Why and with what consequences for political participation in western democracies have the people become 'critical citizens' (Norris)

Why and with what consequences for political participation in western democracies have the people become 'critical citizens' (Norris)? The 20th century was a time of a great ideological struggle that encapsulated the world in a scale of wars never seen before; from the World War's of the first half century to the bitterly long stand off of the Cold War in the latter half. In these battles of the mind, democracy was surrounded from both sides of the ideological spectrum from the extreme right of Nazi National Socialism to the extreme left of the Communist Soviet Union. Democracy emerged victorious against the extreme right by the first half of the century and finally as the people of Germany rose up in defiance and tore down the Berlin wall, so began the fall of Communism. The new western order of democracy, that arose from these ashes, was established on the fundamental values of "freedom, equality and justice"1. There, although in an idealist context, should now stand a democracy which can fulfil the wishes of the citizen, in reality however, apathy of the people prevails for 'them' (the state, the system and the government), so culminating in the birth of the Critical Citizen. The emergence of a Critical Citizen, assuming that this concept is legitimate, is fundamentally due to the peoples apathy for 'them'. The origins for this apathy, and therefore the concept of a

  • Word count: 1856
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

'Is Realism Realistic?'

Kathleen Fitzpatrick Poli 340 S02 'Is Realism Realistic?' Eric Bifford 00-32460 Realism Redux International relations is a highly contested and indefinite area of study. Of the many issues being debated, there is one that takes precedence over all others. Some of the central questions in mind in the ensuing essay are: is there a way to characterize the international arena that rejects the realist premise of an inescapable state of anarchy? Anarchy is to be understood as a state of affairs in which a group of autonomous individuals act without an established, encompassing sovereign authority. Next, is there a way to exit the current state of anarchy without the installation of a single, world authority? Why does the state of anarchy exist? In the following, I will advance the claim that realist thought has succeeded as the dominant ideology of the past and present due to it's tendency to dictate reality--how we perceiving things within given parameters, these parameters being the dictates of realist ideology. Further, this inclination of realism is responsible for its current position as ideological hegemon. I will demonstrate my claim by advancing some of the key characteristics and consequent short-comings of realist and neo-realist thought. Practical not Critical? "Society is the Patient not the Product" Lawrence Frank Before we can understand realism in

  • Word count: 3970
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Ideological Perspectives Emilia De Wolf Liberalism: The word 'liberalism' is from the Latin

Ideological Perspectives Emilia De Wolf Liberalism: The word 'liberalism' is from the Latin word 'liber' meaning literally 'to be free'. The ideology came about as a reaction to the break down of feudalism and to challenge the absolute power of monarchy in Europe in the eighteenth century. Liberalism is based on five main tenants of belief; the individual, freedom, reason, justice and tolerance. According to liberalism the individual is paramount. Emanating from the 'Enlightenment' period, the belief is that every individual should have the freedom to achieve his or her full potential to the benefit of society as a whole. State intervention should be kept to a minimum and even constitutionally restrained because man is inherently 'good' and interference is counter-productive. Liberalism is a progressive ideology and freedom is the only way in which human being can further and better themselves. Classic liberal thinker John Stuart Mill said: "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will is to prevent harm to others". This extends to the liberal of the economy. The 'free market' is self regulatory and, particularly where neo-liberals are concerned, a superior entity. Government should not intervene because people are not capable, intellectually, of regulating the market as well as the market

  • Word count: 1020
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Can anarchy ever be orderly?

R. Jefferys November 2002 Can anarchy ever be orderly? The encyclopaedia Britannica of 1910 gives a clear definition of anarchy. It states that the anarchist ideal is 'a principle or theory of life and conduct under which society is conceived without government - harmony in such a society being obtained, not by submission to law, or by obedience to any authority, but by free agreements concluded between the various groups, territorial and professional, freely constituted for the sake of production and consumption, as also for the satisfaction of the infinite variety of needs and aspirations of a civilized being.'1 From this definition questions arise as to its plausibility and effectiveness in any society given the realities of human nature. Therefore crucial to the anarchist argument is one's definition of human nature, for in viewing human beings as inherently bad only with potential for good (as is the Conservative observation) would lead us to believe that anarchist thought is somewhat aloof and detached from the realities of society, making it an unrealistic ideal. So one's view of human nature necessarily defines whether anarchism in itself can ever be successful. With so few examples of anarchism ever coming to fruition in any country, a lot of the debate as to whether anarchism is a plausible ideology rests on general hypothetical debate and small examples

  • Word count: 1723
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

What is the difference between deep(TM) and shallow(TM) ecology

2. What is the difference between 'deep' and 'shallow' ecology? Ecology can be understood as a branch of biology that has extended into a political ideology, of nature as an interconnected whole1. The two branches of 'deep' and 'shallow' ecology were termed by Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess, and allow some distinction into the varied ecologist groups and views within contemporary society. 'Shallow' ecology, otherwise known as 'weak' ecology or environmentalism, supports an anthropocentric view and endorses that the natural world is something to be nurtured and preserved in order to support human life. 'Deep' ecology, on the other hand, is far more challenging in that it suggests that human life holds equal weighting with any other life form. The vast differences between these two threads can be analysed in a number of areas. Through economic growth, anthropocentric views, the different ways these can be seen, and the problems facing ecology as a whole, we are able to determine a clearer picture of not only deep and shallow threads of ecology, but in the political ideologies of nature as a whole. Ecological ideas can be traced back to as far as the protest against the rise of industrialisation and urbanisation in the nineteenth century2, although mechanistic ideas were created up to two centuries previous in the scientific revolution.3 Shallow ecologists, in light of

  • Word count: 2672
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Why was nationalism so weak in Italy before 1848?

Why was nationalism so weak in Italy before 1848? Nationalism was weak in Italy before 1848 for a variety of reasons. The country was dominated heavily by foreign Austrian rule; its government was dependant on their military power and they controlled many of the major states within the peninsula. The Austrian influence on the country had a massive effect on nationalism because it promoted a feeling of low general self-esteem within Italy. They seemed weak and powerless next to the strong, wealthy and militarily dependable Austrians. There was also anger among the more extremist political radicals who violently opposed Austrian rule, separating them from the moderates (who were not happy with the situation but less likely to react) and emphasising existing divisions within the country. Austrian rule also discouraged a feeling of nationalism through ensuring a lack of any Italian figurehead or ruler to unify the people under because of their dominance; later, the emergence of Pope Pius IX was to change this (but this was not until 1846). The Austrian predominance helped to ensure a lack of national sentiment within Italy by emphasising the weaknesses of the Italian system and by preventing the emergence of any strong Italian figures as a basis for national pride. The views of the Catholic Church also reflected the popular sentiment in Italy at the time. They held a parochial

  • Word count: 971
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

To what extent did the aims and ideas of German nationalism change between 1815 and 1919?

Nima Ordoubadi Miss. Hornick To what extent did the aims and ideas of German nationalism change between 1815 to1919 It is the nature of German nationalism that is significant when answering this question. There are two opposing views, on the nature of German nationalism in 1815. The first view is the traditional view of the German nationalists of the period, who believed that the root of their nationalism dated back to an ancient sense of kinship bound together by a 'devotion for their nation.' This supports the view that the essence of German Nationalism had always been and was merely being rediscovered. The rediscovery process was initiated by French occupation at the turn of the century causing much resentment from the Germans. This resentment is reflected throughout varying tiers of society via contemporary poetry and art. Therefore the nature of German nationalism was also very much a cultural development. The opposing view is the German nationalism, was not in fact an inherent sense German kinship, but a product of the times. This view takes the stance that German nationalism had very much evolved out of its situation in 1815, and continued to do so: that it was an ever changing social-cultural force, driven by modernity. Eric Hobsburn supported this view saying that "the basic

  • Word count: 2542
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Sectionalism vs. Nationalism in 19th century America

HISTORY UNIT TWO ESSAY. Sectionalism vs. Nationalism in 19th century America Prompt: How could both Sectionalism and Nationalism exist at the same time and at the same place in America during the 19th century? During the early 19th century there were many varieties in American nationalism. Many events posed a threat of sectionalism where as other events unified America as a whole. Both nationalism and sectionalism could have co-existed at the same time because although sectionalism always threatened nationalism, nationalism always found a way to with-stand the serious economical, political and social challenges of the time. Many issues during this time period posed a threat to nationalism. The issue of slavery arose after the 1812 war that threatened the unity of America. The issue arose during the Missouri compromise when the government was to decide whether Missouri would be a pro or anti slavery state, this threatened the unity of the nation. The South wanted to build an economy was through the use of slavery. The North on the other hand opposed this idea and therefore based their economy off that of trade and manufactured goods. However this dispute came to represent a larger topic such that would hinder America for decades later: whether the new western regions would take after the southern or northern economy. Additionally politically-wise the two- party system broke

  • Word count: 673
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

libralism and constitutionalism

Why do liberals fear power and advocate constitutionalism? Liberals fear power for many reasons such as it can lead to tyranny of the majority and it also can corrupt those in power. So they advocate constitutionalism to keep limits on the government so that they don't become corrupt and to powerful. Liberals fear power because they feel this could lead to tyranny of the majority. Tyranny of the majority is giving to much power to the majority and there agenda will become more provident and important than the minoritys who will not be heard, so this is why many liberals supported the retention of the property qualification for voting as a couter balance to the power of the majority. Mill said: "Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries." When a person gains power over other persons - the political power to force other persons to do his bidding when they do not believe it right to do so - it seems inevitable that a moral weakness develops in the person who exercises that power. It may take time for this weakness. It was Lord Acton, who said: "All power tends to

  • Word count: 874
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Cenap Cakmak

Review of the book: by Brian Martin, "Nonviolence versus capitalism", London: War Resisters' International, 2001 ISBN 0903517 19 1. Also available at: http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/01nvc/nvcpall.pdf The following is the main thesis of the book: capitalism has been harmful and destructive since its inception. All alternatives to capitalism have failed thus far. There is one viable alternative: nonviolence action. There should be action to effectively struggle with capitalism, but it should not be violent. The action does not necessarily aim at completely eliminating capitalism, but aims at making it "a more humane social and economic system". Nonviolent action is the most promising method against the bad impacts of capitalism. All attempts based on using violence through state apparatus have failed. The author first poses the question: Will "nonviolence" ensure dramatic changes in capitalism? He contends that it has "the capacity to transform capitalism". With the collapse of Soviet Union, capitalism has been declared as "victorious" of the ideological battles. However, it is not an ideal system. Because, it - produces economic inequalities, - has destructive effect on traditional cultures, - is dangerous for environment, - makes the lives of workers worse. Despite its negative sides, capitalism is strong in some respects. It has produced a massive

  • Word count: 1664
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay