History

The events resulting from World War period had to have profound impacts on how the women viewed the world. Initially, women had few rights which they enjoyed but the war would change that for ever. The womans domain was restricted to taking care of the husband and the children. Women were simply restricted to the domestic chores and child rearing. During the war years, the women assumed positions in the factories as men went to the field to fight. This opportunity helped the women to gauge their capabilities and alter their cosmology forever. By the year 1918, women in Britain were granted the voting rights for those who were over 30 years of age. America followed suit in the year 1920. In 1950, 69 countries had granted the women population the right to vote. The trend continued until today women in many democratic societies have the voting rights except for a few regimes especially in the Middle East. The World War event opened a new horizon for women as there was a shift in roles as they were required to fill areas exclusively considered as the mens domain. Women for instance worked as nurses serving in the hospitals in the United States and overseas. At times, they were required to follow the male soldiers in the field to offer assistance when it was needed (Laura, Para 1).
There were women rights movements that agitated for the women rights having realized that women were an important part of the community and that they had been ignored for long. One would wonder whether the success of these movements was dependent on the womens activism or on the changing roles of the women as wage earners in the society. It becomes illogical when the change in roles wants to supersede the activism in the sense that it is likely that the latter led to the former.
Women Activism
    In the United States, the 19th Amendment was a major turning point in the political history. This Amendment was ratified by the congress in 1920 giving the American women the rights to actively participate in the democratic process. This was in recognition and appreciation of the American women for their readiness to help during the war (Duff, Para 30). The 19th Amendment can however be attributed to the tireless efforts of women feminists including Elizabeth Stanton and Susan B. Anthony who formed the National Women Suffrage Association in 1869 championing for an array of rights for women. Their efforts were thwarted due to lack of representation in the government. In 1920s, women still faced discrimination at the work place in wages and priority of employment favoring the men. After the 1920s, women rights movement cooled down and this was attributed to a number of reasons. Partly, this was due to the achievement of the suffrage goal, and because the younger women were less interested in reform and more in rebelling against social conventions (Acumen PI, Para 2).
    Tribute to the success of the 20th century goes to the initial activities of the feminists in the 19th century. Women long before their movements had formed groups based on common interests. After the French Revolution of 1848, various women political groupings took shape in Europe whereas in the United States, the women formed temperance societies. In the United States and Britain, there were two characteristic movements that developed which included social or the domestic movements and the equal rights feminist groups. The social movements were concerned with charitable and social activities, and on the other hand, the equal rights groups worked hard to clear barriers in educational and political matters in order to bring about change in the roles of women (Bryant, Para 55).
    Before the American Civil War, most of the women movements were preoccupied with duties of benevolence and social type including promoting temperance, helping poor women and orphans. Very few groups were concerned with fighting for equal rights for women. Such groups had a clear cut goal of improving the woman welfare in the society. Those fighting for women rights were first rewarded in 1821 with the establishment of the Troy Female Seminary in Troy to offer high school education to the girls. In 1833, there was the first coeducational college in the United States that incorporated the girl child. The women efforts during the 1840-50s led to acquisition of property rights by the women. Women were now able to make contracts, have control over their earnings, own property, and have joint custody of their children, (Bryant, Para 60).
    Feminists led by Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton held a convention in 1848 where women rights issues were discussed leading to the reforms in the legal system. This prompted other conventions across the globe championing for the womens rights. Radical feminists like Susan B. Anthony who was a womens rights leader formed the National Woman Suffrage Association which demanded for equal education, equal employment opportunities, and voting rights for women with immediate effect. There was also the American Woman Suffrage Association led by Lucy Stone that was quite moderate in its demand for women equality. The two organizations were formed in 1869 and later merged in 1890 to form the National American Woman Suffrage association (NAWSA). These feminists held conventions, carried out campaigns to rally out support from women and other feminists (Bryant, Para 62). Their spirited campaigns gave rise to the suffrage rights and many more rights that are being enjoyed by the modern woman.
    The efforts of the 19th century activists no doubt laid a strong foundation onto which the success of the women rights movement was to be based. Despite the many impediments they had to face, these brave women never hesitated to march forward and push for their agenda. They knew that one day their objective would be achieved even if some did not live to witness the triumph of their struggle. It is the activism as opposed to changing roles of women that led to success in women movements of the 19th century.
Conclusion
The road for equality for women hasnt been an easy one. They have been faced with numerous obstacles including ridicule, indifference, congress and legislative obstacles. The struggle for equality has not stopped but has always continued throughout the years and is far from over. The women fraternity needs to bond together in this struggle. Impressive achievements can only be achieved through determination and perseverance of the modern feminist. The women movements as they are today in the world owes a great heritage from the pioneer feminists of the 19th century. The fire that was started by the earlier feminists movements should be kept burning until equality has been achieved in all aspects of life.

How lesbian, gay, bi- sexual, transgender, and queer members of the Latino community face barriers and are not considered NORMAL when it comes to their reproductive rights, health and why hetero sexual activity is considered the norm.
Introduction
 Strong societal orientation towards heterosexuality and consideration of other sexuality behaviors such as lesbianism, gay, and transgender, and queer members of the Latino community to be less normal and therefore impacting major barriers to them is wrong and oppressive in that it denies them the basic human rights requirements and reduces their overall contribution to the societal development. Non-heterosexuality in the Latino community is taken to be against their culture and therefore strongly rejected at different levels. However, the conservative nature of the community as Jael (36) explains, strongly conflicts with changes depicted by the modern society. Jael (41-42) further indicates that it is critical that the Latino community provide a holistic non-discriminatory system where all members of the community have equal rights irrespective of their sexual behavior orientation (Ford Foundation, 41-42). It is from this consideration that this paper critically explores how transgender members of the Latino community face key barriers in accessing different services. Besides, the paper further evaluates how they are considered not normal and further examines why heterosexuality is considered to the norm in the community.
Background of sexuality among the Latinos
Mark (78-79) explains that sexual identity over the years has remained a key facet in dictating the cultural orientation of the Latino Community. Research on sexual identity among the Latino community indicates that most of the youths in the society were les likely to disclose their sexual status among the Latino community for ear of discrimination and victimization in the society.  Researchers further indicate that though Latino men were among the first to be discovered the cultural orientation towards heterosexuality is very strong among them. With the sexual identity being used as a key identifying factor in terms of determining the actual roles of an individual in the family and the relationship within the community, gay, lesbian, and bisexuals have therefore had hard time fitting themselves in the highly fixed social networks of friends, work and family in the society (Smith (49-50). With the rising awareness at the international community more of non-heterosexual Latinos have come out in the open to declare their status culminating to the current barriers and discrimination in the society. Nancy (96-97) argues that similar to other communities, it is no doubt that the Latino community will eventually have to accept the new trends in the modern world.
Reproductive justice and limitations encountered by Non-heterosexual members of the Latino community
The military policy and reproductive justice
    Over the years, Meyer and Mary (39-40) indicate that the military has remained one of the most oppressive systems in curtailing reproductive justice to its members. Women are particularly overlooked in the military by their seniors as well as by their fellow colleagues in their routines. Though it has been kept at a low profile, women have generally been discouraged from getting into the military. For instance, women who are tied either by contract or by marriage to the military have reduced options towards aborting an unwanted pregnancy rights that previously totally hers.
    In addition to that, while condoms are widely provided to men in their camps, routine operations and even in the theaters, the same consideration id absent for women. Ford Foundation (54-55) indicates contraceptives provision for women in the military are not provided for unless the commanders take the initiatives for the women in their groups. Therefore, it has been concluded that the military is very particular on protecting the male members in it from possible risks associated with sex but give very low regards for the females.
    Nancy (105) indicates that privacy for women in the military is very limited or nonexistent.  Though this concern has been raised over many occasions, it has not subsided at all. If a female member of the society for instance suspects that she is pregnant and therefore wants to have the pregnancy test, she must get a medic to prescribe for her and her results provided to the whole chain of command. Notably, this consideration does not consider whether the female military officer would like to abort or not. This is very oppressive as it denies the pregnant officer the choice over her health and indeed forms a platform for reducing the overall cohesion with her colleagues. George and Molly (100-101) argue that it further raises their stresses and even increases contemplation of suicide.
Discrimination in employments
    The recently concluded presidential elections in the United States cemented the need to infer higher levels of democracy and the need for reducing levels of discrimination in all sectors. However, one of the most critical areas that have generated the most heated debates on discrimination is the employment sector. Unlike other key areas in the society, employment sector is considered essential due to the following considerations in the society.
Increasing dependency among non-heterosexuals in the country
Discriminating the different non-heterosexuals in society provides a major platform towards their direct dependence on the government and or their relatives in the society.  Nancy (65-66) argues that though the federal government has taken time to enact the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, it ultimately narrows to shouldering the burden of supporting them through them through the welfare system.  In tandem with the communities holistic religious culture, most of the employers have shifted the requirements for the employees that work in their industries and investments. As a result, non-heterosexual individuals have to rely on the present institutions for personal and professional demands.  Following the recent human rights groups in the country emphasis on the need to reduce discrimination in the society, Mark (85-87) explains that large companies are increasingly assimilating non discriminatory methods in the society. 
Higher levels of stereotypes in companies
Meyer and Mary (77-78) explain that the need to address all the members of the society equally cannot bee effective without support of the communities at all levels. While it is generally agreeable that the government is indeed providing the necessary support and further seeking to reach out to all, the communities to preach the need for harmonious coexistence as exhibited by the country during the last presidential general elections, non-heterosexual individuals have been pasted with key  stereotypes that depict them very negatively in the society. Notably, the recent emphasis on increasing the core publicity and the need for their acceptance by the community has resulted to them being viewed as advocating for promiscuity in the community.  However, Niels and Gilbert (60-61) indicate that this has however been taken too far through stereotypes at the company levels.  Apart from the employers seeking to protect their businesses by only assimilating the employees who are acceptable in the society, even the employees equally reject them.  
Discrimination in social benefits provisions in the nation
Notably, lack of the correct legal definition for non-heterosexuals and their roles in the society has remained a major barrier towards their holistic identity which is very critical for their inherent recognition at all levels. The social security administration as Smith (74-75) put it has got itself between the rock and a hard place as it tries to effectively fit them in a non-discriminatory situation.  However, this consideration has resulted to major disputes as the officials are highly divided on the best action to take. At this point, Ford Foundation (16) indicates that the consideration becomes a major tug of war between ethical applications of the social security duties against execution of the law which do not recognize non-heterosexuals.
Discrimination in health care
Meyer and Mary (39-40) argue that non-heterosexual individuals discrimination have lacked the necessary legal back that can facilitate equal treatment in provision of health care services. Out of the fifty states, it is only five of them that have passed laws that recognize non-heterosexuals in the nation.  As a result, the definition of the relationship is very difficult and indeed unacceptable to many of them. Under this consideration therefore, medical experts have directly been refusing to treat non-heterosexuals on the basis of their sexuality. In North Coast Womens Care Medical Group, standard procedures are denied for member of the lesbian community irrespective of whether they have the employers health care plan (George and Molly (104). Under this consideration therefore, the patients are often treated at highly exaggerated prices for the few medics who accept to treat them. 
Societal rejection and poor association
Ford Foundation (32) indicates that following the negative stereo types that are associated with non-heterosexual behavior in the society, they are easily segregated and dissociated with by their age group mates. Ford Foundation (32) adds that once an individual has been reported to be gay, other members of the same group dissociate with him as they fear being considered to be involved with the same behavior. As a result, they tend to be segregated and can only freely relate with members of their sexual orientation. Under this consideration therefore, they are unable to participate and  contribute to the normal activities of the society.  This is highly traumatizing and culminates to majority of non-heterosexuality members hiding their affiliation in the society. As a result, many of them may result to suffering from psychological disorders in the society. 
4) Why heterosexuality among the Latinos is considered the norm
a) Religious affiliation
    Smith (77-78) indicates that religious affiliation among the Latino community has remained a key element in generating their holistic identity in the society. From their historical derivation, the Latino community has had a strong derivation towards heterosexuality not only as part of their further identity in the community but a particularistic demand from God. According to Mark (93-94), over 75 of the Latino community are Christians who belief in the teaching of the bible.  Notably, being gay is considered to be a strong offense against God due to the strong negative repercussions defined for it. In the book of Genesis which Nancy (112-113) indicates that Christians have strongly clung to, creation of Adam and Eve as the main example presented by God for them to follow.  Notably, the resistance and consideration of non-heterosexual individuals in the Latino community has been extrapolated indicate the non-fruitful nature of these types of relationships. After creation of Adam and Eve, God demanded that they multiply and fill the earth, a consideration viewed to be impossible from sexual relationship of the people belonging from the same sex.
Further religious outlook assimilated by the Latino community is that sexual institution is a holy relationship that must be kept holy at all times. Meyer and Mary (45) indicate that particular notion of Sodom destruction due to the people assimilating gay relationship further indicates the core repercussions that would befall the people who go out of heterosexuality behavior in the society. Under this consideration therefore, people are considered not normal in the community and people would like to dissociate with them.     
b) Lack of clear supportive laws
    In their view, George and Molly (103) lack of effective laws that support non-heterosexuality has been a major factor towards negative views of the community in the society. Though various states have sought to entrench laws that support non-heterosexuality in the society, little success have been made. Currently, the federal state does not recognize marriage between people of the same sex. Rubenstein (19-20), explains that the Defense of Marriage Act indeed denounces such relationship in the community.  This has further raised the Latinos orientation towards heterosexuality. Out of the fifty United States, it is only five of them that have permitted non-heterosexuality in their jurisdiction. In the state of California, same sex marriage was in the year 2008 was considered to be against the constitution and therefore the ban was reinstated.
    Rubenstein (24-25) indicates that in the state of Washington DC and New York, same sex marriage even though it is recognized. In concurrence with Ford Foundation (21-22) non-heterosexuality is therefore depicted to be an unlawful and therefore an action that people should desist from. However, this consideration has further remained a center of the major debate as more people seek to generate a heated debate on whether to legalize non-heterosexuality or not.
Conclusion
    The community as it came out in the discussion has over thee years tended to be highly conservative and therefore oriented towards heterosexuality. As a result, majority of their members have tended to look down upon the non-heterosexuality behavior in the society. Therefore, great discrimination has culminated in the society with key negative repercussions. Besides, majority of the employers and other areas of professional application have also culminated to great levels of discrimination for non heterosexuals in the community. However, it is lack of clear supportive laws that have led to non-heterosexuals being barred from accessing key facilities and various benefits in the society. It is from this consideration therefore that this paper concludes by supporting the thesis statement, strong societal orientation towards heterosexuality and consideration of other sexuality behaviors such as lesbianism, gay, and transgender, and queer members of the Latino community to be less normal and therefore impacting major barriers to them is wrong and oppressive in that it denies them the basic human rights requirements and reduces their overall contribution to the societal development.
It is therefore essential that the Latino community change its view towards lesbianism, gay, and transgender, and queer members to ensure that all people have equal rights and can be able to contribute effectively toward community growth and development.

Iran has not been in good terms with the United States of America for quite some time and the conflict was not really directly started by the United States. Oil was the biggest issues as it was one of the most sought after source of energy by the western countries. This led to a 60- year exclusive rights deal to a Briton, William Knox D Arcy in 1901. The Anglo-Persian Oil Company was established in 1908 when oil was first mined. In 1914, the British government bought 51 of the shares. This led to British literally colonizing the Southern West of the country which affected the politics of the entire Iran. The oil company mistreated its Iranian workers, which was construed as an act of contempt and racism on their own land. )
The company refused a fifty-fifty sharing deal and the realization of how little Iran was getting from the oil mining, angered Mohammed Mossadegh. Saudi-Arabia had a deal with Armaco- an oil company- and were on a fifty-fifty sharing deal. But the Anglo-Persian Oil
Company exported all the oil to Britain. Mohammed Mossadegh observed that nationalizing oil would be the best solution for this problem. To start of this, he brought his idea to the Oil Commission which was mandated by the  Majles . He was able to gather support from the citizens and fellow politicians and later the National Front Bill for oil nationalization was approved.
Mohammed believed in an Iran that was economically independent. He believed that his country would be independent, free and democratic. He stood to fight against British political interference and economic exploitation. He believed that for a country to be politically independent it must first attain economical independence. He defended independent judicial systems, was for a corrupt-free government and stood for gender equality.  The nationalization of oil increased tension between Britain and Iran with Britain imposing sanctions and even threats of military attack. However they saw it best to oust Mohammed from power.
Britain was not in position to dethrone Mohammed and so, they sought the help of the US. Britain sought the government of President Truman who refused, citing it as a colonial and brutal action. But the change of power to President Dwight Eisenhower saw the change of US policies to Iran. The CIA was to undertake the mission of overthrowing the government of Iran. They restored Shah Pahlavi to power. The Shah signed the Consortium Agreement which saw
British and US share 80 of the oil profits. The coup was out of self-interest for the two governments- USA and Britain.
The rule of Shah Pahlavi was characterized by autocracy. He made himself head of the government whilst he was just a monarch. He would thwart or oppose strong Prime Ministers. He also abolished multi-party system of government. He revived the army which was to remain under the royal control and would be the power base of the monarch. SAVAK was an Iranian security and Intelligence organization. It was used to suppress the opponents of the Shah and was used to monitor political opponents. It would also suppress any sort of revolution and had the mandate to censor the media in ensuring sensitive information against the government did not reach the public. It was Shah s tool to protect his rule from the revolutionists, an indication of dictatorship.
Despite the Shah being autocratic he was able to achieve much in areas of economic development. He was able to distribute wealth of small and medium estates to over four million small farmers. He was also able to extend education to women as a form of modernization. There was improvement of the education system and addition of schools. Workers were involved in ownership of factories by owning of shares and other benefits. The Shah was determined to attain his economic goals of making Iran an economic power but his political side was dictatorial.

The Shah angered the Shi a s clergyman of Iran when he replaced the Islamic calendar with the monarchy s calendar. The Islamists were also angered by the mode of secularization and modernization that was taking place with women getting more of the opportunities. They were also angered by his relationship with Israel. Following the dethroning of the Shah, the students of various universities of Iran organized to take hostage of the American embassy. The embassy was the most suitable place for them to cite their objections against the American government.
The students  demands included the return of Shah Pahlavi so that he would be tried and executed in Iran. The US denied having admitted the Shah but said that he was only there for medical purposes only. The Shah was under cancer treatment at the New York Hospital.
The students also demanded the government of the United State of America to stop interfering with internal affairs of Iran and apologize.The students further demanded the release of the Iranian assets which had been frozen in the United States of America. This led to a hostage being held for 444 days.
The President of US Jimmy Carter reacted by imposing economic sanctions to the Iranian government. The oil imports from Iran were immediately stopped. The US government froze Iranian assets worth billions of dollars. The government of US further campaigned for international diplomacy against Iran. (Jimmy Carter)
The policies by President Carter were not really successful as anticipated. There were various attempts for negotiations which became futile. To sum up the failed plans, a planned military rescue mission also failed and left eight United States Servicemen dead when their
helicopter crashed. He in fact, had to stop imposing further sanctions as they worsened the situation.President Carter was not able to solve the Iran Hostage Crisis and it is widely believed it led to his defeat by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 elections.
The two countries have had a bitter diplomatic conflict and the CIA is said to have roused much controversy after its major role to dethrone Mohammed in 1953. Iranians have always sought to have there independence which was first killed when the coup took place.

During the waning years of the Roman Empire, two extraordinary figures rose to rebuild her once great prominence in the world. While their efforts ultimately could not stop the Roman Empire from being lost to the sands of time, their collective work during their reigns would forever transform the empire. Emperors Constantine I and Diocletian would go down in history not only as two savvy political figures, but they also would galvanize and revolutionize the Roman base into pushing back into the Danubian Frontier, a move they thought could essentially restore the empire to its former glory.
    As a quick overview, the Danubian Frontier was the area considered at the time of the Late Roman Empire to be outside the control of the Roman government. Divided by roughly where the Danube itself runs through Europe, with the Late Roman Empire, or Byzantine Empire, occupying the eastern lands centered around the Middle-East while the barbarian-controlled lands being occupied to the west of the Danube. What is important to note is that the Danubian Frontier was once considered part of the Roman Empire, however due to its decline and decay, the Western Roman Empire was unable to survive and fell prey to the barbarian influences of the area (AHRG 1996). The Eastern, Byzantine Empire, though, would outlive its counterpart, and both Constantine and Diocletian viewed the restoration of the Danubian Frontier integral to the restoration of the Empire itself.
    Now, it is one thing to describe the forts and their functions, and quite another to record the massive grandeur they still convey as they still stand today. Pevensey and Portchester, to give examples, are just two of the superb military architectural achievements that defined the Diocletian age. They represented Roman civilization facing a new, threatening world on the frontier, far from the dignified cities where civic life and travel needed no walls. On the frontier, there was a need for castles, and illustrious castles were built. Some were so great in scale that the Saxon people even believed them to be the work of giants. Not only that, their utility is truly underscored by how theyve adapted and readapted into castles for various other figures throughout the ages. There is no more vivid sense of the age of Diocletian and Constantine than through the expression of the military architecture seen dotting the European landscape today (Williams 1997).
    Under Emperor Trajan, the Roman state had reached what is arguable its greatest extent. At this time, Dacia itself was conquered so as to distance the hostile tribes from the ever-dangerous Danube Frontier. Trajan also build numerous important bridges and roads throughout the empire in order to better facilitate trade and military movement from within the empire, greatly increasing the ability of the empire to react to forces on the frontier. It was said, at this height, that the entire Roman Legion could be anywhere within the Roman Empire within two-weeks, a huge accomplishment for the time period. Also, although, Emperor Hadrian, who would succeed Trajan, opposed territorial expansion, he kept the army at full strength, and built fortified boundaries, similar to those found in Britain known thereafter as Hadrians Wall, all between the Rhine and Danube Rivers, further insulated the reigns of Diocletian and Constantine I from assaults against the Danubian Frontiers (AHRG 1996). However, the Danube Frontier would eventually collapse, forever changing the Roman landscape.
    Emperor Diocletian would be the first emperor of the Byzantine Empire to truly push for the Danubian Frontier.  His ascension into power in 284 would prove to be a dynamic changing point for the structure of the Roman ruling organization and consequently their actual military legitimacy in terms of the Empire and its borders. When appointed to power, he single-handedly ended the Crisis of the Third Century, and then he appointed fellow-officer Maximian his Augustus, his senior co-emperor, just a year after he took power. Not only that, he delegated political power over the empire further in 293, appointing Galerius and Constantius as Caesars, and under this Tetrarchy each emperor would rule over a quarter-division of the empire (Roman Colloseum 2008). This division of power allowed the Roman ruling organization at the time, as well as the Roman Caesars at the time, to make quick and decisive decisions regarding military movements.  This type of dynamic and decisive decision-making was instrumental in the successes of the campaigns against Samatian and Danubian tribes during 285-90, the Alamanni in 288, and the usurpers in Egypt around 297-98. In fact, in 299, Diocletian would lead groundbreaking negotiations with Sassanid Persia, a traditional enemy of the Roman Empire, with the result of a lasting and favorable peace (2008).
    To give an example of Diocletians determination with the frontier, he spent the spring of 293, as well as that of 294, campaigning against the Sarmatians and learning how to ensure the security of the borderlands. Diocletian built numerous forts north of the Danube, at Aquincum, Bononia, Ulcisia Vetera, Castra Florentium, Intercisa, and Onagrinum. Again, when examining an ancient map, these forts built a line across the Danube that would later be referred to as the Ripa Sarmatica (Barnes 1976). This afforded himself and his armies a number of safe, defendable structures running the entire length of the Danube, proving it to be a formidable Roman boundary and perfect Roman launching area for an invasion, which is also evidenced with Diocletians victory over Carpi in the same region, and Galerius victory on the Danube. By the end of his reighn, Diocletian had provided the entire length of the Danube with forts, bridgeheads, highways, and walled towns, and sent fifteen or more legions to patrol the region. In fact, an inscription at Sexaginta Prista on the Lower Danube heralded a newfound peace and tranquility for the region, a significant achievement in an area difficult to defend (Petrikovicks 1971). 
    Essentially, Roman methods of fortification over the northwestern portions of the Empire changed significantly during the second and third centuries. What both Diocletian and Constantine recognized were that these changes were due to the increasing insecurity in Dacia, the Danube Frontier. Changes in these methods were more than just a response to the attacks from the frontier. Over both reigns, the Principate sought to standardize the defense of the frontier through the use of fortified cities and other buildings throughout open area of the Danube, so that it could also become a staging ground for further expansion by Roman forces (Thomspon 1956).
    Ultimately, what Diocletian accomplished was nothing short of securing a broken empires borders and purging it of threats to his own power. Diocletian methodically separated and enlarged the empires civil and military services, and through his reorganization of the empires provincial divisions as aforementioned, he basically established the largest and most bureaucratic government the world had ever seen, and at the very least the largest in the history of the empire. He set up new administrative centers for his empire in Nicomedia, Mediolanum, Antioch, and Trier (Petrikovicks 1971). Examined on a map, these locations are found far closer to the empires frontiers, including the Danubian Frontier, than the traditional capital at Rome had originally been. Diocletian not only wanted to shore up the defenses of the Empire on its borders, he was creating a force and a field that could recapture the lost lands of the Western Roman Empire (Johnson 2006).
    Diocletian would use mastery of bureaucratic and military growth, constant campaigning, and construction projects to increase the states expenditures, which, in turn, would lead to the necessity of more military growth to continue campaigning to continue to create more revenue. Building on third-century trends towards absolutism, Diocletian himself wasnt immune to egoistical urges, consistently elevating himself above the empires masses and imposing forms, regulations, and architecture (Baynes 1925). It would eventually be this autocratic nature that would be behind the standardization of imperial taxation in 297, levied to continue to push the empire towards expansion (Roman Colloseum 2008).
    With the essential policy-making behind the restoration in light, Diocletian also instituted a number of archeological developments for the frontier as well. First off, though, what exactly was the use of frontiers in the first place during Diocletian and Constantines time While both emperors held a firm grasp of the military function, perhaps their downfall was a lack of knowledge into the other functions of a frontier in regards to the empire. Pat Southern vividly explains this detail
The way in which the frontiers worked has been much debated. One of the connotations firmly embedded in the term frontier is that it will naturally have a military function, but a variety of other functions has been suggested for all the frontiers of the Empire as customs barriers, intelligence bases, aids to police work inside and outside the provinces, fortified communication routes, and not least, the delimitation of Roman territory. (Johnson 2008)    
Both Diocletian and Constantine I understood the military aspect behind managing the frontier. In addition to the aforementioned policy-changes to shore the frontier up, Diocletian also remodeled late Roman fort design, incorporating new defenses and layouts for the soldiers specific for frontier lands like the Danubian Frontier. For example, Diocletian was directly responsible for changing the styles of the forts by adding U-shaped towers at certain distances to enhance field vision, as well as allowing for a new system of attacking before being attacked (Johnson 2006). Contrast this design with the old design of reactionary actions in regards to Roman border disputes. In fact, Dicletian even attempted to rebuild and repopulate forts that were casualties of the Third Century Crisis, however, Constantine I would ultimately reverse this move, placing soldiers back in the cities and out of the forts (2006). 
    The prevailing character behind Constantines government, however, was one of conservatism. Contrary to what some might have expected, Constantines adoption of Christianity did not lead to any radical reordering or systematic revision of the Empire as a whole. This would go to include general military architecture as well. What Constantine focused on was completing most of the arrangements for the Empire already set up by Diocletian before him, primarily those involving provincial administration and army organization, the two most important aspects to the restoration of the empire (Pohlsander 2009). Constantine did not neglect the security of the frontiers either. He campaigned successfully in 306-308 and 314-15 on the German or Danubian Frontier, in 332 against the Goths, in 334 against the Sarmatians, and again in 336 on the familiar Danube Frontier (Barnes 1976).
    While Diocletian established a basis for power for the Late Roman Empire, Constantine could be said to be the one who fully utilizes that base against the barbarian hordes of the frontiers. Architecture in the area is clear that in 328, Constantine built a stone bridge across the Danube between Sucidava and Oescus. Not only that, a Roman mile marker, a marker that gave the distance of one Roman mile, was on the road north of that bridge, indicated Roman movement across the frontier during the time of Constantine. It would seem, then, that in or before 328 that Constantine effectively decided to re-occupy part of Transdanubian Dacia through the use of that stone bridge. Utilizing the stone bridge to cross the river Danube into the northern barbarian held territories would become the cornerstone in Constantines quiet offensive of conquest of the Danubian Frontier (Thompson 1956).
    Constantine would be considered one of the most important Roman emperors for more than just military conquest though. He also proclaimed the Edict of Milan, granting religious freedom to the empire, and was victorious against Emperor Maxentius at the Milvian Bridge, another event significant to the rise of Christianity in the empire. His main archeological impact, however, was the creation of a new central, Christian city for the Roman Empire at Byzantium, which would impact military and civil architecture for the duration of the empire. (Gill 2009)
    It was during the waning years of the Roman Empire that two extraordinary figures rose to attempt to rebuild her once great prominence in the world. While their efforts ultimately could not stop the Roman Empire from being lost to the sands of time, their collective work during their reigns would forever transform what it means to be an empire. Emperors Constantine I and Diocletian would go down in history as not only two savvy political figures, but also as those who would galvanize and revolutionize the Roman base into pushing back into the Danubian Frontier, a move they thought would lead to the restoration of the empire to its former glory.

 Barber (1996) had predicted the future of international politics in his book, Jihad vs. McWorld How the World Is Both Falling Apart and Coming Together-And What This Means for Democracy.  Jihad vs. McWorld is a war being waged at present.  Although the word, Jihad, is distinctly Muslim, to Barber the Jihad side of this battle is one driven by parochial hatreds, whereas the McWorld side of this war is about universalizing markets (53).  The author further describes the two sides on the battlefield, Jihad vs. McWorld as the one re-creating ancient sub national and ethnic borders from within, the other making national borders porous from without (53).  Barber does not believe that either side is democratic in the context of globalization.  The Jihad is fought between cultures, civilizations, tribes or nations.  McWorld, on the other hand, is about fast music, fast computers, and fast food, that is, massive consumption with utter disregard for everything else (Barber, 53).  Hence, Barber points out that the tribalism of the Jihad side and the consumerism of the McWorld side must somehow be balanced to achieve the goal of democratizing the world.
     Barbers analysis brings to mind a popular theory developed by Thomas Friedman no two countries with McDonalds have fought a war.  In other words, McDonalds makes a statement for a a countrys quest to globalize itself, and this statement is necessary to avoid war.  After all, McWorld is a product of popular culture driven by expansionist commerce (Barber, 17).  To put it another way, anybody that refuses to buy McDonalds because it represents Western cultural values is a Jihadist who must face war.  Barber further describes McWorld thus Its
template is American, its form style.  Its goods are as much images as material, an aesthetic as well as a product line.  It is about culture as commodity, apparel as ideology (17).  To put it another way, the McWorld side believes that Americanization and globalization go together, and the backlash against globalization comes from have-nots that do not possess tremendous resources like the United States and could therefore turn out to be Americas enemies.  Another way to understand the McWorld side of the war is to view America as the big bully that tries to impose its culture upon people with the threat that they would face extinction if they do not become American enough.  Consuming McDonalds is a statement of friendship that any nation can send Americas way, thereby avoiding war with the mightiest military in the world.
     Understanding globalization as Americanization  given Americas vast successes in the global economy  Barber writes that by shrinking the world and diminishing the salience of national borders, the imperatives have in combination achieved a considerable victory over factious and particularize, and not least of all over nationalism (54).  After all, the American brand is nationalistic, just as the Jihad side would like to maintain its own nationalistic character by avoiding all that appears Western.  Both groups at war are extremists.  Barber does not refer to radical Islam alone when he makes mention of Jihad.  Rather, Hamas and Hezbollah are in the same group as the Russian Zhirinovsky, the Serbs of Bosnia, and separatists in Occitan France, Quebec and Catalonia.  In short, all who oppose Americanization are Jihadists. 
     From the perspective of McWorld, America must continue to take the lead in managing and sustaining globalization.  Property rights, training and retraining of employees, successful free markets, as well as new political systems that sustain globalization are vital.  America must assert its supremacy in guiding the system of globalization.  Moreover, the United States must speak up for democratization, along with the European Union, the United Nations Development Program, as well as non-governmental groups that are meant to monitor and promote human rights.  But, the Jihadists believe that America is out to destroy their own cultures and values with its powerful media.  Writing on the subject of Hollywood and how its film distribution around the world is altering cultures, Barber states The infotainment telesector may neither actively seek nor even passively wish to exercise power, but will inevitably have it (82).  In other words, the McWorld side of the war that has originated in America (where McDonalds was birthed) is impressive enough to change cultures of people around the globe, regardless of whether those people appreciate it or not. 
     In Barbers view, the world cannot be democratized as it is globalized the McDonalds way.  When America sends out its culture via the media to almost all nations, not everybody in the world appreciates it.  Democracy requires all peoples voices to be heard and heeded before decisions of global importance are made.  Hence, the World Trade Organization protests globalization on behalf of the developing nations whenever these nations are threatened by it.  As an effect of globalization, the developing nations are asked to accept the rich countries rules and regulations on labor and environmental protection.  The developed countries, too, were unable to afford these standards in the past.  Because the pace of development is extraordinarily rapid with respect to globalization, the World Trade Organization wants to emphasize that developing nations must be given more time to adjust to change. 
     Barber agrees that the world requires an arbitrator like the World Trade Organization to resolve the dispute between Jihadists and consumers of McDonalds.  In fact, his thesis revolves around the differences between socioeconomic classes.  Clearly, the Jihadists do not possess the resources of America to develop consumer societies.  If the Jihad side was rich like the McWorld side, it would not have to target Western culture and values through its war.  Nobody can be forced to watch Hollywood films.  However, American culture and values taught unto the world by media may become an issue because the have-nots are envious of the haves.  Religion does not teach envy.  Rather, Hollywood films clearly reveal the differences between the haves and the have-nots, almost compelling the latter to resist the McDonalds way because the Jihadists cannot live the American Dream, as the McWorld side would call it. 
     When the Jihad vs. McWorld war is waged at the World Trade Organization, it has developing nations arguing that the terms of free trade are actually dictated by economically powerful countries and the latter are the only ones with the power to make or break rules and regulations of transnational institutions such as the World Trade Organization.  Thus, pure democracy appears as a dream for this organization.  Just the same, the World Trade Organization is in a good position to work at consolidating all of its member nations as far as rules of free trade are concerned.  When a Korean farmer suddenly appeared during a meeting of World Trade Organization and committed suicide, the problems facing the global political economy were highlighted  that, in fact, the interests of the poor must be heeded, better than before.  Such events illustrate the negative feelings of the have-nots with respect to globalization, simply because they have not the power to speed up their processes to render them competitive in the global marketplace.  Thus, globalization is like a powerful revolution, pitting rich nations against the poor, just as the conflict theory of inequality predicts in sociological terms.
     Barber maintains that the Jihadists are violent and cannot convince the McWorld side to adopt their cultures and values.  But, the McWorld view of global political affairs is equally unreasonable.  Hence, Barber would like the reader to come up with his or her own view of the creation of a civil society in the era of globalization.  According to the author, both McWorld and Jihad weaken nations.  Jihad splinters them but increase their dependence on McWorld, McWorld draws nations out of their isolation and autarky, but in making them dependent reduces their power (Barber, 48).  In his journalistic style, Barber would like individuals across national boundaries to take responsibility for how they wish to be governed.  They do not have to choose either the Jihad or the McWorld side, that is, tribalism over consumerism or Americanism over radical Islam.  They may opt to establish their own groups to advocate democracy as they refuse both the Jihad and the McWorld sides.  After all, cultural and socioeconomic differences are facets of reality despite globalization.  Thus, Jihad vs. McWorld simply suggests that there is a way out of this struggle between the Jihad and the McWorld sides, and leaves it to readers and policymakers to imagine the kinds of approaches to end this battle so as to democratize the world through globalization.  The bottom line is democratization of the world rather than extremist Americanism or any other form of nationalism or seperatism.