Male Versus Female: Leadership Stype Essay -- Leadership

Women have been on the search for gender equality since the passing of Title IX in 1972. The original 1972 law states that â€Å"no person in the United States shall on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance† (UCSC Title IX), later in 1987 the benefits were extended to all educational institutions, governmental entities, and private employers who accepted federal funds (UCSC Title IX). Although forty years have gone by since Title IX was initially passed, women are still fighting a daily battle for equality in the employment field. Women have made great strides in terms of the careers they choose to pursue: â€Å"According to the Women’s Bureau (2006), 118 million women comprised 46% of the total U.S. labor force† (Chavez et al 79). However, employment is still not completely unbiased and equal between males and females and much of the inequality is due to subjective terms of leadership abilities. Research has shown that males and females have developed different leadership styles, and one may be more preferable than the other for high level corporate positions. According to authors Esther Chavez, Mark Green, and Diana Garza-Ortiz, leadership can be defined as â€Å"the process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal† (Chavez et al. 79). By this definition, any person can be a leader regardless of gender, age, and other stereotypical constraints. What most of society does not consider is the different ways of being a leader and the various styles used, intentionally or not. Women tend to have more of a transformation style where as men are said ... ...nt. Works Cited Chavez, Esther; Green, Mark; and Diana Garza-Ortiz. "Leadership Style Differences Between Men and Women: A Review of the Scholarly Literature." Business Reasearch Yearbook: Global Business Perspectives. By Esther Chavez. 2nd ed. Vol. 17. Beltsville: International Graphics, 2010. 79-84. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. . Mandell, Barbara, and Shilpa Pherwani. "Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Transformational Leadership Style: A Gender Comparison." Journal of Business and Psychology 17.3 (2003): 387-404. Web. Oakley, Judith. "Gender-Based Barries to Senior Management Positions: Understanding the Scarcity of Female CEOs." Journal of Business Ethics 27.4 (2000): 321-34. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. "Samaritan Ministries." Samaritan Ministries. Web. 04 Apr. 2012. .

Canada and The Korean War Essay examples -- History, War

Overshadowed by the previous, long and devastating Second World War, the Korean War became known by Canadian veterans as the "Forgotten War". After Japan's defeat in World War II, Korea was split into two parts, North Korea and South Korea. North Korea was occupied by the communist country of USSR while South Korea was held by the Americans and other democratic nations. War officially broke out on June 25, 1950, when the North Koreans assaulted across the country's division on the 38th Parallel with their men and artillery behind them. North Korea and its leaders wanted to unify the whole country from its division by taking over South Korea under their government. North Korea was allied with China and the Republic of Korea was supported by democratic nations. Although Canada did not send as many troops as the Americans, Canada played a vital part in the war being victorious over several important battles. The Korean War was significant for Canada because it demonstrated Cana da's relations with the US and UN and showcased its growing power among other nations. Canada participated in the Korean War because of their obligation to UN, American influence, and Canada's early misconception of the war. The United Nations was formed shortly before the end of World War II when the League of Nations was deemed useless when it failed to prevent the outbreak of the war. Canada was so obliged to helping UN because they were a part of it when it was formed. Canada alongside the "Big Five" and others, became one of the original members of the peacekeeping and peacemaking UN. It was stated that "Canada has always been a strong supporter of the United Nations and of peacekeeping, and has participated in almost every mission since its inc... ...a/war_conflict/cold_war/topics/274/ (accessed December 18, 2011). canadiansoldiers.com. The Korean War. December 11, 2011. http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/history/wars/koreanwar.htm (accessed December 18, 2011). English, John. "Korean War." The Canadian Encyclopedia. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0004370 (accessed December 18, 2011). Pearson, Lester B. "Documents on the Korean Crisis." University of Manitoba. January 24, 1951. http://www.umanitoba.ca/libraries/units/archives/canada_war/tribune/website/clippings/korea/Documents_on_the_Korean_Crisis1.shtml (accessed December 18, 2011). United Nations Association in Canada. Canadian Participation in UN Peacekeeping - Chronology. http://www.unac.org/peacekeeping/en/un-peacekeeping/fact-sheets/canadian-participation-in-un-peacekeepinga-chro/ (accessed December 18, 2011).

Rape and Responsibility Essays -- Argumentative Persuasive Topics

Rape and Responsibility      Ã‚  Ã‚   When I hear the word "rape," I immediately visualize assault, violence, force, and pain. However, today, there are pills slipped into drinks, thus skipping all of the brutality and allowing the attacker to walk away unscathed. But above all of the pills and physical violence, there lies another story that is more commonly heard of today: rape through blame and excuses. What this means is that, more often than not, women wake up from a night of alcohol consumption, drug abuse, or from a situation where they were not strong enough to say "No," and they cry rape. It is because of this frivolous definition of "rape" that women who are actually attacked are finding it harder and harder to present a case for themselves. Now the question of rape has found a new urgency due to a dramatic increase in rape cases on college campuses. Administrators are using terms such as "verbal consent" and "dating codes." These are just two small sections concerning rules for dating due to the dramatic increase in the cases of sexual assault on campus. Claims of rape and sexual assault are on the rise, and most of these cases are false claims.      Ã‚  Ã‚   Many of these mock rape cases occur when a woman is not strong enough to say "No" and understand that her consumption of alcohol and drugs may impair her ability to act wisely. In these cases, the woman has not been raped. Of course, this does not give a man the right to take advantage of a woman when her judgment has been impaired, simply because it may not be defined as a rape case. However, the fact remains that a woman who puts herself in a vulnerable position should bear some of the responsibility for a sexual assault, both in preventing i... ...ape occurs when one partner's words and demands go unanswered by the other. When a woman says "No" in a clear and strong voice, she means "No," there is no other way to define it. The sooner women learn how to use this word and mean it too, the sooner they can save themselves and their male "attackers" a great deal of grief. Along with this goes the understanding that women should not put themselves in a vulnerable position where they can be taken advantage of. If a woman impairs herself by drinking alcohol or using drugs, and then consents to be alone with a man in a dark room, what exactly does she expect?    Sources   Gaitskill, Mary. 1998. "On Not Being a Victim: Sex, Rape, and the Trouble with Following Rules." In: Gilbert Muller (ed.). Here and Now : Current Readings for Writers. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., p. 167-180.      

Public Enemies: Book Review Essay

The author arranged the book in such a way where he would be able to simultaneously show the progress of the gangs in the so-called â€Å"public enemies† era. He also wrote what happened in every specific time period. He organized his writing by dates; he divided actions and development among the gangs into certain time spans. He mainly focused on the years between 1933 and 1936, were Bonnie & Clyde, the Dillinger gang, and other more was mainstream. Furthermore, the author’s goal towards this book was to give the reader a complete and broad overview of the FBI on the War on Crime history. His goal was to portray the whole story, after the FBI released all files all the cases in the late 1980s. There were three things that made me interested in this book. First, I was amazed by how determined these criminals was. They put thought and planning in all their robberies, which they usually end up succeeding at. Moreover, these are crimes that were implemented about 77 years ago. I also admire their nature. I could never imagine how much courage and will these crooks had in order to carry out their brutal risky heists. I especially enjoyed reading the parts where the Dillinger gang would rob banks quickly and efficiently. Then they would aggressively open fire on the police officers as they perform their getaway. They made the police seem too simple to deal with. Secondly, I was astonished by the loyalty of women back in those days. They didn’t care that their men were actually robbers and in some cases killers. Except for Bonnie Parker where she was a robber herself. They would care for their men, cover for them, and comfort them as much as they can. I found that amazing since these women don’t actually exist anymore in our present time of â€Å"equal-rights. Finally, I was mind blown by how John Dillinger managed to escape from prison twice, and in addition to that, he also freed his fellows from prison as well. The public enemies indeed did have things in common. Nearly all of them are actually European immigrants or offspring of European immigrant parents. All of them seem to be aggressive, dangerous, and trouble making since their youth. Lots of them have even been sent to prison at a very early age. Hence, the majority of the public enemies have already obtained a criminal record before they went on their large scale heists. Furthermore, they all relied on a few common things when it came to undergo a robbery. They all had planned their robberies and getaways. They also used the same technique of preparing a generous amount of powerful gun power to be used in case of a police encounter. They all did not have long lives either. Most of them were killed in their 30s. They have been able to dodge the police for so long mainly for two reasons. First of all, they were well supplied with lots of powerful weapons. This has always helped them even out with the police in a shoot out. The public enemies were also extremely violent and aggressive. In any encounter with the police they would open fire and start shooting vigorously and brutally and the police without thinking or hesitation. Thinking and hesitation are two things the police did not lack, which always gave the crooks an edge. Secondly, they usually had planned their getaways through. Nearly all of them had even kidnapped innocent people, who were sometimes dragged along the shooting during the getaways to get a better chance of escape. Finally, they made sure they had good hiding spots, and they were also on the move continuously. Eventually, the FBI and all cooperating law enforcement agencies had reached their limits of hesitation. They have decided to shoot at the crooks the second they show absolutely any sigh of resistance. Obviously, there were lot of injuries and deaths. The FBI also decided to take the public enemies down once and for all by outnumbering them and engaging them at times were they are least prepared. For instance, they ambushed Bonnie and Clyde, and when the two lovers realized they were in danger they opened fire. But they were outnumbered and eventually killed by the police. Pretty Boy Floyd was killed in Ohio during a pursuit by local officers, and was shot dead by Melvin Purvis himself. The Dillinger Gang was hunted down one-by-one, and at the end killed John Dillinger after he got out of the movie theatre. Machine Gun Kelly was arrested in October 1933 and was poisoned for life. Baby Face Nelson was deeply wounded at the battle of the Barrington and died shortly after. Finally, Baker Karpis Gang was being hunted down and somehow split up. At the end Karpis was arrested in New Orleans and poisoned for life. And he was the last one on the public enemies list.

Amen. Actions and Consequences

Costa-Gavra’s â€Å"Amen. † is a thought-provoking film that combines political thriller, suspense and expose. â€Å"Amen†, translated in Hebrew as â€Å"So be it†, deals with three significant characters, both real and fictional, who act out different moral or ethical principles. These characters, Father Riccardo Fontana, Kurt Gerstein and Pope Pius XII, provide the audience with different perspectives on the dilemma about the genocide of millions of Jews during World War II, commonly known as â€Å"the Holocaust†.By reflecting on the lives, actions or personalities of these three characters, we would understand the ethical challenges, ethical principles and actions they have faced, considered and performed. Body Father Riccardo Fontana, played by Mathleu Kassovitz, is a junior diplomat and an idealistic Jesuit priest. Father Riccardo Fontana learned the life and sufferings of the Jews in the Nazi concentration camps (through the help of Kurt Gerst ein). He also learned that the American government inquired about the genocide of Jews through a letter addressed at the Vatican.He endeavoured or tried his best to alert the Vatican about the genocide of Jews in the Nazi concentration camps. He thought that his familial connections with the local priests and at the Vatican would bring in results or considerations from the Pope. He also thought that by directly stating the problems at the Nazi concentration camps to the Pope, he would be able to bring light to the problem and have the Pope do his part by making a public statement condemning the actions of the Nazis.However, in the end, he was not able to have the support of the Vatican. He lost his life; Father Riccardo Fontana died a martyr. Father Riccardo Fontana is a fictional character in the movie; however, I believe that he symbolizes the early life of Pope Pius XII. As a morally righteous priest, I believe that he wanted to ease the pain or sufferings of the Jews. As a diplo mat, I believe that he wanted to do things in a peaceful and legal manner. I also think Father Riccardo Fontana believes on deontological ethics.Deontological ethics or deontology refers to the method of applying ethics by focusing on what actions are right or wrong, regardless whether the consequences would right or not. This ethical principle is sometimes referred to as â€Å"obligation† or â€Å"duty† ethics. These are the reasons why I believe, Father Riccardo Fontana tried his best to alert the Pope, make a difference or bring the Jews help from the Vatican even if it means to sacrificing his own life for the sake of duty. If I were Father Riccardo Fontana, I would also inform or alert the Vatican, particularly the Pope.I would seek his assistance regarding the genocide of Jews and strongly emphasize my point that it is wrong and immoral. I would let them see that as priests, we should do our best to preserve life and peace all throughout the world, despite the di fferences in race or ethnicity. I would stand for the right of my fellow Jews, especially for their right to live. However, unlike Father Riccardo Fontana, I would seek or provide other kinds of help if all of the previous acts fail. I help the Jews by hiding them from the Nazis and I will ease their pain with my prayers.Subsequently, I will continue my efforts to make the authorities do their part. I will not have myself killed, not for selfish reasons, but because I know that dying won’t solve anything. If I die, I would no longer be able to help the Jews or the needy. If I die, I won’t be able to strengthen their morale and keep their spirits and hopes high. On the other hand, Kurt Gerstein, played by Ulrich Tukur, is a real character or individual, greatly devoted to his duty as a soldier and religious beliefs as a Protestant. He is a German SS officer on board the Waffen-SS during the World War II.He is also an intelligent scientist and member of the Institute for Hygiene who developed the gas Zyklon B for treating or curing the waters drank and used by Nazi soldiers. As a scientist, hygienist and developer of the Zyklon B, he only wanted to prevent illnesses or the spread of diseases among the Nazi troops. Unfortunately, Zyklon B was used to exterminate the Jews. Raised in a family of patriotic officers and soldiers with strong sense of responsibility, his obedience or compliance to authority cannot be doubted. However, after learning this horrible truth, his values as a Protestant dominated his sense of patriotism.He alerted the Protestant leaders, then the authorities, Swedish diplomats and also the Roman Catholic Church about the immoral acts committed by his superiors. He took actions similar to what Father Riccardo Fontana did and just like the efforts of Father Riccardo Fontana, Gerstein’s efforts were in awe. Conversely, I am convinced that he believes the same ethical principles as Father Ricardo Fontana. If I were Kurt Gerst ein, I would first try to reach a higher position in the Nazi party. I will do my best to reach that position as soon as possible because time is of the essence.After having power or authority, I would instantly see to it that the officers under my authority would provide help to the Jews. I would do this secretly or behind the radar of my superiors so that I can still have my power and my life for the service of those who are suffering. With my power and my life, I will provide more help or make more things morally right. Pope Pius XII, the most controversial character in the movie, is subjected to allegations of preserving his selfish-needs, economic interests, ambition and power by doing nothing regardless of knowing the horrible truth at the Nazi concentration camps.In this sense, allegedly, the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church in extension, committed passive sin. Somehow, watching the movie had made me scrutinize or contemplate on the faith and hope that I had for the Vatican or to the Pope. Putting myself in the shoes of Kurt Gerstein and Father Riccardo Fontana made me doubt that the religious authorities are not morally upright. However, considering the position of the Pope, I reclaimed my belief that he did not do anything wrong and that he only wanted greater good for a greater number of individuals or Jews in particular.As a prominent and religious leader, every action should be seriously weighed and the interests of those who are in need or prosecuted should be considered in order to prevent further harm done to them. Alerting the international public would disrupt the allegiance of the Vatican and the Nazi party and spark more tension. If the allegiance is lost and the Nazis are angered by the public statement or expose of their immoral acts, will the Vatican be able to address the retaliation of the Nazis? How can the Vatican keep Jews, provide food and shelter in chapels if the angered Nazis destroyed the Catholic chapels?Will the public state ment improve the situation of the prosecuted Jews? Will it stop a possible war? I don’t think. This is due to the fact that the Nazi party has great military power at that time to retaliate to any threat or opposition. Public protests against this inhumane party would only increase prosecution, not only of Jews but also Roman Catholics; and that would be further agonizing. I think that as a religious leader, a morally upright Roman Catholic and diplomat, Pope Pius XII did actions behind the eye of the public to help the Jews.I believe that Pope Pius XII believes in utilitarianism and because of this. Consequently, he suffered the pain of doing nothing because he knew that the consequences would be right or provide greater good. Conclusion Father Riccardo Fontana, Kurt Gerstein and Pope Pius XII are three interesting characters with varied perspectives when it comes to what is right or wrong. Father Riccardo Fontana and Kurt Gerstein believed in fulfilling their moral obligati ons while Pope Pius XII believed that â€Å"the end justifies the means†.The first two characters believed in doing things now and in considering consequences later while the third character was thinking of the consequences first before making an action. Somehow, I believe that the Holocaust or the genocide of millions of Jews in Nazi concentration camps, considering these two opposite ethical principles, is a dilemma. It is a dilemma where I believe, Pope Pius XII did the best choice. Works Cited Costa-Gavras, dir. Amen. Perfs. Ulrich Tukur, Mathieu Kassovitz. Kino International, 2002.

Alexander The Great In Afghanistan

Alexander the great was born in Pella, Macedonia in 350 B. C. His father who was the Macedonia King Philippe died when Alexander was 20 years after being killed in a Persia’s battle. He immediately replaced the position of his father. Alexander had several talents ranging from being smart, brave, proud and ambitious. His military and brave skills were witnessed when he took part in the battle at the age of 16. One of his ambitious dreams was to establish the world empire and become the ruler of the whole inhabited world. He had inherited his father’s idea to conquer Asia and wage a campaign against the orient.(Hornblower S, 2002). Alexander the great had made several achievements in his interest to populate the world empire with a unity nation but on the other hand his governance had some setbacks. This paper highlights some of the real achievements and failures that Alexander the great made in his time for leadership. At the death of his father when he was 20 year old, he was proclaimed to be the Czar of Macedonia. He did everything to strengthen the armies military skills, developed the army’s organizational system and lead Hellenic Campaign to the Orient.His army entered the main residence of Persia palace which was the most beautiful and had taken 60 years to be built. This action made Alexander to be the ruler of the whole orient. â€Å"Since the time he mounted the throne of Persian czars he started to demand from his subordinates to keep the oriental ritual of worship† (Alexander the great encyclopedia. ) During this period, Czar Darius was still alive and he settled in Ekbantak in Midia. Alexander sent his army to Persian Czar. Darius refused to take the battle and sought safety in flight.His empire ended after his death as a result of a wound inflicted on him. (Kaplan R, 2001). Alexander the great also confronted the rebels in the Sogdian Rock of Sisimitr. The confrontation was faced with confrontation in accessing the solgd ian noblemen who had settled in un sailable mountain which was filled with snow. These noblemen had a great influence on the population of Soldgiana. However with a promise of great reward to his warriors, 300 brave volunteers managed to climb the mountain, and reached where the noblemen had settled. The rebels surrendered as they were astonished by this action.Alexander the Great led to the spread of the Greek Culture all over his empire which affected the law and the government for a very long period. He was an open-minded man in that he integrated more Persian/Asian ideas in his empower and military. He said that Asia found many things that are worthy to be copied. (Mirzaev R, 2006). The king also encouraged the cultural, political and religious development of the western thinking. This was as a result of conquering Darius Persian Armies eliminating the Persian threat in invading Europe. This had loomed for a number of centuries.Alexander the great also lead to conquering the Mac edonia to Modern India. However, Alexander the great cut the Gordian knot which established the physical force, power and brute reasoning, over spiritualism and religious mysteries. He was defeated in India. This defeat came about due to the distance from Europe and the lack of supply lines. It essentially established the borders of European imperialism during that era of technology which remained intact through the time of the Roman Empire. Alexander the great led to disintegration of the great empire after his death.This is because his governance lacked the political and economic ties and instead relied absolutely on the military forces. He neglected his health to a point where he died. Before he died he had failed to provide an heir, and refused to designate an adult successor. His role would not have been taken by any other person because he eliminated aspirants that could have taken his role to succeed him. Neglecting to delegate his responsibility to any other person also kill ed his administrative system because he played all the duties alone.Alexander the Great had made conquest in life which was very extraordinary. This was witnessed all the way since he was 16 throughout his life in the leadership. However the overall outcome was failure due to the collapse of his governance and the rise in the Roman republic. ( Donova D. C. ) A good leader makes a better leader that him/her. (Covey S. 95) One cannot lead alone; he/she should rely on others in order to get criticism and more enlighting in leadership. Delegation of some responsibilities ensures a strong leadership because the burden of leadership is shared to different people.Delegation of responsibility also ensures that leaders focus and concentrate on certain important issues rather than shifting effort to all dimensions. Alexander the Great system of monopoly of powers led to the collapse of the government after his death. It was also followed by 50 years of warfare and also the collapse of his emp ire. The Alexander system of governance could have both positive and negative attributes that one can pinpoint in order to help one employ a right leadership.Ambition and determination irrespective of the age are important leadership attributes that could be seen and copied from Alexander’s leadership. However discouragement of successors’, dictatorship and self-centeredness in leadership should be highly criticized as it can be learnt from Alexander’s leadership. Alexander should be the blame for poor leadership in Central Asia as it did not enhance continuity. References: Jeffery J. Roberts. 2003. The origins of conflict in Afghanistan. Greenwood Publishing Group Simon Hornblower. 2002.The Greek World, 479-323 BC: Exploring Ethnic Identity on Curac? ao. Routledge Publishers Robert D. Kaplan. 2001. Soldiers of God: With Islamic Warriors in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Vintage Books Publishers R. R. Rawson. 2007. The Monsoon Lands of Asia. Transaction Publishers Mi rzaev R. 2006. Alexander the Great in Central Asia. Retrieved on 11th March 2009 from http://www. sairamtour. com/news/gems/49. html Wahid Momand. 2000. Invasion of Alexander. Retrieved on 11th March 2009 from http://www. afghanland. com/history/alexander. html

When Did The Nazis Decide On Genocide? Critically Discuss With A Focus On The Jewish Population Of Europe

Introduction The current essay examined the question of when the Nazis decided on genocide with a specific focus on the extermination of European Jewry. While it is difficult to pinpoint a precise date for the commencement of the Final Solution, this essay suggests the policy was decided upon by high ranking Nazis in 1941 and, finally, legally codified in 1942 in the Wannsee Conference. The Confluence of Several Dangerous Ideas No political idea simply becomes government policy overnight; rather, the process from one to the other occurs in complex ways. Indeed, the critic Christopher Browning, who penned an entire book titled The Origins of the Final Solution (2005), broadly concludes that there is no specific origin or beginning point, as such. As Browning puts it, â€Å"there is no clear and unambiguous dividing line between origins and implementation that would be valid for all regions of Europe under German occupation†. For this reason, trying to pinpoint the precise moment that the Nazis, so to speak, decided on genocide is problematic. For instance, if we wish to identify the senior level administrative policy decision on the Final Solution, we may reasonably cite the 20th of January 1942 as a key date: this was the date of the Wannsee Conference, whereat the â€Å"policy agreement† for the â€Å"Final Solution of the European Jewish question† was formulated, thereby outlining â⠂¬Å"the procedural guidelines for the future exterminations for physically healthy Jews were laid down once and for all†. (The procedure in question was liquidation via hard labour.) Yet manifold instances and legal rulings prior to this admittedly significant moment testify to a good deal of genocidal forethought long in advance of the Wannsee Conference. One of the primary critical difficulties in unlocking the truth behind the Nazis’ policy of genocide is the cloak of euphemism the Reich upheld to conceal the reality of their dreadful actions. â€Å"Final Solution† is itself a euphemism, as is (or, perhaps better to say, was) the term â€Å"concentration camp† (standing in for â€Å"extermination camp†). Because the Nazis employed a discourse of obscurity in their legislative pronouncements, it can be difficult to get to the truth of the matter. As it happens, the difference between what official Nazi language would suggests and what historical f acts prove to be the case represents a vast semantic gulf. Although it is hard as a contemporary reader to distance oneself from the connotations of the term â€Å"concentration camp†, one should bear in mind the extremely different implications this term evokes as compared to â€Å"extermination camp†. Such semantic dissonance is rife in Nazi legislature and official Reich discourse. As a result, scholars note the â€Å"appearance of contradictions between policy and practice†: an issue which can be explained with reference to â€Å"the euphemisms used† to â€Å"cloak† major implementations of liquidation programmes. While 1942 may be described as the year in which the formal decision was taken and, in effect, made policy, there are good grounds to mark 1941 as the year in which an integral Party decision was taken: that set the course for the systematic extermination of European Jewry. As a consequence, the scholar Richard Breitman argues that th is was the year in which the â€Å"fundamental decision to exterminate the Jews† was made; and that, in direct consequence of this decision, â€Å"the Final Solution was just a matter of time – and timing†. The Final Solution was at this inception stage targeted very specifically at European Jews. This is to do firstly with geographical reasons. Germany as a European country bordering on a number of other European countries was more directly in contact with European Jews than those from other continents. While the Nazis’ official hatred for the Jews was not in theory localised (indeed, Hitler despised the Jews as a race, as opposed to a religion on nationally heterogeneous people), in practice the European Jews felt the brunt of its brutality. This very likely had a lot to do with Hitler’s bearing a specific resentment for German Jews (a distinction which the Fuhrer tried to negate), whom, for various and highly dubious reasons, he blamed for causi ng Germany to lose the First World War. Interestingly, there is some debate as to how much Hitler actually knew about the Final Solution and all its grisly details. In this regard, an entry from Goebbels’s diary recounts an episode from December of that year. Hitler had gathered all the highest ranking Nazi officials to his Berlin apartment for a special meeting, the Reichsleiter and Gauleiter. The journal runs: â€Å"Concerning the Jewish question, the Fuhrer is determined to make a clean sweep. He prophesied to the Jews that if they were once again to cause a world war, the result would be their own destruction†; Goebbels goes on to affirm that the latter ominous assertion was â€Å"no figure of speech†. Indeed it was not; the policy was already underway. This commenced with the 1941 invasion of the USSR, whereupon was witnessed the â€Å"crystallisation of a general policy of killing†. At the same time, large numbers of Jews from Easter and central Eur ope were being shipped out to camps, with fatal intent. Conclusion The aforementioned obliqueness of Reich discourse makes it impossible to say for sure how informed and involved Hitler was in the Holocaust; how and when the decision for genocide was made. But we may nonetheless posit an informed surmise. By the end of 1942, the evidence clearly indicates, Hitler knew exactly what was going on and was fixed on a course of action: genocide. References Bloxham D, Kushner T, Kushner A R J, The Holocaust: Critical Historical Approaches (Manchester University Press, 2005). Breitman R, â€Å"Plans for the Final Solution in Early 1941† (1994) German Studies Review, 17, 483-489. Browning C, The Origins of the Final Solution (Arrow Books, 2005). Cesarani D, The Final Solution: Origins and Implementation (Taylor and Francis, 2002). Falk A, Anti-Semitism: A History and Psychoanalysis of Contemporary Hatred (Praeger, 2008). Fleming, G. Hitler and the Final Solution (University of California Press, 1991). Kerr J, Germany, 1919-1939 (Heinemann, 2003).