WordPress is an exceptional website building method just about anyone is able to take advantage of. The design practice is basic, so extensive coding is not necessarily required for someone to create a WordPress page. One of the major benefits of WordPress is access to hundreds of potential plug-ins, which in turn give you the ability to customize the website and add in new widgets and features a visitor is able to interact with. Some widgets allow a person to connect through their social media account, while others improve the overall functionality of the website. For some instances though, requesting donation funds is an excellent addition as well. Whether you manage a non-profit organization, church or other service where donations help keep the operation afloat and running, this sort of donation plugin can take your website from simply informative to a positive outreach method that can bring in money at the same time.
Before implementing the donation plugin into your website, you first need to understand what the plugin is and how it can improve your website. Working with donors can be difficult, as it often requires them to perform several tasks which, at the time, might just seem too much for the donor. Many people do want to help, if it is made easy for them to do. With the WordPress donation plugin, it keeps your donors on your website, as they simply have to click on the widget icon and money can be donated to your account, based on the amount they feel like donating. It is extremely easy to use, gives you confidence that you can raise money and it also is one of the best donation plugin options out there. Few other options give you the piece of mind and ability to bring in more money for your cause than this option, which is why you and your non-profit organization should try it out.
As the best WordPress donation plugin, you are able to take advantage of your website and use it as a means to bring in funding for your cause. There are times people might want to donate but simply do not know how to. With the help of the best donation plugin, people no longer have to search the Internet in order to find a way to donate. All they need to do is click on a single button and complete the process by filling in their credit card information or even PayPal data. The best WordPress donation plugin also makes it possible for someone to donate to you on a spur of the moment. They might feel inclined to donate all of a sudden, so to take advantage of this generous spirit, the donation plugin is there for visitors to use.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/8714558
Tuesday, 8 March 2016
Relevance of Kings And Queens in Ceremonial Role
The royalty titles - Kings and Queens - are still in vogue in the world. These titles are found in developed countries as well as in developing countries. There are quite a few Kings and Queens still in the world: in UK, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Spain, Denmark, Oman, Tonga, Morocco, Monaco, Bahrain, Cambodia, Jordan, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Liechtenstein, Norway, Brunei, Japan, Nepal, Thailand, Kuwait, Sweden, Bhutan, Samoa, Swaziland... What is their utility to humanity in the present era? They have ceremonial value only, but at a huge cost to public exchequer. They are unpopular, and losing power slowly in Middle East, Nepal, Brunei and other developing countries.
Who supports Kings?
Surprisingly, the survival of these kingdoms depends upon support from other democracies of the world. Saudi Arabia King/Sheikh gets support from US. Is it, to maintain stability in the region? Not a convincing argument! It confirms that there are no permanent friends, and principles of a country. There are only permanent interests. Osama-bin-Laden the terrorist had to leave Saudi Arabia for supporting democracy.
Clinging to old pride
Aren't the Kings/Queens just relics of past and irrelevant? What is the hitch? We remember past glory with pride. A Queen in UK, reminds us of the glorious past of UK: the British Empire, where the Sun never set. We want to cling to old memories. Remember the good old school days: Law of Inertia - Newton's First Law of Motion. There is always a resistance to change. Is the social recognition of Kings/Queens relevant in present era? Is the expenditure on maintaining the ceremonial Kings/Queens justifiable? Let there be a voluntary retirement plan, with one lump sum payment. Give them decent accommodation. Take away big palaces. Convert these into museums or hotels. Commoners would love to pay any amount, to live 'royal' life even for a day. Let the Kings and Queens live like commoners. It has to happen. How long can we delay the inevitable? "Who will bell the cat?", and when! The Kings and Queens - the ceremonial relics of the past - may see the writing on the wall and voluntarily surrender the perks. They will reconcile, as they have done in India, a land with hundreds of small kingdoms, in 1947. Let us make a final push to dump the existing irrelevant titles of Kings and Queens into history books. Developing countries are the leaders in the drive to obliterate the kingdoms from the face of the earth. They are fighting a losing battle in the world. The developed nations - democratic nations - are safe havens for these relics of past.
The new avatars
There are new avatars, who are replacing erstwhile Kings and Queens. Saddam Hussein with his seven palaces, was more than a King. Col Gaddafi of Libya lived like a King. Idi Amin was another monster, who ruled like a king. UNO needs to keep an eye on such pseudo-kings in developing countries. Humanity must curb the extravaganza of such public figures, who misuse democracy.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/8717852
Who supports Kings?
Surprisingly, the survival of these kingdoms depends upon support from other democracies of the world. Saudi Arabia King/Sheikh gets support from US. Is it, to maintain stability in the region? Not a convincing argument! It confirms that there are no permanent friends, and principles of a country. There are only permanent interests. Osama-bin-Laden the terrorist had to leave Saudi Arabia for supporting democracy.
Clinging to old pride
Aren't the Kings/Queens just relics of past and irrelevant? What is the hitch? We remember past glory with pride. A Queen in UK, reminds us of the glorious past of UK: the British Empire, where the Sun never set. We want to cling to old memories. Remember the good old school days: Law of Inertia - Newton's First Law of Motion. There is always a resistance to change. Is the social recognition of Kings/Queens relevant in present era? Is the expenditure on maintaining the ceremonial Kings/Queens justifiable? Let there be a voluntary retirement plan, with one lump sum payment. Give them decent accommodation. Take away big palaces. Convert these into museums or hotels. Commoners would love to pay any amount, to live 'royal' life even for a day. Let the Kings and Queens live like commoners. It has to happen. How long can we delay the inevitable? "Who will bell the cat?", and when! The Kings and Queens - the ceremonial relics of the past - may see the writing on the wall and voluntarily surrender the perks. They will reconcile, as they have done in India, a land with hundreds of small kingdoms, in 1947. Let us make a final push to dump the existing irrelevant titles of Kings and Queens into history books. Developing countries are the leaders in the drive to obliterate the kingdoms from the face of the earth. They are fighting a losing battle in the world. The developed nations - democratic nations - are safe havens for these relics of past.
The new avatars
There are new avatars, who are replacing erstwhile Kings and Queens. Saddam Hussein with his seven palaces, was more than a King. Col Gaddafi of Libya lived like a King. Idi Amin was another monster, who ruled like a king. UNO needs to keep an eye on such pseudo-kings in developing countries. Humanity must curb the extravaganza of such public figures, who misuse democracy.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/8717852
Kabaka Mutesa Mukabya: Uganda's Powerful, Murderous, Enlightened, Diplomatic, and Famous Potentate
Buganda's most renowned of warrior-kings, Ssuuna (Suna/ Suuna), whom Henry Morton Stanley compared to Shaka of the Zulu (sky) Clan would succumb to small-pox in 1856. Just before his death, he called together the Kingdom-state's three hereditary senior chiefs and the prime minister and instructed that his eldest son Kajumba be installed as his successor when the moment came. The "Emperor" Ssuuna strongly favored Kajumba whom he likened to himself, and surmised that he would be the appropriate strongman to maintain the prestige and supremacy of Buganda. Kajumba was apparently head and shoulders high above his brethren, he was youthful and violent. However, it is such headstrong tendencies that made Kajumba largely unpopular with the Buganda leaders, the royals, and the local population.
"Kajumba... Suna's favourite... the war-loving father on his death-bed pointed... with pride to his chiefs the heroic qualities of the prince, reminded... how when a..boy he had slain a buffalo with a club and an elephant with a... spear, and assured them with his latest breath that Kajumba would become more renowned than either lion-like [Kabaka] Kimera or renowned [Kabaka] Nakivingi" (Stanley 1878: 295).
After his father's death, Kajumba grabbed his heavy spear and massive shield, declared himself Kabaka Ssuuna's choice and successor, and announced that he would determinedly uphold his father's dignity to the death. The chiefs gave the order and Kajumba was attacked and tightly bound. "Mild-spoken, large-eyed" Prince Mtesa (Muteesa/ Mutesa), an alternative monarchical prospect regarded as much less violent and much easier to deal with than Kajumba, was instead installed as the new king.
However, soon after the burial rituals to honor the late Ssuuna, soft-spoken Mutesa would reveal himself as the ruthless power-obsessed butcher and disciplinarian, though his harshness would subside over the years of his reign. He struck terror in the population and earned the nickname, "Mukaabya," (Mukabya) which translates to, "the one who causes to weep," and by which he was prevalently called.
"He would have no subject... remind him... he owed his sovereignty to him. According to his father's custom, he butchered all who gave... offence, and... lion in war, Namujulirwa, as also... Katikiro (or prime minister), he... beheaded... in a passion, he would take his spear... rush to his harem... spear his women, until his thirst for blood was slaked... Mtesa was of this temper when Speke saw him... continued... until... converted by... Arab Muley bin Salim into a fervid Muslim. After this... became... humane, abstained from... strong native beer which used to fire his blood... renounced... blood-shedding custom of his fathers" (Stanley 1878: 296).
Though he was a slave trader, Muley was regarded as a devout Muslim and teacher of the faith. Mutesa would toy with both Islam and Christianity, he saw the ironies and conflicts in the foreign religions and he never really took them seriously. But he did learn Arabic and he would at length ponder over and debate many philosophical issues.
The Buganda system of governance was a unique and sophisticated system of checks and balances that involved both civil and hereditary leaders that strived to ensure that no group went to extremes or became too powerful. The king married from all the clans in Buganda as a gesture of maintaining familial ties with all the Baganda. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the king did not have absolute powers, but was closely monitored and advised by the senior chiefs and the prime-minister. The king did not have the final say in who would be his successor. A prince who was quite young was usually chosen to be the successor, one who would likely be more easily molded and compliant as he grew and developed into the system of traditionalism. But though the king could be treated as more of a ceremonial figure, he was still capable of enlisting forces to get rid of the ruling elders, and vice-versa. The tradition of killing off princes, during the installation of a new monarch seems to have been in Buganda for centuries, and was designed to minimize royal rebellions and strife for power.
Despite Mutesa's initial ruthlessness that reflected historical royal practices designed to exact utmost compliance to and reverence for him, Mutesa would become renowned for his enlightenment, his diplomacy, and for embracing monotheistic religions and innovative development in his kingdom. Foreign forces were fast penetrating the kingdom-state, and Mutesa was challenged to deal with traditionalism, the forces of colonialism, the new arms and ammunition, the shifting boundaries of his kingdom, the slavery and the slave trade, amongst a myriad of other issues during his three decades in power. The old order was rapidly changing, the forces of the industrial revolution and the Scramble for Africa had come to the most powerful kingdom state in Africa's Great Lakes region.
Kabaka Mutesa Mukaabya died on October 9, 1884 (10th, according to some sources) and the Buganda Council picked his son Prince Mwanga Mukasa Basammula to be the new king. Coincidentally, Uganda officially gained political independence from England on October 9, 1962.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/8736728
"Kajumba... Suna's favourite... the war-loving father on his death-bed pointed... with pride to his chiefs the heroic qualities of the prince, reminded... how when a..boy he had slain a buffalo with a club and an elephant with a... spear, and assured them with his latest breath that Kajumba would become more renowned than either lion-like [Kabaka] Kimera or renowned [Kabaka] Nakivingi" (Stanley 1878: 295).
After his father's death, Kajumba grabbed his heavy spear and massive shield, declared himself Kabaka Ssuuna's choice and successor, and announced that he would determinedly uphold his father's dignity to the death. The chiefs gave the order and Kajumba was attacked and tightly bound. "Mild-spoken, large-eyed" Prince Mtesa (Muteesa/ Mutesa), an alternative monarchical prospect regarded as much less violent and much easier to deal with than Kajumba, was instead installed as the new king.
However, soon after the burial rituals to honor the late Ssuuna, soft-spoken Mutesa would reveal himself as the ruthless power-obsessed butcher and disciplinarian, though his harshness would subside over the years of his reign. He struck terror in the population and earned the nickname, "Mukaabya," (Mukabya) which translates to, "the one who causes to weep," and by which he was prevalently called.
"He would have no subject... remind him... he owed his sovereignty to him. According to his father's custom, he butchered all who gave... offence, and... lion in war, Namujulirwa, as also... Katikiro (or prime minister), he... beheaded... in a passion, he would take his spear... rush to his harem... spear his women, until his thirst for blood was slaked... Mtesa was of this temper when Speke saw him... continued... until... converted by... Arab Muley bin Salim into a fervid Muslim. After this... became... humane, abstained from... strong native beer which used to fire his blood... renounced... blood-shedding custom of his fathers" (Stanley 1878: 296).
Though he was a slave trader, Muley was regarded as a devout Muslim and teacher of the faith. Mutesa would toy with both Islam and Christianity, he saw the ironies and conflicts in the foreign religions and he never really took them seriously. But he did learn Arabic and he would at length ponder over and debate many philosophical issues.
The Buganda system of governance was a unique and sophisticated system of checks and balances that involved both civil and hereditary leaders that strived to ensure that no group went to extremes or became too powerful. The king married from all the clans in Buganda as a gesture of maintaining familial ties with all the Baganda. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the king did not have absolute powers, but was closely monitored and advised by the senior chiefs and the prime-minister. The king did not have the final say in who would be his successor. A prince who was quite young was usually chosen to be the successor, one who would likely be more easily molded and compliant as he grew and developed into the system of traditionalism. But though the king could be treated as more of a ceremonial figure, he was still capable of enlisting forces to get rid of the ruling elders, and vice-versa. The tradition of killing off princes, during the installation of a new monarch seems to have been in Buganda for centuries, and was designed to minimize royal rebellions and strife for power.
Despite Mutesa's initial ruthlessness that reflected historical royal practices designed to exact utmost compliance to and reverence for him, Mutesa would become renowned for his enlightenment, his diplomacy, and for embracing monotheistic religions and innovative development in his kingdom. Foreign forces were fast penetrating the kingdom-state, and Mutesa was challenged to deal with traditionalism, the forces of colonialism, the new arms and ammunition, the shifting boundaries of his kingdom, the slavery and the slave trade, amongst a myriad of other issues during his three decades in power. The old order was rapidly changing, the forces of the industrial revolution and the Scramble for Africa had come to the most powerful kingdom state in Africa's Great Lakes region.
Kabaka Mutesa Mukaabya died on October 9, 1884 (10th, according to some sources) and the Buganda Council picked his son Prince Mwanga Mukasa Basammula to be the new king. Coincidentally, Uganda officially gained political independence from England on October 9, 1962.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/8736728
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)