Psychoanalytic theory and the crisis of masculinity

Psychoanalytic theory and the crisis of masculinity The late 60s saw a rapidly materialising concern about the status of masculinity. Before the 60s it seemed that the idea of masculinity was safe males could be useful within modern capitalist societies, providing for their families and gaining a sense of satisfaction from their place in society. But society began to change, economically, socially and especially in relation to the position of women. The rise of feminism was changing womens attitudes about the way in which they were (and are) treated. In turn this was starting to affect how men viewed themselves. Carroll (2004) explains how in American society the breadwinner ideal was being eroded with support from professional groups including psychologists and cardiologists working all the hours and a constant striving for material wealth might not be good for you. How, asked men, do we define ourselves now? This essay will examine the crisis in masculinity from the point of view of psychoanalysis  ¿Ã‚ ½through the Oedipal compl ex and the cast0tl.QDCOmp,lex and then move onto evidence from social and cultural theories. To examine how masculinity might be in crisis, it is first necessary to examine how psychoanalytical theories posit that boys gain their masculine identity or in other words how they become men. Modern psychoanalytical theory, as did Freud himself, places a great emphasis on the early relationships of the young boy with his parents or caregivers. It is the vicissitudes of these relationships that will have important consequences for development. In Freudian terms, this early relationship is overshadowed by the Oedipal conflict. The mother shows a great interest in the child and the boy realises that his father represents his main rival to this relationship. The boy desires the mother, but the father stands in the way. Attempting to maintain these conflicting influences at some kind of equilibrium is the central drama of development from a psychoanalytical viewpoint. What, then, are the most important processes that occur in early life that influence the construction (or otherwise) of the male identity out of the Oedipal crisis? Greenson (1968) explains that psychoanalytic theory concentrates on the idea of disidentification, this is divided into two processes: firstly a boy must sever the emotional ties he has with the primary caregiver usually the mother and secondly he needs to identify with a male role-model usually the father. The identification with the father should allow the boy to have a way of communicating with the outside world, to tempt the boy away from psychological closeness with the mother and provide the support needed to avoid the boys return to a symbiotic relationship with his mother. The relationship with the mother, then, is seen by Klein (1975) as a delicate balancing act. It proVides a prototype for later relationships with women and so needs to be warm and lOVing, but it is difficult for a man to have relationships with women if he is too close to his mother. Horrocks (1994) argues that, in fact, the male child is surrounded by femininity throughout his early childhood, and it is important for him to break away and discover a world of men for here lie the roots of the male identity. The central paradox, though, is that the man wishes to escape this cocoon of womanhood but there is also the desire to become close to a woman. One danger in this dynamic is that the early influence of the mother is too great and not sufficiently counter-acted by the father this leads to an inability to separate himself from the mother (Horrocks, 1994). The role of the father in the masculine identity is seen as crucial by psychoanalysts. Horrocks (1994) sees the role of fathering as an introduction to manhood, the introduction to a role that has previously been shrouded in mystery. While there are some initiation rights and ceremonies in some cultures, overall, and especially in western societies, it is not particularly strong. There has actually been a disconnect between the son and his father, now the father heads out to work everyday and no longer has a chance to bond with his son. Horrocks (1994) sees one of the most important functions of the father as to show the young boy that it is possible to live with the mother, to have conflict, fear and guilt, but still to live together. It is through the father-son relationship that the boy can learn that it is possible to live a civilised existence without continual recourse to violence and satiation of primitive longings. The damaged modern male, the male in crisis, is seen by Horrocks (1994) as unfathered. Women are viewed as dangerous to have a relationship is to have a bat tle and the man must draw himself away from women from time to time to maintain his safety. By never really making a strong connection, the modern man in crisis feels damaged and abused and uses the methods of abuse and damage to relate to others because he knows no other way. This analysis of the Oedipal complex and its effects, as well as the possibility of transcendence, actually describes a rather prototypical interaction between the young boy and his caregiver. Blazina (2004) describes how some criticisms and refinements of this model have been made by subsequent theorists. Bergman (1995), for example, has argued that it is not necessarily with the mother the boy should be disidentifying. There are many situations where the father is actually the provider of the most emotional nurturance. In this case it is better to see the individuation as occurring with the primary caregiver rather than the mother. Blazina (2004) also maintains that there should not be such emphasis on the cutting off of the other identity. Where the other identity is feminine, there is now greater acceptability of feminine qualities in men so these can be integrated into male identity without compromising maleness. For the crisis in masculinity, Freuds conception of the castration complex is of great interest. Freud (1925) theorised that the castration complex had the follOWing stages. Firstly a boy guesses from the evidence of his own anatomy that everyone has a penis. Secondly he finds out that women do not have penises and assumes that they have been mutilated in some way. Thirdly when he begins to masturbate, he is told that he will be castrated. Fourthly, finding that the breast has already been removed, summarises that the penis will be next. Finally, the Oedipus complex is destroyed by this threat of castration. According to Horrocks (1994), Freud saw this sequence of events as concrete, whereas many psychoanalysts now see this in more allegorical terms, as mediated by culture and society. Through gender, both men as well as women are denied a whole world of being, the world of the other gender. After the process of partitioning men and women both feel a sense of loss at the things that they will not be able to experience. In men this castration complex expresses itself in a variety of different ways. Men have a desire for love, a fear of their own sexuality, and, in particular, a fear of their own anger. Horrocks (1994) describes how, as a psychotherapist, many men talk about their fear that their anger will be exposed to the world. To stop this, they have to bottle it up and repress the emotion. As a result, in heterosexual men, this is recognised by the women with whom they have relationships and they are rendered impotent and asexual. A man who acts in this way behaves passive aggressively ¿Ã‚ ½ he is motivated to manipulate those around him by his anger. This prohibits a direct connection with other people because his relationships are based on manipulation. The result of this is that feelings are kept inside and denied. A similar problem is seen, in Horrocks experience, in macho men. The castration of the macho man leaves him profoundly afraid of expressing his own feelings. This denies him the possibility of acting emotionally in any situation as this will simply reveal his weakness as he sees it. It is the emotional parts of himself that this man hates and wants to hide away the feminine parts of him are an embarrassment. By being cut-off from his own feelings, the psychologically castrated man experiences an emptiness within himself that he attempts to fill with methods that will never work. The emptiness inside is often experienced as a dead feeling, almost of death itself. It is precisely this almost death from which, Horrocks argues, many men in the crisis of masculinity are suffering. Without the connection with his own emotions, or those of anyone else, he is only half a man, not able to experience himself or others properly, safely cocooned within an empty world. Within Freuds writings, woman were theorised to suffer from envy of the male penis, but Freud did not acknowledge the possibility of men being envious of the female breast. The male-centred idea that penis envy is fundamental to psychoanalysis is attacked by the introduction of the idea of breast envy. Klein (1975), for example, has pointed out that both male and female children have very strong feelings towards the breast both are attracted to it and both want to destroy it. Instead of defining both sexes in terms of the penis one having and the other jealous a reciprocal envy provides balance that acknowledges the lacuna in mens lives as well. The breast does, after all provide, not only nourishment, but also love to the child, and so a womans breast is a symbol of these qualities. Horrocks (1994) argues that men have a strong desire to return to the breast, to return to the originator of life and at the same time men attack the breast and want to destroy it. Melanie Klein posited that the idea of womb envy was also an important component in the male psyche. Minsky (1995) describes how the Kleinian viewpoint sees the development of male power as being rooted in the fear of the womb. Like the young boys envy of his mothers breasts, he also becomes envious of her womb and the power it has to create new life. To make up for this envy, men are forced to concentrate their efforts on cultural and creative efforts and to suppress womens forays into the same field. Minsky (1995) explains that it is the phallus that then saves men and provides a distraction from the envy of the womb. Lacan has a different take on the Oedipus complex. He sees the father not as a real father but as a representation or a metaphor for culture (Lacan, 2004). It is through the young boys experience of cultural factors such as language that he is pulled away from the mother. The mother represents desire for Lacan and so culture, through the representation of the father, pulls the boy from what he desires. This cutting off is like a castration and the child then attempts to substitute this with a search for truth (Minsky, 1995). Many of these psychoanalytical ideas about the roots of a crisis in masculinity are analysed in social theories in terms of a conflict in gender roles. ONeil, Helms, Gable, David, Wrightsman (1986) have defined gender role conflict as where socialised gender roles have an adverse psychological effect which causes a restrictive effect on the self through barriers created around personal creativities and freedom. ONeil et al. (1986) identify four different types of role conflict. There is a restriction in the range of internal emotionality; similarly, there is a restriction in the types of emotional behaviour that are possible towards other men ¿Ã‚ ½ this results in an inability to communicate feelings. Personal achievement and constant comparison to what others have creates a constant sense of fear and worry. There is a conflict between the requirements of work and those of the family which results in stress and health problems, and a simple lack of time to relax. Evidence to support these ideas of role conflicts has come, for example, from Sharpe Heppner (1991) who found a connection between role conflict and problems with intimate relationships. Watts Borders (2005) point out, though, that many of these studies have not been carried out in younger, adolescent boys. In rectifying this hole in the research, Watts Borders (2005) investigated role conflict in adolescent boys. Their findings were in line with the theories put forward by ONeil et at. (1986). The boys in their study said they found there was a societal pressure to restrict their emotionality, both internally and between themselves and other boys. Further they theorised that many of the boys had only been exposed to a very limited range of emotions from male role models ¿Ã‚ ½ indeed many denied experiencing any emotions other than anger. Cultural theories, which intersect with Lacans ideas, are also important in how the crisis in masculinity has been studied. Whitehead (2002) considers arguments that have been played out in the public domain. Firstly he considers the publication of Stiffed: The Betrayal of Modern Man (Faludi, 2000). The thesis of this book is that it is now the male who finds himself objectified and the subject of much sexist consumer culture. In addition the mans secure attachments and relationships with the world of work are no longer as strong and exclusive as they once were. Men seem also, in Faludis view, to be failing to fight back against the new culture, failing to take on this creeping emasculation. Now that feminism has attacked the patriarchal systems of power and control, masculinity has been left undermined and unsure. The rise of feminism has surely encouraged many men to question how they view women ¿Ã‚ ½ and then apparently left them confused. Faludi (2000) places the blame for this crisis in masculinity at the door of culture and encourages them to work together to combat it. While the argument has some elements of truth, quite how men and women are supposed to step outside of culture is not clear. Without men and women, there is no culture people are intimately bound up with it and part of it. The second set of arguments centre around research carried out by Professor Richard Scase as part of the European Commissions Futures Programme (Scase, 1999). This research found that many women are choosing to live alone as their opportunities in the workplace increase and especially as the roles they can adopt widen. It is hypothesised that this is having a knock-on effect on men who find it difficult to cope with this new situation. Evidence for this is in the rising rates of suicide  ¿Ã‚ ½between 1991 and 1997 they have increased by 60%. Social research finds that men are choosing to remain living at home rather than move out on their own (Office of National Statistics, 2000). Whitehead (2002) sees this as evidence that men are failing to cope with the new challenges they are facing. Further cultural and social evidence that men are in crisis is prOVided by Beynon (2001). Relying heavily on role theory, Beynon (2001) points to the changes in work patterns particularly the fact that less than half the men over 55 are in work. There is also a sense in which these men are caught between attempting to maintain the old-style macho posturing and the new-man type behaviour requiring a man to be in touch with his feelings. Beynon (2001) claims that generally men are less likely to a breakdown, Be of divorces. S . a ~_ C 0 ogical or physical illness which faces them. In marital a::> es, the man is normally most responsible, with women starting 75% of ten men move out of the marital home after the breakdown of a e er, is probably more of an artefact of the legal system and simple ietment on men. Apart from anything else, men generally die younger and e e y to suffer from heart disease. e g facts and figures continue through both crime and education and other major areas of  ¿Ã‚ ½;e. _.en crimes are mostly committed by men, indeed it is men who are mostly the victims of e crime, and so it is violence that is seen as an important component of masculinity. itehead (2002) sees this violence discourse as having a powerful effect on peoples attitudes to men. Men are seen as being unable to cope with the demands of modern life, especially those men on the social and economic fringes, and so the resort to violence is only natural. Within education, in the schools, male performance is significantly lower then female. Despite much theoretical attentior as well as some evidence from research on role theories and other areas, there has been a far degree of criticism of the idea of a crisis in masculinity. Writers have asked whether the crisis of gender is anything new. Mangan (1997) (as cited in Whitehead, 2002) argues that masculinity, li e femininity is constantly in crisis, constantly changing and adapting to new circumstances. Indeed, some of the fundamental ideas from psychoanalysis support the idea that masculinity is always a matter of crisis men will always have to cope with breast envy, womb en and a castration complex. This question aside though, some commentators have asked if t ere is really anything to explain at all with the rise of feminism, men have suffered a loss of power relative to women and are trying to cope with that loss, some less successf J t an others. Whitehead (200l) suggests that the crisis in masculinity is, in reality, an iHuson co ned to academic journals and has no meaning for people in the real world. Heartfield (2002), in arguing against a crisis of masculinity, talks of the fetishising of sexual difference, an exaggera ion of the differences between men and women. Heartfield (2002) suggests that it is instead the working classes that are in crisis, not men in general. These ideas are far removed from those that come from psychoanalysis where many of the roots of future struggle are born in that difference. In conclusion, psychoanalytical ideas about the crisis in masculinity are grounded in the biological differences between the sexes and how these are dealt with psychologically. Other psychoanalysts and Lacanian ideas have taken these literal conflicts and, to some extent, moved them away from a focus on biological difference and introduced more cultural and social ideas. Social and cultural theories provide a wide variety of, and some reasons for, a possible crisis in masculinity. In particular, the use of role theory has provided an important analysis. Despite using the language of role conflict, the male preoccupations and problems described by role theory have many things in common with those arrived at by psychoanalytical means. Nevertheless, many authors have questioned whether this crisis in masculinity really exists and whether it is anything new

Galileos Work :: essays research papers

Galileo Galilei was born on February 15, 1564 in Pisa, Italy. In 1570 his family relocated to Florence. Galileo pioneered "experimental scientific method" and was the first to use a refracting telescope to make important astronomical discoveries. In 1581, Galileo studied at the University of Pisa. There he became interested in the workings of science and concluded that the period (the time in which a pendulum swings back and forth) does not depend on the arc of the swing (the isochronisms). In 1609 Galileo learned of the invention of the telescope in Holland. From the barest description he constructed a vastly superior model. Galileo made a series of profound discoveries using his new telescope, including that the moon has craters, valleys, and mountains much like the Earth’s terrain. He also was able to see four small lights orbiting around the planet Jupiter. He was then able to conclude that it too was moons. Galileo was also able to discover that the planet Venus had phases much like our Moon. As a professor of astronomy at University of Pisa, Galileo was required to teach the accepted theory of his time that the sun and all the planets revolved around the Earth. Later at University of Padua he was exposed to a new theory, proposed by Nicolaus Copernicus, that the Earth and all the other planets revolved around the sun. Galileo's observations with his new telescope convinced him of the truth of Copernicus's sun-centered or heliocentric theory. In 1610, Galileo published a book, The Starry Messenger, describing his findings that supported the Copernican theory. Galileo's support for the heliocentric theory got him into trouble with the Roman Catholic Church. He was forced to abandon his astronomical pursuits. But, Galileo retaliated by publishing a book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. This book cause more arguments with the church due to it were in Italian which was a direct conflict with the church. In 1633 the Inquisition convicted him of heresy and forced him to recant (publicly withdraw) his support of Copernicus. They sentenced him to life imprisonment, but because of his advanced age allowed him serve his term under house arrest at his villa outside of Florence, Italy. It was not until 1992 that the church publicly forgave Galileo. But due to the timeframe, the damage had already been done.

Ethics of Compliance Southwest Essay

The purpose of this paper is to present, discuss, and examine the topic of ethical and social responsibility. It will discuss Southwest Airlines’ failure to comply with the Federal Aviation Administration’s rules on inspecting aircraft and what violations occurred. On March 6, 2008, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) inspectors submitted documents to the United States Congress, alleging that Southwest allowed 117 of its aircraft to fly carrying passengers despite the fact that the planes were â€Å"not airworthy† according to air safety investigators. In some cases, the planes were allowed to fly for up to 30 months after the inspection deadlines had passed, rendering them unfit to fly. Records indicate that thousands of passengers were flown on aircraft deemed unsafe by federal standards. Clearly, this is an issue tied to social responsibility and ethics at the highest level, ignoring the safety inspections put people’s lives in jeopardy. This situation actually began in 1988, when an Aloha Airlines Boeing 737 suffered an accident that killed a flight attendant. The top of the plane’s fuselage tore off, opening up a large section of the plane’s roof, killing the flight attendant. The accident occurred because of cracks in the plane’s fuselage. Since then, the FAA has required regular inspections of 737 fuselages to ensure an accident like this does not occur again. In 2007, two FAA inspectors began to question documentation and inspections at Southwest Airlines. They had reason to be concerned, because they felt their concerns were being ignored, and their supervisor was not investigating their complaints. FAA inspectors Bobby Boutris and Douglas Peters testified before Congress about their experiences, and asked for whistleblower status, meaning they could not be fired from their jobs because of their testimony. Boutris was the first to question records kept by Southwest about airplane inspections. In 2003, he was in charge of inspecting engines for the 737, and he could validate the Southwest’s reports. He told an NPR Radio reporter, â€Å"‘I had found a lot of inconsistencies with the records,’ Boutris says. They were different from aircraft to aircraft; it was very hard to determine compliance'† (Goodwyn, 2008). He notes that he complained to his supervisor, Douglas Gawadzinski, but he ignored Boutris’ complaints. In 2006, Boutris took over safety responsibility for the entire 737-700 series aircraft, and when he reviewed Southwest, he found the same recordkeeping problems he had uncovered in 2003. He notified his supervisor and wanted to send a le tter of investigation, again his supervisor Gawadzinski refused to acknowledge his concerns. Boutris believes it is because Gawadzinski had a close friendship with Paul Comeau, a former FAA employee who went to work for Southwest as their manager for regulatory compliance. Anything to do with Southwest and the FAA went through these two men, and Boutris believes they routinely covered up inspection irregularities or lack of inspections. Boutris continued to complain, and Southwest asked for him to be removed from their inspections. Reporter Goodwyn continues, â€Å"At first, Gawadzinski refused to remove Boutris. But it wasn’t long before the supervisory maintenance inspector told Boutris he was out and that his career was in jeopardy because there had been undisclosed complaints from anonymous Southwest officials† (Goodwyn, 2008). At this point, Douglas Peters, another FAA inspector, were brought in to review Boutris’ investigation into Southwest’s compliance. Goodwyn notes, â€Å"The more he looked into the matter, the more he agreed with Boutris that the flying public was in danger. Peters says the situation defied logic. ‘That something so critical †¦ would be not addressed †¦ I can’t explain it. It’s a mystery'† (Goodwyn, 2008). People from Southwest began to contact Gawadzinski directly, instead of going through Peters. Another reporter states, â€Å"The whistle-blowers complained repeatedly in memos written in 2007 that their concerns about Southwest were not being taken seriously. The underlying safety concern — the airline was unable to keep up with mandatory inspections — had been raised as early as 2003, one charged† (Levin, 2008). Finally, in March 2007, Southwest admitted to flying 47 737s without completing the problem fuselage inspections, which triggered a Congressional investigation. Even more disturbing, the airline continued to fly the planes even after disclosing they had not been inspected – it took almost a week to ground the planes. The two men testified before Congress in April 2008, and the FAA fined Southwest $10. 2 million for the blunders. Reporter Levin continues, â€Å"Last month, nearly a year after the initial problems were discovered, the FAA levied a $10. 2 million fine against Southwest. The vast majority of the fine was imposed because Southwest had certified that it stopped flying the planes as soon as it learned of the missed inspections, FAA officials said† (Levin, 2008). These are the basic facts and timeline of the case. The major overriding issue in this case is that the FAA and Southwest conspired to cover up inspection information, and they did so at passengers and crewmembers expense. The inspections were mandated because the FAA knew this particular plane had critical safety issues. By not inspecting planes and allowing them to continue flying, they were putting everyone on those planes in jeopardy, and they knew it. That is perhaps the biggest ethical concern of this case, that the company knew they had not completed checks, but continued to fly the planes anyway. One of the whistleblowers was told they did not ground the planes because it would â€Å"disrupt† Southwest’s service and flight schedule (Goodwyn, 2008). Every airline has a social responsibility to keep their passengers and crews as safe as possible. Flying is a relatively safe form of travel, however accidents do occur. Maintaining high maintenance and safety standards is simply the right thing to do in the transportation industry; it is the ethical, moral, and socially responsible choice. For an airline to lower those standards, especially because of worries about disruption of service, is simply incomprehensible. For example, the entire airline would be in jeopardy if one of the planes had crashed, and it was found to have been because of a crack that was not detected because of a missed inspection. Indeed, inspections on the aircraft did turn up cracks in some of the planes in question, cracks that had to be repaired before the airplanes took flight again (Wilber, 2008). Thus, Southwest put people in danger, and that is a major ethical violation that has not thoroughly been addressed in the media or by the airline itself. In addition, the FAA was compliant in this ethical transgression, because they allowed it to happen, calling into question the integrity of the organization that is supposed to be primarily concerned with airline safety and maintenance. If the agency doing the oversight is questionable, it brings the entire system into question. This issue should be studied further because it raises so many moral and ethical questions, and it should be studied because it seems, since there seem to be no lasting ramifications for the FAA, that it could happen again, which is even more disturbing. The stakeholders in this case are the people who fly on Southwest Airlines. Southwest damaged their reputation by letting down their stakeholders, and that is extremely disturbing. They put passenger safety in jeopardy over worries about income and disrupted flights, when their first concern should have been safety and only safety. This calls into question the entire integrity of the company. This is more than just the classical interpretation of right and wrong, it is a moral dilemma that should have had an extremely simple solution. Ground the planes, inspect them as quickly as possible, and get them back in the air. The fact that there was any other solution seen to the problem indicates just how unethical and morally irresponsible Southwest was, and the stakeholders should demand compensation for the threat this decision made to their safety. Southwest simply got lucky that one of the affected planes did not develop more serious issues, and the $10. 2 million dollar fine seems quite low in retrospect, considering the damage that could have occurred to people and property had a plane crashed. The economic responsibility of this situation is clear; Southwest had to pay a large fine and ground the planes, losing revenue anyway. Their reputation suffered, although it did not seem to make a dent in their passenger. Most people did not even seem to care that Southwest had endangered them and only a few spoke out in blogs or in other areas when the news broke. Southwest has a serious responsibility to keep its passengers and crews safe, and they lost the trust of at least some people because of their callous disregard for safety. That is a huge moral responsibility, and Southwest has never really acknowledged their failure, which is an even larger ethical concern, it seems. In a statement before Congress, Southwest CEO Gary Kelly said, â€Å"Our compliance with certain specific Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airworthiness directives has been called into question. We have committed to a thorough review and to make any changes necessary to ensure that we are in full compliance with FAA airworthiness directives and our own maintenance programs, policies, and procedures† (Kelly, 2008). However, in previous testimony before Congress, Kelly and Southwest Executive Chairman Herb Kelleher both maintained that Southwest did comply with all FAA requirements, and the safety of passengers was never in question (Kelly, 2008). Thus, Southwest maintains they complied with all FAA regulations and did inspect the aircraft, only under a different maintenance directive than the one the two whistleblowers charged had not been done. It seems like a technicality, and that Southwest is not taking true moral or ethical responsibility for the incidents. They also stated that they did not think they would be fined for the maintenance issues, and it seems as if in their testimony, they were attempting to lay groundwork to fight a fine. However, they did eventually back down and stop contesting the fine, probably because they felt they looked bad enough already. Some recommendations for this case have already been completed. The FAA inspector, Gawadzinski, was transferred to another division, without contact with Southwest. Southwest placed several maintenance and safety personnel on leave, and developed new maintenance and safety guidelines. The two top executives maintain they did not know about the 2007 maintenance charges until March 2008, and as soon as they learned of them, they implemented stronger maintenance and communication directives so they would be notified and aware of any problems. These would have been at least some of the recommendations made in this case. Another would be for Southwest to undergo a major campaign to gain back the public’s trust, as many people would seem to have trust issues in flying on Southwest planes. This would include a media campaign that would address trust issues, and perhaps even a campaign including top executives flying on their own planes. This would not be too costly or difficult to administer, and it would let people know that the company is actually sorry about its actions and is going to be more responsible in the future. It also seems as if the company should apologize to their stakeholders and their crewmembers, not in front of Congress, but in front of them, and with humility. Frankly, their testimony and apology to Congress sounded defensive and insincere, and a true measure of humility might be to offer anyone who flew on those planes some type of compensation or personal apology to make the situation even a little bit more palatable. Of course, that would entail a large expense, but it would make their intentions a bit more acceptable. Finally, they have to be open and above board with their maintenance issues and they have to make quite certain there is nothing questionable about any of their practices. Their maintenance and safety department must be impeccable, and it must always be open to scrutiny not only by the FAA, but by the public, as well. They owe that, at the very least, to the people that choose to fly on Southwest Airlines. In conclusion, this case indicates how deeply ethical issues can affect a business. Allowing planes to fly uninspected is a terrible disservice to the passengers and crews of this airline. It indicates a deep-seated lack of respect for the public, the employees, and the agency created to maintain air travel safety. It also indicates an arrogance that the company can flaunt the system and win. Southwest Airlines has deeper issues than maintenance and safety. It has to take a strong look at its ethics and principles, and alter them to create a more socially responsible organization that respects and values the people it serves. Without a change, the organization will certainly suffer more ethical violations in the future.

The Gestapo Definition and History

The Gestapo was the secret police of Nazi Germany, a notorious organization tasked with destroying political opponents of the Nazi movement, suppressing any opposition to Nazi policies, and persecuting Jews. From its origins as a Prussian intelligence organization, it grew into a sprawling and greatly feared apparatus of oppression. The Gestapo investigated any person or organization suspected of opposing the Nazi movement. Its presence became pervasive in Germany and later in the countries the German military occupied. Key Takeaways: The Gestapo The greatly feared Nazi secret police had its origins as a Prussian police force.The Gestapo operated by intimidation. Using surveillance and interrogation under torture, the Gestapo terrorized entire populations.The Gestapo collected information on anyone suspected of opposing Nazi rule, and specialized in hunting down those targeted for death.As a secret police force, the Gestapo did not operate death camps, but it was generally instrumental in identifying and apprehending those who would be sent to the camps. Origins of the Gestapo The name Gestapo was a shortened form of the words Geheime Staatspolizei, meaning Secret State Police. The organizations roots can be traced to the civilian police force in Prussia, which was transformed following a right-wing revolution in late 1932. The Prussian police was purged of anyone suspected of sympathy to left-wing politics and Jews. When Hitler took power in Germany, he appointed one of this closest aides, Hermann Goering, as the minister of the interior in Prussia. Goering intensified the purge of the Prussian police agency, giving the organization powers to investigate and persecute enemies of the Nazi Party. In the early 1930s, as various Nazi factions maneuvered for power, the Gestapo had to compete with the SA, the Storm Troops, and the SS, the elite guard of the Nazis. After complicated power struggles among Nazi factions, the Gestapo was made part of the security police under Reinhard Heydrich, a fanatical Nazi originally hired by SS chief Heinrich Himmler to create an intelligence operation. Germany: Heinrich Himmler reviews German Gestapo Troopers. Bettmann  /  Getty Images Gestapo vs. the SS The Gestapo and the SS were separate organizations, yet shared the common mission of destroying any opposition to Nazi power. As both organizations were eventually headed by Himmler, the lines between them can appear blurred. In general, the SS operated as a uniformed military force, the elite shock troops enforcing Nazi doctrine as well as engaging in military operations. The Gestapo operated as a secret police organization, utilizing surveillance, coercive interrogation to the point of torture, and murder. Overlap between SS and Gestapo officers would occur. For instance, Klaus Barbie, the notorious head of the Gestapo in occupied Lyons, France, had been an SS officer. And information obtained by the Gestapo was routinely used by the SS in operations aimed at partisans, resistance fighters, and perceived enemies of the Nazis. In many operations, particularly in the persecution of Jews and the mass murder of The Final Solution, the Gestapo and the SS effectively operated in tandem. The Gestapo did not operate the death camps, but the Gestapo was generally instrumental in identifying and apprehending those who would be sent to the camps. Gestapo Tactics The Gestapo became obsessed with accumulating information. When the Nazi Party rose to power in Germany, an intelligence operation aimed at any potential enemies became a vital part of the party apparatus. When Reinhard Heydrich began his work for the Nazis in the early 1930s, he started keeping files on those he suspected of opposition to Nazi doctrine. His files grew from a simple operation in one office to an extensive network of files comprising information gathered from informers, wiretaps, intercepted mail, and confessions extracted from those taken into custody. As all German police forces were eventually brought under the auspices of the Gestapo, the prying eyes of the Gestapo seemed to be everywhere. All levels of German society were essentially under permanent investigation. When World War II began and German troops invaded and occupied other countries, those captive populations were also investigated by the Gestapo. The fanatical accumulation of information became the Gestapos greatest weapon. Any deviation from Nazi policy was quickly ferreted out and suppressed, usually with brutal methods. The Gestapo operated by intimidation. Fear of being taken in for questioning was often enough to stifle any dissent. The Gestapo arrest a group of Jewish men hiding in a cellar in Poland, circa 1939. Possibly a staged German propaganda photo. Keystone / Getty Images In 1939, the role of the Gestapo changed somewhat when it was effectively merged with the SD, the Nazi security service. By the early years of World War II, the Gestapo was operating essentially without any meaningful restraint. Gestapo officers could arrest anyone they suspected, question them, torture them, and send them off to imprisonment or concentration camps. In the occupied nations, the Gestapo waged war against resistance groups, investigating anyone suspected of resisting Nazi rule. The Gestapo was instrumental in perpetrating war crimes such as the taking of hostages to be executed in retaliation for resistance operations aimed at German troops. Aftermath The fearsome reign of the Gestapo ended, of course, with the collapse of Nazi Germany at the end of World War II. Many Gestapo officers were hunted down by the Allied powers and faced trials as war criminals. Yet many veterans of the Gestapo escaped punishment by blending in with the civilian population and eventually establishing themselves with new lives. Shockingly, in many cases Gestapo officers escaped any accountability for their war crimes because officials of the Allied powers found them useful. When the Cold War began, the Western powers were very interested in any information about European communists. The Gestapo had kept extensive files on communist movements and individual members of communist parties, and that material was considered valuable. In return for providing information to American intelligence agencies, some Gestapo officers were assisted in traveling to South America and beginning life with new identities. American intelligence officers operated what were known as ratlines, a system of moving former Nazis to South America. A famous example of a Nazi who escaped with American help was Klaus Barbie, who had been the Gestapo chief in Lyons, France. Barbie was eventually discovered living in Bolivia, and France sought to extradite him. After years of legal wrangling, Barbie was brought back to France in 1983 and put on trial. He was convicted of war crimes after a well-publicized trial in 1987. He died in prison in France in 1991. Sources: Aronson, Shlomo. Gestapo. Encyclopaedia Judaica, edited by Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik, 2nd ed., vol. 7, Macmillan Reference USA, 2007, pp. 564-565.Browder, George C. Gestapo. Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, edited by Dinah L. Shelton, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2005, pp. 405-408. Gale Virtual Reference Library.Gestapo. Learning About the Holocaust: A Students Guide, edited by Ronald M. Smelser, vol. 2, Macmillan Reference USA, 2001, pp. 59-62. Gale Virtual Reference Library.