document_title: Disinvestment from South Africa

question_text: what was the divestment social movement in south africa

text: Disinvestment from South Africa

text: United Nations campaigns[edit]

text:
International opposition to
apartheid in South Africa

Campaigns[show]

Academic boycott
Sporting boycott
Disinvestment
Constructive engagement
Free South Africa Movement
International anti-apartheid music

Instruments and legislation[show]

1962 UN Resolution 1761
1973 Crime of Apartheid Convention
1977 Gleneagles Agreement
1977 Sullivan principles
1986 Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act

Organisations[show]

Anti-Apartheid Movement
Artists United Against Apartheid
Commonwealth of Nations
Halt All Racist Tours
Organisation of African Unity
TransAfrica
UN Special Committee against Apartheid

Conferences[show]

1964 Conference for Economic Sanctions
1978 World Conference against Racism

UN Security Council Resolutions[show]

Resolution 134 (Sharpeville massacre)
Resolution 181 (voluntary arms embargo)
Resolution 191 (sanctions feasibility)
Resolution 282 (arms embargo strengthening)
Resolution 418 (mandatory arms embargo)
Resolution 435 (South-West Africa ceasefire)
Resolution 591 (arms embargo strengthening)

Other aspects[show]

Elimination of Racism Day
"Biko" (song)
Activists
Nelson Mandela 70th Birthday Tribute
Equity television programming ban
Rugby union and apartheid

v
t
e

tag: table

text: In November 1962, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 1761, a non-binding resolution establishing the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid and called for imposing economic and other sanctions on South Africa. All Western nations were unhappy with the call for sanctions and as a result boycotted the committee.[3]

text: Following this passage of this resolution the UK-based Anti-Apartheid Movement spearheaded the arrangements for an international conference on sanctions to be held in London in April 1964. According to Lisson, "The aim of the Conference was to work out the practicability of economic sanctions and their implications on the economies of South Africa, the UK, the US and the Protectorates. Knowing that the strongest opposition to the application of sanctions came from the West (and within the West, Britain), the Committee made every effort to attract as wide and varied a number of speakers and participants as possible so that the Conference findings would be regarded as objective."[3]

text: The conference was named the International Conference for Economic Sanctions Against South Africa. This conference, Lisson writes,

text: established the necessity, the legality and the practicability of internationally organised sanctions against South Africa, whose policies were seen to have become a direct threat to peace and security in Africa and the world. Its findings also pointed out that in order to be effective, a programme of sanctions would need the active participation of Britain and the US, who were also the main obstacle to the implementation of such a policy.[3]

text: Attempts to persuade British policymakers[edit]

text: The conference was not successful in persuading Britain to take up economic sanctions against South Africa though. Rather, the British government "remained firm in its view that the imposition of sanctions would be unconstitutional 'because we do not accept that this situation in South Africa constitutes a threat to international peace and security and we do not in any case believe that sanctions would have the effect of persuading the South African Government to change its policies'".[3]

text: The AAM tried to make sanctions an election issue in the 1964 General Election in Britain. Candidates were asked to state their position on economic sanctions and other punitive measures against the South African government. Most candidates who responded answered in the affirmative. After the Labour Party sweep to power though, commitment to the anti-apartheid cause dissipated. In short order, Labour Party leader Harold Wilson told the press that his Labour Party was "not in favour of trade sanctions partly because, even if fully effective, they would harm the people we are most concerned about - the Africans and those white South Africans who are having to maintain some standard of decency there".[3] Even so, Lisson writes that the "AAM still hoped that the new Labour Government would be more sensitive to the demands of public opinion than the previous Government." But by the end of 1964, it was clear that the election of the Labour Party had made little difference in the governments overall unwillingness to imposing sanctions.

text: Steadfast rejection by the West[edit]

text: Lisson summarizes the situation at the UN in 1964:

text: At the UN, Britain consistently refused to accept that the situation in South Africa fell under Chapter VII of the [United Nations] Charter. Instead, in collaboration with the US, it worked for a carefully worded appeal on the Rivonia and other political trials to try to appease Afro-Asian countries and public opinion at home and abroad; by early 1965 the issue of sanctions had lost momentum.[3]

text: According to Lisson, Britain's rejection was premised on its economic interests in South Africa, which would be put at risk if any type of meaningful economic sanctions were put in place.

text: In 1977, the voluntary UN arms embargo became mandatory with the passing of United Nations Security Council Resolution 418.

text: An oil embargo was introduced on 20 November 1987 when the United Nations General Assembly adopted a voluntary international oil embargo.[4]

text: United States campaign (1977–1989)[edit]

text: The Sullivan Principles (1977)[edit]

text: Knight[5] writes that anti-apartheid movement in the U.S. found that Washington was unwilling to get involved in economically isolating South Africa. The movement responded by organized lobbying of individual businesses and institutional investors to end their involvement with or investments in the apartheid state as a matter of corporate social responsibility. This campaign was coordinated by several faith-based institutional investors eventually leading to the creation of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility. An array of celebrities, including singer Paul Simon, also participated.

text: The key instrument of this campaign was the so-called Sullivan Principles, authored by and named after the Rev. Dr. Leon Sullivan. Leon Sullivan was an African-American preacher in Philadelphia who, in 1977, was also a board member of the corporate giant General Motors. At that time, General Motors was the largest employer of blacks in South Africa. The principles required that the corporation ensure that all employees are treated equally and in an integrated environment, both in and outside the workplace, and regardless of race, as a condition of doing business. These principles directly conflicted with the mandated racial discrimination and segregation policies of apartheid-era South Africa, thus making it impossible for businesses adopting the Sullivan Principles to continue doing business there.

text: While the anti-Apartheid movement lobbied individual businesses to adopt and comply with the Sullivan Principles, the movement opened an additional front with the institutional investors. Besides advocating that institutional investors withdraw any direct investments in South African-based companies, anti-Apartheid activists also lobbied for the divestment from all U.S.-based companies having South African interests who had not yet themselves adopted the Sullivan Principles. The institutional investors such as public pension funds were the most susceptible to these types of lobbying efforts.

text: Public companies with South Africa interests were thus confronted on two levels: First, shareholder resolutions were submitted by concerned stockholders who, admitted, posed more of a threat to the often-cherished corporate reputations than to the stock price. Second, the companies were presented with the significant financial threat whereby one or more of their major institutional investors decides to withdraw their investments.[citation needed]

text: Achieving critical mass (1984–1989)[edit]

text:
Part of a series on

Apartheid

Events

[show]

1948 general election
Coloured vote constitutional crisis
1956 Treason Trial
Sharpeville massacre
Rivonia Trial
Soweto uprising
Church Street bombing
Trojan Horse Incident
Khotso House bombing
Cape Town peace march
CODESA
Assassination of Chris Hani
Saint James Church massacre
Shell House massacre

Organisations[show]

ANC
APLA
IFP
AWB
Black Sash
CCB
Conservative Party
DP
ECC
FOSATU
PP
RP
PFP
HNP
MK
PAC
UDF
Broederbond
National Party
COSATU
SACC
SADF
SAIC
SAMA
SAP
SACP
State Security Council

People[show]

P. W. Botha
Steve Biko
Mangosuthu Buthelezi
F. W. de Klerk
Ruth First
Bram Fischer
Arthur Goldreich
Chris Hani
Bantu Holomisa
Joel Joffe
Ahmed Kathrada
Albert Luthuli
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela
Mac Maharaj
D. F. Malan
Nelson Mandela
Govan Mbeki
Thabo Mbeki
Raymond Mhlaba
Benjamin Moloise
Albertina Sisulu
Walter Sisulu
JG Strijdom
Joe Slovo
Robert Sobukwe
Helen Suzman
Adelaide Tambo
Oliver Tambo
Eugène Terre'Blanche
Desmond Tutu
H. F. Verwoerd
B. J. Vorster
Jacob Zuma

Places[show]

Bantustan
District Six
Robben Island
Sophiatown
South-West Africa

Soweto
Sun City
Vlakplaas

Related topics[show]

Afrikaner nationalism
Apartheid in popular culture
Apartheid legislation
Cape Qualified Franchise
Freedom Charter
Sullivan Principles
Kairos Document
Disinvestment campaign
Rhodes Must Fall
South African Police
Music in the movement against apartheid

 Category

v
t
e

text: The disinvestment campaign in the United States, which had been in existence for quite some years, gained critical mass following the Black political resistance to the 1983 South African constitution which included a "complex set of segregated parliaments". Richard Knight writes:

text: In a total rejection of apartheid, black South Africans mobilized to make the townships ungovernable, black local officials resigned in droves, and the government declared a State of Emergency in 1985 and used thousands of troops to quell "unrest". Television audiences throughout the world were to watch almost nightly reports of massive resistance to apartheid, the growth of a democratic movement, and the savage police and military response.[5]

text: The result of the widely televised South African response was "a dramatic expansion of international actions to isolate apartheid, actions that combined with the internal situation to force dramatic changes in South Africa's international economic relations".[5]

text: University campuses[edit]

text: Students organized to demand that their universities "divest", meaning that the universities were to cease investing in companies that traded or had operations in South Africa. At many universities, many students and faculty protested in order to force action on the issue. The first organized Anti-Apartheid Organization on University Campuses in the United States was CUAA founded at the University of California Berkeley by Ramon Sevilla. Sevilla was a principal organizer that had support from Nelson Mandela, with whom Sevilla was in communication while Mandela was imprisoned on Robben Island in South Africa as well as with The African National Congress (the ANC). Some of the most effective actions in support of the divestment of investments of U.S. companies doing business in South Africa took place between the years of 1976 and 1985, as Sevilla travelled throughout the American Continent and Europe gathering support for the overthrow of the South African Apartheid Government, which also led to his arrest at U.C. Berkeley on several occasions in the successful effort to force the University of California to divest all of their investments in companies doing business in South Africa, which also became the driving force for divestment worldwide in all companies doing business in the country of Apartheid South Africa. For example, in April 1986, 61 students were arrested after building a shantytown in front of the chancellor's office at UC Berkeley, Ramon Sevilla Chair CUAA.[6]

text: As a result of these organized "divestment campaigns", the boards of trustees of several prominent universities voted to divest completely from South Africa and companies with major South African interests.

text: The first of these was Hampshire College in 1977.

text: These initial successes set a pattern which was later repeated and many more campuses across the country. Activism surged in 1984 on the wave of public interest created by the wide television coverage of the then recent resistance efforts of the black South Africans.

text: Overall, according to Knight's analysis,[5] the numbers year over year for educational institutions fully or partially divesting from South Africa were:

text:
1984
1987
1988

Number of institutions divesting
53
128
155

text: Michigan State University[edit]

text: The anti-Apartheid disinvestment campaign on campuses began on the West coast and Midwest in 1977 at Michigan State University and Stanford University.[7][8] It had some early successes in 1978 at Michigan State University, which voted total divestiture, [9][10] at Columbia University;[11] and the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Following the Michigan State University divestiture in 1978, in 1982, the State of Michigan Legislature and Governor voted for divestiture by all of the more than 30 State of Michigan colleges and universities, an action later struck down as unconstitutional by the Michigan Court of Appeals in response to a suit against the Act by the University of Michigan. [12]

text: Columbia University[edit]

text: The initial Columbia divestment, focused largely on bonds and financial institutions directly involved with the South African regime.[13] It followed a year long campaign first initiated by students who had worked together to block the appointment of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to an endowed chair at the University in 1977.[14] Broadly backed by a diverse array of student groups and many notable faculty members the Committee Against Investment in South Africa held numerous teach-ins and demonstrations through the year focused on the trustees ties to the corporations doing business with South Africa. Trustee meetings were picketed and interrupted by demonstrations culminating in May 1978 in the takeover of the Graduate School of Business.[15][16]

text: Smith College[edit]

text: Smith College, in Northampton, Mass., which is connected to Hampshire College in Amherst, Mass., through the Five College Consortium engaged with divesting from South Africa several years later. In the spring semester of 1986 students at Smith College protested the Board of Trustee's decision not to fully divest[17] the college's endowment from companies in South Africa. Student protests included a sit-in in College Hall, the main administrative office which included nearly 100 students sleeping in over night on 24 February 1986. The next day students staged a full blockade of the building, not allowing any staff into the building and anticipating arrest, though the President of the college at the time, Mary Maples Dunn, refused to have the students arrested.

text: A comprehensive list of the demands they made throughout the demonstration was published on 28 February 1986,[18] at 8:30 am. The "Women at College Hall" agreed to end the blockade if The Board of Trustees agreed to "issue a statement of intent to deliberate again, with a quorum, the issue of divestment" before Spring Break, and that the Investor Responsibility Committee would meet with representatives from the South African Task Force, the Ethical Investment Committee, and students from the Divestment Committee to look at "a restructuring of the investment policy". Students also demanded that the Board of Trustees “recognize the need for more dialogue with the Smith College community” and that they act on this with more meetings and transparency. In relation to the action, students demanded that a required teach-in be conducted to educate the college and the Board of Trustees on divestment, South African apartheid, and the College Hall Occupation, in addition, a booklet would be compiled by the demonstrators that would be distributed to the college to educate the community on the movement. They also demanded that the president grant amnesty to anyone who directly or indirectly participated in the occupation.

text: On 1 March 1986, the protest ended when negotiations with administrators led to an agreement that the trustees would re-evaluate their decision, a mandatory teach-in would be held, and amnesty would be granted to anyone involved in the demonstration.[18] After student pressures, Smith College voted to divest all $39 million in stocks that they held in companies working in South Africa by 31 October 1988.[19]

text: Harvard University[edit]

text: Harvard University only undertook a partial "divestment" from South Africa and only after significant resistance.[20] Adam Soften and Aln Wirzbicki give this description:

text: Throughout the 1980s, Harvard professors for the most part avoided involvement with South Africa in protest of apartheid, and then president Derek C. Bok was a vocal supporter of work by the U.S. to prompt reform in South Africa. But the University was slow to pull its own investments out of companies doing business in South Africa, insisting that through its proxy votes, it could more effectively fight apartheid than by purging stocks from its portfolio. But after a decade of protests, Harvard did adopt a policy of selective divestment, and by the end of the 1980s was almost completely out of South Africa.[20]

text: University of California[edit]

text: University of California, in contrast to the limited action undertaken by Harvard, authorized the withdrawal of three billion dollars worth of investments from the apartheid state. Nelson Mandela stated his belief that the University of California's massive divestment was particularly significant in abolishing white-minority rule in South Africa.[21]

text: Gettysburg College[edit]

text: In 1989, after a three-year review by the Gettysburg College Board of Trustees and a five-month campaign by the Salaam Committee--a campus group made up of students and faculty--the college voted to divest $5.4 million from companies connected to South Africa.[22]

text: States and cities[edit]

text: In addition to campuses, anti-apartheid activists found concerned and sympathetic legislators in cities and states. Several states and localities did pass legislation ordering the sale of such securities, most notably the City and County of San Francisco, which passed legislation on June 5, 1978 not to invest "in corporations and banks doing business in or with South Africa".[23] The result was that "by the end of 1989 26 states, 22 counties and over 90 cities had taken some form of binding economic action against companies doing business in South Africa".[5] Many public pension funds connected to these local governments were legislated to disinvestment from South African companies. These local governments also exerted pressure via enacting selective purchasing policies, "whereby cities give preference in bidding on contracts for goods and services to those companies who do not do business in South Africa".[5]

text: Federal involvement[edit]

text: The activity at the state and city level set the stage for action at the federal level.

text: Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act[edit]

text: This began when the Senate and House of Representatives presented Ronald Reagan with the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 which had been introduced by Congressman Ronald Dellums, supported by the members of the Congressional Black Caucus in the House, and piloted through the House by Congressman Howard Wolpe, chairman of the House Africa Subcommittee. Ronald Reagan responded by using his veto, but surprisingly and, in testament to the strength of the anti-Apartheid movement, the Republican controlled Senate overrode his veto. Knight gives this description the act:

text: The Act banned new U.S. investment in South Africa, sales to the police and military, and new bank loans, except for the purpose of trade. Specific measures against trade included the prohibition of the import of agricultural goods, textiles, shellfish, steel, iron, uranium and the products of state-owned corporations.[5]

text: The results of the act were mixed in economic terms according to Knight:[5] Between 1985 and 1987, U.S. imports from South Africa declined 35%, although the trend reverses in 1988 when imports increased by 15%. Between 1985 and 1998, U.S. exports to South Africa increased by 40%.

text: Knight attributes some of the increase in imports in 1988 to lax enforcement of the 1986 Act citing a 1989 study by the General Accounting Office. Knight writes that a "major weakness of the Act is that it does little to prohibit exports to South Africa, even in such areas as computers and other capital goods".[5]

text: Budget Reconciliation Act[edit]

text: A second federal measure introduced by Representative Charles Rangel in 1987 as an amendment to the Budget Reconciliation Act halted the ability of U.S. corporations from attaining tax reimbursements for taxes paid in South Africa. The result was that U.S. corporations operating in South Africa were subject to double taxation. According to Knight:

text: The sums of money involved are large. According to the Internal Revenue Service, taxes involved in 1982 were $211,593,000 on taxable income of $440,780,000. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce in South Africa has estimated that the measure increases the tax bill for U.S. companies from 57.5% to 72% of profits in South Africa.[5]

text: Further legislative efforts[edit]

text: An additionally and much harsher sanctions bill was passed by the House of Representatives (Congress) in August 1988. This bill mandated "the withdrawal of all U.S. companies from South Africa, the sale by U.S. residents of all investments in South African companies and an end to most trade, except for the import of certain strategic minerals".[5] In the end, the bill didn't become law as wasn't able to pass the Senate. (In the United States legislative system a bill must be passed by both the Senate and the House of Representatives before it can be signed into law by the President.) Even so, the fact that such a harsh bill made any progress at all through the legislature "alerted both the South African government and U.S. business that significant further sanctions were likely to be forthcoming" if the political situation in South Africa remained unchanged.

text: Effects on South Africa[edit]

text: Economic effects[edit]

text: While post-colonial African countries had already imposed sanctions on South Africa in solidarity with the Defiance Campaign, these measures had little effect because of the relatively small economies of those involved. The disinvestment campaign only impacted South Africa after the major Western nations, including the United States, got involved beginning in mid-1984. From 1984 onwards, according to Knight,[5] because of the disinvestment campaign and the repayment of foreign loans, South Africa experienced considerable capital flight. The net capital movement out of South Africa was:

text:
R9.2 billion in 1985
R6.1 billion in 1986
R3.1 billion in 1987
R5.5 billion in 1988

text: The capital flight triggered a dramatic decline in the international exchange rate of the South African currency, the rand. The currency decline made imports more expensive which in turn caused inflation in South Africa to rise at a very steep 12-15% per year.[5]

text: The South African government did attempt to restrict the damaging outflow of capital. Knight writes that "in September 1985 it imposed a system of exchange control and a debt repayments standstill. Under exchange control, South African residents are generally prohibited from removing capital from the country and foreign investors can only remove investments via the financial rand, which is traded at a 20% to 40% discount compared to the commercial rand. This means companies that disinvest get significantly fewer dollars for the capital they withdraw."[5]

text: Anti-apartheid opposition[edit]

text: While disinvestment, boycotts and sanctions aimed at the removal of the apartheid system, there was also considerable opposition from within the anti-apartheid movement within South Africa coming from both black and white leaders. Mangosuthu Buthelezi, Chief Minister of KwaZulu and leading black figure slammed sanctions, stating that "They can only harm all the people of Southern Africa. They can only lead to more hardships, particularly for the blacks."[24] Well known anti-apartheid opposition MPs Helen Suzman and Harry Schwarz also strongly opposed moves to disinvest from South Africa. Both politicians of the Progressive Federal Party, they argued that disinvestment would cause further economic hardships for black people, which would ultimately worsen the political climate for negotiations. Suzman described them as "self defeating, wrecking the economy and do not assist anybody irrespective of race". Schwarz also argued that "Morality is cheap when someone else is paying."[25]

text: Outside criticism[edit]

text: Many criticised disinvestment because of its economic impact on ordinary black South Africans, such as British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who described sanctions and disinvestment as "the way of poverty, starvation and destroying the hopes of the very people — all of them—whom you wish to help."[26] John Major, then her Foreign Secretary, said disinvestment would "feed white consciences outside South Africa, not black bellies within it",[27] although in 2013, he said that the Conservative Government led by Margaret Thatcher was wrong to oppose tougher sanctions against South Africa during the apartheid era.[28]

text: Many conservatives opposed the disinvestment campaign, accusing its advocates of hypocrisy for not also proposing that the same sanctions be leveled on either the Soviet Union or the People's Republic of China.

text: Libertarian Murray Rothbard also opposed this policy, asserting that the most-direct adverse impact of the boycott would actually be felt by the black workers in that country, and the best way to remedy the problem of apartheid was by promoting trade and the growth of free market capitalism in South Africa.[29]

text: Ronald Reagan, who was the President of the United States during the time the disinvestment movement was at its peak, also opposed it, instead favoring a policy of "constructive engagement" with the Pretoria government.

text: Further reading[edit]

text:
"For U.S. Firms in South Africa, The Threat of Coercive Sullivan Principles". Heritage Foundation. 12 November 1984.
"On 'Constructive Engagement' in South Africa". The MIT Tech. 105(47). 5 November 1985.
"The Choice for U.S. Policy in South Africa: Reform or Vengeance". Heritage Foundation. 25 July 1986.
Misconceptions about U.S. policy toward South Africa. US Department of State Bulletin. September 1986.
Richard Knight. Chapter: "Sanctions, Disinvestment, and U.S. Corporations in South Africa". Sanctioning Apartheid (Africa World Press). 1990.
"Disinvestment from South Africa: They Did Well by Doing Good". Contemporary Economic Policy. XV(1):76-86. January 1997.
Robert Kinloch Massie, Loosing the Bonds, The United States and South Africa in the Apartheid Years, Doubleday, New York, 1997


document_title: Ratification

question_text: who is in charge of ratifying treaties in the us

root

text: Ratification

text: Private law[edit]

text: In contract law, the need for ratification can arise in two ways: if the agent attempts to bind the principal despite lacking the authority to do so; and if the principal authorizes the agent to make an agreement, but reserves the right to approve it. An example of the former situation is an employee not normally responsible for procuring supplies contracting to do so on the employer's behalf. The employer's choice on discovering the contract is to ratify it or to repudiate it.

tag: p

text: The latter situation is common in trade union collective bargaining agreements. The union authorizes one or more people to negotiate and sign an agreement with management. A collective bargaining agreement can not become legally binding until the union members ratify the agreement. If they do not approve it, the agreement is void, and negotiations resume.

text: Ratification of an international treaty[edit]

text: The ratification of international treaties is always accomplished by filing instruments of ratification as provided for in the treaty.[3] In most democracies, the legislature authorizes the government to ratify treaties through standard legislative procedures by passing a bill.

text: India[edit]

text: The President of India makes a treaty in exercise of his executive power, on the aid and the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister, and no court of law in India may question its validity. The president is allowed to ratify, under Article 73(1)(b) of the Constitution of India, but no agreement or treaty entered into by the president is enforceable by the courts, even on ratification by the Parliament of India, as India follows a dualist theory for the implementation of international laws.

text: If the parliament wishes to codify the agreement entered into by the executive thereby making it enforceable by the courts of India, it may do so under Article 253 of the constitution.

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text: Treaty ratification was a Royal Prerogative, exercised by Her Majesty on the advice of her Government. By a convention called the Ponsonby Rule, treaties were usually placed before parliament for 21 days before ratification. It was put onto a statutory footing by the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

text: United States[edit]

text: Treaty power is a co-ordinated effort between the Executive branch and the Senate. The President may form and negotiate, but the treaty must be advised and consented to by a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Only after the Senate approves the treaty can the President ratify it. Once it is ratified, it becomes binding on all the states under the Supremacy Clause. While the House of Representatives does not vote on it at all, the requirement for the Senate's advice and consent to ratification makes it considerably more difficult to rally enough political support for international treaties. Also, if implementation of the treaty requires the expenditure of funds, the House of Representatives may be able to block or at least impede such implementation by refusing to vote for the appropriation of the necessary funds.

text: The President usually submits a treaty to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) along with an accompanying resolution of ratification or accession. If the treaty and resolution receive favorable committee consideration (a committee vote in favor of ratification or accession), the treaty is then forwarded to the floor of the full Senate for such a vote. The treaty or legislation does not apply until it has been ratified. A multilateral agreement may provide that it will take effect upon its ratification by less than all of the signatories.[4] Even though such a treaty takes effect, it does not apply to signatories that have not ratified it. Accession has the same legal effect as ratification, for treaties already negotiated and signed by other states.[5] An example of a treaty to which the Senate did not advise and consent to ratification is the Treaty of Versailles, which failed to garner support because of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

text: The US can also enter into international agreements by way of executive agreements. They are not made under the Treaty Clause and do not require ratification of two thirds of the Senate. Congressional-executive agreements are passed by a majority of both houses of Congress as a regular law. If the agreement is completely within the President's constitutional powers, it can be made by the President alone without Congressional approval, but it will have the force of an executive order and can be unilaterally revoked by a future President. All types of agreements are treated internationally as "treaties". See Foreign policy of the United States#Law.

text: Australia[edit]

text: In Australia, power to enter into treaties is an executive power within Section 51 of the Australian Constitution so the Australian Government may enter into a binding treaty without seeking parliamentary approval. However, implementation of treaties requires legislation by the Australian parliament, following Section 51(xxix) of the Australian Constitution, signed by the Governor-General of Australia.

text: Japan[edit]

text: In Japan, in principle both houses of the parliament (the National Diet) must approve the treaty for ratification. If the House of Councilors rejects a treaty approved by the House of Representatives, and a joint committee of both houses cannot come to agreement on amendments to the original text of the treaty, or the House of Councilors fails to decide on a treaty for more than thirty days, the House of Representatives the will be regarded as the vote of the National Diet approving the ratification. The approved treaty will then be promulgated into law by the act of the Emperor.

text: Ratification of a constitution[edit]

text: Federations usually require the support of both the federal government and some given percentage of the constituent governments for amendments to the federal constitution to take effect.

text: Ratification in the Constitution of India[edit]

text: Not all constitutional amendments in India require ratification by the states. Only constitutional amendments that seek to make any change in any of the provisions mentioned in the proviso to article 368 of the Constitution of India, must be ratified by the Legislatures of not less than one-half of the States. These provisions relate to certain matters concerning the federal structure or of common interest to both the Union and the States viz., the election of the President (articles 54 and 55); the extent of the executive power of the Union and the States (articles 73 and 162); the High Courts for Union territories (article 241); The Union Judiciary and the High Courts in the States (Chapter IV of Part V and Chapter V of Part VI); the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States (Chapter I of Part XI and Seventh Schedule); the representation of States in Parliament; and the provision for amendment of the Constitution laid down in article 368. Ratification is done by a resolution passed by the State Legislatures. There is no specific time limit for the ratification of an amending Bill by the State Legislatures. However, the resolutions ratifying the proposed amendment must be passed before the amending Bill is presented to the President for his assent.[6]

text: Ratification in the United States Constitution[edit]

text: Article Seven of the constitution of the United States describes the process by which the entire document was to become effective. It required that conventions of nine of the thirteen original States ratify the constitution. If fewer than thirteen states ratified the document, it would become effective only among the states ratifying it.[7] New Hampshire was the ninth state to ratify, doing so on June 21, 1788, but, as a practical matter, it was decided to delay implementation of the new government until New York and Virginia could be persuaded to ratify. Congress intended that New York City should be the first capital, and that George Washington, of Mount Vernon, Virginia, should be the first President, and both of those things would have been somewhat awkward if either New York or Virginia were not part of the new government. Ratification by those states was secured - Virginia on June 25 and New York on July 26 - and the government under the Constitution began on March 4, 1789.

text: For subsequent amendments, Article Five describes the process of a potential amendment's adoption. Proposals to adopt an amendment may be called either by a two-thirds vote by both houses of Congress or by a national convention as a result of resolutions adopted by two-thirds (presently at least 34 out of 50) of the states' legislatures. For an amendment to be adopted, three-quarters of the states (presently at least 38 out of 50) must ratify the amendment either by a vote of approval in each state's legislature or by state ratifying conventions – Congress may specify which method must be used to ratify the amendment. Congress may also set a deadline by which the threshold for adoption must be met.

text: Use in parliamentary procedure[edit]

text: A deliberative assembly, using parliamentary procedure, could ratify action that otherwise was not validly taken. For example, action taken where there was no quorum at the meeting is not valid until it is later ratified at a meeting where a quorum is present.[8]


document_title: Tami Lynn

question_text: who sang i'm gonna run away from you

question_tokens: who sang i 'm gon na run away from you

text: Tami Lynn

text:
Tami Lynn

Also known as
Tamiya Lynn

Born
1942 (age 75–76)
Gert Town, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States

Years active
1965–present

Labels
Mojo Records, Atlantic Records

text: Tami Lynn (born 1942, Gert Town, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States)[1] is an American soul singer. She scored a Top Ten hit on the UK Singles Chart in 1971, with the song "I'm Gonna Run Away From You".[2]

text: Biography[edit]

text: Lynn was discovered by Jerry Wexler in 1965 after hearing her sing at a talent show.[3] Wexler had her record the Bert Berns penned and produced[4] song, "I'm Gonna Run Away From You", for Atco Records, but the song was not released at the time, although it was released in the UK on Atlantic, AT.4071. She then sang backup for musicians such as The Rolling Stones (backing vocalist on Exile on Main St.), Dr. John, Wilson Pickett, and Sonny & Cher.[3] In 1971, "I'm Gonna Run Away From You" was released as a single, with "The Boy Next Door" as the b-side, on Mojo and Atlantic, where it became a hit in the UK among devotees of Northern soul. The tune hit number 4 in the UK Singles Chart in 1971.[2] A full-length album, Love Is Here and Now You're Gone, followed in 1972, produced by John Abbey. "I'm Gonna Run Away From You" returned to the UK chart in 1975 after being reissued, hitting number 36 the second time around.[2]

text: Another album was the 1992 CD, Tamiya Lynn.[4] Love Is Here and Now You're Gone was reissued on CD in 2005, by DBK Works.[5]

text: Discography[edit]

text:
Love Is Here and Now You're Gone (1972, reissued 2005)
Tamiya Lynn (1992)

tag: ul


document_title: Black Mass (film)

question_text: who plays whitey bulger's girlfriend in black mass

question_tokens: who plays whitey bulger 's girlfriend in black mass

text: Black Mass (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: In 1975, James "Whitey" Bulger, leader of the Winter Hill Gang, controls most organized crime within South Boston, along with his right-hand man Stephen Flemmi, newcomer Kevin Weeks, and callous hitman Johnny Martorano. Bulger lives with his common-law wife Lindsey Cyr and their young son Douglas.

text: Bulger's supremacy is challenged by the North End Angiulo Brothers, a rival gang that is part of the New England Mafia family. FBI agent John Connolly returns to the area – he grew up in South Boston as a friend of Whitey and his brother William "Billy" Bulger, the Massachusetts Senate President. Connolly tries infiltrating the Angiulo Brothers and attempts to get Whitey to work with the FBI. Although Whitey hates the idea of being a rat, he understands the protection he would have for himself, his gang, and his family. Douglas suffers from Reye syndrome, leading a devastated Lindsey to remove him from life support over Whitey's furious objections. When the Angiulo Brothers murder a Winter Hill member, Whitey becomes an informant.

text: Although Connolly is supported by his co-worker John Morris, their boss, Charles McGuire, is suspicious. Whitey increasingly exploits the FBI informant relationship, using Connolly's "protection" as a cover for his crimes. Connolly demands information on the Angiulos' racketeering locations. Finally, Whitey gets pictures of the rival gang's hideouts, allowing the FBI to wiretap the Angiulos. The FBI arrests them, thus eliminating underground opposition to Whitey's power. Connolly, blinded by his past, grows closer to Whitey and the gang, even inviting them to his house for a cookout. His wife, Marianne, sees negative changes in her husband as his agent-informant relationship with Whitey grows.

text: Cut out of an embezzlement scheme from World Jai Alai, Whitey orders Martorano to murder his rivals Roger Wheeler and John Callahan. An associate, Brian Halloran, goes to the FBI to report Whitey's involvement, much to Connolly's displeasure, who then tells Whitey of Halloran's accusation, thereby resulting in the murders of Halloran and an unnamed accomplice. Following the passing of his mother, Whitey's behavior becomes increasingly violent and unpredictable, deteriorating his informant relationship.

text: A "bulldog" prosecutor, Fred Wyshak, is appointed the new assistant U. S. Attorney in Boston. Connolly attempts to make friends and to perhaps divert his attention from Bulger, but Wyshak bluntly refuses, demanding that the FBI arrest Whitey. John McIntyre, an informant within the Winter Hill Gang, informs on an attempt by Whitey to smuggle weapons for the IRA. Connolly tells Whitey, who murders McIntyre. Wyshak and McGuire investigate Connolly's management of Whitey's informant role. They discover that most of what Connolly called Whitey's tips were already obtained from other sources. Morris, disillusioned and fearing prosecution for his association with Connolly's activities, anonymously divulges Connolly's and Whitey's relationship to the Boston Globe and a front-page story exposes the FBI's links to organised crime.

text: In the final scenes, Connolly, Flemmi, Weeks, and Martorano are arrested. Whitey goes on the run, but not before giving Billy a final goodbye from a pay phone. Morris turns state's evidence and testifies against Connolly in return for immunity. Connolly's and the other characters' sentences are listed, and a concluding sequence shows a now-elderly Whitey being caught by the FBI in 2011.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Johnny Depp as James "Whitey" Bulger
Joel Edgerton as John Connolly
Benedict Cumberbatch as William "Billy" Bulger[8][9]
Rory Cochrane as Stephen "The Rifleman" Flemmi
Kevin Bacon as Charles McGuire[10]
Jesse Plemons as Kevin Weeks
Peter Sarsgaard as Brian Halloran[11]
Dakota Johnson as Lindsey Cyr
Corey Stoll as Fred Wyshak
David Harbour as John Morris[12]
Julianne Nicholson as Marianne Connolly
Adam Scott as Robert Fitzpatrick[13]
Brad Carter as John McIntyre
W. Earl Brown as Johnny Martorano
Mark Mahoney as Mickey Maloney
Juno Temple as Deborah Hussey
Erica McDermott as Mary Bulger
Bill Camp as John Callahan
Scott Anderson as Tommy King
David DeBeck as Roger Wheeler
Jamie Donnelly as Ms. Cody
Patrick M. Walsh as Michael Donahue
Jeremy Strong as Josh Bond[14] (uncredited)
James Russo as Scott Garriola[15] (uncredited)

text: Production[edit]

text: Development[edit]

text: An idea for a film adaptation of Black Mass: The True Story of an Unholy Alliance Between the FBI and the Irish Mob garnered interest intermittently since 2000. Even before its published release, the book's film rights had already been sold to Miramax, when Harvey Weinstein was still part of the company. According to co-author Dick Lehr, Weinstein had never exercised the film option for unknown reasons, and the rights expired.[16][17] At one point afterwards, in 2002, filmmaker Robert Greenwald had planned to adapt Black Mass into a 4-hour miniseries for USA Network, but the project was never developed.[18] Eventually in 2006, film producer Brian Oliver acquired the film rights for Black Mass, and was set to produce the adaptation with CP Production partners Michael Cerenzie and Christine Peters.[17][19]

text: After Oliver's acquisition, Jim Sheridan was attached to direct the film. In 2009, Sheridan had finished writing a draft of the adapted screenplay with Nye Heron, and principal photography was reportedly scheduled to begin in April 2010.[20][21] However, in December 2010, while discussing the troubled production of his 2011 film Dream House, Sheridan hinted at his detachment from the Black Mass project.[22] Oliver's then-newly founded Cross Creek Pictures film production company took over financing for Black Mass, and Sheridan's exit was confirmed when Russell Gewirtz was hired in 2011 to write another draft for the adaptation, and Barry Levinson was attached to direct instead.[17][23][24] The finished version of Black Mass was scripted by Mark Mallouk and Jez Butterworth, and has been billed as the "true story of Whitey Bulger, FBI agent John Connolly and the FBI's witness protection program that was created by J. Edgar Hoover."[25]

text: Later in January 2014, Scott Cooper was attached to re-write and direct the film.[26] On February 27, 2014, Warner Bros. picked up the film's worldwide distribution rights, eyeing an October 2015 release, and the studio co-financed the film with Cross Creek.[27]

text: Casting[edit]

text: Johnny Depp's involvement with Black Mass dates back to February 2013, when he was attached to star in the film, while Barry Levinson was still slated to direct and principal photography was scheduled to begin in May 2013. Depp briefly exited the project shortly after its sale at the 66th annual Cannes Film Festival, because of a salary dispute with Cross Creek Pictures. He later rejoined at around the same time Scott Cooper was attached to replace Levinson as director, and his signing for the film was made official in February 2014.[26][28][29][30][31] Jesse Plemons and Juno Temple joined the cast to play as Kevin Weeks (a cohort of Bulger) and Deborah Hussey, one of Bulger's victims, respectively, around April 2014. Plemons reportedly prepared for his role by hiring a dialect coach and studying video of the actual Kevin Weeks.[32][33]

text: Benedict Cumberbatch replaced Guy Pearce as William "Billy" Bulger on May 22, 2014.[8] On June 10, it was announced that Jeremy Strong would co-star in the film.[14] On June 14, James Russo joined the cast of the film to play Scott Garriola, one of the FBI agents who took down Bulger.[15] On June 26, Kevin Bacon was added to the cast to play Charles McGuire, the FBI Special Agent in charge of the Boston field office and John Connolly's boss.[10] On July 1, David Harbour was added to the cast of the film to star as John Morris, a corrupt FBI agent along with Connolly.[12]

text: The roles of Connolly – who was Whitey Bulger's FBI handler – and his first wife Marianne, were filled by Joel Edgerton and Julianne Nicholson, respectively. Cooper chose Nicholson for the part after her performance as Sally in Sam Shepard's off-Broadway play Heartless (before Claire van der Boom succeeded her for the play's two-week extension). Edgerton developed his portrayal of Connolly by studying past footage of the FBI agent before his imprisonment, some of which include his appearances on talk shows and in courtrooms. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Edgerton stated that he declined trying to meet with the actual Connolly, reasoning that Connolly "has one version of events and the film has a different version".[34][35][36][37] Edgerton originally dropped out of the project when Depp agreed to return, and Tom Hardy was in early talks for the role.[31] However, Edgerton returned in the role.

text: In preparing for his role, Depp similarly studied surveillance and police audio footage involving Bulger. The actor was adamant in depicting the Boston gang leader's criminal and personal life as would be ultimately portrayed in the film. To achieve that, Depp attempted to meet with Bulger himself, but was declined a meeting and instead consulted Jay Carney, Bulger's attorney. Carney appeared on set a few times, to provide feedback on Depp's performance.[36][38][39][40]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Principal photography commenced on May 19, 2014 in Boston;[27][41] actors were seen filming scenes in Dorchester.[42] On May 23, some shots were also filmed at Polish American Club (altered to recreate West Broadway's Triple O's Lounge, Whitey's infamous South Boston hangout), on Cambridge Street in Cambridge.[43][44] On May 27, filming was taking place in East Boston, where Johnny Depp and Jesse Plemons were seen together on the set.[45] Next day on May 28, Joel Edgerton was seen during filming of a scene on Silver Street in South Boston.[46][47] On June 4, Depp was spotted in Lynn during a recreation of the 1982 murders of Brian Halloran and Michael Donahue by Bulger.[48] On June 6–7, Depp was seen filming scenes at Copley Square in Boston.[49]

text: On June 9, Depp's 51st birthday, he was filming scenes on location in Quincy,[50][51] where actress Dakota Johnson was in Back Bay, playing Whitey Bulger's longtime former girlfriend, Lindsey Cyr.[52] On June 11, shooting was underway in Lynn, where the crew was filming scenes in which Bulger and Stephen Flemmi pick up a prostitute named Deborah Hussey (played by Juno Temple) from the police station. Temple was seen on the set.[53][54] On June 16, Depp and Plemons were spotted on the set of the film in South Boston.[55]

text: On June 20, news posted some photos from the set of the film, which features classic cars from the film set in South Boston.[56] On June 23, Cumberbatch and Depp were spotted during a re-creation of Saint Patrick's Day parade scenes in Lynn.[57][58] On June 24, scenes were shot at the Harvard Club in Boston.[59] On June 26, Cumberbatch was spotted with crew while filming around Ashmont Grill in Dorchester.[60] On June 29, the pavement outside South Boston High School had graffiti readings of "Stop Forced Busing" and "Press Print the Truth."[61]

text: On July 2, Depp and Cumberbatch were together filming some scenes in Boston.[62] On July 7–8, filming was set to take place on Gilson Road in Quincy.[63] A four-story building on 6 Gilson Road was transformed to resemble the Princess Eugenia apartments in Santa Monica, California, where FBI agents arrested Bulger on June 22, 2011. Arrest scenes were filmed there on July 7 and 8, and Sienna Miller was spotted dressed as Catherine Greig.[64][65] From July 8–10, scenes were filmed on Revere Beach, so that a portion of Revere Beach remained closed. Between July 11–12, Revere Beach Boulevard remained closed for shooting.[66] Revere Beach was transformed into Miami Beach, Florida, as live palm trees had been planted in the sand and a pizza restaurant was transformed into a Cuban cafe on Revere Beach Boulevard across the street from Beach.[67] Depp as Whitey Bulger and Miller as Catherine Greig were spotted on the Black Mass set on the Revere Beach on July 10, 2014.[68]

text: On July 15, Cumberbatch wrapped filming for his part in Boston.[69] On July 21, Depp filmed some scenes at the former Anthony's Hawthorne restaurant, located at Oxford Street and Central Avenue in Lynn.[70] Depp's wife Amber Heard visited Depp on the set of the film on July 21, the last day of filming for Depp's role.[71]

text: In July, director Cooper told The Boston Globe that filming had to take place for two more weeks in Boston, focusing on the FBI's role in the Bulger story.[71] On July 25, Kevin Bacon was in Boston, filming some remaining scenes for the film.[72] According to The Boston Globe, filming for Black Mass wrapped up on Friday, August 1, 2014, in Boston.[73][74]

text: Post-production[edit]

text: Sienna Miller was cast and filmed scenes as Catherine Greig, Bulger's companion while a fugitive, but her scenes ended up getting cut from the film due to "narrative choices".[75][76] Erica McDermott was cast as Mary Bulger, wife of Billy Bulger, but the majority of her scenes were cut out.[77]

text: Release[edit]

text: On June 30, 2014, Warner Bros. set the film for a September 18, 2015 worldwide release.[78] It was selected to be shown in the "Fuori Concorso" section of the Venice Film Festival. It was also shown at the Telluride Film Festival the next day, and in the Special Presentation section of the 2015 Toronto International Film Festival.[79]

text: Marketing[edit]

text: On April 23, 2015, the first trailer for the film was released, followed by a second trailer on May 22.[80][81] A third trailer was released on July 30.[82]

text: Home media[edit]

text: Black Mass was released on DVD and Blu-ray on February 16, 2016.

text: Reception[edit]

text: Box office[edit]

text: Black Mass grossed $62.6 million in North America and $37.2 million in other territories for a worldwide total of $99.8 million, against a production budget of $53 million.[7]

text: In its opening weekend, the film was projected to earn $26–27 million from 3,188 theaters. It grossed $8.8 million on its opening day, including $1.4 million from its early Thursday showings, and in its opening weekend, earned $22.6 million, finishing second at the box office behind fellow newcomer Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials ($30.3 million).[83]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: On Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 74% based on 254 reviews and an average rating of 6.7/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Black Mass spins a gripping yarn out of its fact-based story – and leaves audiences with one of Johnny Depp's most compelling performances in years."[84] On Metacritic, the film has a rating of 68 out of 100, based on 43 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[85] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "B" on an A+ to F scale.[83]

text: Depp's portrayal of Bulger received critical acclaim. Critics from The Hollywood Reporter, Variety, and TheWrap called it one of his best performances to date.[86][87][88] The Hollywood Reporter's Todd McCarthy, in addition to praising the film, called Depp's performance "fully convincing and frightening", saying it is "very welcome at this point in his career and one of his best."[86]

text: Similarly, Indie Wire's Eric Kohn praised the cast and highlighted Depp's performance and Cooper's directorial efforts to depict "the haunting legacy of Bulger's criminal deeds, and the lingering sense that no justice can erase their impact."[89] Admiring Black Mass as an "elegantly understated crime drama", Variety's Scott Foundas positively compared Depp's performance in the film to his earlier roles with Tim Burton.[87]

text: TheWrap's Alonso Duralde praised Depp's performance, but was less positive towards the film's pacing and short onscreen appearances of some supporting characters.[88] BBC Culture's Nicolas Barber found some of the subplots to be unnecessary (specifically mentioning Benedict Cumberbatch as Billy Bulger), and argued that "the film is never bad, but, given the gob-smacking true story, it's disappointing that it's not great".[90] In a negative review, CraveOnline's Fred Topel labeled Black Mass as a "black mess". He criticized the screenwriting and argued that the film borrows too heavily from Goodfellas, writing: "...it's clear that the filmmakers wanted to turn this into Goodfellas and tried to shoehorn this story into a similar kind of seductive, funny, shocking gangster tale. ...Several scenes seem to want to be like the 'how am I funny?' scene in Goodfellas, but it's blatant".[91]

text: Accolades[edit]

text:
Award
Category
Recipient
Result

Indiana Film Journalists Association Awards[92]
Best Actor
Johnny Depp
Nominated

Satellite Awards[93]
Best Film
Black Mass
Nominated

Best Actor – Motion Picture
Johnny Depp
Nominated

Best Adapted Screenplay
Jez Butterworth, Mark Mallouk
Nominated

Saturn Awards[94][95]
Best Thriller Film
Black Mass
Nominated

Best Make-Up
Joel Harlow, Kenny Niederbaumer
Nominated

Screen Actors Guild Award
Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role
Johnny Depp
Nominated

Washington D.C. Area Film Critics Association[96]
Best Actor
Johnny Depp
Nominated

Palm Springs International Film Festival
Desert Palm Achievement Award (actor)
Johnny Depp
Won

Critics' Choice Movie Award
Best Actor
Johnny Depp
Nominated

Best Makeup

Nominated

text: Many people believed Depp deserved an Academy Award nomination for his performance as Bulger and were surprised when his name was left off the list of nominees.[97] Some believe it was because Depp commented that he didn't want to win an Oscar if nominated for one.[98]

text: Soundtrack[edit]

text: The soundtrack, written and composed by Tom Holkenborg, was released on September 11, 2015.

text: Track listing[edit]

text:
"Black Mass Opening Title"
"Boston Crime Lord"
"John Connolly"
"Bulger Burial Ground"
"My Boy"
"Don't Wake Him Up"
"You Got Two Minutes"
"Aspirin"
"No Drugs, No Murder"
"I Will Pull the Plug Myself"
"When You Wake Up In the Morning"
"It's Just the Beginning"
"Martorano"
"Did You Ever See Whitey Bulger Murder Anyone?"
"Thanks to Whitey"
"Jimmy and Marianne"
"You'll Be Sorry"
"Boston Globe"
"Valhalla"
"Strictly Criminal"
"Take Care Kid"

tag: ol

text: 2015 Watertower Music (61:26)


document_title: Popcorn

question_text: who came up with popcorn at the movies

question_tokens: who came up with popcorn at the movies

text: Popcorn

text: History[edit]

text: Corn was first domesticated 9,000 years ago in what is now Mexico.[3] Archaeologists discovered that people have known about popcorn for thousands of years. In Mexico, for example, remnants of popcorn have been found that date to around 3600 BC.[4]

text: Popping of the kernels was achieved by hand on the stovetop through the 19th century. Kernels were sold on the East Coast of the United States under names such as Pearls or Nonpareil. The term popped corn first appeared in John Russell Bartlett’s 1848 Dictionary of Americanisms.[5][6] Popcorn is an ingredient in Cracker Jack, and in the early years of the product, it was popped by hand.[5]

text: Popcorn's accessibility increased rapidly in the 1890s with Charles Cretors' invention of the popcorn maker. Cretors, a Chicago candy store owner, created a number of steam powered machines for roasting nuts, and applied the technology to the corn kernels. By the turn of the century, Cretors had created and deployed street carts equipped with steam powered popcorn makers.[7]

text: During the Great Depression, popcorn was fairly inexpensive at 5–10 cents a bag and became popular. Thus, while other businesses failed, the popcorn business thrived and became a source of income for many struggling farmers, including the Redenbacher family, namesake of the famous popcorn brand. During World War II, sugar rations diminished candy production, and Americans compensated by eating three times as much popcorn as they had before.[8] The snack was popular at theaters, much to the initial displeasure of many of the theater owners, who thought it distracted from the films. Their minds eventually changed, however, and in 1938 a Midwestern theater owner named Glen W. Dickson installed popcorn machines in the lobbies of his theaters. The venture was a financial success, and the trend soon spread.[5]

text: In 1970, Orville Redenbacher's namesake brand of popcorn was launched. In 1981, General Mills received the first patent for a microwave popcorn bag, with popcorn consumption seeing a sharp increase by tens of thousands of pounds in the years following.[7]

text: At least six localities (all in the Midwestern United States) claim to be the "Popcorn Capital of the World;": Ridgway, Illinois; Valparaiso, Indiana; Van Buren, Indiana; Schaller, Iowa; Marion, Ohio; and North Loup, Nebraska. According to the USDA, corn used for popcorn production is specifically planted for this purpose; most is grown in Nebraska and Indiana, with increasing area in Texas.[9][10] As the result of an elementary school project, popcorn became the official state snack food of Illinois.[11]

text: Popping mechanism[edit]

text: Each kernel of popcorn contains a certain amount of moisture and oil. Unlike most other grains, the outer hull of the popcorn kernel is both strong and impervious to moisture and the starch inside consists almost entirely of a hard type.[12]

text: As the oil and the water within the kernel are heated, they turn the moisture in the kernel into pressurized steam. Under these conditions, the starch inside the kernel gelatinizes, softens, and becomes pliable. The internal pressure of the entrapped steam continues to increase until the breaking point of the hull is reached: a pressure of approximately 135 psi (930 kPa)[12] and a temperature of 180 °C (356 °F). The hull thereupon ruptures rapidly and actually explodes, causing a sudden drop in pressure inside the kernel and a corresponding rapid expansion of the steam, which expands the starch and proteins of the endosperm into airy foam. As the foam rapidly cools, the starch and protein polymers set into the familiar crispy puff.[12] Special varieties are grown to give improved popping yield. Though the kernels of some wild types will pop, the cultivated strain is Zea mays everta, which is a special kind of flint corn.

text: Cooking methods[edit]

text: Popcorn can be cooked with butter or oil. Although small quantities can be popped in a stove-top kettle or pot in a home kitchen, commercial sale of freshly popped popcorn employs specially designed popcorn machines, which were invented in Chicago, Illinois, by Charles Cretors in 1885. Cretors successfully introduced his invention at the Columbian Exposition in 1893. At this same world's fair, F.W. Rueckheim introduced a molasses-flavored "Candied Popcorn," the first caramel corn; his brother, Louis Ruekheim, slightly altered the recipe and introduced it as Cracker Jack popcorn in 1896.[13]

text: Cretors's invention introduced the first patented steam-driven popcorn machine that popped corn in oil. Previously, vendors popped corn by holding a wire basket over an open flame. At best, the result was a hot, dry, unevenly cooked snack. Cretors's machine popped corn in a mixture of one-third clarified butter, two-thirds lard, and salt. This mixture can withstand the 450 °F (232 °C) temperature needed to pop corn and it produces little smoke. A fire under a boiler created steam that drove a small engine; that engine drove the gears, shaft, and agitator that stirred the corn and powered a small automated clown puppet-like figure, "the Toasty Roasty Man," an attention attracting amusement intended to drum up business. A wire connected to the top of the cooking pan allowed the operator to disengage the drive mechanism, lift the cover, and dump popped corn into the storage bin beneath. Exhaust from the steam engine was piped to a hollow pan below the corn storage bin and kept freshly popped corn uniformly warm for the first time. Excess steam was also used to operate a small, shrill whistle to further attract attention.[14]

text: A very different method of popcorn-making can still be seen on the streets of some Chinese cities and Korea today. The un-popped corn kernels are poured into a large cast-iron canister — sometimes called a 'popcorn hammer' — that is then sealed with a heavy lid and slowly turned over a curbside fire in rotisserie fashion. When a pressure gauge on the canister reaches a certain level, the canister is removed from the fire, a large canvas sack is put over the lid and the seal is released. With a huge boom, all of the popcorn explodes at once and is poured into the sack.[15][16][17] This method is believed to have been developed, during the Song dynasty, originally for puffing rice.

text: Individual consumers can also buy and use specialized popping appliances that typically generate no more than a gallon or about four liters of popped corn per batch. Some of these appliances also accept a small volume of oil or melted butter to assist thermal transfer from a stationary heating element, but others are "air poppers" which rapidly circulate heated air up through the interior, keeping the un-popped kernels in motion to avoid burning and then blowing the popped kernels out through the chute. The majority of popcorn sold for home consumption is now packaged in a microwave popcorn bag for use in a microwave oven.[18]

text: Expansion and yield[edit]

text: Popping results are sensitive to the rate at which the kernels are heated. If heated too quickly, the steam in the outer layers of the kernel can reach high pressures and rupture the hull before the starch in the center of the kernel can fully gelatinize, leading to partially popped kernels with hard centers. Heating too slowly leads to entirely unpopped kernels: the tip of the kernel, where it attached to the cob, is not entirely moisture-proof, and when heated slowly, the steam can leak out of the tip fast enough to keep the pressure from rising sufficiently to break the hull and cause the pop.[19]

text: Producers and sellers of popcorn consider two major factors in evaluating the quality of popcorn: what percentage of the kernels will pop, and how much each popped kernel expands. Expansion is an important factor to both the consumer and vendor. For the consumer, larger pieces of popcorn tend to be more tender and are associated with higher quality. For the grower, distributor, and vendor, expansion is closely correlated with profit: vendors such as theaters buy popcorn by weight and sell it by volume. For both these reasons, higher-expansion popcorn fetches a higher profit per unit weight.

text: Popcorn will pop when freshly harvested, but not well: its high moisture content leads to poor expansion and chewy pieces of popcorn. Kernels with a high moisture content are also susceptible to mold when stored. For these reasons, popcorn growers and distributors dry the kernels until they reach the moisture level at which they expand the most. This differs by variety and conditions, but is generally in the range of 14–15% moisture by weight. If the kernels are over-dried, the expansion rate will suffer and the percentage of kernels that pop at all will decline.

text: When the popcorn has finished popping, sometimes unpopped kernels remain. Known in the popcorn industry as "old maids,"[20] and called "duds"[citation needed] in the consumer market, these kernels fail to pop because they do not have enough moisture to create enough steam for an explosion. Rehydrating prior to popping usually results in eliminating the unpopped kernels. Kernels that are partially popped, but failed to fully expand are known as "bridesmaids".

text: Popcorn varieties are broadly categorized by the shape of the kernels, the color of the kernels, or the shape of the popped corn. While the kernels may come in a variety of colors, the popped corn is always off-yellow or white as it is only the hull (or pericarp) that is colored. "Rice" type popcorn have a long kernel pointed at both ends; "pearl" type kernels are rounded at the top. Commercial popcorn production has moved mostly to pearl types.[21] Historically, pearl popcorn were usually yellow and rice popcorn usually white. Today both shapes are available in both colors, as well as others including black, red, mauve, purple, and variegated. Mauve and purple popcorn usually has smaller and nutty kernels. Commercial production is dominated by white and yellow.[22]

text: Terminology[edit]

text: In the popcorn industry, a popped kernel of corn is known as a "flake." Two shapes of flakes are commercially important. "Butterfly" (or "snowflake")[23] flakes are irregular in shape and have a number of protruding "wings". "Mushroom" flakes are largely ball-shaped, with few wings. Butterfly flakes are regarded as having better mouthfeel, with greater tenderness and less noticeable hulls. Mushroom flakes are less fragile than butterfly flakes and are therefore often used for packaged popcorn or confectionery, such as caramel corn.[22] The kernels from a single cob of popcorn may form both butterfly and mushroom flakes; hybrids that produce 100% butterfly flakes or 100% mushroom flakes exist, the latter developed only as recently as 1998.[22] Growing conditions and popping environment can also affect the butterfly-to-mushroom ratio.

text: When referring to multiple pieces of popcorn it is acceptable to use the term "popcorn". When referring to a singular piece of popcorn the accepted terminology is kernel.

text: Consumption[edit]

text: Popcorn is commonly eaten in movie theaters. This snack is usually served salted or sweetened. In North America, it is traditionally served salted, often with butter or a butterlike topping, or with toffee or spices. However, sweetened versions, such as caramel corn and kettle corn, are also commonly available. In the United Kingdom, ready-made popcorn is available either salted or simply sweetened with sugar. Toffee (i.e. caramel) popcorn is also available, but tends to be more expensive. In Peru, popcorn is sometimes sweetened with small candy pellets and sweetened condensed milk, but it is more often eaten with salt and the only buttered version known to any considerable degree is microwave popcorn. In Brazil, although salted or buttered popcorn is the most popular and widely available, various other toppings can be found on street vendors: bacon, cheese, caramel, chocolate and condensed milk are among the most common. In Mexico, popcorn is served with either jalapeño juice, hot sauce, cheese, butter, or salt. Popcorn is a popular snack food at sporting events and in cinemas, where it has been served since the 1930s.[24] Popcorn as a breakfast cereal was consumed by Americans in the 1800s and generally consisted of popcorn with milk and a sweetener.[25]

text: Popcorn balls (popped kernels stuck together with a sugary "glue") were hugely popular around the turn of the 20th century, but their popularity has since waned. Popcorn balls are still served in some places as a traditional Halloween treat. Cracker Jack is a popular, commercially produced candy that consists of peanuts mixed in with caramel-covered popcorn. Kettle corn is a variation of normal popcorn, cooked with white sugar and salt, traditionally in a large copper kettle. Once reserved for specialty shops and county fairs, kettle corn has recently become popular, especially in the microwave popcorn market. The popcorn maker is a relatively new home appliance, and its popularity is increasing because it offers the opportunity to add flavours of the consumer's own choice and to choose healthy-eating popcorn styles.

text: Some popular brands of popcorn in the United States are Boomchickapop, Smartfood, Orville Redenbacher's, Act II, Jiffy Pop (all three of which are brands of the ConAgra Foods conglomerate), Pop Secret, Jolly Time, Newman's Own, and Pop Weaver.

text: Nutritional value[edit]

text:
Popcorn, air-popped, no additives

Nutritional value per 100 g (3.5 oz)

Energy
1,598 kJ (382 kcal)

Carbohydrates

78 g

Dietary fiber
15 g

Fat

4 g

Protein

12 g

Vitamins

Thiamine (B1)

(17%)
0.2 mg

Riboflavin (B2)

(25%)
0.3 mg

Minerals

Iron

(21%)
2.7 mg

One cup is 8 grams.

Units
μg = micrograms • mg = milligrams
IU = International units

Percentages are roughly approximated using US recommendations for adults.
Source: USDA Nutrient Database

text: Air-popped popcorn is naturally high in dietary fiber and antioxidants,[26][unreliable source?] low in calories and fat, and free of sugar and sodium.[27] This can make it an attractive snack to people with dietary restrictions on the intake of calories, fat or sodium. For the sake of flavor, however, large amounts of fat, sugar, and sodium are often added to prepared popcorn, which can quickly convert it to a very poor choice for those on restricted diets.

text: One particularly notorious example of this first came to public attention in the mid-1990s, when the Center for Science in the Public Interest produced a report about "Movie Popcorn", which became the subject of a widespread publicity campaign. The movie theaters surveyed used coconut oil to pop the corn, and then topped it with butter or margarine. "A medium-size buttered popcorn", the report said, "contains more fat than a breakfast of bacon and eggs, a Big Mac and fries, and a steak dinner combined."[28] The practice continues today. For example, according to DietFacts.com, a small popcorn from Regal Cinema Group (the largest theater chain in the United States)[29] still contains 29 g of saturated fat.[30] the equivalent of a full day-and-a-half's reference daily intake.[31]

text: However, in studies conducted by the Motion Picture Association of America it was found that the average American only attends six movies a year and that movie theater popcorn and other movie theater snacks are viewed as a treat that is not intended to be part of a regular diet.[32]

text: Health risks[edit]

text: Popcorn is included on the list of foods that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends not serving to children under four, because of the risk of choking.[33]

text: Microwaveable popcorn represents a special case, since it is designed to be cooked along with its various flavoring agents. One of these formerly common artificial-butter flavorants, diacetyl, has been implicated in causing respiratory illnesses in microwave popcorn factory workers, also known as "popcorn lung." Major manufacturers in the United States have stopped using this chemical, including: Orville Redenbacher's, Act II, Pop Secret and Jolly Time.[citation needed][34][35]

text: Other uses[edit]

text: Popcorn, threaded onto a string, is used as a wall or Christmas tree decoration in some parts of North America,[36][37] as well as on the Balkan peninsula.[38]

text: In several Afro-American Religions, popcorn is used ritually, either as offerings for deities or as cleansing "baths" for devotees. This popcorn is usually cooked in Palm Oil.

text: Some shipping companies have experimented with using popcorn as a biodegradable replacement for expanded polystyrene packing material. However, popcorn has numerous undesirable properties as a packing material, including attractiveness to pests, flammability, and a higher cost and greater density than expanded polystyrene. A more processed form of expanded corn foam has been developed to overcome some of these limitations.[39]

text: The world's largest popcorn ball[definition needed] was unveiled in August 2013 in Indianapolis, Indiana. It weighed 6,510 pounds (2,950 kg), measured 8 feet (2.4 m) in diameter, and had a circumference of 24.9 ft (7.6 m).[40]


document_title: Fluid compartments

question_text: what are the two extracellular fluid compartments in the body

text: Fluid compartments

text: Intracellular compartment[edit]

text: The intracellular fluid is all fluid contained inside the cells. Most of this is cytosol, the matrix in which cellular organelles are suspended. The cytosol and organelles together compose the cytoplasm. The cell membranes are the outer barrier. In humans, the intracellular compartment contains on average about 28 litres of fluid, and under ordinary circumstances remains in osmotic equilibrium. It contains moderate quantities of magnesium and sulphate ions.

text: Extracellular compartment[edit]

text: The interstitial, intravascular and transcellular compartments comprise the extracellular compartment. Its extracellular fluid (ECF) contains about one-third of total body water.

text: Interstitial compartment[edit]

text: The interstitial compartment (also called "tissue space") surrounds tissue cells. It is filled with interstitial fluid. Interstitial fluid provides the immediate microenvironment that allows for movement of ions, proteins and nutrients across the cell barrier. This fluid is not static, but is continually being refreshed by the blood capillaries and recollected by lymphatic capillaries. In the average male (70 kg) human body, the interstitial space has approximately 10.5 litres of fluid.

text: Intravascular compartment[edit]

text: The main intravascular fluid in mammals is blood, a complex mixture with elements of a suspension (blood cells), colloid (globulins), and solutes (glucose and ions). The blood represents both the intracellular compartment (the fluid inside the blood cells) and the extracellular compartment (the blood plasma). The other intravascular fluid is lymph. It too represents both the intracellular compartment (the fluid inside its lymphocytes) and the extracellular compartment (the noncellular matrix of the lymph, which is roughly equivalent to serum). The average volume of plasma in the average (70 kg) male is approximately 3.5 liters. The volume of the intravascular compartment is regulated in part by hydrostatic pressure gradients, and by reabsorption by the kidneys.

text: Transcellular compartment[edit]

text: The third extracellular compartment, the transcellular, consists of those spaces in the body where fluid does not normally collect in larger amounts,[3][4] or where any significant fluid collection is physiologically nonfunctional.[5] Examples of transcellular spaces include the eye, the central nervous system, the peritoneal and pleural cavities, and the joint capsules. A small amount of fluid, called transcellular fluid, does exist normally in such spaces. For example, the aqueous humor, the vitreous humor, the cerebrospinal fluid, the serous fluid produced by the serous membranes, and the synovial fluid produced by the synovial membranes are all transcellular fluids. They are all very important, yet there is not much of each. For example, there is only about 150 mL of cerebrospinal fluid in the entire central nervous system at any moment. All of the aforementioned fluids are produced by active cellular processes working with blood plasma as the raw material, and they are all more or less similar to blood plasma except for certain modifications tailored to their function. For example, the cerebrospinal fluid is made by various cells of the CNS, mostly the ependymal cells, from blood plasma.

text: Fluid shift[edit]

text: Fluid shifts occur when the body's fluids move between the fluid compartments. Physiologically, this occurs by a combination of hydrostatic pressure gradients and osmotic pressure gradients. Water will move from one space into the next passively across a semi permeable membrane until the hydrostatic and osmotic pressure gradients balance each other. Many medical conditions can cause fluid shifts. When fluid moves out of the intravascular compartment (the blood vessels), blood pressure can drop to dangerously low levels, endangering critical organs such as the brain, heart and kidneys; when it shifts out of the cells (the intracellular compartment), cellular processes slow down or cease from intracellular dehydration; when excessive fluid accumulates in the interstitial space, oedema develops; and fluid shifts into the brain cells can cause increased cranial pressure. Fluid shifts may be compensated by fluid replacement or diuretics.

text: Third spacing[edit]

text: "Third spacing" is the abnormal accumulation of fluid into an extracellular and extravascular space. In medicine, the term is often used with regard to loss of fluid into interstitial spaces, such as with burns or edema, but it can also refer to fluid shifts into a body cavity (transcellular space), such as ascites and pleural effusions. With regard to severe burns, fluids may pool on the burn site (i.e. fluid lying outside of the interstitial tissue, exposed to evaporation) and cause depletion of the fluids. With pancreatitis or ileus, fluids may "leak out" into the peritoneal cavity, also causing depletion of the intracellular, interstitial or vascular compartments.

text: Patients who undergo long, difficult operations in large surgical fields can collect third-space fluids and become intravascularly depleted despite large volumes of intravenous fluid and blood replacement.

text: The precise volume of fluid in a patient's third spaces changes over time and is difficult to accurately quantify.

text: Third spacing conditions may include peritonitis, pyometritis, and pleural effusions.[6] Hydrocephalus and glaucoma are theoretically forms of third spacing, but the volumes are too small to induce significant shifts in blood volumes, or overall body volumes, and thus are generally not referred to as third spacing.