What do you think of Magna Carta’s implications for human rights and freedom in modern society

(you are encouraged to use textual details to support your arguments)?

The implication for human rights and freedom of the “cornerstone of British
constitution”, Magna Carta, is progressive and pioneering in spite of a few
limitations.

The human rights and freedom in modern theories and ideas are considered to
originate from Magna Carta. To be more specific, some clauses in Magna Carta are
embryonic form of human rights protected by contemporary British constitution. For
instance, the emphasis on rights of liberties is embodied in the the 39 th and 40th
clauses, saying “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or
possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor
will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful
judgment of his equals or by the law of the land” and “To no one will we sell, to no
one deny or delay right or justice” respectively. Property rights, another essential
component of human rights today, can also find their roots in 21 clauses of Magna
Carta. The 52th clause, as an example, regulates that “to any man whom we have
deprived and dispossessed of lands, castles, liberties, or rights, without the lawful
judgment of his equals, we will at once restore these.” Additionally, the judicial
rights, children's and women's rights, political rights and many more implied in
Magna Carta conform with the core value of those we emphasize today.

However, limitations still exist in Magna Carta indeed. For one thing, its aim and the
majority of its contents are to protect and render rights of nobles while undermining
the power of the monarch. The progress in human rights and freedom reflected in
Magna Carta is neither the original intention of its framers, nor foreseen by them—
That is to say, certain feudalism is included. For another, the advancement, to some
extent, is relative rather than absolute. One of the influential clauses, 12th clause, for
example, only reemphasizes existing laws in feudal society to the monarch, without
any supplement and improvement.

In all, despite some conspicuous limitations, and differences between the human
rights and freedom in Magna Carta and those in the contemporary sense, Magna
Carta, represents the cornerstone of British Constitution and threshold of human rights
and freedom.
Please briefly explain historical causes of the Protestant Reformation in the 16 th century England.

Protestant Reformation in the 16th century England was caused by a combination of

several historical events, three of which, from my perspective, should assumed
responsibility primarily.

Corruption and wrongdoing within the Roman Catholic Church in the late middle
ages, which triggered widespread discontent of the English public. In the 16 th- century
England, Roman Catholic Church enjoy supreme power and privilege, ranging over
politics, economics, justice, education etc. The power and privilege were misused by a
majority of clergy, contributing to the rebellion.

The embryonic capitalist relations of production in England called for eliminating the
intervention of the Roman Church in domestic affairs. The capitalist relations of
production appeared in 14th in England and has grown prosperously since then. While
the English bourgeoisie and gentry need the primitive accumulation of capital, the
Roman Catholic Church owned approximately one third of the land and income in
England. Therefore, the conflict between the Roman Church and newly-arising
Bourgeoisie was aggravated. Consequently, Bourgeoisie, allied with and depending
on the monarchy, caused the Protestant Reformation in the 16th England.

The ideas of John Wyclif and the Lollards, which took root in English citizens’ minds,
provided a theoretical foundation for Protestant Reformation. In the 14 th century, John
Wyclif blasted avaricious clergy and sought a return to the Scriptures as the center
force of Christianity; the Lollard demanded reform of Western Christianity. The
movement and ideas triggered the awakening of the English people, preparing them
for the upcoming Protestant Reformation.

In conclusion, it was the corruption within the Church, the political and economic
grievances of rising bourgeoisie, and previous thoughts and ideas that fueled the
rebellion against the Roman Catholic Church.
Based on our discussion upon the British educational system, what do you think are the major
educational beliefs in the UK? Or how does the British educational system resemble and differ
from the Chinese one?

According to our discussion in class, there are two major educational beliefs in the
UK: to vest responsibility for a task in an individual body, with intervention only
when apparent mistakes are made; to allow schools to plan and conduct its corporate
life freely as long as they are within the social framework. The British educational
system encourages freedom of both individuals and schools.

The British educational system differs a lot from its Chinese counterpart. Firstly, the
purpose of education in UK is to provide children with literacy and other basic skills
they will need to become active members of society. In China, however, the purpose
is to achieve universal education so that everyone has knowledge and skills to live
better. Also, the British education doesn’t pay much attention upon three R’s—
reading, writing and arithmetic but mainly focuses on socializing children, while the
Chinese education is rather exam-oriented. As a result, British schools emphasize
practice more while Chinese schools give priority to theories and basic subjects like
math, physics, chemistry etc. Additionally, the aim of most Chinese students is to
enter a prominent university to receive higher education; vocational schools are not as
welcomed. But in Britain, students have a variety of choices in terms of their
academic life and future career. The two educational systems are also different from
each other in the sizes of classes, the forms of imparting and many other aspects. But
in general, British educational system is more free, flexible, and student-centered and
Chinese one is more systematized, efficient and teacher-centered.

Despite the differences, there’re numerous similarities that the British and Chinese
educational systems share. The most apparent one is that both countries emphasize the
importance of education and compulsory education is stipulated—British students
ought to attend school from 5 to 16 years old, and Chinese students are obliged to
accept the 9-year compulsory education.

The differences and similarities are mainly derived from the present situations and the
traditional cultures of the two countries. The British educational system offers the
chance to teach students in accordance with their aptitude and allows more freedom
for creativity and improvement. It suits the U.K. and has shown great achievements.
Though Chinese educational system is not that similar, it’s suitable for our present
situation, able to achieve universal education and to educate children as efficiently
and properly as possible.
Thomas Cook Group, one of the leading travel agencies in the world and the oldest travel
company in Britain with a history of 178 years, has pronounced its liquidation in September this
year. Search for some relevant information and explain your understanding of the reasons for its
bankrupt. Compare the tourist business in Britain and China and find out similarities and
differences.

There’re three primary causes of the bankruptcy of Thomas Cook Group. Firstly, the
number of visitors declined and the exchange rate of pound sterling dropped
dramatically due to the Brexit. Instability caused by Brexit contributed to a slump in
demand in the British tourism. In order to attract customers and expand its market,
Thomas Cook Group was forced to reduce the price of their services, and thus reduce
their gross profits. At the same time, when most of their customers spent pound
sterling (whose exchange rate declined dramatically) on booking in the platform,
Thomas Cook Group spent dollars or euros when cooperating with foreign hotels and
tourist attractions. Therefore, the unfavorable exchange rate brought the company
extra loss as well. Secondly, the high operating costs have reduced the company’s
capability of resisting risks for long. According to statistics, Thomas Cook used to
own 97 planes, 2926 stores and 21490 employers before liquidation. This helped
achieve economies of scale successfully when risks hadn’t emerged. But once the
company faced a crisis, the high operating costs of maintaining machines and
employers aggravated the situation even more. Thirdly, Thomas Cook Group hasn’t
kept pace with the fast-growing and dramatically-changing tourist business. The
internet has largely changed people’s ways of living, as well as their ways of
travelling, and this was one of the main reasons why the traditional travel agency
failed to bear the crisis and went bankruptcy.

The tourist business is a critical industry both in Britain and China. In Britain, tourism
is a 127-billion-pound industry, representing around 10% of GDP; Chinese tourism
accounts for 11% of the total GDP. They both create millions of job opportunities. At
the same time, both the U.K. and China are rich in tourist resources as well as
historical and cultural relics. However, apparent differences do exist. Firstly, the
British tourist business has a long history, which started from 1910, while Chinese
tourism didn’t get off the ground until 1978. Therefore, the British tourism can focus
more on advertising British tourist resources and the country’s image, while its
Chinese counterpart should first emphasize infrastructure improvements. In addition,
international visitors contribute a lot to the British tourism. For example, foreign
tourists to the U.K. spent a record 24.5 billion pounds in 2017. However, they are not
of the same importance in the Chinese tourist business, for less than 50 million
international visitors came to China in 2018 and only 33.5% of them were for
sightseeing tours. In conclusion, the Chinese tourism differs from the British one
because of their different natural resources, geographical positions, history etc.; but
they both pay much attention to tourism, one of the most important industries in both
countries.
 Boris Johnson, Britain’s prime minister-designate, said his government would be
very “pro-China”, in an interview with a Hong Kong-based Chinese-language
broadcaster shortly before he was chosen to succeed Theresa May. Considering
actions of the Johnson government, how would you evaluate this “pro-China” claim,
or how do you view the current situation of Chinese investment in the UK?

The “pro-China” claim of the Johnson government is a diplomatic parlance, which

reflects an ideal closer bilateral relationship between China and the UK, though this
claim isn’t reliable enough.

The reason why we question the credibility of the claim is that there are obstacles that
prevent the UK from keeping its word, and there have already been many negative
manifestations. For instance, whether the UK will allow Huawei into its 5G plans is
one of the most critical criteria to test the “pro-China” claim. But when Boris Johnson
and Trump met at the NATO summit Johnson appeared to be swaying in the direction
of the U.S line on Huawei, with Boris Johnson saying that “I don’t want this country
to be unnecessarily hostile to investment from overseas but, on the other hand, we
cannot prejudice our vital national security interests.” The uncertainty of British
attitude towards Huawei’s participation in its 5G plans adds to our suspicion. At the
same time, the ongoing Sino-US trade war escalates the uncertainty as well. Since the
UK has long been allied with the U.S. and it’s very unlikely that the UK betrays the
U.S., its pro-China actions may not be thorough and reliable. Additionally, the Hong
Kong issue also put the UK in an awkward situation.

However, there is great urgency and necessity for the UK to cooperate with China,
which, to some extent, ensures a relatively friendly attitude of the UK towards China.
Boris Johnson is determined to leave the EU “at any cost”, which will pose a threat to
the British economy and political status. A close relationship with China can act as a
cushion for the UK to recover from the possible threat of Brexit, especially under the
background of a series of protectionist measures of the U.S.

In conclusion, the “pro-China” claim can be seen as an optimistic signal of a better

Sino-British relations in the future, while Chinese government and investors should
never be overoptimistic and should still be cautious enough when dealing with the
relationship with the UK.