Concept of collective identity

Concept of collective identity Introduction: Although the concept of collective identity is a post-colonial phenomenon, a few nations would describe themselves under a collective identity before the modern times. In fact, Europe is historically unique in terms that it has been the people living in the continent of Europe who have persistently described themselves as Europeans since the 17th Century (Pagden, 2002). Indeed, European Union emerged as the most important attempt for creating a supranational entity in the Continent and the best example of a Pan-European common identity as even the words Europe and the European Union are being used as synonyms by millions of people every day. Nevertheless, an uncertainty of a common identity has always been the case for Europeans throughout history and the physical as well as social borders of Europe has never been distinctly known for centuries which are full of wars, confrontation competition and blood. Today, the same problem continues to exist and many believe that it is the major factor blocking the efforts for achieving a fully integrated Europe, as the definition and frontiers of a common European identity is still unknown. Indeed, one of the most important issues of the European integration from a socio-political perspective is the vague concept of a common European identity including prospects of European Union Citizenship. Although a common European identity has been long around for centuries, these are fairly new issues in relevance to the half a century long history of todays European Union. However, I believe how the common European identity is defined is very important for the future steps of the European integration project, as nowadays the EU is undergoing transformation towards a political union with an aim to become a global actor in the international political arena. What shall be the elements of a common European identity, how shall it be formulized if it is to bec ome a successful construct which would define Europe correctly to end the efforts that lasted for such a long time? I believe a triumphant common European identity must include the concrete and symbolic realities and it must be rooted to the diversity of cultures which had been created by the long history of Europe (DAppollonia, 2002). Otherwise, if it remains as a form of thin identity suggested by Habermas (2006), the problems and uncertainties of European identity as well as the poorly functioning European Union citizenship is most likely to exist in the Unions foreseeable future. In fact, a common European identity can only be successfully constructed by taking into account all the ambiguities, contradictions and developments in form of a unity in diversity principle which can be applied to the reality of Europe rather than building a shallow and artificial construct as it seems to be today. Theoretically, a united Europe in political terms is made possible if a united Europe in cultural terms is established through formulating a collective common identity which may only be conceived as a coll ection of multiple and complex values created by complicated dynamics of Europes long history. Nevertheless, a united Europe in cultural terms shall not mean to enforce a homogenous and strictly ordered European society; rather the European identity shall celebrate Europes long tradition of diversity. Another important question is how should European Union citizenship be defined and what should be the frontiers of cultural implications of such a political formulation. Considering the wide cultural diversity and long history that the individual members of the European Union had share in the European continent, a collective identity may prove to be far too complex to construct, so one may argue that a common European identity is still an illusion. Although Europeans have a successfully formed a common economic and increasingly political union, they are still far away from the desired level of cultural unity and a common identity which seems to be an alarming factor for the next stages of the European integration. Nonetheless, European Union citizenship is an area open to developments and it might be used as a critically important tool by the European Union leaders to accumulate a common European identity, only if it is formulized correctly. The critical point on the debate of Europe an Union citizenship is that the dominant Classical Model of Citizenship is based on the structures of nation-state and that is why this model cannot be applied to the European Union, as it is a whole different level of organization which cannot be compared to a nation-state. On the other hand, Post-National citizenship is a modern approach to the issue of European identity and my evaluation shows that it is a feasible solution suitable for todays Europe in order to reach its goals of unification and deepening through building a stronger common identity in the 21st Century. This paper is organized in several sections. European identity from a historical perspective is analyzed in the first part; nationalist responses to the current status of European identity and the issue of national identities in contrast to the common European identity is discussed in the following part; a new European identity and suggestions for a new understanding of common European identity is suggested in the third part; a brief history of European Union efforts and progress on building a common identity is examined in the fourth part; the current status of European Union Citizenship is discussed in the fifth part and finally, Post-National citizenship as a model for European Union citizenship is proposed in the last part of this paper. After all, this paper argues that a common identity in form of a collective European identity is clearly necessary for the Union at this stage of integration, and it is a crucial element for the future of the European integration project especially as our world is getting smaller as well as more fragmented simultaneously due to the complex dynamics of international relations every day at the age of globalization. European citizenship is very much connected to the issue of European identity and it is the key to achieving such a strong common and collective identity when it is formulized as a Post-National phenomenon. The Europeans must derive their power from the diversity of their cultures by building a thick identity for Europe rather than a thin identity which consists of merely political rights; yet the Europeans shall not overlook the uniqueness of the Continent and the similarities they share in comparison to the rest of the world emphasized by the Unity in Diversity principle. Today, it is time for the Europeans to unite under one roof in socio-political terms, complete the long standing task of defining the boundaries of the European civilization by establishing a common and collective European identity in order to carry on the progress of the European integration project in a globalized world. Nonetheless, the question of possibilities of the Europeans to achieve such a high level of cultural as well as political unity remains a question and it is subject to a whole different level of research. However, often seen as a regional product of globalization itself, I believe the European integration project cannot progress any further without achieving a common European identity which is more critical than ever today in order to overcome the challenges of globalization in the 21st Century. What is Identity? Identity has always been a problematic concept because it is uncertain, fluid and highly flexible. Identity is the way to define ones self and to differentiate from the others. If taken literally, identity means equal; identical. Identity is not static but dynamic, and it can be defined in different ways in different circumstances. Identity is construct, which cannot be constructed immediately but only in time. It is not a fixed, constant and pre-given entity; while identity formation is heavily dependent on how one is perceived by the others. Identification implies belonging or membership, in turn which implies the exclusion of non-members (Bretherton Vogler, 1999: 236). In other words, the sole purpose of identity is to separate self from the other in a sense. Moreover, identities are multiple in nature, or even kaleidoscopic. A person may have a single identity, but it will be made up of many levels of loyalty and identification (Von Benda-Beckmann Verkuyten, 1995: 18). Meanwhil e, identities change, because they are based on perceptions, which themselves change over time and environment; as it is possible to identify ones self with more than one thing at a time such as class and gender, or religion and age. Therefore there are various elements of ones identity and which operate at different levels and these various elements in an identity may well be contradictory (Von Benda-Beckmann Verkuyten, 1995: 12). On the other hand, a collective identity means the attitudes, which all members of that group have in common in their thoughts and behavior; which differentiates them from the other (Munch, 2001: 137). Collective identities can provide existential meaning for people, thus they are primary means of unity in a society which give additional stability especially during periods of upheaval. Collective identities can generate a degree of continuity between individuals and their social environment, and can provide social recognition and approval (Von Benda-Beckmann Verkuyten, 1995: 24). Therefore, collective identities are defined mainly by culture from a historical point of view rather than biological genes, ethnicity, nationalism or simple political rights. Finally, they are used to construct community and feelings of cohesion and holism, a concept to give the impression that all individuals are equal in the imagined community (Strath, 2002: 387). From the perspective of political scienc e; there are two types of political identities: a civic identity and a cultural identity. The cultural definition of political identity entails a sense of belonging of an individual towards a particular group which can mostly defined by its uniform cultural or ethnic values. On the other hand, the civic definition of political identity involves with the identification of an individual mostly in form of citizenry with a political structure, which includes political institutions, rights, duties and rules (Bruter, 2004: 26). Therefore, a cultural European identity implies a reference to Europe as a continent, a civilization and a cultural entity whereas a civic European identity implies a reference to the political and institutional aspects of European Union identity largely in the form of EU citizenship. European Identity throughout History: Europe has always been more of a mental construct than a geographical or social entity (Lowenthal, 2000: 314). Europe has no natural frontiers both in geographic and sociological terms. Therefore it had never been easy to acquire a singular definition of European identity because the borders of Europe had always been dynamic, and no one knew where Europe started and Europe ended (Pagden, 2002). A European identity is an abstraction and a fiction without essential proportions (Strath, 2002: 387). The concept of a European identity is an idea expressing artificial notions of unity rather than an identity of equality. In this sense, the concept of European identity is inscribed in a long history of political reflection on the concept of Europe. From the perspective of history, Europe has been united as a singular entity in various settings for a number of times in its past such as the Roman Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, the Napoleonic Empire, and arguably the Nazi Third Reich. However, identity was only conceptualized as a macro-level collective phenomenon by the intellectual elites of Europe; on the other hand, for the rural masses of Europe, identity was a local term associated with the micro-level, rarely the nation and never an incident as large as the continent of Europe (Pagden, 2002). In different period of history, a common European identity had been defined on different basis. In the Middle Ages, Christianity was the main defining characteristic of European identity, whereas in modern times, the emergence of the nation state, periods of nationalism and afterwards democracy and secularism has been the common characteristic of the Europeans. Meanwhile, Christianity lost its dominance yet it arguably remained as one of the important components of European identity. Today, the European Union similar to the continent of Europe can be characterized by overlapping and unclear boundaries. From a geographical perspective, the EU has fuzzy boundaries due to the ongoing enlargement processes since the 1970s (Risse, 2003: 490). Although the geographical borders of Europe are not objectively defined particularly in the East, a state without a geographical relevance to the European continent cannot become a part of the European Union, even if it shares the EUs collective values and norms. Moreover what adds to the uncertainty of Europes borders is that boundaries of the EU may change according to different policy fields such as the Schengen includes the non EU member Norway but at the same time it does not include the EU member state the United Kingdom. Therefore, before anything else the lack of solid geographical boundaries weaken efforts of the EU to be seen as a singular entity by its own people (Castano, 2004). Meanwhile, the geographic boundaries of Europe have suffered dramatic changes within time and even the recent years provide an image of changing boundaries in Europe considering the reunification of Germany, the break-up of Yugoslavia and collapse of the Soviet Union. Therefore, Europe cannot be defined solely as a geographical space. On the contrary, Europe cannot be defined in cultural space either, unless European culture is associated with the Continents long history of diversity itself. Indeed, diversity shall be the main characteristic of European identity from a cultural point of view. Religious and cultural heritages including Roman law, political democracy, parliamentary institutions, Renaissance humanism, rationalism, romanticism characterize the common identity of the Europeans (Smith, 1992). On the other hand, there are undeniable socioeconomic, cultural, national and ethnic differences among the member states of the European Union. Nevertheless, the motto of the EU, unity in diversity, reflects this fact from a positive point of view and proposes a common identity for Europeans based on their peaceful diversity as a fundamental character of the European society at large. A collective political culture is an important feature of the common European identity. The Greeks gave Europe the science and philosophy and the Romans gave it the idea of single continent and unity which created Europes strong cultural and political origins. The diverse and multiple cultures of the ancient Europe shared a single identity as they were brought together under a common system of Roman law. The people of Europe also shared a common language, Latin, and after Europe slowly converted to Christianity they acquired a common religion as well. Christianity has been a crucial part of the European identity and it played a key role to create its internal cohesion and to designate its relationship with the rest of the world. Further references are made to Europes identity besides its heritage of Greco-Roman civilization and Christianity; such as the ideas of the Enlightenment, Science, Reason, Progress, Industrialization, Democracy and Individualization as the core elements of th is claimed European legacy (Wintle, 1996: 13-16). Hellenism, Romanticism, welfare society and cross-fertilization of diversity can be added to this list (Garcia, 1993: 7-9), while one may argue that Europes core values include its commitments to an undivided continent, to individual freedom, and to the universalism of humanity (Havel, 1996). However, this unity never reached to the point of sharing a common European culture up to this point in history of the Continent. In fact, a single body of citizenry or a common cultural identity could not be reached even in the peak of Europes history of unity and solidarity. When the differences within Europe are emphasized, they are often in the form of unity in diversity; religious differences such as Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox Christianity, and linguistic differences including Romance, Germanic and Slavic languages are obvious; yet they are seen as correlated, Catholic-Romance, Protestant-Germanic, Orthodox-Slavic, and essentially are underlying the major ethnic cleavages and conflicts in the history of Europe (Wintle, 1996). Anthony Smith is among the scholars who are skeptical of the possibility of a common European identity because they could not find a common culture across the European continent, and even more critically they claim that Europe lacks of a shared set o f myths, experience and symbols; these elements which they find crucial to create post-national identity (Smith, 1992: 72-73). Furthermore, Europe lacks of a shared historical and cultural content as which is the largest source of division among Europeans. Other obstacles to a common European identity include linguistic diversity and its tripartite religious division. In fact, a major difference among EU countries is the persistence of linguistic diversity, even though in practical level English has become the dominant language in Europe. Language does not only have an instrumental but also an emotional dimension and peoples sense of nationality is often tied up with their mother tongue (Guibernau, 2001: 192). Finally, confrontation, wars and the effort to establish clear differences between peoples of the continent dominate the history of Europe, which is the exact opposite of what the European Union seeks to achieve today. On the other side of the debate, scholars such as Michael Wintle are more optimistic on the possibility of creating a European identity. Indeed, the existence of the EU identity in the form of converging education standards, educational exchanges, and the organization of a European civil society is already established in most parts of Europe. Wintle argues that a European identity was previously already created during the high Middle Age (Wintle, 1996: 19-22), and it can be easily established today considering the forces of globalization. For now, the major success of the EU in fostering its identity has been limited with the increasing free movement of people across European borders, which has accelerated since the 1985 and formalized in 1990 Schengen accords parallelly correlated with the rising impact of globalization. Increased interaction among peoples of Europe would also encourage cultural exchanges and this could foster a stronger sense of a shared community. Education and hi gh culture shall play a key role in European Unions cultural policy which has critical importance for building a thick European identity, because these two factors have an important effect on the creation as well as promotion of the EU identity. Education is obviously one of the crucial dimensions in any attempt to develop the future identity of the EU or at least more understanding and convergence among Europeans; high culture unites Europeans against the low culture which separates them. After all, the development of the EU identity will be the outcome of a long process in which bottom-up as well as top-down initiatives are likely to be employed (Guibernau, 2001: 183-184). The idea of Europe as well as the identity of Europeans are constructed over time with processes of contention and bargaining. Gerard Delanty argues that a European Culture is not an entity with cohesion and fixed boundaries, but a floppy concept, with no clear borders and with internal opposition and contradictions, discursively shaped in contentious social bargaining processes (Delanty, 1995; 1999). In other words, the images of Europe do not exist as a natural phenomenon but are discursively shaped by internal as well as external forces (Strath, 2002). A basic step in the process of creating a collective identity is to defining itself in relation to the other. Central to ones identifications are images of others. Likewise any identity, European identity necessarily contains an element of separation from the non-European. The boundaries of Europe can only be drawn and the identity of Europe can only be realized in the mirror of others. Indeed, Europe does not exist without non-Euro pe and that non-Europe does not exist without Europe (Wintle, 1996). Many centuries ago, the Europeans defined people living in the north as uncivilized and people living in the south as oriental (Pagden, 2002). Furthermore, the Greeks labeled the non-Greek speaking people as barbarians, even if that word would surely have a different meaning by that time. In nearer times, although the Russians shared many features with a European society including the same religion, it could not reach the formal limits of a Romanized civilization thus perceived as a barbaric empire or the orient, depending on the time. Moreover, European belief of its superiority relied on the common features of European societies such as science and liberal arts. Thus the rest of the world could only be portrayed as actors in relation to Europe, in other words always remained as the other. According to Delanty, Europe has been always invented and reinvented on the basis of division and strategy for the construction of difference from the other starting from Christian identity against Islam in the Middle-Ages, after that in the colonial politics to the New World, and to the ethnic minorities in the contemporary European Union (Delanty, 1995). Therefore, historical experience suggests that the new European identity may be constructed on the other which may be the United States, the East, Islam or the European past itself. Samuel Huntington has argued that religion provides the best common means of historically distinguishing between Europeans and the other, especially in terms of the confrontation between the Judeo-Christian tradition and Islam (Huntington, 1996). However, at the same time, the separation between Eastern Orthodox Christianity and Western variations of Christianity has, for a long time, been crucial in establishing a division between Western and Eastern E urope; partially reinforced in the Cold War, divisions between Catholicism and Protestantism and separation between North and South (Guibernau, 2001). Therefore, history shows that peoples of Europe has been united against peoples of other civilizations at times such as global upheaval and wars while at other times Europeans get divided and separated due to the face that they may perceive the other internally. Today, the European Union is frequently argued to be a fortress for the other and the EU is often referred to as a Christian Club, because historically all states on the continent of Europe had Christian societies. The Ottoman Empire was the greatest enemy of European states as well as Christianity in the Middle Ages; which made Islam the primary characteristic of the other for Europeans from the perspective of history. Today, the accession dialogues of Turkey into the European Union raise wide public opposition in Europe while the European Union officials make constant efforts to prove their allegiance to non-religious, non-ethnic but solely liberal and non discriminatory Copenhagen Criteria independent from historical aspects of the other which has actually been extensively used to define the European identity. Finally, Europe is unique because it has possessed an identity as a cultural space which gave birth to political unions throughout its history; however, it has never succeeded to constitute a single nation-state or a unified ethnic group. Although the European Union with its single currency and supranational political and legal institutions changed these historical facts to an extent, it is only possible with the means of a common European identity which will carry Europe to the next stage of integration that it always aimed but failed to achieve during its long history. Nevertheless, history has already proved that it will surely be hard to overcome uncertainties of a common European identity at the level of the masses. Over the past millennium, the advancements of European civilization gave rise to the elites living on the continent of Europe who feel increasingly attached to Europe as a whole and shared dreams of a united continent. However, Europe as a realm sharing a common history as well as a common destiny has been largely abandoned by fixed prejudices on often nationalistic and ethnic grounds. National interests and biases at local, national, and global levels have prevented the masses of European people from viewing themselves collectively (Lowenthal, 2000: 315). However today, forces of globalization, advancements in communications technologies and popular culture now promote the sense of being European among larger segments of society other than the European elites. Although a truly trans-European society is still far away, many of its essential elements are already in place this time largely due to the forces of globalization. Most European states are increasingly democratic; their econo mies are for the most part market driven; their popular culture grows more homogeneous as communication technologies expand under the forces of globalization in the 21st Century (Waterman, 1999: 23). Therefore, Europe is at the stage of defining its identity today; however which criteria are being deployed to define Europe, Europeans, Europeanness and their respective boundaries is critically important. A common European identity must be constructed by defining and understanding the historical roots of outstanding features of the European society in relation to the notion of citizenship, which will be discussed in depth in the following parts of this paper; developed in the past over the land of Europe. For sure, Europe is being redefined as a result of a complex set of processes, but an important question is what sort of Europe is emerging from them? Nationalist Responses to European Identity: There is certainly a structured symmetry in the perception of the European Union as the coincidence of a homogenized socio-political space, a unified regulatory space of an EU super-state, a singular European civil society surpassing existing national and regional differences in culture and identity (Hudson, 2000). In some respects there has been progress towards such an ideal of European common European cultural and a trans-national civil society. For example, the Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights have had an important role in defining acceptable standards across Europe. The issue of European identity and the criteria used to denote Europeans is clearly a critical one for the political and social integrity of the European Union. Europe will exist as an unquestionable political community only when European identity permeates peoples lives and daily existence (Demos 1998). Identity is a key issue which is continuously changing and thats the reason why it is so hard to define especially in a world of fast changes in the 21st Centurys globalization. The member states of todays enlarged EU have become multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies with various structural phenomenon ranging from the immigrant community of France to Post-Communist yet ethnic communities of the Central and Eastern European states. As the EU expanded eastwards in the last two rounds of enlargements, the issue of defining a European identity became even more critical for sake of integrity and stability of the Union. One conception of a singular European identity would see it constructed through a process similar to that involved in the creation of national identities in the 19th and the 20th Centuries. Ironically, while the aim was to create those national identities in the past, the challenge that Europeans face today would be to transcend them for the creation of a trans-national understanding of Europeannes. However, the current trends at local European level are quite different from the interests of Europeanists at the supranational level. There are pressures from nation-states and their citizens to resist any further transfer of national sovereignty as well as erosion of national identity (Hudson, 2000). In fact, the success of extreme right wing political parties in important European countries such as Austria and France in recent years may be seen as a sign of the reappearance of dangerous nationalist and racist ambitions which the peoples of Europe have most probably experienced more tha n any other continent in the world history. Eric Hobsbawm has proclaimed that nationalism is dead (Hobsbawm, 1990). On the contrary, Llobera argues that national identities are certainly not eternal, but the time of their demise has not yet arrived (Llobera, 2003). In fact, national identities are still dominant in Europe as recent Eurobarometer surveys show that people in Europe prefer maintaining their national identity and sovereignty; but increasing number of people have accepted European identity in addition to their national identities. Therefore, European nationalism is another important component of a common European identity and it has been a major ideological tool for unifying nation states as well as the Europeans as a whole throughout Europes history. To start with, the European Union, with its both intergovernmental and supranational characteristics represents a far different type of state-organization than a classical nation state. The main distinguishing characteristics of the EU from the nation-state are the ab sence of a shared language, a uniform media, common education system and most importantly a central state structure (Shore, 2000: 64). Furthermore, the powers of the EU rely on the sharing of sovereignty of its member states which may often have conflicting national interests. Indeed, the European integration project has mainly served as a tool for progressively limiting individual nation-states to practice any kind of harmful nationalism and this makes up an important part of the European identity. At this point, nationalist Euroskeptics may argue that building a common Europe and an identity for it means destroying nations. However, a general feeling of Europeanness and loyalty to Europe in a cultural sense, does not need to conflict with national identities (Andreani, 1999). A successful construct of European identity must include the concrete and symbolic realities created within history of the Continent but exclude nationalist ambitions of the past. Surely, the European states have not always been nationalist through Europes long history. The definition of nationalism counts on the idea of nation and territory; while the definition of a European nationalism depends on the historical and ideological evolution of the European nation states and aspirations for a post-national Europe. In fact, the aspirations that underlie in the roots of the foundation of the European Union are parallel to European cosmopolitanism in the 18th and the 19th centuries. From the Enlightenment to the beginning of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) after the Second World War; European nationalism found two separate meanings: one as an antinational Pan-European idea of a new united Europe that limits the sovereignty of the nation states, and the other as a pro-national ideology to create or legitimate new nation states (DAppollonia, 2002). Historically, cosmopolitanism reflected intentions for a European unity, and gave rise to anti-national European nationalism. European nationalism was characterized by the will to protect the European interests and its supremacy from non-Europeans as well as protecting Europe from itself by creating a federation. It can be argued that economic development, comme

Lorraine Hansberrys A Raisin In The Sun - The Importance of the Strug

The Importance of the Struggle in A Raisin in the Sun      Ã‚   â€Å"Why do some people persist despite insurmountable obstacles, while others give up quickly or never bother to try† (Gunton 118)? A Raisin in the Sun, a play by Lorraine Hansberry, is a commentary on life and our struggle to comprehend and control it. The last scene in the play between Asagai and Beneatha contrasts two contemporary views on why we keep on trying to change the future, and reaches the conclusion that, far from being a means to an end, the real meaning of life is the struggle. Whether we succeed or not, our lives are purposeful only if we have tried to make the world a better place for ourselves and others- only, in other words, if we follow our dreams.    Many self-described realists dismiss this attitude as naive and unrealistic, that finding value in the pursuit of dreams is merely a self-induced delusion. Often, this perspective is obtained after much bitter suffering for little or no apparent reason, as in the case of Beneatha Younger. Already a natural cynic due to the condition of the world into which she was born, a world where poor blacks with aspirations of something better were generally doomed, she became embittered with life when her dream of becoming a doctor was seemingly shattered. From an outside perspective, it seems obvious that she reacted poorly: the money her brother lost, after all, was not hers at all but her mother's, and how she expected to finance college without the death of her father and the insurance check that followed is unclear. What is clear, however, is that the death of her long-held aspiration had a profound effect on her. â€Å"A dream glanced from afar brings disappointment when it collapses; a dream that dies w... ...th the mundane, everyday anxieties of life, giving little thought to what our existence means or how we can change it. There is another reason, however, that we should strive to mold our own future, no matter how futile a task it may seem. Lost causes can be winnable, if enough people care about them to make them succeed: there is always the hundredth dream.    Works Cited: Bloom, Harold. Twientieth-Century American Literature. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1986. Draper, James P. Black Literature Criticisms. Detroit: Gale Research Incorporated, 1992. Gunton, Sharon R. Contemporary Literary Criticisms. Detroit: Gale Research Company, 1981. Hansberry, Lorraine. A Raisin in the Sun. Literature and the Writing Process. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1996. Hansberry, Lorraine.   A Raisin in the Sun.   New York:   Signet, 1988.

Odor and Perfume

perfume COMMUNICATION AND ADVERTISING ‘CHANEL' Xing Cheng Zhao Qin Zeynep Sezer Chanel Perfume Background: What’s the different of the man and woman’s perfume Man perfume is generally vegetation type, lady perfume with floral majority And from perfume bottles can see it, man perfume scent-bottle mostly concise have edge, lady perfume bottles are mostly curve. Man perfume bottle of color with grey,black, blue, give priority to warm color Lady scent-bottle color is rich, have beige, pink, red, etc Key message: This product is a unisex perfume, so it cannot have obvious difference between man and woman. e should invite a artist to design a wonderful scent-bottle,a attractive bottle design will catch consumers’ eye . this will increase sales volume. Special features: Because to make both men and women can use, so perfume bottle cannot too feminine also cannot too hard, so two paragraphs are designed respectively scent-bottle may be better. Also we need to produ ce this unisex perfume which has unique flavor. This perfume will used by the couples who want to make their relationships strong. Another special feature is the products use an environment friendly materials which are biodegradable.There are still many problems of environmental protection in recent years. Our products with bio-degradable packaging. It is favorable to Protect the environment and can’t increase waste . Our target consumers: Our new perfume is produced for the young fashion people especially couple between 16-25 years old and who are living in english speaking countries. For our new product, we chose young generation because our product will launch in Valentine's day so we focus the young couples who wants to buy the present for each others. The other reseason of our target is: our product's lower price.We want to make the young people able to buy the product who have small budget. USP: As unique selling points, we focus on price. our unisex perfume is produced with lower price by well-known up market manufacture. Our customers choose our new product on basis of price with brand's quality. Media of Advertisement As a media advertisement using : TV commercial—-Use a storyboard to illustrate maybe invite famous star as a spokesperson to act the story. We decided to choose for our TV commercial as Robert Pattinson and Emma watson nowadays who are very famous and England stars.Because this is a unisex perfume, if use of television advertising can describe a love story illustrates this one perfume products. our main idea is reflected in this scent unisex, and romantic, aesthetic. The main storyline is a couple of strange men and women with the same fragrance, in passing, are each other on the same smell attracted, then fell in love! Because this kind of perfume is produced by a well-known up-market manufacturer,So the quality of products is believing,and it already have a lot of loyal customers.The company now wishes to enter the lower end of the market, the product’s price will be cheaper than other products of company. It is attractive to consumers, Wonderful perfume with cheap price . Radio spot—- write the script to make a radio play as a advertisement, including sound effects and music Magazine —-use famous star to take some fashion photograph and we are going to make the testers for customers in magazine. We make the people try our perfume in beauty shops and malls. Other media—- we use e-branding in facebook and the websites.We will inform the customers about our promotions and new product in Chanel's website. And also we use the billboard in street with the photograph's of our brand star. Special promotion This perfume’s key point is unisex, so special promotion is the perfume is a couple perfume, if a couple to buy lovers perfume, so that they can be presented a set of new product trial outfit. To launch the new perfume in Valentine's Day activities(make bundling perfume body lotion & shower gel) The products discount activities: buy one get 50% discount for the second one.

Life Tenure of Supreme Court Justices Free Essay Example, 1500 words

Behind them as proof of "bad" behavior, but this does not hold true where good behavior is described as "a favorable manner of conducting oneself. " If decisions unpalatable to some individuals, or even the majority, are used as a basis of impeachment by Congress, the judiciary would become politicized and subject to the whims of the majority. (See Good Behavior). the view that it is independent judges who can guard the Constitution as well as the rights of individuals. The Supreme Court upholds the Constitution and defends it against ideas that endanger the social order. If the people no longer finds the Constitution acceptable, however, they can propose to amend it through their representatives. History -Federalist Papers). Some put forth the argument that the Supreme Court is not accountable because Justices are not required to stand for election while serving during good behavior. Also, impeachment is difficult to carry out, with only one Justice in U. history having been impeac hed, and none ever been removed. Despite the claims to the contrary, it is argued the Supreme Court is actually not immune from external influence, being subject to appointment by the President and confirmation by the Senate (a political process). We will write a custom essay sample on Life Tenure of Supreme Court Justices or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page