Ask Google

Results for will you be mine valentine for the ... translation from English to Hindi

Human contributions

From professional translators, enterprises, web pages and freely available translation repositories.

Add a translation

English

Hindi

Info

English

will you be mine

Hindi

तुम मेरी होगी

Last Update: 2014-11-29
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

Will you be mine forever

Hindi

क्या तुम हमेशा के लिए मेरे हो सकते हो

Last Update: 2019-02-07
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

will you be mine forever

Hindi

मैं आपसे हमेशा प्यार करता रहूँगा

Last Update: 2016-03-08
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

i want you forever for the rest of my life

Hindi

मैं अपने जीवन के बाकी हिस्सों के लिए आपको हमेशा चाहता हूं

Last Update: 2018-03-04
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

i want you todsy for the rest of my life ha ha

Hindi

मैं चाहता हूँ की आप मेरे जीवन के बाकी के लिए todsy हा हा

Last Update: 2018-12-14
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

will you be mine on this propose day

Hindi

आप इस प्रस्ताव दिवस पर मेरी होगी

Last Update: 2017-02-08
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

let me love you if not for the rest of your life then for rest to time

Hindi

मुझे आपसे प्यार करता हूँ यदि नहीं तो अपने जीवन के बाकी हिस्सों के लिए तो आराम करो

Last Update: 2017-12-24
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

i want you today tomarraw next week next month next year and for the rest of my life

Hindi

मैं अपने जीवन के बाकी हिस्सों के लिए हमेशा से चाहता हूं हा हा

Last Update: 2017-09-17
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

Never ask why I love u just accept that I do, and that I will for the rest of my life

Hindi

कभी नहीं पूछने क्यों मैं तुमसे प्यार करता हूँ बस स्वीकार करते हैं कि मैं क्या, और कि मैं मेरे जीवन के आराम के लिए होगा

Last Update: 2016-04-07
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

The decision regarding the rest of the candidates for the Assembly would only be made after Diwali.

Hindi

बाकी सीटों पर फैसला दीपावली बाद जिले की बाकी विधानसभा सीटों पर प्रत्याशियों की घोषणा दीपावली के बाद होने की संभावना व्यक्त की जा रही है।

Last Update: 2014-10-20
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

Channel 19 is the online video channel where this media, created by and for the communities is showcased for the rest of the population.

Hindi

सामुदायिक वीडियो सामग्री जिसे सामुदायिक वीडियो स्वयंसेवकों द्वारा ही आमतौर पर तैयार किया जाता है, उसे प्रभावी तरीके से जन जन तक पहुँचाने का प्रयास ऑनलाइन वीडियो चैनल चैनल 19 द्वारा बखूबी किया जा रहा है.

Last Update: 2016-02-24
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

He suffered only a broken arm at first, but an infection developed and spread to his brain, creating a hematoma that would affect him for the rest of his life.

Hindi

आरंभ में उनका केवल हाथ टूटा था, लेकिन एक संक्रमण बढ़ गया जो उनके मस्तिष्क तक फैल गया, तथा उसने रक्तार्बुद निर्मित कर दिया, जिसने उनके शेष जीवन को प्रभावित किया।

Last Update: 2014-10-20
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

In fact, having the big boys doing so well made the victories of the others that much sweeter and it was great to see the excitement and genuine pride these winners exuded for the rest of the evening.

Hindi

वस्तुतः पुरस्कृतों में बड़े और महान चिट्ठाकारों के बीच अपने आप को पाना बहुत से चिट्ठाकारों को स्वप्न सदृश्य महसूस हो रहा था और वे पूरी शाम चमत्कृत से हो रहे थे.

Last Update: 2016-02-24
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous

English

Say to them, "If the abode of the Hereafter with Allah is exclusively reserved for you and not for the rest of mankind, then you should long for death, if you arc sincere in your claim."

Hindi

(ऐ रसूल) इन लोगों से कह दो कि अगर खुदा के नज़दीक आख़ेरत का घर (बेहिश्त) ख़ास तुम्हारे वास्ते है और लोगों के वासते नहीं है पस अगर तुम सच्चे हो तो मौत की आरजू क़रो

Last Update: 2014-07-03
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous
Warning: Contains invisible HTML formatting

English

Say to them, "If the abode of the Hereafter with Allah is exclusively reserved for you and not for the rest of mankind, then you should long for death, if you arc sincere in your claim."

Hindi

अपने हाथों इन्होंने जो कुछ आगे भेजा है उसके कारण वे कदापि उसकी कामना न करेंगे; अल्लाह तो ज़ालिमों को भली-भाँति जानता है

Last Update: 2014-07-03
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous
Warning: Contains invisible HTML formatting

English

so that perhaps I shall act righteously for the rest of my life." Although he will say so but his wish will never come true. After death they will be behind a barrier until the day of their resurrection.

Hindi

(जवाब दिया जाएगा) हरगिज़ नहीं ये एक लग़ो बात है- जिसे वह बक रहा और उनके (मरने के) बाद (आलमे) बरज़ख़ है

Last Update: 2014-07-03
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous
Warning: Contains invisible HTML formatting

English

so that perhaps I shall act righteously for the rest of my life." Although he will say so but his wish will never come true. After death they will be behind a barrier until the day of their resurrection.

Hindi

उसमें अच्छा कर्म करूँ।" कुछ नहीं, यह तो बस एक (व्यर्थ) बात है जो वह कहेगा और उनके पीछे से लेकर उस दिन तक एक रोक लगी हुई है, जब वे दोबारा उठाए जाएँगे

Last Update: 2014-07-03
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous
Warning: Contains invisible HTML formatting

English

hindi essay about visit to old age home I was on my way to visit a home for the aged during a school trip, wondering how I would feel when I saw them and how they live away from their families. I have heard and read a lot about the good care of old people on TV and magazines but this painted a much nicer picture than the reality I found. We spoke to the patients and heard about the food they are given and the place they live in and I found their plight tragic. One old man cried as he told us how he used to sacrifice everything for his children and his children's gift to him in return was to throw him in the old-age home, never to visit him. They all long to return to their homes and live with their family. They feel cheated after all the years of love and care they had given to their children, but their children seems to have left them to their fate. Allah has instructed man on the treatment of his parents in the Holy Qur'an many times, and respect for parents is one of the good deeds to enter paradise. Our parents sacrificed everything for our happiness and future. So it is improper to act as if they deserve no respect and love. Every person who puts a parent in a home for the aged should ask: How will I feel if my children did the same to me when I am old? Shocking From Ms H.A. Al Ktheery, Abu Dhabi. Old age is a time when we need the love and care of our loved ones most. However, in our country some old people are put in homes for the aged and are conveniently forgotten by their children. While the government has built special homes for the elderly and provide them the care they need, it is no substitute for one's own home. These homes are for those who are childless and do not have anyone to look after them. Surprisingly, in the homes for the aged, there are many inmates who are put there as their children find them a burden. I remember a photograph published in a newspaper about some of these old people and reading about an old woman who said she was thrown out of the house by her son just to please his wife! While an old handicapped man was put in one of the homes by his son to get rid of the burden of looking after him. I am shocked at these happenings. ************************************************ Rights due to the Parents in Old Age None can deny the parents favor upon their children. The parents are the underlying reason for the existence of the child. They have reared him in his babyhood and experienced painstaking efforts to provide full comfort and sound well-being. Your mother had you in her womb while you were a parasite there sharing her food and whole being for nine months. In this context, Allah says: "And We have enjoined on man (to be dutiful and good) to his parents. His mother bore him in weakness and hardship upon weakness and hardship..." (31:14) It is a preliminary stage followed by incubation and breast feeding for two years marked by peculiar fatigue and hardships. The father, on his part, is meanwhile also fully engaged catering for his child and bringing him up, not sparing any sort of instructions or guidance he could provide his child with; the child, meanwhile, a helpless creature neither harmful nor useful to himself. Allah has always enjoined that children should be good and thankful to their parents and He says: "And We have enjoined on man (to be dutiful and good) to his parents. His mother bore him in weakness and hardship upon weakness and hardship, and his weaning is in two years ; give thanks to Me and to your parents, unto Me is the final destination."(31:14) "... And that you be dutiful to your parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of disrespect, nor shout at them but address them in terms of honor. And lower unto them the wing of submission and humility through mercy, and say: "My Lord! Bestow on them Your Mercy as they did bring me up when I was small."(17:23,24) The right of parents upon you is to do good with them. You should be good to them physically as well as monetarily, and also with your words and your actions. You should be obedient to them unless in it there is disobedience to Allah or there is some harm to you. Be kindhearted to them and serve them as they need your help. In their old age, in case of any ailment or weakness, never consider them a burden on you neither speak to them harshly, because one day you will also become as old as they are. You will be a father as they are your parents and, if life permits, soon you will be an old man before your children just like your parents became old before you. So you will be needing the help of your children as your parents need you today. If you are doing good to your parents then you must have the good news of a great reward and a better showing from your children, because whoever remained good to his parents, his children will also be good to him; and whoever annoyed his parents, will also be annoyed by his children. It is the process of recompense that deeds provide the results accordingly " as you sow, so will you reap. Allah has ranked the rights due to the parents high next only to His and the Prophet"s, Allah says: "Worship Allah and join none with Him in worship, and do good to parents..." (4:36) And Allah also says: "...give thanks to Me and to your parents... (31:14) Being dutiful to one"s parents assumes priority even over Jihad (fight in the cause of Allah) as is narrated in the tradition of Ibn Mas"ud(R.A.) when he asked the Prophet (peace be upon Him) : "Which deed is most beloved by Allah" "He said, "Observing prayer in time." And next to that" He said: "Being dutiful to one's parents." And next to that" He answered: "Jihad (fight in the cause of Allah)." This Hadith (Prophetic saying) reported by Bukhari and Muslim points directly to the significance of the rights due to one's parents. Unfortunately, most people have forgotten these rights, instead disobedience and severance of ties have risen to harden the hearts, and even they contempt and detest their parents;especially in old age. Some people have even deemed themselves superior to those two old good creatures. A recompense is sure in store for those disobedient children, sooner or later. Definitely, our aged parents, now that they cannot look after themselves, need all our attention at home, the home they reared us in; and definitely NOT AN OLD AGE HOME !

Hindi

वृद्धाश्रम के लिए यात्रा के बारे में हिंदी निबंध

Last Update: 2017-02-11
Usage Frequency: 4
Quality:

Reference: Bhupals
Warning: Contains invisible HTML formatting

English

Education in India Search Add your Institute Institutions Courses Entrance Exams Career Options Alerts Coaching Centres Articles Knowledge Date Sheets Languages Home / Articles / Reality Shows - Facts and Effects Report Error Reality Shows - Facts and Effects Reality Shows are genre of television shows or programmes which feature common people and or celebrities or both, in real life or scripted situations/environment or a mix of both real and scripted incidents. Reality Shows are also referred as ‘Reality Television’. Reality shows have become quite a rage of late; these were non-existent until the 1940’s. Reality shows in those times were quite authentic. This was because it was a new concept and as such manipulation was limited to only creating unordinary situations for ordinary citizens. However, the reality shows of today have blurred the reality. The irony of ‘Reality Shows’ is that even though they are known as ‘Reality Based Shows’; most of them are ‘Unreal’. Facts of Reality Shows History of Reality T.V. Popularity Factors Types of Reality Shows Effects of Reality Shows Reality Television Pros and Cons Reality Shows Advantages Reality Shows Disadvantages Curbing or Limiting the Effects of reality Shows Real Life is nothing, what popular Reality Shows depict. The idea of placing people in situations, just to see how they react, became imaginable and almost ‘Passé’. Audiences have seen and known what will happen. As such, previous projections of human behaviour do not hold that much ground as compared to the ones that are being churned out with all the melodrama and unexpected spoofs or stunts. Real Life on day to day basis is not as much Dramatic and entertaining as is depicted in these shows. Life is very much real as we witness it, not what we are made to see. Reality shows edit and manipulate scenes which appear and imitate reality. The situations created or occurred are altered in order to make things interesting. To sustain the interest of the audience, producers of such shows resort to depiction of emotions which incite humans. Thus, conflict, drama, sleaze and humour are added as per the TRP. These may not be scripted but depending upon the response of these audiences, these maybe added as per the requirement. Such shows will create an exciting footage from various clips mixed with each other. Sometimes, the producers of the show will involve a celebrity to create hype for the show. So, a question arises what, when, why, where and how of these shows. There are many reasons behind it. These have been analysed below. Reality Shows – Facts Facts of Reality television have been subdivided into its History, Popularity Factors and their Types. History of Reality T.V. It was during 1948, that Alan Funt, came up with the idea of the first Reality Show in the form of TV series ‘Candid Camera’. It was initially launched as Radio Show, titled – ‘Candid Microphone’ on 28th June, 1947. Later, he shot a series of theatrical film shorts, also titled Candid Microphone. It was his next venture that materialised into the ‘First Reality Show’ which appeared on television (ABC channel) on August 10, 1948. The show featured ordinary people encountering unusual situations, who were being secretly taped with concealed cameras. Sometimes, these would involve trick props, such as a desk with drawers that pop open when closed or a car with a hidden extra gas tank. When the joke was revealed, victims would be told the shows catch phrase, ‘Smile, you're on Candid Camera.’ Peter Funt, his son became the producer and the host of the show from 1998 to 2004. Soon others too conceived similar ideas with different approach. Ted Mack's Original Amateur Hour and Arthur Godfrey's Talent Scouts also appeared during 1948. These show started the much famed ‘Talent Shows’ or ‘Talent Search Shows’ which featured amateur competitors and introduced the concept of ‘Audience Voting’. In the 1950s, game shows – ‘Beat the Clock’ and ‘Truth or Consequences’ involved contestants in wacky competitions, stunts, and practical jokes. Then, appeared the ‘Game Show’, known as ‘You Bet’ on NBC-TV in October 1950, which was simultaneously broadcast on the radio and the television. In 1954, ‘Miss America Pageant’, a beauty contest appeared on T.V. whose winner achieved the status of a national celebrity. During 1950-1959, a new type of series ‘You Asked For It’ had some elements of a ‘Audience Participation’ in the sense that viewers were given certain freedom to see what they wished to see on television. The show created and hosted by Art Baker, involved the ‘Real Re-enactment’ of William Tell shooting an apple off his son's head. Many other reality based shows featured on T.V., like series Seven Up! in UK. during 1964 (Granada Television). However, the Shows with the flavour of Modern Reality Shows started to be produced during the 1970’s. PBS series ‘An American Family’ was more or less documentary in purpose and style. It featured the daily lives of the Loud family. The televised decision of the parents to divorce and the on-screen coming out of their gay son shocked audiences. This prompted the sociologist, Margaret Mead to suggest a different genre for this series as it didn’t fit the category of Documentary. This show gave birth to the ‘Reality-soap Genre’ in which compelling story lines through careful writing and editing shaped the real-life subjects into reality-show characters. In 1974, a counterpart program, The Family, was made in the UK, following the working class Wilkins family of Reading. Similar such productions were ‘Chuck Barris: The Dating Game’, ‘The Newlywed Game’, and ‘The Gong Show’. These participants shared some of their privacy and dignity in a televised competition. Then, there were ‘Camcorder Taped’ reality shows which appeared during 1989. First of such a show was ‘COPS’ which showed police officers on duty apprehending criminals. The Rescue 911 was another such show which featured people in dire situations and their efforts. America’s Funniest Home Videos was also such reality show in terms of recording equipment. It featured unique and funny incidents taped on camcorder. Further themes of reality shows were conceived in the 1990’s. The concept of grouping strangers for a certain period of time in a certain environment and the drama that followed, originated in the form of series ‘Nummer 28’. It aired on Dutch television in 1991. This show was backed by computer-based non-linear editing systems which enabled quick editing of hours of video footage into a usable form. The idea of ‘Competition and Elimination’ was introduced by TV producer Charlie Parsons. He created the TV show ‘Expedition Robinson’, which first aired in 1997 in Sweden. In the show cast members/contestants battled against each other and were removed from the show until only one winner remained. These shows became popularly known as ‘Elimination Shows’. The end of 90’ and the advent of 2000, saw an unprecedented popularity of the reality based shows. These new generation of Reality shows were more blunt, witty, sensuous, sensational, glamorous and more. These were produced by specialists who created complex and unexpected shows which stirred the emotions of the masses. Their uniqueness and the ‘Awe’ factor made them a huge success. Survivor became such a show. It was originally named ‘Expedition Robinson’ and appeared first on the Swedish public service network SVT in 1997. Then, ‘Big Brother’ first televised in the Netherlands during 1999 on the Veronica TV channel became a world-wide sensation. It was picked up by Brazil, Germany, Argentina, Portugal, USA, UK, Spain, Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland, Italy and Indonesia. It is a hit show in almost 70 countries; further licensing rights for same format program but with regional people. Example, ‘Big Boss’ in India. Another major hit is ‘American Idol’. It is based on the British show Pop Idol, which was in turn inspired by Popstars. The show debuted in 2001 in Britain and soon spread to other parts of the world, with its Indian Version, known as ‘Indian Idol’. Soon more shows followed with different concepts and ideas like the Amazing Race (2001), Fear Factor (June 11, 2001), the America's Next Top Model (May 2003), The Apprentice (2004), Dancing With The Stars (2005) and others. These all became an instant hit all over the world and inspiring licensed version and unlicensed altered shows in dozens of countries. Furthermore, these shows inspired channels totally devoted to reality shows, like Zone Reality (UK) was launched in 2002 and Global Reality Channel (Canada) was launched in 2010. Several cable channels started featuring original reality programming as a mainstay. Thus, today various types of reality shows have got a permanent slot during their telecast. The reality series of modern times borrow a lot from their precedents and differ mostly in scope and locale. Popularity Factors of Reality Shows So what makes Reality Shows Tick? There are multiple factors attributing to the success of these shows. Human Curiosity – There is saying that says ‘Curiosity killed the cat’, here the ‘Curiosity lured the Public’. Though not as deadly as the original saying but alluring, that is to say that the public is always willing to know the unknown or the mysteries. Of all the entertainment series we are aware of, we think that’s the end of it. However, the brainy producers are always up to new tricks, they introduce new formats, new faces and other unexplored or unimaginable acts. Anything new or different is obviously bound to be noticed, the same goes with reality shows. Such shows engross and tease the mind into watching them. This is one important ingredient of a reality show. Entertainment Value – Watching the mundane soap operas and movies causes the mind to get bored. It is here that reality shows score over other programs. They are filled with drama, shock value, original stunts, talent, celebrities, laughter, sleaze and violence. It fills the void of human mind bored with conventionally formatted programs. Some series featuring original acts are applauded because here someone with the best talent gets acknowledged, appreciated and paid. Here, they see what they haven’t realised or imagined, especially the one’s which are dramatic. Even if the audience is aware of the manipulations, they don’t mind it as it adds spice and zing to their lives, which is otherwise dull and dreary. Also, they like to be acknowledged for their prediction of the outcome or can gossip about it with their friends and so on. Aggressive Marketing – One of the major factors of the popularity of reality television is the aggressive marketing. This marketing is clearly visible in Television promos, large hoardings, cover story in magazines and other media. It grabs the attention of even a an uninterested person and that is what the advertisers want and that is what influences us in to watching these programs. Belief in Reality Shows – Though the public is smart but it can be fooled. Reality shows are an example of this occurrence. There are certain sections of viewers who still believe that what is being shown is ‘Reality’ as it matches the normal daily life routines. This notion becomes a permanent fact in their minds and they find it hard to dismiss it as fake. Then there are young minds which do not have the wider scope of thought as to ‘What is real?’ and ‘What is not?’. They perceive the fake acts as real and the shows become their favourite ones. Favourites and Non Favourites – Whilst watching certain such shows we tend to have our ‘Favourites’ and ‘Non-Favourites’. We like our favourite ones for variety of reasons; some are cute, some appear honest, some are form their own region or religion and some are sympathised. On the opposite side we hate certain participants for variety of reasons; some are ugly, some appear fake, some don’t belong to their region or religion and some we simply love hate. Our emotional attachment with these characters is the source of popularity of these shows. Thirst for Power – The concept of voting for favourite ones is sort of quencher of thirst for power hungry people. They think that their vote is a contributing factor in the victory of their chosen one. It makes them feel important, related to whom they are voting and self satisfaction of having some power or certain portion of power. Pleasure in other’s Sufferings – There are some demented minds who like to see other people in pain and gore. It gives them certain euphoria which they get addicted to. The causes can be many; some can relate to the pain which they have suffered or the pain which they want to deliver to their oppressors but haven’t been able to do so. It provides them a certain outlet of emotions. Peer Influence – Some people just watch these shows just to stay in tune with the current flow of trend. They stay in touch with these shows so they have something to talk about whenever a conversation occurs or whenever they are socialising. It is embarrassing for certain people to be unaware of what’s hip and what’s not. Types of Reality Shows Reality shows cater to different age groups and tastes because of the wide range of themes available. These shows can be classified into: 1. Reality T.V. Talent Shows – A reality based talent show is ‘Made for Television’ program which is televised live or deferred live featuring a number of participants who present their talent or talents in front of a panel of judges. These talents can be in the conventional forms like singing, dancing and or other unique forms of talents. Most of these shows have a format where certain performers are selected and judged. Based on the quality of their performance, these are either eliminated out of the competition by judges or by the public through voting. Each week or each episode one or more contestants are eliminated until a winner emerges. Reality based talent shows are the most popular reality television shows. These are the most popular as these present a much authentic presentation as compared to others which can be easily pointed out as fake. Some of the most popular reality shows of this type are American Idol, America's Got Talent, Dancing with the Stars, Celebrity Duets etc. These maybe licensed to other countries which work on the same format to produce a local show like ‘India’s Got Talent’ is the Indian version of AGT. 2. Fly on the Wall Shows – Fly on the Wall Shows are those shows which are styled in a documentary format but maybe scripted partially or wholly to create sensationalism; camera shooting and footage editing gives the viewer the impression that they are passive observers following people going about their daily personal and professional activities. These are known as ‘Fly on the Wall Shows’ as events are seen candidly, as a fly on a wall might see them. These shows are also known as factual television shows as they do show some actual happenings. Some of these types of shows are: Environment Confined – These are live or deferred live televised shows, where a number of familiar or unfamiliar participants have to live along with each other and perform tasks in an artificial living environment surrounded by cameras at strategic spots. Every day they are given a task to perform and their behaviour is recorded. Every week or every episode voting is conducted wherein the members nominate each other depending upon their preferences or task performance. These nominated members are further put to vote by public until a winner emerges. The winner is awarded a large sum of amount. Participants are often interviewed, often by an off-camera voice. The ancestor of these types of shows is MTV’s ‘The Real World’. The most popular amongst these shows is ‘Big Brother’ with different versions produced in many countries around the word. Some other shows in this category are ‘Road Rules’, ‘The 1900 House’, ‘Temptation Island’, ‘U8TV: The Lofters’ etc. Celebrity Shows – Reality based Celebrity Shows are the ones which show daily routine of celebrities or show celebrities in a certain environment with other celebrities performing task or tasks. These show some scripted, unscripted, kinky or unknown aspect of celebrities. Some routine based shows are Keeping Up With the Kardashians, Kathy Griffin: Life on the D List, The Anna Nicole Show, The Osbournes, Newlyweds: Nick and Jessica and Hogan Knows Best etc. Some of the Environment Confined shows are Celebrity Big Brother, The Simple Life, Tommy Lee Goes to College, The Surreal Life, and I'm a Celebrity... Get Me out of Here! Based on Professional Lives - Professional Lives is type of a reality based show which shows professionals either going about day-to-day business or performing an entire project over the course of a series. These shows unseen footage of a professional on day to day basis, thereby providing an insight into the life of professionals engaged in different occupations. The first of its kind series is COPS which premiered in 1989. Other examples of this type of reality show include the American shows Miami Ink, The First 48, Dog the Bounty Hunter, American Chopper, Deadliest Catch etc. 3. Game Shows – Reality based Game Shows are televised events which involve members of the public and or celebrities competing as a team or as individual against each other in as series competitive games which can physical challenging and or mentally challenging usually for money and/or a variety of prizes. The prize can be cash, a spouse, a date, a contract, trips, goods and services etc. Game shows are also referred as ‘Competition Shows’. Games shows can be categorised as: Mentally Challenging Games – These are quiz or information based game shows where the host of the show or panel of judges asks the contestant general knowledge questions divided into various levels. The contestants have to answer these in a certain period of time and gather points and or cash for every correct answer. In the process they may get evicted or gain certain advantages which are useful in the later stage of the game. Some of this type of games are Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, American Gladiators, Dog Eat Dog, Deal or No Deal, Weakest Link etc. These are usually shot in an enclosed environment or TV studio over a short period of time. Physically Challenging Games - These are mostly stunt based or adventure based game shows which involves members of the public and or celebrities performing weird, dangerous or tricky physical tasks better and/or quicker than all the other contestants or simply completing the task given. The game is divided into several zones and stages with each round getting tougher and tougher. These usually take place outdoors with specially created structures and or equipments. Some of these are Minute to Win It, Who Dares Wins, Fear Factor, Total Wipeout, Takeshi's Castle etc. Self-improvement / Makeover Shows – Reality based Self-improvement / Makeover Shows cover the attempts and success of a person or group of people (afflicted celebrities or common people) improving their lives with the help of an expert along with a celebrity as a host. The improvements in life can be related to problems like obesity, lack of fashion sense, bad behaviour, psychological issues etc. Thus we have Charm School and From G's to Gents focussing on self-improvement and manners, Biggest Loser and Fat March which focus on weight loss, How Do I Look? focusing on fashion makeover, ‘Queer Eye’ and ‘What Not to Wear’ which focus on style and grooming, ‘Made’ focusing on attaining difficult goals, ‘Supernanny’ focuss

Hindi

फायदे और रियलिटी शो का नुकसान

Last Update: 2016-11-04
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Bhupals

English

Fukuyama Francis Fukuyama From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama image from BloggingHeads.tv podcast Fukuyama in 2005 Born October 27, 1952 (age 63) Chicago, Illinois, U.S Website fukuyama.stanford.edu Institutions George Mason University[1] Johns Hopkins University Stanford University Main interests Developing nations Governance International political economy Nation-building and democratization Strategic and security issues Notable ideas End of history Influences [show] Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama (born October 27, 1952) is an American political scientist, political economist, and author. Fukuyama is known for his book The End of History and the Last Man (1992), which argued that the worldwide spread of liberal democracies and free market capitalism of the West and its lifestyle may signal the end point of humanity's sociocultural evolution and become the final form of human government. However, his subsequent book Trust: Social Virtues and Creation of Prosperity (1995) modified his earlier position to acknowledge that culture cannot be cleanly separated from economics. Fukuyama is also associated with the rise of the neoconservative movement,[2] from which he has since distanced himself.[3] Fukuyama has been a Senior Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University since July 2010.[4] Before that, he served as a professor and director of the International Development program at the School of Advanced International Studies of the Johns Hopkins University. Previously, he was Omer L. and Nancy Hirst Professor of Public Policy at the School of Public Policy at George Mason University.[4] He is a council member of the International Forum for Democratic Studies founded by the National Endowment for Democracy and was a member of the Political Science Department of the RAND Corporation.[5] Contents 1 Early life 2 Education 3 Writings 3.1 Neoconservatism 3.2 Fukuyama's current views 4 Affiliations 5 Personal life 6 See also 7 Selected bibliography 7.1 Scholarly works (partial list) 7.2 Books 7.3 Essays 8 See also 9 References 10 External links Early life Francis Fukuyama was born in the Hyde Park neighborhood of Chicago. His paternal grandfather fled the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 and started a shop on the west coast before being interned in the Second World War.[6] His father, Yoshio Fukuyama, a second-generation Japanese American, was trained as a minister in the Congregational Church, received a doctorate in sociology from the University of Chicago, and taught religious studies.[7][8][9] His mother, Toshiko Kawata Fukuyama, was born in Kyoto, Japan, and was the daughter of Shiro Kawata, founder of the Economics Department of Kyoto University and first president of Osaka City University.[10] Francis grew up in Manhattan as an only child, had little contact with Japanese culture, and did not learn Japanese.[7][8] His family moved to State College, Pennsylvania in 1967.[10] Education Fukuyama received his Bachelor of Arts degree in classics from Cornell University, where he studied political philosophy under Allan Bloom.[8][11] He initially pursued graduate studies in comparative literature at Yale University, going to Paris for six months to study under Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida, but became disillusioned and switched to political science at Harvard University.[8] There, he studied with Samuel P. Huntington and Harvey Mansfield, among others. He earned his Ph.D. in political science at Harvard for his thesis on Soviet threats to intervene in the Middle East.[8][11] In 1979, he joined the global policy think tank RAND Corporation.[8] Fukuyama lived at the Telluride House and has been affiliated with the Telluride Association since his undergraduate years at Cornell, an education enterprise that was home to other significant leaders and intellectuals, including Steven Weinberg, Paul Wolfowitz and Kathleen Sullivan. Fukuyama was the Omer L. and Nancy Hirst Professor of Public Policy in the School of Public Policy at George Mason University from 1996 to 2000. Until July 10, 2010, he was the Bernard L. Schwartz Professor of International Political Economy and Director of the International Development Program at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University in Washington, D.C. He is now Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow and resident in the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.[11] Writings Fukuyama is best known as the author of The End of History and the Last Man, in which he argued that the progression of human history as a struggle between ideologies is largely at an end, with the world settling on liberal democracy after the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Fukuyama predicted the eventual global triumph of political and economic liberalism: What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such.... That is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government. Authors like Ralf Dahrendorf argued in 1990 that the essay gave Fukuyama his 15 minutes of fame, which will be followed by a slide into obscurity.[12][13] He continued to remain a relevant and cited public intellectual leading American communitarian Amitai Etzioni to declare him "one of the few enduring public intellectuals. They are often media stars who are eaten up and spat out after their 15 minutes. But he has lasted."[14] One of the main reasons for the massive criticism against The End of History was the aggressive stance that it took towards postmodernism. Postmodern philosophy had, in Fukuyama's opinion, undermined the ideology behind liberal democracy, leaving the western world in a potentially weaker position.[15] The fact that Marxism and fascism had been proven untenable for practical use while liberal democracy still thrived was reason enough to embrace the hopeful attitude of the Progressive era, as this hope for the future was what made a society worth struggling to maintain. Postmodernism, which, by this time, had become embedded in the cultural consciousness, offered no hope and nothing to sustain a necessary sense of community, instead relying only on lofty intellectual premises.[16] Being a work that both praised the ideals of a group that had fallen out of favor and challenged the premises of the group that had replaced them, it was bound to create some controversy. Fukuyama has written a number of other books, among them Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity and Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. In the latter, he qualified his original "end of history" thesis, arguing that since biotechnology increasingly allows humans to control their own evolution, it may allow humans to alter human nature, thereby putting liberal democracy at risk.[17] One possible outcome could be that an altered human nature could end in radical inequality. He is a fierce enemy of transhumanism, an intellectual movement asserting that posthumanity is a desirable goal. In another work, The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstruction of Social Order, Fukuyama explores the origins of social norms, and analyses the current disruptions in the fabric of our moral traditions, which he considers as arising from a shift from the manufacturing to the information age. This shift is, he thinks, normal and will prove self-correcting, given the intrinsic human need for social norms and rules. In 2006, in America at the Crossroads, Fukuyama discusses the history of neoconservatism, with particular focus on its major tenets and political implications. He outlines his rationale for supporting the Bush administration, as well as where he believes it has gone wrong. In 2008, Fukuyama published the book Falling Behind: Explaining the Development Gap Between Latin America and the United States, which resulted from research and a conference funded by Grupo Mayan to gain understanding on why Latin America, once far wealthier than North America, fell behind in terms of development in only a matter of centuries. Discussing this book at a 2009 conference, Fukuyama outlined his belief that inequality within Latin American nations is a key impediment to growth. An unequal distribution of wealth, he stated, leads to social upheaval, which then results in stunted growth.[18] Neoconservatism As a key Reagan Administration contributor to the formulation of the Reagan Doctrine, Fukuyama is an important figure in the rise of neoconservatism, although his works came out years after Irving Kristol's 1972 book crystallized neoconservatism.[19] Fukuyama was active in the Project for the New American Century think tank starting in 1997, and as a member co-signed the organization's 1998 letter recommending that President Bill Clinton support Iraqi insurgencies in the overthrow of then-President of Iraq Saddam Hussein.[20] He was also among forty co-signers of William Kristol's September 20, 2001 letter to President George W. Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks that suggested the U.S. not only "capture or kill Osama bin Laden", but also embark upon "a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq".[21] In a New York Times article from February 2006, Fukuyama, in considering the ongoing Iraq War, stated: "What American foreign policy needs is not a return to a narrow and cynical realism, but rather the formulation of a 'realistic Wilsonianism' that better matches means to ends."[22] In regard to neoconservatism he went on to say: "What is needed now are new ideas, neither neoconservative nor realist, for how America is to relate to the rest of the world – ideas that retain the neoconservative belief in the universality of human rights, but without its illusions about the efficacy of American power and hegemony to bring these ends about."[22] Fukuyama's current views Fukuyama began to distance himself from the neoconservative agenda of the Bush administration, citing its excessive militarism and embrace of unilateral armed intervention, particularly in the Middle East. By late 2003, Fukuyama had voiced his growing opposition to the Iraq War[23] and called for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation as Secretary of Defense.[24] At an annual dinner of the American Enterprise Institute in February 2004, Dick Cheney and Charles Krauthammer declared the beginning of a unipolar era under American hegemony. "All of these people around me were cheering wildly,"[25] Fukuyama remembers. He believes that the Iraq War was being blundered. "All of my friends had taken leave of reality."[25] He has not spoken to Paul Wolfowitz (previously a good friend) since.[25] Fukuyama declared he would not be voting for Bush,[26] and that the Bush administration had made three major mistakes:[citation needed] Overstating the threat of radical Islam to the US Failing to foresee the fierce negative reaction to its "benevolent hegemony". From the very beginning showing a negative attitude toward the United Nations and other intergovernmental organizations and not seeing that it would increase anti-Americanism in other countries Misjudging what was needed to bring peace in Iraq and being overly optimistic about the success with which social engineering of western values could be applied to Iraq and the Middle East in general. Fukuyama believes the US has a right to promote its own values in the world, but more along the lines of what he calls "realistic Wilsonianism", with military intervention only as a last resort and only in addition to other measures. A latent military force is more likely to have an effect than actual deployment. The US spends 43% of global military spending,[27] but Iraq shows there are limits to its effectiveness. The US should instead stimulate political and economic development and gain a better understanding of what happens in other countries. The best instruments are setting a good example and providing education and, in many cases, money. The secret of development, be it political or economic, is that it never comes from outsiders, but always from people in the country itself. One thing the US proved to have excelled in during the aftermath of World War II was the formation of international institutions. A return to support for these structures would combine American power with international legitimacy. But such measures require a lot of patience. This is the central thesis of his 2006 work America at the Crossroads. In a 2006 essay in The New York Times Magazine strongly critical of the invasion, he identified neoconservatism with Leninism. He wrote that neoconservatives:[28] believed that history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and it has returned as farce when practiced by the United States. Neoconservatism, as both a political symbol and a body of thought, has evolved into something I can no longer support. Fukuyama announced the end of the neoconservative moment and argued for the demilitarization of the War on Terrorism:[28] [W]ar is the wrong metaphor for the broader struggle, since wars are fought at full intensity and have clear beginnings and endings. Meeting the jihadist challenge is more of a "long, twilight struggle" [quoting John F. Kennedy's inaugural address] whose core is not a military campaign but a political contest for the hearts and minds of ordinary Muslims around the world. Fukuyama endorsed Barack Obama in the 2008 US presidential election. He states:[29] I'm voting for Barack Obama this November for a very simple reason. It is hard to imagine a more disastrous presidency than that of George W. Bush. It was bad enough that he launched an unnecessary war and undermined the standing of the United States throughout the world in his first term. But in the waning days of his administration, he is presiding over a collapse of the American financial system and broader economy that will have consequences for years to come. As a general rule, democracies don't work well if voters do not hold political parties accountable for failure. While John McCain is trying desperately to pretend that he never had anything to do with the Republican Party, I think it would be a travesty to reward the Republicans for failure on such a grand scale. Affiliations Between 2006 and 2008, Fukuyama advised Muammar Gaddafi as part of the Monitor Group, a consultancy firm based in Cambridge, MA.[30] In August 2005, Fukuyama co-founded The American Interest, a quarterly magazine devoted to the broad theme of "America in the World". He is currently chairman of the editorial board.[11] Fukuyama was a member of the RAND Corporation's Political Science Department from 1979 to 1980, 1983 to 1989, and 1995 to 1996. He is now a member of the Board of Trustees.[11] Fukuyama was a member of the President's Council on Bioethics from 2001 to 2004.[11] Fukuyama is a Fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science (WAAS). Fukuyama is on the steering committee for the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Trust.[31] Fukuyama is a long-time friend of Libby. They served together in the State Department in the 1980s. Fukuyama is a member of the Board of Counselors for the Pyle Center of Northeast Asian Studies at the National Bureau of Asian Research.[32] Fukuyama is on the board of Global Financial Integrity. Fukuyama is on the executive board of the Inter-American Dialogue. Personal life Fukuyama is a part-time photographer. He also has a keen interest in early-American furniture, which he reproduces by hand.[33] He is keenly interested in sound recording and reproduction, saying, "These days I seem to spend as much time thinking about gear as I do analyzing politics for my day job."[25] Fukuyama is married to Laura Holmgren, whom he met when she was a UCLA graduate student after he started working for the RAND Corporation.[8][11] He dedicated his book Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity to her. They live in California, with their three children, Julia, David, and John away in school. See also Daniel Bell Selected bibliography Scholarly works (partial list) The Soviet Union and Iraq since 1968, Rand research report, 1980 Books The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press, 1992. ISBN 0-02-910975-2 Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. Free Press, 1995. ISBN 0-02-910976-0 The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstitution of Social Order. Free Press. 1999. ISBN 0-684-84530-X Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2002. ISBN 0-374-23643-7 State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st century. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. 2004. ISBN 0-8014-4292-3 America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 2006. ISBN 0-300-11399-4 US edition After the Neo Cons: Where the Right went Wrong. London: Profile Books. 2006. ISBN 1-86197-922-3 UK edition Falling Behind: Explaining the Development Gap between Latin America and the United States (editor). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-536882-6 The Origins of Political Order. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2011. ISBN 978-1-846-68256-8 Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2014. ISBN 978-0-374-22735-7 Essays The End of History?, The National Interest, Summer 1989 Women and the Evolution of World Politics, Foreign Affairs October 1998 Immigrants and Family Values, The Immigration Reader 1998. ISBN 1-55786-916-2 Human Nature and the Reconstruction of Social Order, The Atlantic Monthly, May 1999 Social capital and civil society, paper prepared for delivery at the International Monetary Fund Conference on Second Generation Reforms, October 1, 1999 The neoconservative moment, The National Interest, Summer 2004 After neoconservatism, The New York Times Magazine, February 19, 2006 Supporter's voice now turns on Bush, The New York Times Magazine, March 14, 2006 Why shouldn't I change my mind?, Los Angeles Times, April 9, 2006 The Fall of America, Inc. Newsweek, October 13, 2008 The New Nationalism and the Strategic Architecture of Northeast Asia Asia Policy January 2007 Left Out, The American Interest, January 2011 Is China Next?, The Wall Street Journal, March 12, 2011 The Future of History; Can Liberal Democracy Survive the Decline of the Middle Class?, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2012 What is Governance? Governance (journal), March 2013

Hindi

Francis Fukuyama From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama image from BloggingHeads.tv podcast Fukuyama in 2005 Born October 27, 1952 (age 63) Chicago, Illinois, U.S Website fukuyama.stanford.edu Institutions George Mason University[1] Johns Hopkins University Stanford University Main interests Developing nations Governance International political economy Nation-building and democratization Strategic and security issues Notable ideas End of history Influences [show] Yoshihiro Francis Fukuyama (born October 27, 1952) is an American political scientist, political economist, and author. Fukuyama is known for his book The End of History and the Last Man (1992), which argued that the worldwide spread of liberal democracies and free market capitalism of the West and its lifestyle may signal the end point of humanity's sociocultural evolution and become the final form of human government. However, his subsequent book Trust: Social Virtues and Creation of Prosperity (1995) modified his earlier position to acknowledge that culture cannot be cleanly separated from economics. Fukuyama is also associated with the rise of the neoconservative movement,[2] from which he has since distanced himself.[3] Fukuyama has been a Senior Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University since July 2010.[4] Before that, he served as a professor and director of the International Development program at the School of Advanced International Studies of the Johns Hopkins University. Previously, he was Omer L. and Nancy Hirst Professor of Public Policy at the School of Public Policy at George Mason University.[4] He is a council member of the International Forum for Democratic Studies founded by the National Endowment for Democracy and was a member of the Political Science Department of the RAND Corporation.[5] Contents 1 Early life 2 Education 3 Writings 3.1 Neoconservatism 3.2 Fukuyama's current views 4 Affiliations 5 Personal life 6 See also 7 Selected bibliography 7.1 Scholarly works (partial list) 7.2 Books 7.3 Essays 8 See also 9 References 10 External links Early life Francis Fukuyama was born in the Hyde Park neighborhood of Chicago. His paternal grandfather fled the Russo-Japanese War in 1905 and started a shop on the west coast before being interned in the Second World War.[6] His father, Yoshio Fukuyama, a second-generation Japanese American, was trained as a minister in the Congregational Church, received a doctorate in sociology from the University of Chicago, and taught religious studies.[7][8][9] His mother, Toshiko Kawata Fukuyama, was born in Kyoto, Japan, and was the daughter of Shiro Kawata, founder of the Economics Department of Kyoto University and first president of Osaka City University.[10] Francis grew up in Manhattan as an only child, had little contact with Japanese culture, and did not learn Japanese.[7][8] His family moved to State College, Pennsylvania in 1967.[10] Education Fukuyama received his Bachelor of Arts degree in classics from Cornell University, where he studied political philosophy under Allan Bloom.[8][11] He initially pursued graduate studies in comparative literature at Yale University, going to Paris for six months to study under Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida, but became disillusioned and switched to political science at Harvard University.[8] There, he studied with Samuel P. Huntington and Harvey Mansfield, among others. He earned his Ph.D. in political science at Harvard for his thesis on Soviet threats to intervene in the Middle East.[8][11] In 1979, he joined the global policy think tank RAND Corporation.[8] Fukuyama lived at the Telluride House and has been affiliated with the Telluride Association since his undergraduate years at Cornell, an education enterprise that was home to other significant leaders and intellectuals, including Steven Weinberg, Paul Wolfowitz and Kathleen Sullivan. Fukuyama was the Omer L. and Nancy Hirst Professor of Public Policy in the School of Public Policy at George Mason University from 1996 to 2000. Until July 10, 2010, he was the Bernard L. Schwartz Professor of International Political Economy and Director of the International Development Program at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University in Washington, D.C. He is now Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow and resident in the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.[11] Writings Fukuyama is best known as the author of The End of History and the Last Man, in which he argued that the progression of human history as a struggle between ideologies is largely at an end, with the world settling on liberal democracy after the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Fukuyama predicted the eventual global triumph of political and economic liberalism: What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of postwar history, but the end of history as such.... That is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government. Authors like Ralf Dahrendorf argued in 1990 that the essay gave Fukuyama his 15 minutes of fame, which will be followed by a slide into obscurity.[12][13] He continued to remain a relevant and cited public intellectual leading American communitarian Amitai Etzioni to declare him "one of the few enduring public intellectuals. They are often media stars who are eaten up and spat out after their 15 minutes. But he has lasted."[14] One of the main reasons for the massive criticism against The End of History was the aggressive stance that it took towards postmodernism. Postmodern philosophy had, in Fukuyama's opinion, undermined the ideology behind liberal democracy, leaving the western world in a potentially weaker position.[15] The fact that Marxism and fascism had been proven untenable for practical use while liberal democracy still thrived was reason enough to embrace the hopeful attitude of the Progressive era, as this hope for the future was what made a society worth struggling to maintain. Postmodernism, which, by this time, had become embedded in the cultural consciousness, offered no hope and nothing to sustain a necessary sense of community, instead relying only on lofty intellectual premises.[16] Being a work that both praised the ideals of a group that had fallen out of favor and challenged the premises of the group that had replaced them, it was bound to create some controversy. Fukuyama has written a number of other books, among them Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity and Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. In the latter, he qualified his original "end of history" thesis, arguing that since biotechnology increasingly allows humans to control their own evolution, it may allow humans to alter human nature, thereby putting liberal democracy at risk.[17] One possible outcome could be that an altered human nature could end in radical inequality. He is a fierce enemy of transhumanism, an intellectual movement asserting that posthumanity is a desirable goal. In another work, The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstruction of Social Order, Fukuyama explores the origins of social norms, and analyses the current disruptions in the fabric of our moral traditions, which he considers as arising from a shift from the manufacturing to the information age. This shift is, he thinks, normal and will prove self-correcting, given the intrinsic human need for social norms and rules. In 2006, in America at the Crossroads, Fukuyama discusses the history of neoconservatism, with particular focus on its major tenets and political implications. He outlines his rationale for supporting the Bush administration, as well as where he believes it has gone wrong. In 2008, Fukuyama published the book Falling Behind: Explaining the Development Gap Between Latin America and the United States, which resulted from research and a conference funded by Grupo Mayan to gain understanding on why Latin America, once far wealthier than North America, fell behind in terms of development in only a matter of centuries. Discussing this book at a 2009 conference, Fukuyama outlined his belief that inequality within Latin American nations is a key impediment to growth. An unequal distribution of wealth, he stated, leads to social upheaval, which then results in stunted growth.[18] Neoconservatism As a key Reagan Administration contributor to the formulation of the Reagan Doctrine, Fukuyama is an important figure in the rise of neoconservatism, although his works came out years after Irving Kristol's 1972 book crystallized neoconservatism.[19] Fukuyama was active in the Project for the New American Century think tank starting in 1997, and as a member co-signed the organization's 1998 letter recommending that President Bill Clinton support Iraqi insurgencies in the overthrow of then-President of Iraq Saddam Hussein.[20] He was also among forty co-signers of William Kristol's September 20, 2001 letter to President George W. Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks that suggested the U.S. not only "capture or kill Osama bin Laden", but also embark upon "a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq".[21] In a New York Times article from February 2006, Fukuyama, in considering the ongoing Iraq War, stated: "What American foreign policy needs is not a return to a narrow and cynical realism, but rather the formulation of a 'realistic Wilsonianism' that better matches means to ends."[22] In regard to neoconservatism he went on to say: "What is needed now are new ideas, neither neoconservative nor realist, for how America is to relate to the rest of the world – ideas that retain the neoconservative belief in the universality of human rights, but without its illusions about the efficacy of American power and hegemony to bring these ends about."[22] Fukuyama's current views Fukuyama began to distance himself from the neoconservative agenda of the Bush administration, citing its excessive militarism and embrace of unilateral armed intervention, particularly in the Middle East. By late 2003, Fukuyama had voiced his growing opposition to the Iraq War[23] and called for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation as Secretary of Defense.[24] At an annual dinner of the American Enterprise Institute in February 2004, Dick Cheney and Charles Krauthammer declared the beginning of a unipolar era under American hegemony. "All of these people around me were cheering wildly,"[25] Fukuyama remembers. He believes that the Iraq War was being blundered. "All of my friends had taken leave of reality."[25] He has not spoken to Paul Wolfowitz (previously a good friend) since.[25] Fukuyama declared he would not be voting for Bush,[26] and that the Bush administration had made three major mistakes:[citation needed] Overstating the threat of radical Islam to the US Failing to foresee the fierce negative reaction to its "benevolent hegemony". From the very beginning showing a negative attitude toward the United Nations and other intergovernmental organizations and not seeing that it would increase anti-Americanism in other countries Misjudging what was needed to bring peace in Iraq and being overly optimistic about the success with which social engineering of western values could be applied to Iraq and the Middle East in general. Fukuyama believes the US has a right to promote its own values in the world, but more along the lines of what he calls "realistic Wilsonianism", with military intervention only as a last resort and only in addition to other measures. A latent military force is more likely to have an effect than actual deployment. The US spends 43% of global military spending,[27] but Iraq shows there are limits to its effectiveness. The US should instead stimulate political and economic development and gain a better understanding of what happens in other countries. The best instruments are setting a good example and providing education and, in many cases, money. The secret of development, be it political or economic, is that it never comes from outsiders, but always from people in the country itself. One thing the US proved to have excelled in during the aftermath of World War II was the formation of international institutions. A return to support for these structures would combine American power with international legitimacy. But such measures require a lot of patience. This is the central thesis of his 2006 work America at the Crossroads. In a 2006 essay in The New York Times Magazine strongly critical of the invasion, he identified neoconservatism with Leninism. He wrote that neoconservatives:[28] believed that history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and it has returned as farce when practiced by the United States. Neoconservatism, as both a political symbol and a body of thought, has evolved into something I can no longer support. Fukuyama announced the end of the neoconservative moment and argued for the demilitarization of the War on Terrorism:[28] [W]ar is the wrong metaphor for the broader struggle, since wars are fought at full intensity and have clear beginnings and endings. Meeting the jihadist challenge is more of a "long, twilight struggle" [quoting John F. Kennedy's inaugural address] whose core is not a military campaign but a political contest for the hearts and minds of ordinary Muslims around the world. Fukuyama endorsed Barack Obama in the 2008 US presidential election. He states:[29] I'm voting for Barack Obama this November for a very simple reason. It is hard to imagine a more disastrous presidency than that of George W. Bush. It was bad enough that he launched an unnecessary war and undermined the standing of the United States throughout the world in his first term. But in the waning days of his administration, he is presiding over a collapse of the American financial system and broader economy that will have consequences for years to come. As a general rule, democracies don't work well if voters do not hold political parties accountable for failure. While John McCain is trying desperately to pretend that he never had anything to do with the Republican Party, I think it would be a travesty to reward the Republicans for failure on such a grand scale. Affiliations Between 2006 and 2008, Fukuyama advised Muammar Gaddafi as part of the Monitor Group, a consultancy firm based in Cambridge, MA.[30] In August 2005, Fukuyama co-founded The American Interest, a quarterly magazine devoted to the broad theme of "America in the World". He is currently chairman of the editorial board.[11] Fukuyama was a member of the RAND Corporation's Political Science Department from 1979 to 1980, 1983 to 1989, and 1995 to 1996. He is now a member of the Board of Trustees.[11] Fukuyama was a member of the President's Council on Bioethics from 2001 to 2004.[11] Fukuyama is a Fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science (WAAS). Fukuyama is on the steering committee for the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Trust.[31] Fukuyama is a long-time friend of Libby. They served together in the State Department in the 1980s. Fukuyama is a member of the Board of Counselors for the Pyle Center of Northeast Asian Studies at the National Bureau of Asian Research.[32] Fukuyama is on the board of Global Financial Integrity. Fukuyama is on the executive board of the Inter-American Dialogue. Personal life Fukuyama is a part-time photographer. He also has a keen interest in early-American furniture, which he reproduces by hand.[33] He is keenly interested in sound recording and reproduction, saying, "These days I seem to spend as much time thinking about gear as I do analyzing politics for my day job."[25] Fukuyama is married to Laura Holmgren, whom he met when she was a UCLA graduate student after he started working for the RAND Corporation.[8][11] He dedicated his book Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity to her. They live in California, with their three children, Julia, David, and John away in school. See also Daniel Bell Selected bibliography Scholarly works (partial list) The Soviet Union and Iraq since 1968, Rand research report, 1980 Books The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press, 1992. ISBN 0-02-910975-2 Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. Free Press, 1995. ISBN 0-02-910976-0 The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstitution of Social Order. Free Press. 1999. ISBN 0-684-84530-X Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2002. ISBN 0-374-23643-7 State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st century. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. 2004. ISBN 0-8014-4292-3 America at the Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and the Neoconservative Legacy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 2006. ISBN 0-300-11399-4 US edition After the Neo Cons: Where the Right went Wrong. London: Profile Books. 2006. ISBN 1-86197-922-3 UK edition Falling Behind: Explaining the Development Gap between Latin America and the United States (editor). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-536882-6 The Origins of Political Order. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2011. ISBN 978-1-846-68256-8 Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 2014. ISBN 978-0-374-22735-7 Essays The End of History?, The National Interest, Summer 1989 Women and the Evolution of World Politics, Foreign Affairs October 1998 Immigrants and Family Values, The Immigration Reader 1998. ISBN 1-55786-916-2 Human Nature and the Reconstruction of Social Order, The Atlantic Monthly, May 1999 Social capital and civil society, paper prepared for delivery at the International Monetary Fund Conference on Second Generation Reforms, October 1, 1999 The neoconservative moment, The National Interest, Summer 2004 After neoconservatism, The New York Times Magazine, February 19, 2006 Supporter's voice now turns on Bush, The New York Times Magazine, March 14, 2006 Why shouldn't I change my mind?, Los Angeles Times, April 9, 2006 The Fall of America, Inc. Newsweek, October 13, 2008 The New Nationalism and the Strategic Architecture of Northeast Asia Asia Policy January 2007 Left Out, The American Interest, January 2011 Is China Next?, The Wall Street Journal, March 12, 2011 The Future of History; Can Liberal Democracy Survive the Decline of the Middle Class?, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2012 What is Governance? Governance (journal), March 2013

Last Update: 2016-07-05
Usage Frequency: 1
Quality:

Reference: Anonymous
Warning: Contains invisible HTML formatting

Get a better translation with
4,401,923,520 human contributions

Users are now asking for help:



We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to visit this site you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more. OK