Political science

For your final paper, choose: One international crime AND one transnational crime, And one or two theories we have covered in class. Your paper should present a clear argument about how these theories explain international and transnational crime (application), as well as limitations when applying the theory to the specific international and transnational crime. In the paper, you must give some context (definition and actual cases that have taken place) for the crime in question, explain the key points of the theory/theories used, and you should justify your arguments with examples and data. End the paper with policy preventions. Ex. Outline: Intro Define Theory Define specific international crime Apply theory to the specific crime Provide limitations ***Repeat these steps for the transnational crime*** You must use academic sources. The paper should be about 3,500 words (minimum of 3,300 and a maximum of 3,700, excluding the bibliography with a minimum of 10 different references). The final paper will be submitted through BlackBoard under “final paper” due on 12/05/ 2020. Note: The paper will be verified via SafeAssign for Plagiarism. Make sure to use references accordingly as I have requested throughout the class.

must be a three page outline not an essay but an outline using Roman numerals The final exam is not a paper. It is a three-page long, single-spaced, detailed outline complete with correct and proper citation format as outlined in class (see handout: “How To Write A Paper”), In this year alone, we have witnessed a unique Presidential Election, and a rare exercise, and/or non-exercise as the case may be, of power from the Judicial Branch and the Legislative Branch. So, in your considered view, is the Executive branch of government really the most powerful of the three? If so, why? If not, why not? What interrelationships are involved? In your answer, include an explication how the Federalists believed the relative power of each branch might be and why, and then go to the readings to back up your argument. Other than that, how you use historical analyses found in the textbooks is at your discretion. You must use at least five sources in your answer. only the sources I give u can be used no outside sources are allowed

For this portion of the exam you will have to answer a total of three of the following questions, one from the first three, one from the second four, and a third of your choosing from any of the seven. For your exam you must answer one of this first set of three questions. According to Habermas, what is the public sphere? What is Habermas’ ideal speech situation (aka rational critical discourse) and what should result from it? Does rational critical discourse occur within our political media? If so, when and where (think about what particular media formats or outlets)? If not, why not? Did the recent presidential debates have a proclivity towards RCD? Why or why not?  What is the binary discourse of American civil society? How is this binary related to Habermas’ ideal vision of civil society?  In what ways can a political actor or institution be discussed utilizing these binaries? Describe an example in which these binaries are disseminated. Why, after an examination of the binary discourse present in American civil society, does Alexander conclude that we can never have a perfect civil society or public sphere?      Habermas argues that political communication must be rational in order to be effective.  On the other hand, Alexander and others argue that political communication is performative. What do they mean by this? (Think cultural scripts, drama, and recognizable narratives). Be sure to define the concept of performative rationality. Argue your position in reference to this debate. That is, by using examples from our media (be specific), answer these two pertinent questions: which type of political communication is more likely to occur?  In your opinion is one type of communication more ideal/desirable? Why? Which one do you think is more effective? Why?   For your exam must answer one of this second set of four questions. What is a political gaffe? Is understanding political gaffes important for political campaign coverage? Why? How are gaffes connected to the construction of authenticity? Be sure to describe the process by which gaffes are constructed. What are some of the communicative strategies used by politicians to mitigate a gaffe moment? Which strategy do you think is most effective? Lastly, if you worked on a campaign how would you administer this strategy? What is political polarization? How has political polarization shifted over the last couple of decades? Describe using examples. How is this process connected to media bias? Be sure to define and describe the type of media bias that is connected to political polarization. Lastly, what are echo chambers, and how are they connected to confirmation bias and political polarization? (Be sure to describe echo chambers and confirmation bias.)    There have been a number of recent changes in technology and policy that have altered the dissemination and impact of political advertisements. First, describe two of these changes and their impacts on contemporary political advertisements. Second, describe two strategies you would take to create an effective political advertisement. Lastly, describe an empirical example of an existent effective advertisement that used those strategies (link to the advertisement if possible).  Describe three characteristics of the troll community of 4chan. Connect these characteristics to at least three of the anxieties expressed by alt-right trolls. Describe these anxieties and why they are connected to the political positions of the alt-right. Next describe how these communities use bots and memes to signify their political positions and attempt to influence politicians and the public. (Be sure to define the concepts of memes and bots.)      One of the most important insights of the aesthetic public sphere paradigm is that entertainment media and serious political debate cannot be so easily separated. Utilizing this framework, select and describe a pop culture text or icon that emphasizes this social fact. That is, describe how this entertainment text or icon enters into “serious” political issues.  How can these fictional characters or celebrity personalities be used to take a political stance? Lastly, why does this further problematize the ubiquitous desire for RCD?

This essay needs to include a lot such as the research in oil in Iran.  It must be a research question. The crash in oil prices on Iran would hurt Iran economy, How does Iran deal with this challenge including political instability and economic crisis in Iran caused by the crash in oil prices

Was Russian authoritarianism inevitable?  Write an essay arguing either for the contingency or inevitability of Russian authoritarianism. Was Russia’s trajectory affected most by elite, institutional, or structural factors? Of these explanations, which is the most persuasive and why? To do this well, you will need to not only explain the arguments of all sides (and all three factors), but also provide the historical and/or political context for the explanation to showcase its logic. You’ll also need to explain (using evidence and logic) why your preferred explanation is the best one. I really need this essay done on time before the deadline. Thank you

Directions: For the final essay exam in this class, you are required to compose a 400-450 word argumentative essay addressing the following question. As a brief reminder, this essay is worth 32 points.     FINAL ESSAY EXAM QUESTION    During the semester, we discussed a variety of issues related to Black liberation and the oppressive experiences Black communities face.  Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor examines the explosion of the #BlackLivesMatter Movement by examining Black people’s ongoing struggle with violence, police brutality, and exploitation by the criminal justice system.  She ends the book with a simple question. Based on our class readings, class discussions, and your essays and research papers, develop a 400-450 word argumentative essay that addresses the following question.    Can Black people gain equality in America?    A few things to consider…..  Do you have a claim (thesis) that takes a position on one side or the other? This is an argument so the essay should be arguing a position related to the question. To make it easy for the reader to find, try to keep it in the introduction.   Have you clearly incorporated the reading material from the class? The purpose of this essay is for you to demonstrate that you understand how to make clear statements and use source material to support your ideas, claim, and discussion about a particular topic.    Are you still using I, me, my, you, us, we, our? That language should not be included in this essay. Remember, we talked about the many reasons why this type of language should not be used. At this point of the semester, you should have already made the adjustment in your writing. This essay is your opportunity to demonstrate growth.  Does your essay follow the basic essay structure at the least? At the very least, an essay has an introduction, body paragraphs that examine the points of discussion, and a conclusion. These are the basic components of an essay. Also, make sure the first line of each sentence is indented. This signals to the reader that a new paragraph is starting. Avoid using pronouns in the first sentence of a paragraph. A sentence with a noun has to precede a sentence replacing that noun with a pronoun.    Are your sentences complete? Remember when we talked about fragments? A complete sentence has to have a subject, verb, and complete thought.  Also, do not combine two complete sentences with a comma (that makes a comma-splice).     Did you proofread?

Essay #4 – Domestic Public Policy For this essay you will pick an example of a domestic policy.  This needs to be a law passed by Congress OR an executive order issued by a President since January 20, 2001.  I will not accept anything that deals with International relations or foreign policy, however anything involving immigration would be acceptable for example……I will say often the policies chosen to write about are in the areas of taxes, entitlements, healthcare, energy, environment, education, etc.   Good examples would be anything relating to healthcare, education, the environment, immigration, or energy, although technically anything involving entitlements, spending, taxes, and regulation are also acceptable. 1.  Introduce and describe when your policy was passed/issued.  Who was President, which party mainly supported it, etc.  What problem/issue was the policy meant to deal with and/or improve?  You can also mention what was going on in the economy/society that made this in your view come to the forefront of the policy agenda.   2. Describe how the policy came to be adopted.  Track the steps in the executive order, or law.  Was the policy you picked something that had never been done before, or the reform of an existing law, or an EO that had been issued in the past or an EO that was just changing how a law was being implemented…..those details help as to describing the process in how this policy came to be.  You can mention the controversy over it, how the votes for it in Congress were very split between the two parties or non-partisan, if it was originally vetoed at first by a President, anything to highlight the process (and struggle) of getting this policy adopted.   3. Find sources that give us an idea of how successful (or unsuccessful) the policy has been.  Has it been effective in solving the problem it set out to fix?  What are some major problems the policy has faced?  Has Congress (Or the White House) set out to improve the law at any point in time?  Try to show an example of how the policy is working, and another example that points out a problem. 4. What’s your opinion of the policy?  Do you think it’s been effective or not?  What would be recommendations you would have in improving the policy?  For this I’m looking for good examples based on good sources because I know that there’s always tons of material out there with ideas of how to improve laws. As always, at least 4-5 pages and 4-5 sources.

The topic is why the United Kingdom has a two-party system? The essay should not be a broad general introduction of a country. A case study is NOT a country profile. I already did an introduction but its not finished, so just review and finish it and then follow the topic.  This essay needs to apply comparative politics methods and theories and concepts. Clear arguments and your own perspective on the topic.

Part one: Each response should take a few sentences to a paragraph. I’m looking for specific information in your response. 1. What are the differences between an interest group, political party, and faction? 2. What are direct and indirect techniques in lobbying? 3. Define hard and soft money in campaign finances. Give me an example of each. 4. What are the current federal restrictions in hard money? Part two: Each response should take about a half page to a full page. 5. What did Shelby County v. Holder, 570 US 529 (2013) rule? How many justices ruled in the majority? Who wrote the majority opinion? What was declared unconstitutional? Please explain. Who wrote the dissenting opinion? What was the focus and reasoning of the dissenting opinion? What is preclearance? What states were subject to preclearance? 6. Explain California’s primary system. How is California more democratic than the federal system? What is a jungle primary? 7. Why has the US two-party system endured? 8. Explain the Electoral College process outlined in the Constitution? 9. What did Buckley v. Valeo 424 US 1 (1976) rule? The case is a per curiam opinion. What is a per curiam opinion? How does this ruling change the way we look at financing political campaigns? 10. Explain political party realignment and dealignment. Which one best describes the last presidential election (2020). Please cite evidence. Part three: 1 question. This response should be at least a page. 11. Citizens United v FEC 558 US 310 (2010) is a famous Supreme Court case that introduces superPACs. Please read and summarize the case into a one-page brief using the following headers: -Case -Facts (what circumstances led to this case going before the Court) -Constitutional issue (written as a question) -Reasoning/Analysis (how did the Court rule, who wrote the majority opinion and what were the arguments made) -Conclusion (what did the Court rule). -Impact of case (how does this case change society)

All questions must be answered in short essay format. Strategic advice: remember to include an introduction, body and conclusion and address all relevant parts of each question. Write in short paragraphs, I recommend one main idea per paragraph. Use an introduction to identify the key argument you will be making and concepts. Use a conclusion to summarize your main arguments and any questions that should guide further discussion. General Instructions Length and Formatting Answers to each question should be 1-2 pages in length. This total is for pages of text and does not include such elements as a title page, bibliography. Papers should be typed, double-spaced, with 1-inch margins on all sides, and use 12-point font. Failure to meet all format and length requirements will lead to a reduction in your grade. Clarity I will be grading these by looking at your answers: the clarity of your thoughts, your use of specific the text and slides to support your ideas and your ability to clearly explain how your examples relate to the question I have asked (where appropriate). However, numerous grammatical and/or proofreading errors will interfere with my ability to follow your argument and will result in a reduction of your grade, so please edit carefully. Citations and References Written assignments must conform to Chicago Manual of Style guidelines. You must answer ALL of the questions below. Question 1: Is the saying that “politicians decide and public servants do” just a heuristic (a saying or idea that allows us to see how things ideally work, even though they don’t always do so) or is it an important division of labour that we should strive as best as possible to achieve so as to ensure accountability? Why or why not? Use examples and evidence to support your answer. Question 2: Max Weber saw bureaucracy as a technically superior form of organizing. Robert Merton, on the other hand, believed that bureaucratic structures are inherently dysfunctional. Discuss how it is possible that bureaucracy is technically superior or dysfunctional or both? How do you reconcile this apparent paradox? a) Why is bureaucracy claimed to be technically superior? b) Why does Merton say bureaucracy is dysfunctional, c) Is it possible for bureaucracy to be technically superior while also dysfunctional? Make sure to provide at least one real-world or hypothetical example to support your discussion. Question 3: Ted Turner, a public servant sings a folk song that was critical of the Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Do you feel that Turner violated the Code of Ethics that mandates public servants must be impartial? What parts of the Code did Turner violate and why? Be specific and detailed in your answer. Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei50lM6ab1c