How does a non-democratic country become a democratic country? Well this can be described as a regime change. When a non-democratic country’s regime breaks down it will either become another non-democratic country, a semi-democratic country or a full democratic country. For these countries to have a regime change it usually takes something big like the people of that country rebelling against their government.
So how does one buy democracy? Well powerful democratic countries such as the United States of America spends lots of money to fund a rebellion to fight countries that are currently in a non-democratic system.
U.S. pledges $12M to Syria’s rebels
A coalition of more than 70 partners, including the United States, pledged Sunday to send millions of dollars and communications equipment to Syria’s opposition groups, signaling deeper involvement in the conflict amid a growing belief that diplomacy and sanctions alone cannot end the Damascus regime’s repression.
Blog Post #8) Due 23:59 SUNDAY, March 18th. For this week’s blog post, I’d like you to write something about Chapter 12–Interest Groups and Social Movements.
Good luck,
Interest group: A group that brings together people with common interest and/or a common sense of identity for the purpose of influencing the political process
This is the way I was taught what a interest group in politics means and after a little research this holds true but there are different types of interest groups, public and special.
The main difference between them is that the public interest groups are what it sounds like looking out for the public interest. They are a group of people that share a common sense of values and a shared sense of collective identity, which often informs their work. They are not interested in economic benefits, but instead are seeking policy changes that have the potential to affect many people all over the country.
A Special interest group is any association of individuals or organizations, usually formally organized, that, on the basis of one or more shared concerns, attempts to influence public policy in it is favor.
Which has more power? Well when in the United States of America the candidates that we vote for into government are usually backed by a special interest group.
There are many ways of how countries vote for who they want in parliament.
In Canada we use a system called First Past the Post which means who ever has the most votes wins. So Canada is divided into ridings where we vote for a candidate from a party to represent us.
A fun way of learning about the First Past the Post
A less fun explanation of First Past the Post
Another Electoral System is called the Alternative Vote. For the Alternative Vote the voters may list the candidates in order from who they want elected the most to who they are least afraid to be in office. Then the candidate with the least amount of votes is eliminated and the voters of the candidate will have their 2nd vote put in use and so on and so on until 1 candidate has more the 50% of the votes.
a continuation of the animal kingdom but explaining the Alternative Vote
Lastly in the animal kingdom is the Mixed-Member Proportional Representation. The Mixed-Member Proportional Representation is similar to First Past the Post but adds extra seats and gives everybody an extra vote to pick which party they like better. Then the extra seats are given to the parties to equal how the people voted.
Lastly we see in the animal kingdon how Mixed-Meber Proportional Representation works.
Lastly for my blog will be the Single Transferable Vote. In this electoral system the people again can list in order who they want in office from one to how many candidates there are in that riding or how many they feel deserve a seat. In the Single Transferable Vote system the candidate with the most votes wins a seat but the votes for that person is reviewed again for the 2nd candidate picked then the votes are counted and given out accordingly. This continues until all the seats for that riding is occupied by a candidate.
Single Transferable Vote explained but not from the animal kingdom.
So now its up to you to pick. Which electoral system is more fair or the best?
In my Political Science course I have been taught about a crucial part of the government that makes the laws of a country. This branch is called the Legislature. The Legislatures are involved in basically every bill passing or failing. Also bills can be “lost” or “put into the bottom drawer” which basically gets rid of a bill because it will most likely go against the will of a member of parliament.
I thought it was funny that the legislature can be different from states/provinces in the same country. Recently a bill in Iowa has been passed that criminalizes the act of videotape animal abuse.
” Iowa has become the first state to pass legislation that criminalizes the act of surreptitiously getting into a farming operation to videotape animal abuse, setting a precedent for others considering similar measures….
The measure was changed from an earlier version that included language to make undercover videotaping at farms or other animal operations illegal.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled such language is protected by the Constitution, and the Iowa attorney general’s office recommended that it be removed from the bill, said the bill’s sponsor and veterinarian Joe Seng, D-Davenport.
Seng said the bill approved Tuesday strikes a balance by discouraging animal activists from sneaking into livestock facilities but doesn’t prohibit someone who legitimately works there to report animal abuse.”
But the fact that this feeling can be so different between states is what I thought was funny.
“….While many states have considered similar laws, Iowa is the first to pass it, said Scott Hendrick, a senior policy specialist for the National Conference of State Legislatures. Florida and Minnesota considered bills last year, but they died in their Legislatures”
I understand that different people have different views but to see things such as animal abuse being viewed differently in places that are not very far away…… It is funny to see the political difference in a thing that I felt would have been almost second nature.
The Legislature has so much to do with our day to day life and how we live it. I’ve even posted a once or twice on my blog about something that would have been connected to the Legislatures but at the time did not know. The power they hold in Legislature kind of scares me but the constitution save me.
As we have learned there are many differences between the Parliamentary system versus the Presidential system. One of those main differences is that the Prime Minister can lose the trust of his people and fellow members of parliament. Once he has lost the trust of the people he can be asked to resign or call for an election.
Australia has done shown the power of a Parliamentary system of government.
Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd of Australiaannounced on Friday that he would challenge his successor, Julia Gillard, for the leadership of the Labor Party and the country in a vote set for Monday morning. The move sets up a showdown to end an acrimonious public leadership battle that analysts warn has begun to paralyze the Australian government…….
…..“Rightly or wrongly, Julia has lost the trust of the Australian people, and starting on Monday I will start restoring that trust. That is why I have decided to contest the leadership of the Australian Labor Party.”
They are about to have a vote to have a new Prime Minister because the current leader has lost the trust of his people. This coming Monday Australians will go to the polls to show how their faith has been lost and to show the strengths of a Parliamentary system of government.
Washington State who has nothing in their constitution about marriage has passed a bill allowing the act of gay marriage in their state. But what happens when you have something in your constitution already but you want o make an amendment? Well….
With the political makeup in Washington’s statehouse in favor of same-sex marriage, the state had little trouble getting a gay-marriage bill passed. But in Oregon, lawmakers don’t have the same authority as Washington lawmakers, because in Oregon they are prohibited from pursuing such a change in the law.
The reason goes back eight years to 2004 when Multnomah County began marrying same-sex couples. In response, Oregonians voted to amend the state constitution, declaring Oregon would recognize only marriages between a man and a woman. Ever since then, the Oregon state Legislature has not been legally able to work on the issue.
So it seems in the United States of America it is much harder to change something already in the constitution then if you were to add something to the constitution. In Washington State it was much easier because adding a bill did not need the public to make a vote. Where as in Oregon State because they are making an amendment to the constitution they need the public to make a vote on either allowing the state to change the constitution or not.
This weeks blog post is about how as we age our political views change. The conventional way of looking at our political view was that a person was either left wing or right wing. Left wing being a Liberal and a right wing being a conservative. But now there is another way to judge our political outlook. There are now 4 quadrants an Authoritarian Left, Authoritarian Right, Libertarian Left, and Libertarian Right.
Below is the political view of my father who is around 30 years older then I. So our views on life should be different because of the events that have affected our life are different. He being one of the first Chinese children in a school full of only Caucasian people and I being a child born in a city were all ethnic identities are accepted. This graph shows he is a Libertarian Left still in his age. Which corresponds to what Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s view of growing with age does not make you a conservative.
“I shall not grow conservative with age” Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Now below is the graph of a 19 year old male (me) born and raised in a whole new generation with much different things that have affected me and my outlook on life.
As we can see the newer generation is a little more left and a little more Libertarian.
Liberalism is, I think, resurgent. One reason is that more and more people are so painfully aware of the alternative. ~John Kenneth Galbraith, New York Times, 8 October 1989
As John Kenneth Galbraith puts it the reason for this Liberalism is because people are become more aware of the alternatives. In the newer generation the teachings are different than before and it has become so much easier for us to research anything. Our view are slightly more aware of what is happening around the world which has made our view more Libertarian. The two graphs still show that as you age you may become more conservative but it does not mean you will become a conservative. It also shows how close political views are within a family. This is the generation that was taught to challenge what we are taught, challenger what we are told is right, and challenge authority. Both graphs show that the movement has not ended and is only getting stronger which is the reason for all these occupy movements and for the fight against bills such as SOPA and C-11. It shows that both generations are done with having things just the way they are and want some sort of change to happen because if we were happy with what we have we would be more conservative.
globalization-The movement of goods. capital. ideas, and people across geopolitical boundaries today and in the past. contemporary patterns of globalization involve a deepening constellation of economic, technological cultural changes that are worldwide in scope and that challenge the sovereignty of the state.
Has contemporary globalization weakened nationalism? With the growth rate of technology and the media it has become hard to hide from the world. With technology and media it has become very easy to share almost anything. This ability to share anything worldwide has giving companies a foothold to expand their companies because of the demand in another country and now many national icons have become international icons such as Hello Kitty and Mickey Mouse. Now Angry Birds has even made the move from Finland to Shanghai.
HONG KONG – Rovio Entertainment, the developer of Angry Birds, one of the most popular iPhone games, is expanding to Asia. It will set up an office in Shanghai, its first beyond its headquarters in Finland, possibly as a prelude to a Hong Kong listing. The company will also incorporate more Chinese flavor in it products in the future, said Peter Vesterbacka, a senior executive of Rovio.
As companies continue expanding and spreading culture using marketing, media centers and expanding the world will have no choice but to become more multicultural.
Multimedia centers such as youtube has made it easier to for people to learn about other cultures and given us the ability to have a better understanding for people who are not as fortunate. Sending some of the largest youtube stars to different parts of the world has made it so people will watch and learn while not feeling like they were forced to. Just one of the many examples is Kevjumba in Kenya. One might not learn much by just watching these videos but you get a small sense of what it is like and it give you links to site where you can learn more about different places in the world.
Globalization will continue to grow as it becomes easier for all parts of the earth to communicate and travel to each other. As the world starts to share more and more, making it easier for countries to learn about other countries and showing that no matter where we live in the world we are all pretty similar. With this Globalization the world will slowly become more multicultural and have a better understanding for each other.
nationalism – an ideology that holds that certain population are nations, that the world is divided into nations, and that a nation should be self-determining(i.e., able to establish its own institution, laws. and government and to determine its future).
Multiculturalism and the understanding of other cultures has slowly weakened nationalism. Below is a table from census Canada 2006 of the ethic background in Vancouver British Columbia. Being myself from a Chinese background but born and raised in Vancouver I will be using Vancouver as the example.
Having being raise in Vancouver in a time where most cultures are accepted I feel that Vancouver is a great city to show how multiculturalism and understanding for each culture weakens nationalism. There are some exceptions but there always will be. I myself have no real ties to China but to hear China do well in something (for example winning The Festival of Lights) I feel a small sense of pride but never will I feel that the Chinese community should band together and form our own small governing part of Vancouver or Canada because we are so close to the other cultures in Vancouver now. Growing up with different cultures I wouldn’t call any one culture more of a Vancouverite then another. Neither would I call any one culture more of a Canadian then another. With our cultural backgrounds in Vancouver it has even changed how political parties have to run their campaigns.
Vancouver is a city of immigrants and outsiders, and any political party that can’t engage them will lose out, according to demographic studies byAndrew Yan, a researcher at the research and development division of Bing Thom Architects (BTA).
“We’re a city of strangers,” Yan said, adding that political parties will have to “learn to bridge, as opposed to bunkering themselves out of one particular neighborhood or one particular group.”
“Political parties need to think of themselves as lighthouses that shine on urban issues and concerned with how they will govern rather than clubhouses focused on their special interests and obsessed with how they will rule.”
Using the understanding that each culture has for one another in Vancouver as a small scale if we were to put that onto a larger scale and make everybody in the world have a better understanding for other cultures we could call ourselves Earthlings rather than all these subcategories. But one of the ways we can do that is through globalization and the spread of cultures that come with it because no matter where people go they will always have a cultural identity of where they are from and it will meld with where they are now or are going. With this lack of a single cultural identity nationalism will be harder to establish because everybody will be will have either a little bit of everything in them or a good understanding of the others.
Sovereignty - “The ability to carry out actions or policies within a territory independently from external actors and internal rivals”
“The final or ultimate power over a population and a piece of territory, commonly claimed by the government of a state but ultimately sanctioned by the international system of states. in over contexts sovereignty can be said to reside in the people of in parliament; in all cases, however, it has probably been eroded by global forces.”
I will use Canada, a first world country that is governed under a democracy and who is part of the United Nations, as an example to show that a country does not truly have sovereignty.
“After spending much of 2011 squabbling and infighting, the Quebec sovereignty movement has kicked off the new year with a bang.
Not only are they feuding about what to do to boost the moribund movement and prevent further high-profile defections, the issue of Parti Quebecois leader Pauline Marois’ leadership has reared its head again…..”
If a country that is well established like Canada has a province who are fighting itself about if they want to have their own sovereignty can we say Canada as a whole has its own sovereignty? The Governing party of Canada not only has internal rivals from Quebec, feeling that they should have the ability to govern themselves, but even with majority government the other parties will come out and speak up against anything the governing party feels is needed. With 4 main parties in Canada fighting to be the party that gets to govern over Canada and all of them giving reasons not to vote for the other how can we say the rule without internal rivals? Just watch the many
