Võ Nguyên Giáp

Võ Nguyên Giáp was a general in the Vietnam People's Army and a politician. Võ Nguyên Giáp is considered one of the greatest military strategists of the 20th century, he first grew to prominence during World War II, where he served as the military leader of the Viet Minh resistance against the Japanese occupation of Vietnam. Giáp was a crucial military commander in two wars: the First Indochina War of 1946–1954, the Vietnam War of 1955–1975, participating in several significant battles: Lạng Sơn in 1950, Hòa Bình in 1951–1952, Điện Biên Phủ in 1954, the Tết Offensive in 1968, the Easter Offensive in 1972, the final Ho Chi Minh Campaign of 1975. Giáp had no direct military training and was a history teacher at a French-speaking academy, influenced by historical military leaders and citing T. E. Lawrence and Napoleon as his two greatest influences, he would earn the moniker "Red Napoleon" by some Western sources. Giáp was a journalist, an interior minister in President Hồ Chí Minh's Việt Minh government, the military commander of the Viet Minh, the commander of the People's Army of Vietnam, a defense minister.

He served as a member of the Politburo of the Vietnam Workers' Party, which in 1976 became the Communist Party of Vietnam. Giáp was a mastermind military builder, he was a effective logistician, laying the foundation of the Ho Chi Minh trail, recognised as one of the great feats of military engineering of the 20th century. Võ Nguyên Giáp served as Military Minister and Chief of Staff, is credited with North Vietnam's military victory over South Vietnam and the US during the Vietnam War. Recent scholarship indicates other leaders had played more prominent roles, with former subordinates and now rivals Văn Tiến Dũng and Hoàng Văn Thái assuming a more direct military responsibility than Giáp, he played a pivotal role in the second transformation of the PAVN into "one of the largest, most formidable" mechanised and combined-arms fighting force capable of delivering a knockout blow to an more powerful rival Army of the Republic of Vietnam in conventional warfare. Võ Nguyên Giáp was born on 25 August 1911 in French Indochina.

Giáp's father and mother, Võ Quang Nghiêm and Nguyễn Thị Kiên, worked the land, rented some to neighbours, lived a comfortable lifestyle. Giáp's father was both a minor official and a committed Vietnamese nationalist, having played a part in the Cần Vương movement in the 1880s, he was arrested for subversive activities by the French colonial authorities in 1919 and died in prison a few weeks later. Giáp had two sisters and one brother, soon after his father's incarceration, one of his sisters was arrested. Although she was not held for long, the privations of prison life made her ill and she too died a few weeks after being released. Giáp was taught at home by his father before going to the village school, his precocious intelligence meant that he was soon transferred to the district school and in 1924, at the age of thirteen, he left home to attend the Quốc Học, a French-run lycée in Huế. This school had been founded by a Catholic official named Ngo Dinh Kha, his son, Ngô Đình Diệm attended it.

Diem went on to become President of South Vietnam. Years earlier the same school had educated another boy, Nguyen Sinh Cung the son of an official. In 1943 Cung adopted the name Ho Chi Minh. At age 14, Giáp became a messenger for the Haiphong Power Company, he was expelled from the school after two years for taking part in protests, went home to his village for a while. While there, he joined the Tân Việt Revolutionary Party, an underground group founded in 1924, which introduced him to communism, he continued his political activities. He was arrested in 1930 for taking part in student protests and served 13 months of a two-year sentence at Lao Bảo Prison. By Giáp's own account the reason for his release was lack of evidence against him, he joined the Communist Party of Vietnam in 1931 and took part in several demonstrations against French rule in Indochina as well as assisting in founding the Democratic Front in 1933. Although he has denied it, Giáp was said by the historian Cecil B. Currey to have spent some time in the prestigious Hanoi Lycée Albert Sarraut, where the local elite was educated to serve the colonial regime.

He was said to have been in the same class as Phạm Văn Đồng, a future Prime Minister, who has denied having studied at Albert Sarraut, Bảo Đại, the last Emperor of Annam. From 1933 to 1938, Giáp studied at the Indochinese University in Hanoi where he earned a bachelor's degree in law with a major in political economy. While a student, Giáp had taken lodgings with Professor Dang Thai Minh, whose daughter, Nguyen Thi Minh Giang, he had first met at school in Hue, she too had learned nationalism from her father and had joined the revolutionary activities which Giáp was involved with. In June 1938 they were married and in May 1939 they had a daughter, Hong Anh. Giáp's busy political activities took a toll on his postgraduate studies, he failed to pass the examinations for the Certificate of Administrative Law. Unable therefore to practice as a lawyer, he took a job as a history teacher at the Thăng Long School in Ha

Swiss units of measurement

A number of units of measurement were used in Switzerland to measure length, etc. Metric system was optional in 1868, has been compulsory since 1877. Units were not in fixed values. During the transition to the metric system, units were fixed. Before 1856 every canton had its own system of units. A number of units were used to measure length. One pied was equal to 0.30 m, according to the fixed value defined during the transition to the metric system. Some other units and their fixed values are given below: 1 ligne = 1/144 pied 1 linie = 1/144 pied 1 pouce = 1/12 pied 1 zoll = 1/12 pied 1 aune = 2 pied 1 elle = 2 pied 1 brache = 2 pied1 toise = 6 pied 1 ruthe = 6 pied 1 perche = 16 pied 1 lieue = 16 000 pied. Lieue was used as a road measure. One arpent was 400 1.44 ha A number of units were used to measure mass. One livre was equal to 0.500 kg according to the fixed value defined during the transition to the metric system. Some other units and their fixed values are given below: 1 loth = 1/32 livre1 once = 1/16 livre1 quintal = 100 livre.

One livre was equal to 0.375 kg according to the fixed value defined during the transition to the metric system. Some other units and their fixed values are given below: 1 grain = 1/5760 livre 1 scruple = 1/288 livre 1 drachme = 1/96 livre 1 once = 1/12 livre. Two main systems and liquid, were used. Several units were used to measure dry capacity; some units are given below: 1 quarteron = 10 emine = 15 l 1 double quarteron = 2 quarteron 1 sac = 10 quarteron. Quarteron is the volume of 30 livre of pure water at 4° Celsius. Quarteron was equal to 5/9 of a cubic pied. Several units were used to measure dry capacity; some units are given below: 1 sctier = 25 pot 1 muid = 4 setiers 1 pot = 1.5 l. Pot was the bulk of 3 livres weight of pure water at the temperature of 4° Celsius. Pot was equal to 1/18 pied3 and was subdivided into 1/2, 1/4 and 1/8

Justification for the state

The justification of the state refers to the source of legitimate authority for the state or government. Such a justification explains why the state should exist, to some degree scopes the role of government - what a legitimate state should or should not be able to do. There is no universally accepted justification of the state. In fact, anarchists believe that there is no justification for the state at all, that human societies would be better off without it. However, most political ideologies have their own justifications, thus their own vision of what constitutes a legitimate state. Indeed, a person's opinions regarding the role of government determine the rest of their political ideology. Thus, discrepancy of opinion in a wide array of political matters is directly traceable back to a discrepancy of opinion in the justification for the state; the constitutions of various countries codify views as to the purposes and forms of their governments, but they tend to do so in rather vague terms, which particular laws and actions of politicians subsequently flesh out.

In general, various countries have translated vague talk about the purposes of their governments into particular state laws, enforcement actions, etc. The following are just a few examples. In feudal Europe the most widespread justification of the state was the emerging idea of the divine right of kings, which stated that monarchs draw their power from God, that the state should only be an apparatus that puts the monarch's will into practice; the legitimacy of the state's lands derived from the lands being the personal possession of the monarch. The divine-right theory, combined with primogeniture, became a theory of hereditary monarchy in the nation states of the early modern period; the Holy Roman Empire was not a state in that sense, was not a true theocracy, but rather a federal entity. The political ideas current in China at that time involved the idea of the mandate of heaven, it resembled the theory of divine right in that it placed the ruler in a divine position, as the link between Heaven and Earth, but it differed from the divine right of kings in that it did not assume a permanent connection between a dynasty and the state.

Inherent in the concept was that a ruler held the mandate of heaven only as long as he provided good government. If he did not, heaven would withdraw its mandate and whoever restored order would hold the new mandate; this is true theocracy. This has similarities to the idea presented in the Judeo-Christian Bible from the time when Israel requests "a king like the nations" through to Christ himself telling his contemporary leaders that they only had power because God gave it to them; the classic Biblical example comes in the story of King Nebuchadnezzar, who according to the Book of Daniel ruled the Babylonian empire because God ordained his power, but who ate grass like an ox for seven years because he deified himself instead of acknowledging God. Nebuchadnezzar is restored. In Renaissance Italy, contemporary theoreticians saw the primary purpose of the less-overtly monarchical Italian city-states as civic glory. In the period of the eighteenth century called the Enlightenment, a new justification of the European state developed.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau's social contract theory states that governments draw their power from the governed, its'sovereign' people, that no person should have absolute power, that a legitimate state is one which meets the needs and wishes of its citizens. These include security, economic development and the resolution of conflict; the social contract requires that an individual gives up some of his natural rights in order to maintain social order via the rule of law. The divine right of kings fell out of favor and this idea ascended; this is an example of the theoretical thinking shifting the emphasis from faith and theoretical principles such as sovereignty to the socio-economic logic, as Karl Marx did. Thus modern political theorists legitimize the state with two major ideas: redistribution and the provision of public goods. In The Limits of Government, philosopher David Schmidtz takes on the second of these ideas. While a market system may allow self-interested to create and allocate many goods optimally, there exists a class of "collective" - or "public goods" that are not produced adequately in a market system.

These collective goods are goods that all individuals want but for whose production it is not individually rational for people voluntarily to do their part to secure a collectively rational outcome. The state can step in and force us all to contribute toward the production of these goods, we can all thereby be made better off. There are many different opinions when it comes to this topic, it is on those questions that one can find the differences between conservatism, liberalism, fascism the latter, other political ideologies. There are two ideologies—anarchism and communism—which argue that the existence of the state is unjustified and harmful. For this reason, the kind of society they aim to establish would be stateless. Anarchism claims that the community of those fighting to create a new society must themselves constitute a stateless society. Communism wishes to or replace the communities and divisions that things su