| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "GOVERNMENTS FRANCE BRITAIN": |
|
|
The Governments of France and Britain, 2004.
Description and comparison of the French and British political systems.
1,305 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 6 sources, APA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a description of both the French and British political government systems and then follows these descriptions with a look at the similarities and the differences between the two governments. The paper also looks at how the citizens of each country see their respective government and concludes with a positive assessment of the outlook for both countries.
From the Paper
"In France and Britain, citizens have displayed various attitudes toward their governments. Recent elections in France show a dramatic leaning toward right wing politics and a general loss of interest and faith in politics from the masses. Voter turnout was just over 71 per cent, the country's lowest turnout since 1958 (Rebick, 2003). This can create a problem in a representative democracy and it benefits the right. People are spending a lot of effort in trying to counter the rise of the far right by mobilizing grassroot groups focusing on war, the Israeli occupation, anti-Semitism and racism. But their efforts don?t seem to be supported due possibly to a global view that is being manipulated by the right since the terrorist attacks of 9/11."
| |
|
France, Britain and the European Union, 2006.
Examines the impact of the European Union on the social and economic elements of France and the United Kingdom.
3,203 words (approx. 12.8 pages), 14 sources, MLA, $ 92.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In order to fully understand the impact of the European Union and its effects on Great Britain and France, as well as the rest of its members, this paper takes a critical look at how their economies and societies have changed over the last few years. Great Britain and France are two of the strongest nations that participated in the European Union experiment and their problems of integration are perhaps representative of the problems that the rest of the EU suffers. This paper examines the socio-economic impact of the European Union on the unity and culture of these two powerful nations.
From the Paper
"For Great Britain the greatest damage of the European Union has been on its currency. With the onset of the EU, and the creation of the Euro, the pound sterling has taken a large hit in the international monetary market. Pre Euro, the pound sterling and the Deutschemark were the standard currency of the European market next to the dollar. However, with the birth of the Euro, most international banks want to fill its reserves with the Euro because it spreads out the risk of inflation and other negative factors across many member states and therefore it is largely more stable than other currencies. With this shift in currency focus, the pound has been doing relatively badly against the dollar as well as the Euro."
| |
|
Great Britain and France: Recipes for Failure?, 2002.
Examines the parliamentary systems of France and Great Britain, comparing and contrasting them. Presents an argument that they are both not effective forms of government.
1,524 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper argues that the political systems utilized in the UK and in France are ultimately recipes for failure. They are each inherently fractious systems which produce divided, multi-party governing bodies. It argues that, as a result, they are unstable, creating governments of short duration, and they are inefficient, poorly fulfilling the representative objectives to which they aspire.
From the Paper
"Great Britain is a parliamentary democracy in which citizens have the right to vote for the parliament and government of their choice. The British Parliament has three components: the House of Commons (1), an elected body consisting of 659 paid members, the House of Lords(2), an unelected body consisting of hereditary members, senior bishops of the Church, and others nominated mainly by the major political parties, and the Monarchy(3), an unelected post- largely ceremonial and necessarily impartial. Jointly, the three governing bodies pass laws, provide the government with funds, and(in the House of Lords) debate policy and relevant issues of the day(Britain in the USA, 1999)."
| |
|
Britain and France - Political Comparison, 2005.
A comparison of Britain's and France's different political systems.
1,874 words (approx. 7.5 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 59.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the two-party system of Britain and the multi-party system of France. The paper discusses the various advantages of the two political systems and questions whether they are suitable for their respective countries. The writer explains that in recent years many British citizens have called for a new system--the multi-party system-arguing that the two-party system produces stable governments, rather than stable democracy - and the latter is more desirable.
Outline
Introduction
Britain's Two-Party System
France's Multi-Party System
Will Britain Transition to a Multi-Party System?
Bibliography
From the Paper
"Many democracies in Europe have traditionally aligned themselves on the left-right axes (Katz and Mair, 1995). The main difference is the amount of government involvement they advocate. Left-wing parties usually promote more government involvement to overcome the market failures and provide social service. Right-wing parties promote more free market oriented politics of free enterprise.
In competitive systems, there is a sharp distinction between two-party systems, which often promote a party strategy of moderation and compromise intended to win a majority vote, and multiparty systems, where there is less compromise and in which a party's strategic plan places a strong emphasis on maintaining the support of its primary voters (Katz, 1981). However, generally speaking, the structure and behavior of a specific country's political parties is strongly dependent on the country's political and cultural history."
| |
|
Government In Great Britain, France and Germany, 1997.
Examines political structures, executive and legislative leadership, head of state vs. head of governmnet, parties and Parliament.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 5 sources, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"In the United States, the head of state and the head of government are both embodied in the person of the President, but in many European countries, the two functions are fulfilled by different individuals. The European systems have developed from earlier monarchical structures that evolved through history to the present situation. Great Britain, France, and Germany each have these functions separated and embodied in different individuals, and the way these systems evolved differs as well as does the way the two roles function in each country.
The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy under a democratic parliamentary regime. The United Kingdom reached its greatest global influence in the Victorian era and then endured the strains of the two world wars without impairment to its political institutions but with a reduction in relative economic ..."
| |
|
Science in Britain and France in the 19th Century, 1994.
An analysis of the nature of and reasons for differences in philosophy, issues, methods in scientists and the scientific approaches of two nations.
2,250 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 10 sources, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The manner in which science was practiced in Britain and France during the nineteenth centuries (and previously and subsequently as well) differed sharply. It may be said, broadly, that British science was rooted in mechanical modes of thought, whereas French science was rooted in mathematical modes of thought. British science might be typified by Michael Faraday, who addressed himself to the essentially mechanical problem of electromagnetis, whereas for French science we might choose Urbain Jean-Joseph Leverrier, who mathematically predicted the planet Neptune, subsequently found in the position he proposed.
The difference in the underlying approach taken to scientific endeavor in Britain and France had important effects not only on the specific means by which the scientists of the two countries attempted to solve scientific problems, but on the..."
| |
|
Parliamentary Form of Government, 2003.
Discusses the political systems of France and Great Britain.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 4 sources, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Contends that both France and Great Britain have fractious systems that divide multi-party governing bodies resulting in unstable governments of short durations. Examines Great Britain's parliamentary democracy.
From the Paper
"The world plays host to many forms of government; an interesting hypothesis to consider today pertains to the parliamentary system, as is used in Great Britain, and the mixed presidential-parliamentary system..."
| |
|
The Nazi Occupation of Poland and France, 2007.
This paper examines WWII and the differences in the way the Nazis treated their subjects after their invasions of Poland and France.
3,315 words (approx. 13.3 pages), 14 sources, MLA, $ 94.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper stresses that many of Germany's policies in both Poland and France during the occupation were similar as far as the Jewish population was concerned; however, the people of France clearly showed more willingness to cooperate with these policies than the Poles, despite the fact that Poland had a much larger Jewish population, in both numbers and per capita, than France. The author further points out that the Germans systematically destroyed the economy of Poland for the solitary purpose of helping the German war effort; whereas, the Germans gave many resources to the French economy to help reestablish it after the devastation from WWI. The paper relates that, in the sphere of government, France was given autonomy through the Vichy government, whereas the Poles, seen as nothing better than pack animals, barely more worthy of life than Jews, were given no such autonomy.
From the Paper
"One of the first actions of the German administration of Northern France was to try to make the region economically stable again. This was not done out of the goodness of the Nazis' hearts, but rather because France could become a valuable factory for war material and food. This area of France was also where the proposed invasion of Britain, "Operation Sealion", was to be launched. The iron, steel, and other natural resource industries were nationalized in order to give the Germans better control. In order to try to prevent wartime inflation and shortages, price controls were instituted."
| |
|
"Strong of Body, Brave and Noble: Chivalry and Society in Medieval France", 2002.
Reviews this book by Constance Britain Bouchard.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a book review of "Strong of Body, Brave and Noble: Chivalry and Society in Medieval France" by Constance Britain Bouchard (Cornell University Press: 1998). The book is a synthesis of recent scholarship and focuses on new interpretations and research presented in a manner accessible to undergraduates.
| |
|
Britain in Napoleonic Wars, 1993.
Role in defeating France. Looks at Britain's strategy, use of sea power & multinational coalitions, economics and specific battles.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, $ 63.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Britain and the Defeat of France in the Napoleonic Wars This paper will discuss the role of Great Britain in the Napoleonic Wars, focusing upon the role of Britain in France's ultimate defeat and the strategy used by Britain in fighting France. Specifically, the discussion will center around the strategy of using sea power and multinational coalitions to fight Napoleon, rather than directly confronting the bulk of his ground forces in campaigns on the continent. The discussion will also analyze how the Peninsular Campaign fit into this strategy and what effects it had upon France.
All of the European ruling classes reacted negatively to the French Revolution in the late 1780s; they viewed it as a dangerous precedent for the classes in their own countries who were essentially excluded from the function of governing. Many.."
| |
|
Television Media in France, 2006.
This paper explores television media in France and how it has changed over time.
1,817 words (approx. 7.3 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses the development of the television media in France and examines the ownership of the television channels, including the role of the government in controlling the television media. The paper looks at the program content, such as the different genres of shows featured on television including which are most popular and offers examples of specific television shows and their ratings. The writer illustrates this and notes how the phenomenal rise distinctly reflects the mushrooming of available channels. The paper also provides a brief comparison of the similarity between the television content in France and America.
Contents:
Development of the Television Media in France
Ownership
The role of the Government in Controlling the Television Media
The Program Content...
Examples of Specific Television Shows and Their Ratings
Recent Developments in the Television Media...
A Brief Comparison...
From the Paper
"Ever since the dawn of television since the initial part of 1970, broadcasting in France was controlled by a public service culture and an administrative philosophy. Under the strict administration of the Minister of Information, and subsequently of Culture and sometimes of Communication, broadcasting was managed by a single functionary, the Office of French Radio and Television -- ORTF. Till 1968, the body was fully funded by license fees and enjoyed the status of a unique triple monopoly on signal transmission, programming content and production. Commercial broadcasting was disallowed on the justification that it would result in mediocre programming or disparities among viewers. This initial phase of broadcasting was marked by extremely high authoritarian broadcasting and television was considered as a tool for promotion of culture and education and was not believed to fulfill the preferences of the majority. Accountability was absent and little audience research. Government used the medium to justify its political moves and controlled news content. President Georges Pompidou declared in 1970 that the television was the voice of people of France at home and overseas implying that television was supposed to symbolize the opinion of the legitimate Government and the cultural resources of the French nation."
| |
|
France, 2002.
An insight into France and its position in the international market.
1,435 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper considers how one of the oldest countries in Europe, France, has long been a key trading partner with other nations, particularly those in Western Europe and North America. It looks at how today, France is seen as one of the more important markets within the European Union and American companies considering expanding operations to France need to evaluate the political, demographic and business environment within France before making the commitment to market there. It shows how France is an attractive market for American companies because it is a country which does not have significant trade barriers, because its work force and consumers are highly educated and because its political system is stable.
From the Paper
"Although French unions are considered to be powerful, membership in unions has declined to approximately half of that in the United States. However, French law is much more rigorous about the relationship which exists between unions and employers than American law. For example, employee delegates to unions serve one-year terms in companies with more than 10 employees. These delegates can present individual or collective issues to the employer, and they can inform the government of any violations of labor law. Reorganization of the work week by management must also be discussed with the delegate. To some degree, this delegate is the French counterpart of the shop steward in American firms (Ellison, 1999, p. 4)."
| |
|
?France Against Herself?, 2002.
A review of the book "France against Herself: A Perceptive Study of France's Past, Her Politics, and Her Unending Crises" by Herbert Leuthy.
1,432 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the above book and assesses the arguments of the author on some of the issues then dominating French colonial policy. It looks at how the French colonial policy 1945-46 was irresponsible in that it made promises and raised expectations among colonial peoples that were impractical based on liberal ideologies rather than on real world facts. It analyzes how the French colonial policy in North Africa was totally unrealistic and impossible to hold on to and how with the barrier of religious belief, Arab Muslims could never become Frenchmen.
From the Paper
"Ultimately, what France wanted from her various colonies was that they simply become French in their thinking, their attitude, and their loyalties. "What France expected from 'greater France' was the production of Frenchmen; French citizens in the future, but here and now French soldiers" (Leuthy 216). Thus, the policy of 1945-46 did not address the possibilities of disenfranchisement of the colonies; rather it stated that these colonies would not desire or need disenfranchisement. However, this was both unrealistic and mistimed. After the Second World War, the policy of colonization was generally recognized as pass?, but the French could not seem to give up their dreams of united Frenchman located around the globe."
| |
|
Decline of France?, 2004.
This paper is a literature review seeking an answer to the question: Has France declined?
2,595 words (approx. 10.4 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that, in the areas of the arts and politics, France surely was an able leader; but today, unemployment is at 10 percent and rising, the national debt has doubled in eight years, and the country has fallen to tenth position in the European Union for income per capita. The author points out three main arguments on the causes of the decline of France: the chaotic history up to the end of decolonization; the domestic confusion caused by lost opportunities and mistaken choices since 1970; and the months after French President Jacques Chirac's re-election in May 2002 with 82 per cent of the vote, followed by some of the worst economic statistics since the war. The paper concludes that France, like every other country, has its good and bad points, successes and failures; other Western nations, including Britain and the United States, need to do some internal cleaning as well.
From the Paper
"Further, in a Time magazine article ?From Decline to Renewal? Stanley Hoffman quotes what he considers a still-relevant quote by President Charles De Gaulle. He invoked "old France, overburdened by history, bruised by wars and revolutions, moving endlessly from grandeur to decline and back, but regenerated, century after century, by the genius for renewal." The article then notes that France, which was so devastated by World War II occupation, has to be commended on its reconstruction, industrial revolution along with the modernization of the country?s agriculture."
| |
|
Decentralisation in France, 2002.
An outline of the principal advantages of and obstacles to decentralisation in France.
3,282 words (approx. 13.1 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 94.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how France has remained far more centralised than many of its European neighbours and seeks to explain why this is so. It considers a number of factors including its highly divided social and political history and attitudes towards state power. It also explores the recent growth in decentralisation in France and attempts to reveal that while France has benefited from decentralisation in several areas, it has been unable to commit fully to the process due to a number of inherent obstacles which derive from a ?cultural and historical legacy? that has been responsible for France?s highly centralised nature.
From the Paper
"One of the key reasons behind France?s long history of centralisation is that of its highly divided political values. It is generally accepted that the more a society is divided the more likely it is to have a centralised government and vice versa. In a homogenous society with shared interests and values it can be assumed that it is safe to allow decentralisation, yet this has certainly not been the case in France (at least until the late 1960s) where the government and its opposition have been completely split throughout much of France?s history. Logically, it then follows that the French government would be less enthusiastic for decentralisation as it may have allowed for a loss of power to opposition parties."
|
|
|
