control every aspect of the social and economic systems in Libya.
[Page 8]
The family is also a form of protection for the people, a basis for social development and a vehicle to protect the lives of the people, a vital constituent
In reading Lareau’s paper, I clearly can see where the sociologist’s Social-Conflict and Structural Functional Analysis plays into the author’s term of Concerted Cultivation. According to Lareau for example, she found that middle class families fostered their children’s talents through organized leisure activities which was supposed to teach children respect for authority figures and how to properly interact within a structured environment. Parents became role models in helping their children to learn various skills such as reasoning, use of proper language, bargaining as well as how to think critically. This form of structured/organized child bearing practices was seen as opportunities thus creating and instilling a sense of entitlement especially within various social institutions such as education for example where children are allowed to ask adults questions and saw adults as their equals. This style of child bearing allowed parents to be fully engaged in their children’s lives thus providing their children confidence and the ability to advance in certain social institutions such as employment, education and within their own communities.
On the other hand, Lareau’s concept of Natural Growth is far different and somewhat similar to the sociologist’s theoretical concept of Symbolic Interaction Analysis. The concept of Natural Growth implies that the parent cares for their child but as a means to support a child’s natural growth. Evidence of this could be seen whereas children would spend most of their non-school time in unstructured play with age mates. This form of child-bearing practices was found in working class families or those of lower socio-economic status. Children raised in this type of environment are left in activities that are usually unstructured (i.e. hang out) and thus did not provide equal opportunities to develop skills such as those children raised using the concerted cultivation style of child bearing. Due to socio-economic status, parents often times did not have the time to spend with their children due to disparities in employment hours for example or forcing families to work more than one job in order to “make ends meat” thus taking qualitative time away from their children which is supposed to foster nurturance and a sense of entitlement.
The strengths and weakness between these two styles of child bearing practices vary. For example, the uses of language provided by parents unto their child were different between those using Concerted Cultivation vs. Natural Growth. For example, a parent using the Natural Growth practice may say unto their child “I told you not to touch the remote control” and the child might respond by saying “why not” and the parent’s reply would simply be because “I said so.” The weakness here is that a child will never learn to assert self and feel free to critically reason with their peers or adults. In other words, what I have heard so many times as a child, “do as I say and not as I do.” For parents using the Concerted Cultivation practice using the same example just discussed, the child would be encouraged to pursue the reasoning or meaning behind their parent’s statement thus creating an open dialogue of understanding, bargaining or even compromising. With this form of child bearing, children raised using this technique have an advantage in becoming assertive in achieving what they want versus children of the natural growth practices would learn to become less assertive, and thus display a sense learned helplessness.
Another weakness that can be identified with the Natural Growth practice is that when it comes to institutions