Matching Items (33)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

136373-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
I will examine the relation between techne and virtue as it appears in Plato‘s dialogues and suggest that in order to adequately confront our greatest political and social challenges our understanding must move beyond mere scientific and technical knowledge and our practices must move beyond the political art taught by

I will examine the relation between techne and virtue as it appears in Plato‘s dialogues and suggest that in order to adequately confront our greatest political and social challenges our understanding must move beyond mere scientific and technical knowledge and our practices must move beyond the political art taught by Gorgias and Protagoras. It is my belief that the Platonic conception of virtue and the political art that aims toward that conception of virtue offer a paradigm that can help remedy today‘s arguably technocratic political condition. I begin this work by exploring the nature of techne as it was understood in ancient Greece, and arguing (contra Irwin) that Plato did not hold a technical conception of justice. Whereas each techne establishes an eidos (idea, form, blueprint) in advance, which can be clearly known and uniformly applied in each particular case, I argue that Plato‘s conception of justice leaves all substantive content to be filled out in each concrete situation, precluding the possibility of the anticipatory disposition that techne affords and demanding a certain degree of deliberation in each situation, with attention paid to the unique aspects of each particular set of circumstances. I argue that this conception of justice informs Plato's notion of a "political art" and suggest that this art requires constant attention to the unique attributes of each particular situation in which we find ourselves, and that the pre-interpretive prejudice of many modern ideologies and political-economic perspectives hinders our ability to see the particularity in each situation and thereby reduces our capacity for achieving justice in the historically-situated, concrete moment within which we always must act.
ContributorsOlsen, Tyler (Author) / Crittenden, Jack (Thesis director) / Ramsey, Ramsey Eric (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Historical, Philosophical and Religious Studies (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2015-05
136246-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This paper examines the development of United States drone policy outside of traditional battle zones. It poses the question of why do states use drones as a projection of force? In particular, the paper examines the expansion of the drone program within a system of democratic checks and balances. It

This paper examines the development of United States drone policy outside of traditional battle zones. It poses the question of why do states use drones as a projection of force? In particular, the paper examines the expansion of the drone program within a system of democratic checks and balances. It looks at the effect that political and legal influences have had on the expansion of the drone program and hypothesizes that the presence of these constraints should increase drone use outside of traditional battle zones. In order to investigate this hypothesis, the paper looks at data on drone strikes from Yemen and Somalia. The data partially supports the hypothesis as there has not been a clear linear increase in the number of drone strikes in each of these countries. Nevertheless, an examination of the surrounding literature regarding political and legal influences within these countries seems to favorably point to the increase of drone operations. Future research, however, needs to be cognizant of the limitations in gathering specific statistics on drone operations as these operations are covert. It's also important to understand how the covert nature of the drone operations impacts issues regarding political oversight and legality. Lastly, it's important to constantly examine the broader implications drone policy has for US policy.
ContributorsRajan, Rohit Subramaniam (Author) / Wright, Thorin (Thesis director) / Rothenberg, Daniel (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2015-05
132808-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
In this paper, I will be arguing for the adoption of compulsory voting legislation in the United States. More specifically, for the implementation of compulsory voting in all federal elections. I begin my paper by stating essential democratic principles and how they demand this kind of voting policy in a

In this paper, I will be arguing for the adoption of compulsory voting legislation in the United States. More specifically, for the implementation of compulsory voting in all federal elections. I begin my paper by stating essential democratic principles and how they demand this kind of voting policy in a country that prides itself as a beacon of democracy. Secondly, I will discussing voter suppression in the United States, both in the past as well as currently. My goal with this section is to show how compulsory voting would reduce voter suppression and bring about a democratically legitimate elected government. Thirdly, I will discuss how countries across the globe have already implemented compulsory voting in their elections. Primarily, I will show how Australia and Brazil require voting in their elections, as they are the most similar in size and culture to the United States out of the nations that currently operate with it. Lastly, I will refute any arguments against compulsory voting and argue why it is imperative for the United States to implement it in their elections.
ContributorsMontijo, Sean Jacob (Author) / Simhony, Avital (Thesis director) / Lennon, Tara (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
137258-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This paper examines the Syrian Civil War using seven different civil war settlement theories in order to assess the likelihood of a negotiated settlement ending the conflict. The costs of war, balance of power, domestic political institutions, ethnic identity, divisibility of stakes, veto player, and credible commitment theories were used

This paper examines the Syrian Civil War using seven different civil war settlement theories in order to assess the likelihood of a negotiated settlement ending the conflict. The costs of war, balance of power, domestic political institutions, ethnic identity, divisibility of stakes, veto player, and credible commitment theories were used in a multi-perspective analysis of the Syrian Civil War and the possibility of a peace settlement. It was found that all of the theories except for costs of war and balance of power predict that a negotiated settlement is unlikely to resolve the conflict. Although the Syrian government and the Syrian National Coalition are currently engaged in diplomatic negotiations through the Geneva II conference, both sides are unwilling to compromise on the underlying grievances driving the conflict. This paper ultimately highlights some of the problems inhibiting a negotiated settlement in the Syrian Civil War. These obstacles include: rival ethno-religious identities of combatants, lack of democratic institutions in Syria, indivisibility of stakes in which combatants are fighting for, number of veto player combatant groups active in Syria, and the lack of a credible third party to monitor and enforce a peace settlement.
ContributorsRidout, Scott Jeffries (Author) / Grossman, Gary (Thesis director) / Siroky, David (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2014-05
137489-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
I argue that the most important value put in jeopardy by the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power in post-Mubarak Egypt is not democracy but liberalism. Further, I find that that the lens of religion is insufficient to explain and understand the Brotherhood's illiberal tendencies. A review of the group's rhetoric,

I argue that the most important value put in jeopardy by the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power in post-Mubarak Egypt is not democracy but liberalism. Further, I find that that the lens of religion is insufficient to explain and understand the Brotherhood's illiberal tendencies. A review of the group's rhetoric, along with an examination of the literature on collectivism and individualism, reveals that the Brotherhood's collectivist worldview is at the heart of its opposition to liberalism, an inherently individualistic value. I conclude that viewing the Brotherhood as a movement motivated by a collective sense of morality would provide policymakers and academics with greater insight into the group's behavior and policy positions, facilitating deeper comprehension and greater predictability.
ContributorsColthart, David Anthony (Author) / Gallab, Abdullahi (Thesis director) / Halverson, Jeffry (Committee member) / Simhony, Avital (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2013-05
137515-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
On December 28th 2012, immigration authorities arrested my father and mother while grocery shopping. As soon as they stepped outside, immigration officers stopped them to be questioned. Jeopardizing my university graduation, I took on the challenge to fight court and petition my parents to not be deported. As a first

On December 28th 2012, immigration authorities arrested my father and mother while grocery shopping. As soon as they stepped outside, immigration officers stopped them to be questioned. Jeopardizing my university graduation, I took on the challenge to fight court and petition my parents to not be deported. As a first generation born American, I have the power and the right to petition for the freedom of my parents. I was fortunate to be born in this country as a citizen and take advantage of all the opportunities given to me. Up until today, my family and I have done nothing but participate as good citizens. What I failed to realize is that one day our family would become deportation victims of the broken immigration system. There are currently between 11 to12 million undocumented people living in the United States with no pathway to citizenship. My father and mother were humiliated in jail, separated from the family for three months and suffered from emotional distress. It is imperative for me to share our family experience so others know the reality about illegal immigration. In this paper I aspire to leave the reader with knowledge and understanding about illegal immigration. The main purpose of my thesis is to retell my family's experience and the struggle we are still currently facing. The fate of my family was decided on March 25th 2013, and my family has been forever changed. We learned the valuable lesson that as Latinos in the community, we need to fight for freedom and speak on those that are undocumented and afraid.
ContributorsCalderon, Rudy (Author) / Larson, Elizabeth (Thesis director) / Ovando, Carlos (Committee member) / Sanchez, Marta (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor)
Created2013-05
137528-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This paper elaborates on the considerations of organizing a democratic deliberation. It addresses issues of topic, length, defining consensus, and how to effectively translate deliberative theory into a concrete, results-producing event. The paper presents this information in the context of the body of academic work on deliberation plus the author's

This paper elaborates on the considerations of organizing a democratic deliberation. It addresses issues of topic, length, defining consensus, and how to effectively translate deliberative theory into a concrete, results-producing event. The paper presents this information in the context of the body of academic work on deliberation plus the author's own experience organizing two successful deliberative events.
ContributorsReich, Jennifer Marie (Author) / Crittenden, William J. (Thesis director) / Simhony, Avital (Committee member) / Varrato, Rory (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Public Participation in Government (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2013-05
137346-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Democracy is regarded as the ultimate form of government, but most Americans do not realize the true origins of their democratic republic. Their yearn for freedom and liberty overshadows their lack of knowledge and potential to be more involved in the lawmaking process. A move toward a more democratic form

Democracy is regarded as the ultimate form of government, but most Americans do not realize the true origins of their democratic republic. Their yearn for freedom and liberty overshadows their lack of knowledge and potential to be more involved in the lawmaking process. A move toward a more democratic form of government would be the answer to most of their disdain for our current political climate. Thus, a deliberative democracy, where citizens are engaged and invested in issues would prove to be a solution for a better educated, more involved citizenry.
Created2013-12
137177-Thumbnail Image.png
DescriptionA nonprofit organization / grassroots movement capturing the voice of a generation of young Arizonans
Created2014-05
134598-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This paper explores whether American football player Colin Kaepernick and other athletes’ refusal in 2016 to acknowledge the national anthem symbolizes a form of nationalism in the United States. At first glance, the rising support of “un-American” acts that reject traditional patriotism would imply that American nationalism is faltering. If

This paper explores whether American football player Colin Kaepernick and other athletes’ refusal in 2016 to acknowledge the national anthem symbolizes a form of nationalism in the United States. At first glance, the rising support of “un-American” acts that reject traditional patriotism would imply that American nationalism is faltering. If one observes the colloquial understanding of nationalism as extreme commitment to a country, this may be true. But after closer examination, the pattern instead depicts a polarization of two distinct forms of nationalism — ethnocentric nationalism and what I call multicultural nationalism, both intensifying away from each other.
As opposed to colloquial understanding, there is no standard scholarly definition of nationalism, but it is widely seen as zeal over an identity that strives to manifest into an organized state. Despite this minimal consensus, nationalism is usually equated with an ethnocentric conception of the nation-state, what I recognize to be ethnocentric nationalism, the commitment to a linguistically, racially, and culturally likeminded nation. I argue that this traditional, ethnocentric understanding of nationalism is only one interpretation of nationalism. Ethnocentric nationalism has and continues to be in tension with a more recently established interpretation of the nation, which I call multicultural nationalism: the commitment to a country’s principles rather than to its racial, cultural, and religious ties.

A common acceptance of difference is growing in the United States as shown by Kaepernick’s public support in the face of patriotic conformity. This perspective draws from the United States’ ideological roots that argue for one nation made up of many, e pluribus unum, so that foreign backgrounds should not just be accepted but also embraced to form a more diverse nation. The passion for a progressive, multicultural America can be translated into its own movement of multicultural nationalism. In this context, the support for Kaepernick’s actions no longer appears to represent increased dissent from the United States, but instead seems to be an attempt to challenge ethnocentric nationalism’s claim to the nation.

This paper will begin by contrasting the reactions to Kaepernick’s protest and to protests before him in order to contend that nationalism is no longer characterized by only ethnocentric tradition. I will analyze theoretical studies on nationalism to dispute this common understanding that nationalism is solely ethnocentric. I will argue that nationalism, rather, is the intense manifestation of a community’s identity within a political state; the identity of which can be either ethnocentric or multicultural. The Kaepernick ordeal will be used to signify the greater division in the American public over whether a multicultural or ethnocentric conception of the nation should be supported in the United States. Lastly, this paper will observe how the Kaepernick protest suggests multicultural nationalism’s viability in today’s politically progressive environment, and how multiculturalism should embrace nationalism to advance its platform.
ContributorsFite, Owen Gunehame (Author) / Suk, Mina (Thesis director) / Voorhees, Matthew (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05