Political science

i need the Book summary in the main body, write;  1)What is it about ? 2)What did the author/s find or say ? 3) What is you opinion? Important Note: Your goal is to summarize the content.  You can add your thoughts and opinions. In the opinion section, you can highlight things that you like or do not like and/or add recommendations

Write a 2 page double spaced essay answer the following questions: Compare the political grievances of the Communist Manifesto with those you find today (on the left or right) ?

write a 4-5 page (minimum!) description and analysis of an artifact of your choosing. If you write only 4 pages, you will not get more than a C. To get an A or B, you must have at least 5 pages of very detailed, exhaustive description and analysis that includes quotes from your artifact for proof.Times New Roman12 point font1 inch marginsWorks cited in APAParenthetical citation4-5 pages MINIMUM, However, for top quality, I would expect longer and more detailed papers.Introduction that captures attention and has thesis statement.UNDERLINE THESIS STATEMENTConclusion summarizes paper and gives a sense of finalityEdited for grammar and spellingEdited for organization and topic sentences (if I read only the topic sentence of each paragraph, I shouldunderstand the whole paper!)Have looked at They Say, I Say for transition wordsSentences have variety, not just all simple sentencesNo contractions!No “you”No “I think” or “I feel”DescriptionAnalysisThe purpose of descriptive analysis is to answer two questions:What is the purpose of this discourse, or what aim or goal does the rhetor (speaker) seem to seek?How does the discourse work to achieve that purpose, or what strategies does the rhetor use to achieve that goal?Your paper should take the following format and have a section for each:-Introduction – in the introduction, you want to introduce the reader to your topic, capture their attention, and state your thesis statement.  HINT: It is hard to begin papers. It is often a good idea to begin with a quote from your artifact, then start the introduction by unpacking the quote or saying “So and so said this in X year  when _ a little bit about context____.” Underline your thesis statement!-Description – In this section you want to write a description of the text.  Remember to study the text closely! Slow down and sit with it a long time, reflecting on it. Look over it MULTIPLE times.What is the goal of the artifact? What is the rhetor trying to do? What is its purpose?What is the context of the artifact? What was going on at the time? Who was in the audience? Look for evidence in the text that helps you understand the audience: what statements does the rhetor make that demonstrate awareness of the audience? How does the discourse select or target an audience? Who is included? Who is alienated? What do the rhetor’s appeals tell you about the audience? How does the discourse empower the audience?Is it similar to other messages of the time? Is it a response to a certain situation? Who is the rhetor? What do we need to know about them to understand this piece?What do you notice immediately? What do you remember about the message? What was surprising? What topics are covered? Whatkinds of questions does it bring up in your mind? You should do research into the context.-Analysis – In this section you want to write an analysis of the text. How does it achieve the purpose that you described?Persona: the role or roles a rhetor takes on for strategic purposes. This creates or contributes to the speaker’s ethos or credibility. For example: the president may enact the role of commander-in-chief, moral/spiritual leader of the nation, prophet, teacher/authority on U.S. history, etc. depending on the circumstance. Ask yourself: how does this discourse create an identity for the speaker? What does this discourse tell me about the character of the speaker?-Tone: the linguistic elements that suggest the rhetor’s attitude toward the audience and subject matter. Tone is found in the stylistic qualities of the discourse. Some words used to describe tone are personal, direct, ironic, satirical, sympathetic, angry, bitter, intense, scholarly, dogmatic, distant, condescending, tough, sweet, realistic, euphemistic, incisive, elegant, etc. Your description of the tone should accurately reflect the language used in the discourse you are studying. Also consider whether the discourse is abstract or concrete, colloquial or technical. Are the sentences long or short? Complex or simple?Structure: the form of the discourse, the method by which it unfolds, and the nature of its movement. Consider whether it seems to be narrative-dramatic, historical-chronological, cause-effect, problem-solution, effect-cause, topical, spatial, or taxonomical. Any combination of these structural elements can be found in a speech. Try outlining the speech in order to better understand its structure.What other devices do you notice in the text? Do not leave anything out! Hyperbole, personification, metaphor, simile, rhyming, alliteration, anaphora, epistrophe, imagery, allusion, etc.-Conclusion – conclusion should summarize the paper and give a sense of finality.You might use the above to start an outline or concept map!Remember: Use your professional voice! Write like it is a research paper for a journal. Avoid using contractions (can’t, won’t, don’t).

ESSAY TOPIC: Citizens, elected officials, and political scientists have argued for centuries that the president has either too much or too little power.  You will choose ONE area of presidential power to write a historical analysis of how the power of the presidency has grown and why there is concern over this: presidential pardons, executive orders, or executive privilege. Your paper needs to explain the law or historical precedent to established the presidential power, how it has been used and evolved over time, how it has been used recently (since 2000), and the current debate over the presidential power.Functional Requirements:The paper must be 2-3 pages.It must have a 12-point font and be double-spaced.It must have parenthetical citations or  foot/endnotes.Resource Requirements:You must cite at least five sourcesThe works cited page does not count towards the page limit.Each citation must be from a reputable source: books, scholarly journals, major news outlets, etc.Additional Requirements:Your paper must have theoretical and practical arguments.GRADING CRITERIA :Appropriateness and focus: Do you have a clear thesis that makes a specific, insightful claim concerning your selected area of presidential power (presidential pardons, executive orders, or executive privilege) and why there is concern over this area of presidential power?Do you have a clear thesis that makes a specific, insightful claim concerning your selected area of presidential power (presidential pardons, executive orders, or executive privilege) and why there is concern over this area of presidential power?Structure and Organization: Does the overall organization of the paper follow naturally from the controlling thesis? Does it explain the law or historical precedent that established the presidential power? Does it address how it has been used and evolved over time?Does the overall organization of the paper follow naturally from the controlling thesis? Does it explain the law or historical precedent that established the presidential power? Does it address how it has been used and evolved over time?Supporting Evidence: Does the paper include full and specific evidence in support of the thesis? Does it address the following: How has it been used recently (since 2000)? What is the current debate over the presidential power you have selected? Does your analysis reflect an understanding of your selected area of presidential power, especially as concerns the materials we’ve covered in the course?Does the paper include full and specific evidence in support of the thesis? Does it address the following: How has it been used recently (since 2000)? What is the current debate over the presidential power you have selected? Does your analysis reflect an understanding of your selected area of presidential power, especially as concerns the materials we’ve covered in the course?Style and Clarity: Style, grammar, punctuation, etc.…Style, grammar, punctuation, etc.…Resource Requirements: Do you cite at least five scholarly sources other than the textbook? Does each citation come from a reputable source?Do you cite at least five scholarly sources other than the textbook? Does each citation come from a reputable source?Functional Requirements: Is your paper 2-3 pages long? Has it been written in 12-point font and double spaced? Did you include parenthetical citations or footnotes/endnotes, in addition to a works cited page?Is your paper 2-3 pages long? Has it been written in 12-point font and double spaced? Did you include parenthetical citations or footnotes/endnotes, in addition to a works cited page?

Examine the ethnic makeup of the top leadership of America’s major political, economic, educational, and cultural institutions. Are Anglo-Americans still the dominant ethnic group? In what ways has their political, economic, and cultural power been diluted?

–Research Project: This project, which will take the form of a research paper with minimum length of 15 (fifteen) double-spaced pages, counts for 30% of your course grade (the initial submission, due at the end of Week 11, is worth 5%, and the final submission is worth 25%). The paper will include a properly formatted bibliography chiefly utilizing sources other than ones listed on the syllabus. While course readings may be referenced in the writing of your paper, they are not to constitute more than 25% of sources used.Your topic is the National Security Strategy of a US Administration of your choice in the post-Civil War era. A complete, A-grade paper, will have all of the following components:–Description of national security threat(s) the administration is seeking to address, domestic and foreign.–The role of the armed forces in addressing that threat, including the type of forces deemed required.–The role of the intelligence community–Presence or absence of allies, and their motivations for supporting/not supporting the US.–Domestic policies in furtherance of the national security strategy–Assessment of the strategy’s effectiveness/success, including reasons for success or failure. Which of the above proved the weak link?Which of the above was more than up to the task?–Last but not least: Discussion of relevance to the current US national security…predicament.What are we doing better? Worse? Lessons to be drawn from past mistakes or triumphs?

The assignment for this week: Watch the talk by Jason Brennan: Is Democracy Just? (Before answering the following questions, students should watch Brennan’s talk in its entirety.) In light of Brennan’s claims and arguments, answer the following questions: Provide a normative definition of ‘justice’. (A normative definition is prescriptive rather than descriptive: tell me how the term should be defined.) Expand upon your definition of ‘justice’ by sharing what the foundations of justice ought to be. (Answering this question will allow you to define the term ‘Justice’ more fully; so that I will understand what you mean when you say, “justice” or “just” in the questions that follow.) (Be specific: provide a detailed explanation.) (This assignment requires that you take a stance: i.e. answering that ‘justice’ “…can mean many things…” will not earn credit for this assignment. Provide a specific answer and explore that answer. Your answer does not have to be simple or singular, but it does need to be specific.) Is the political system in the United States Just? Explain. Apply your articulation of ‘justice’ from parts 2 and 3 to this question. Depending on your answer to number four, answer either 5 or 6 [below]. If the system is just, how should we defend it? (i.e. what facts would help to demonstrate this for someone that might not agree?) If the system is unjust, how should we refine it to make it to better approximate a just system? Finally: Offer your opinion(s) on the ideas expressed by Jason Brennan. (For the purposes of the question above, an opinion is defined as follows: an opinion is a belief which is explicitly supported by verifiable or falsifiable facts. An opinion is not a collection of preferences. Any claim supported by only inclination, preference, or hearsay will not be considered an “opinion”.)   (If you are feeling lost when considering what might count as a foundation of justice, please take some time to reflect upon the material of this course: intrinsic vs instrumental value, hedonism, egoism, altruism, utilitarianism, deontology, teleology and virtue, social contract theory, etcetera.)   Parameters: Length: between 350 and 650 words. No quotations or paraphrasing of any source material. Express everything in your own words. Any sources reviewed as a part of this assignment should be included in a bibliography. (A “bibliography” is a Book-Map. I want to see where you’ve been and what you have considered. Include links to any youtube videos watched, any articles or blogs read, and any other source of information that you encountered while preparing for or completing this assignment. Hint* every student should include [at least] the assigned video and our assigned text-books in their bibliography.)

Describe the different techniques of influence used by organized interests. When is one technique preferable to another? With the rise of the New Politics movement, different techniques are now used more frequently. Which ones? Why, do you think, are these techniques so well suite to New Politics?

Please use only the file I have uploaded to site and answer the question. The orthodox/traditional perspective to suburban development suggests that factors such as transportation technology, population increases, and the distribution of income influenced suburban development. Discuss two examples from the course material to challenge the orthodox/traditional view of suburban development.

Using only the sources above, our class discussions, and your own reasoning and logic, please write an essay in which you wrestle with the question of how people’s voting and party identification are related to their policy attitudes and beliefs, and how this has changed over time. A central question of this essay is the question of realignment: when, how, and why did people change their patterns of voting and party identification, and what did this have to do with their issue attitudes or beliefs? Explain in detail in your own words what the authors claim, including the causal mechanisms they say were at work, explain the evidence they bring to support their claims, compare their positions to each other, and weigh in with your own evaluations of the logic and evidence their adherents bring to support their claims. In the process or at the end, give your evaluation of which of these descriptions and explanations are compatible with each other and which are not. Throughout, please be sure that when you use the authors’ terms, you always explain them thoroughly in your own words so as to demonstrate your own complete understanding. Note that this will require you to wrestle with the question of what the racial resentment scale is really measuring.