“Doing Race” by Hazel Rose Markus & Paula M.L. Moya

 

 

 

Using the text “Doing Race” by Hazel Rose Markus & Paula M.L. Moya (PDF can be found online)
-describe what it would mean to imagine a world without racism. Using the four levels of analysis described in
Markus & Connor’s “Culture Cycle,” students will summarize what it means for Ideas, Institutions, Interactions,
and Identities to be antiracist.
-For each level of analysis in the culture cycle, based on how students define their vision and definitions, they
should also identify specific short and long term goals that they can pursue in their own antiracist efforts. Note
that students will not be evaluated on what those goals are, and goals can be located more at some levels of
analysis than on others.
-For the points associated with this outcome, students should clearly explain both what they plan to DO to
promote antiracism at the various levels, and persuasively explain why those actions will help bring about the
antiracist vision described in the section on vision and definitions.
*I want to work with young students, so a plan for me is to incorporate more readings with people of color as
main characters and to talk about race.

 

 

 

Sample Solution

Consequently, jus ad bellum comprises several conditions but most importantly: just cause and proportionality. This gives people a guide whether it’s lawful to enter a war or not. However, this is only one part of the theory of the just war. Nevertheless, it can be seen above that jus ad bellum can be debated throughout, showing that there is no definitive theory of a just war, as it is normatively theorised. The second section begins deciphering jus in bello or what actions can we classify as permissible in just wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 323). First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittola’s first proposition. This is widely accepted as ‘all people have a right not to be killed’ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, sho

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.