Filtering by
- All Subjects: Partisanship
- All Subjects: congenital disability
- Creators: Lennon, Tara
Inspired by John Rawls and his life's work Justice as Fairness, I sought to measure how much political empathy a person has and then compare this to decision-making styles in search of any relation between the two. Political empathy is a term to refer to one's willingness to utilize governmental policy to help those who are the neediest because of the understanding that humans deserve equal treatment since no one is more human than anyone else. Because of current research I found that I can test political empathy because of empathy’s correlation with political ideology; specifically, that those who are more liberal have more empathy. I test participant’s ideology in a normal setting and then present them with the concept of Rawls’ Original Position to see if they shift more one way when presented with this idea which is supposed to make them think more empathetically.<br/>I have two hypothesis that I cover: first, that more people will shift in a more liberal direction between the two tests, and second, that those who have more political empathy make political decisions based more on emotion rather than facts and reason. I tested decision-making through a myriad of tests within a focus group so I could get multiple angles at the issue. My first hypothesis was proven incorrect and while I didn’t have enough participants in my focus groups to make a clear determination, it didn’t look like there was any correlation between political ideology and decision-making styles.
Using critical disability theory, Foucauldian philosophy, phenomenology and my personal lived experience with a congenital impairment, the purpose of this paper is to explore a relatively unexplored subject, stigma against disability onset at birth, and how this manifests in inequitable U.S. electoral outcomes. The scope of the paper is mostly focused on federal U.S. elected officials for two reasons: the high visibility of the position and the ideal standards for an elected official. The U.S. candidates running for federal offices receive the most social attention, drawing from millions of Americans whose views on these candidates determine their electoral success. An analysis of disability representation at this level serves as the best indicator for the stigma held against congenital disability. Additionally, the role of an elected official embodies not just the model citizen but the archetypal human. An exploration of U.S. constituent perspectives on this role in politics suggest social norms locate congenitally disabled people in a particularly marginalized identity. Insights gained from this analysis might allow readers to restructure narrow assumptions about disabled people and what would constitute effective representation.
Despite George Washington’s warning against political parties, the United States we know today consists of two political parties that are becoming even more polarized. Since President Trump’s first run for the Republican party candidate and presidency, these partisan tensions have been recharged with further polarization and many individuals swearing on social media they would never date a Trump supporter. According to Pew Research Center, “45% [of Democrats and those who lean left who are currently seeking relationships] say they definitely would not consider seriously dating a Trump voter” (Brown 2020). The divide between parties and the importance of political beliefs amongst partners has appeared to only increase after the actions taken at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. My research aims to quantify this phenomenon and then discover the “why?” behind it. How many people really consider their partner’s partisan affiliation and political beliefs a deal-breaker? Further, is it a deal-breaker because of the individual’s identity and political beliefs? Using intersectionality as a framework to examine identity and the confluence of identifiers and oppressors, will allow for a deeper understanding and personal account of why individuals find partisanship to be such a big criterion in a partner.