See details Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

See details - Essay Example However, when the Spartans staged a war against the Athenians, the Athenians managed to win against them with an army three times less than theirs. The victory of the Athens against the Spartans won the state a lot of respect form other Greek states. However, it was the rise of the Persians and their conquests against the Greek states and islands that prompted the formation of the Delian League. The formation of the League promoted Athens’ struggle to conquer the Persia. Many things did not go as planned after the formation of League, with Athens hijacking the leadership and control of the union. The activities of the Athens in the leadership of the League prompted the question, were Athens trying to genuinely make a united government under their leadership to promote a better defence against the Persian threat or were the Delian League just an attempt by them to create a Thalassocracy. According to various studies, the Athens was angry for power. Little did they consider the interests of other cities. The Persian threat, although having been key to the formation of the government, in a big way, it was not the main interest of the Athenians. There was more to the unity, as the various scholars suppose. If the Athenians were after uniting the various cities into the Delian League, they would have allowed independence to various states forming part of the league. However, the exercise of supremacy by the Athenian power indicated their intentions to create a Thalassocracy. The forceful pulling of the various groups into the League by the Athens, and intimidating means it used to draw the members into the league was proof enough that Athens was not interested in uniting them into the common interest that united them against Persian. This paper seeks to justify that the reasons why Athens formed a united government under their leadership was not to promote a better defence against Persian invasion, but the Delian League was an attempt to create a Thalassocrac y. In explaining whether Athens was genuinely making a united government under their leadership to promote a better defence against the Persian threat, reasons for the formation of the Delian League are discussed. The Delian League as an organization was established in the early 5th Century BC by several Greek states. The main reason why these states formed the league was to defend them against Persian invasion. They had defeated the Persians in the Greaco-Persian wars, and an alliance of several states against them was the best way to ensure immunity (Spielvogel 78). Uniting against a common enemy made states stronger. They created a strong army by bringing the best men together to form one common army. They would also enjoy the best leadership and command from a single source. The unity would also ensure that the states shared a common interest, making them even stronger. Although they had earlier defeated the Persians, its Empire was still powerful. Besides, the reason for the le ague was to get a little payback for the devastation the member states had suffered in the hands of the Persian forces (Duiker and Jackson 103-104). The common interest between Greek forces united together states consisting of Athens and Greek from Ionia, the Hellespont of the besieged Sentos, a city previously held by the Persians. As a result of this, the Greek fleet under the command of   Pausanias who was a military commander from Sparta, sailed to

Information Explosion Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Information Explosion - Assignment Example While some of this vilification might have the concrete basis of simple retaliation; a good proportion of it is unprovoked with an attempt to sensationalize and target specific persons and organizations leading to defamation claims. In the paragraphs that follow we examine the treatment of obscenity and defamation issues on the internet in jurisprudence, supplanted with case laws. The concept of intellectual freedom is a draw-out from the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. This amendment guarantees freedom of speech by mandating that "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech" (US) An individual's right of free speech is, however, circumscribed. Very many forms of speech - e.g. defamation and obscenity - do not enjoy protection under the First Amendment. American jurisprudence has also afforded different levels of protection for speech depending on the method by which it is communicated or transmitted. A definition of obscene material was provided in the English case of Regina v. Hicklin (1868) by proposing that material is obscene if it corrupts the minds of those who are open to immoral influences. Most obscenity laws were based on this definition until 1957 when a US court in United States v. Roth defined obscene material as "material which deals with sex in a manner appealing to prurient interest,". In 1966 US Supreme Court in Woman of Pleasure v. The Attorney General (1966) added an angle to the obscenity test that the material must also be "utterly without redeeming social value". This diluted the law and made First Amendment protection available even to that material which entirely lacked literary value. Only with the case law Miller v. California (1973) did the US supreme court reigned in the "utterly without redeeming social value" dimension and redefined the present three stage obscenity test. The Supreme court stated that in order to ascertain if any material is obscene, the jury must reckon (1) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest; (2) whether the work depicts or describes sexual conduct (defined by state statute) in a patently offensive way; and (3) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. In United States v. Thomas (1966) Rob ert and Carleen Thomas, owners of a computer bulletin board system were convicted for knowingly distributing and transporting obscene material in interstate commerce over the internet. The jury had applied the Miller obscenity test in this case. In Miller case, the Court insisted that juries should use a local standard to determine the prurient interest component, rather than applying any national standard. However in Pope v. Illinois. (1987) the "serious value" dimension was tested to a national standard. More importantly despite the evolution of the law over the years, US courts continue to find interpretation and application of obscenity law arduous. The solution appears to be determining a national standard carefully considering the tastes and inclinations of internet users.