Matching Items (4)
Filtering by
- Creators: Rothenberg, Daniel
- Creators: Department of Economics
- Member of: Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
Description
Since the collapse of the Medellin Cartel in Colombia in 1993, the Mexican drug cartels have been increasing in strength and international presence. Along with the organization's political and economic involvement, a deeply rooted culture has been developing. Three distinct time periods define this culture: pre-Medellin Cartel collapse (1970s-1993), post-Medellin Cartel Collapse (1993-2006) and post-President Calderon's Drug War announcement (2006-present day). More specifically, the history and fascination with the cartel is documented in songs, known as narcocorridos, which celebrate and support the drug cartels. The science of political sociology addresses the power relationship that exists between a state, its citizens, and the state's social groups. This study investigates the political sociology of each period, specifically how society viewed the cartel and their roles within the cartel. I argue that the narcocorridos accurately describe the evolution of narcoculture in Mexican society. This study consists of analyses of narcocorrido song lyrics, the political sociology of each time period, and finally, the societal perception of the drug cartel. First, I will evaluate the most popular songs' lyrics of the three defining time periods in the Mexican Drug Cartel history. Next, I will analyze the lyrics and determine whether or not they accurately reflect the political sociological features of the time period. Last, I will discuss what the societal perceptions of being associated with the cartel were during each time period. This study concludes by hypothesizing what the future of narcocorriodos will be. This prediction will demonstrate how the songs will continue to reflect the political sociology of the time period, including the societal attitudes towards the cartel.
ContributorsRichardson, Katherine Ann (Author) / Rothenberg, Daniel (Thesis director) / Canales, Carlos (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
In 2021, Palestine will have been under official Israeli occupation for 54 years. As conflict persists between the two populations, it is becoming increasingly difficult to imagine a peaceful resolution. As international legal bodies have failed to bring an end to the occupation, the Israeli government continues to carry out extensive violations of human rights against the Palestinians. One significant consequence of the occupation has been the Palestinians’ lack of access to safe and reliable water, a problem that is continuing to worsen as a result of climate change and years of over-utilization of shared, regional water resources. Since the occupation started, international organizations have not only affirmed the general human right to water but have overseen several peace agreements between Israel and Palestine that have included stipulations on water. Despite these measures, neither water access nor quality has improved and, over time, has worsened. This paper will look at why international law has failed to improve conditions for Palestinians and will outline the implications of the water crisis on a potential solution between Israel and Palestine.
ContributorsTimpany, Grace Louise (Author) / Haglund, LaDawn (Thesis director) / Rothenberg, Daniel (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / School of Sustainability (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
Normally, the United States and most of Europe are grouped into the same category as “Western countries”, yet their ideological differences have become larger in the last 50 years, especially in regards to free speech/expression protections. This raises the possibility that extremely broad free speech/expression protections aren’t intrinsic values of a Western society, but are instead an American experiment that was gradually adopted by Western Europe. Analyzing historical documents from both Europe and the United States, this becomes much more of a probability than a possibility and would help explain the recent differences in case law regarding free speech rights in American and European jurisprudence. Furthermore, Europe is also experiencing a potential threat to social stability in the form of massive, sudden demographic shifts, something that America has not experienced on nearly the same scale. Due to the heightened sensitivity towards hateful expression resulting from such a demographic shift, governmental action in the form of restrictions on racially, religiously, and ethnically charged forms of expressions may be deemed necessary in order to preserve social cohesion. Often throughout history, governments have deemed it necessary to limit free expression/speech and the spread of information in order to prevent any threat to its ability to rule, regardless of whether or not said government is tyrannical or democratized. Although not a direct threat to power, in a representative democracy social unrest created by increased division in the populace rooted in the spread of hateful ideology is nonetheless still a threat to those who depend on social harmony in order to govern in a representative democracy. In analyzing these two possible reasons for emerging differences and considering supporting textual and historical evidence, it becomes much clearer as to what the differences in case law and fundamental beliefs regarding the extent of free speech protections are attributable to.
ContributorsMantz, Noah (Author) / Stanford, Michael (Thesis director) / Foy, Joseph (Committee member) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
Turkish Safe Zones, as areas to push migrants into for protection, have always been contentious but the recent push to expel Syrians into The Northern Syria Buffer Zone (also known as the Safe Zone, Peace Corridor, or Security Mechanism) has added to the concern of international human rights violations in Turkey. In addition this paper considers the arguments made for the geographical limitation, of the The 1951 Refugee Convention, for refugees in Turkey as it pertains to the welfare of Syrian migrants. As justified under the geographic limitation in Turkey, sending Syrian migrants to Safe Zones is extremely dangerous because it not only puts peoples lives at risk, but it also sets the stage to accept that international law is not truly international and can be broken to avoid the responsibility of migrants. International law quite clearly shows how the forcible return of any migrant to an area where they are put in harm’s way is a direct violation of international law regardless of geographical limitations.Because the development of Turkish Safe Zones in Northern Syria is a recent development, much of the current political science literature fails to see the problem with the Turkish StateFs deportation. Instead, current literature (Abdelaaty, 2019, p. 1) (United Nations, 2011) (Blake, 2020) (Mann, 2021) focuses on how Syrian migrants are termed guests instead of refugees. The guest status makes it so migrants with refugee level concerns do not receive refugee level benefits. This paper argues that the Turkish state deportation of Syrian migrants to Safe Zones is morally wrong, but not surprising. Based on historical events, the expulsion of Syrians to Turkish safe zones in Syria is the logical next step for the Turkish state to legally displace the responsibility of taking care of minorities and migrants.
ContributorsRosenthal, Emily (Author) / Rothenberg, Daniel (Thesis director) / Niebuhr, Robert (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor)
Created2022-05