What is nationalism? Is there a difference between nationalism and patriotism?
Nationalism is about protecting ones country when they appear under threat or are seeking independence from another country. Nationalism does not suggest utilizing the use of force, though such groups resort to using force to achieve their interest. The difference between nationalism and patriotism comes with the distinction they are utilized within. Patriotism is seen as a positive connotation with the idea that your country is worth fighting for. Nationalism can have a positive intention but is associated negatively. Patriotism is utilized to label forms of nationalism that are seen as “acceptable” in its intentions, but it is seen as another form of nationalism. Both terms refer to putting one's countries interests above others' or above all else.
Explain why Richard Neustadt argues that a president’s personality matters, and explain the two “pillars” of presidential power?
Power within the constitution is not enough for presidents to be successful. Presidents share power with other actors within the political system and their power is restricted within the constitution. Presidential power is the power to persuade. Pillars of presidential power include reputation and prestige meaning presidents must be able to negotiate. The most effective presidents are those who understand their presidential power and take advantage of it. There is a need for the president to convince others their own interests are theirs as well.
We discussed several theories concerning the origin of racial conflict. Which theory do you find the most compelling and why? Do you believe heterogeneity produces or reduces racial conflict?
With the social learning theory, race and ethnicity provide a source of identity. Racial prejudice is shaped through interactions. Without these discourses, individuals who are labeled as the in-group would not hold racial views. These interactions, enables the in-group to keep its stereotypical views of out-groups resulting in keeping the status quo. A society will be in racial conflict if they are based on an ideology or value system with those do do not share the same view. Heterogeneity itself cannot be the cause of racial conflict.
What is social capital? Why is it deemed important? Do you believe television impacts social capital? Why or why not?
Social capital is as a variety of social interactions that connect individuals in society together. Social capital is measured by looking at civic interest, such as how many people vote. In "Bowling Alone," Putnam argued that, “the rise of television may be responsible for social capital's decline”. Television and other forms of technologies play a positive role in the development of social capital despite the lack of face-to-face interactions. Technological advancements have diminished the need for face-to-face interactions, without negative impacts on trust or engagement.
Is “in-your-face” political television good for American democracy?
Television can provide political awareness, but the televised of “in your face” of incivility and close-up camera angles causes those that are watching to “react more emotionally and think of opposing views as less legitimate.” Emphasizing what Mutz defines “in-your-face-politics,” violates political incivility. These televised political debates are aggressive. Mutz finds that with observing “uncivil political television” results in one to remember more about the arguments that were made and the positions one disagrees with. Nevertheless, those arguments and positions are then viewed as “less legitimate”. She also finds that viewing televised political debates that are aggressive reduces one’s overall trust in the government and in politics.
What can the findings of the Milgram experiment and Stanford prison experiment tell us about the origins of ethnic conflict and genocide?
The findings in the Milgram experiments and the Stanford experiment explained the involvement of individuals in mass killings within ethnic conflict and genocide. The Milgram, experiment was centered on the conflict between “obedience to authority” and “personal conscience”. Their reasoning was they were being obedient in taking orders from their superiors. The Stanford Prison experiment gives an understanding of how such situational can impact one’s behavior. There is a patter of “radical behavior” that impacts individuals, in both the Milgram experiments and Zimbardo's prison experiment. In both findings, one can see the impact that self-persuasion has in influencing one's own behavior that results in extreme behaviors.
What is the difference between the “politics-is-complicated” model and the symbolic racism model? Which model do you find more convincing and why?
The “politics-is-complicated” model asserts that racists still exist but racial policies vary will vary depending on whether someone believes in structural or individual explanations for group inequalities. The symbolic racism model states that racism exists and that it is socialized as “traditional American individualist values”. The politics is complicated model is more convincing as race conflict should separate its views on race related issues from prejudice. This needs to appeal not to racial issue but appeal to the greater referent group of Americans.
Why do groups value conformity so highly? How do groups react to non-conformists? What, in your opinion, drives these reactions to norm violators?
Groups value conformity to make decisions. Conformity happens when groups agree with what the majority vote. For example, a group must come up with a proposal that everyone agrees on before taking such actions. Group decision-making does not imply that every member of the group agrees with the proposal. Every member in the group however, must come to a decision. It results in poor decisions for the group when members agree to the majority choice against their better judgment when looking at past historical events.
Civility and Race:
Civil discourse expresses the values of being open-minded, understanding and respectful to those who may not share the same views as theirs. Civil discourse is critical in prejudice and racism discourse. One can argue that discourse with regards to race is “uncivil” as it maintains norms of supremacy targeting marginalized groups. Racial discourse however, can create a better understanding of racial issues and what forms racism. Civil Discourse plays a role in both interaction and cognition.
Civil discourse is good for race relations at it can bridge a racial divide. Discourse of race should be seen as an issue in which individuals with different backgrounds must engage in as it should not be only seen as a “white, or non-white” issue. For race discourse relations to improve, “violations” of civil codes are needed to minimize the fear of saying the wrong thing and being blamed for being for discrimination and racism. Uncivil discourse is not good for race relations. Therefore an “uncivil” discourse cannot improve strained relations between other non-racial groups. Uncivil discourse about race undermines tolerance and understanding between.
Terrorism:
Individuals or groups turn to terrorism because of institutional, ideological, or individual reasons. Institutions create violence by marginalizing certain groups. Ideas are implemented to provide resolutions, and a means of how focusing on the rationale of using political violence. Individual experiences turn groups to violence, whether it be because of desperation, liberation, or solidarity. Individuals and groups turning to terrorism shows that it is personal motivations and psychological reasoning that lead people to use violence for political interest.
The term is difficult to define due to the fact that there are contradictions about whether and when terrorism can be utilized. In addition, is difficult in agreeing on a basis for deciding when the utilization of violence directed towards is legitimate. One does not simply have an idea what terrorism or a terrorist group is. How one applies the “terrorism label” depends on who they are and what their intentions are. It is not possible for the intelligence community to identity terrorist ahead of time. One can cannot simply detect a threat and prevent such acts for occurring. Creating a “ terrorist profile” with the characteristics of identified terrorist is useless. With the uncertainty of the term of “terrorism” we are not fully able to understand the notion of the term.
Emotion and Democracy:
Democratic politics would not improve if emotion were kept out of it. Emotion cannot be kept out of politics as it makes individuals more rational. If one is uncertain, they tend to look for information and think more rationally about the issues. For example, anxiety leads to uncertainty with one’s attitudes and decisions. To make rational decisions one looks for more information about the issue that concerning. An emotion such as anxiety can imply that one is better informed.
In other words, the feeling of uncertainty makes individuals act rationally. Emotion creates a cognitive decision-making process. Emotions are part of one’s decision-making process. Even when one does not try to provoke emotion, providing new information can arouse such emotions. In most cases, emotions are not are bad thing in a democracy as it makes us more rational.
w