Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

136834-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This thesis seeks to answer as to how leaders implement grand strategy. The framework for this endeavor comes from Peter Trubowitz's Politics and Strategy: Partisan Ambition and American Statecraft. In this work Trubowitz makes many claims about the nature of grand strategy, but the relevant ones to this research are

This thesis seeks to answer as to how leaders implement grand strategy. The framework for this endeavor comes from Peter Trubowitz's Politics and Strategy: Partisan Ambition and American Statecraft. In this work Trubowitz makes many claims about the nature of grand strategy, but the relevant ones to this research are that grand strategy is driven solely by structural constraints (domestic and foreign) individual characteristics of leaders do not affect exercises of political power and that President Nixon pursued an internal balancing grand strategy, which means that he pursued a containment policy. This thesis tests those claims via operational code analysis and the Verbs in Context System to map President Nixon's general grand strategy and his strategy regarding conflict in Southeast Asia, as well as dealing with the Communist Bloc. The findings are that Nixon does pursue a general grand strategy of internal balancing, but that the targeted instances of Southeast Asia and the Communist Bloc, he acts against constraints and shifts strategy. This is evidence that individual leaders do shape the exercise of political power by the state.
ContributorsNewman, Mercedes Lynn (Author) / Simhony, Avital (Thesis director) / Walker, Stephen (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor)
Created2014-05
133877-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
In 2016, the Western world was shocked by the victory of the "Leave" campaign in the referendum on European Union membership in Great Britain and by the victory of Donald Trump in the United States' presidential election. These two electoral successes have been called "populist" campaigns in their respective countries.

In 2016, the Western world was shocked by the victory of the "Leave" campaign in the referendum on European Union membership in Great Britain and by the victory of Donald Trump in the United States' presidential election. These two electoral successes have been called "populist" campaigns in their respective countries. In this paper, I ask whether the widespread populist sentiment in the United States and Great Britain qualifies as "populist" and should be regarded as part of the same movement. I then explore whether Trump and Leave voters are motivated by a common issue or set of issues. Initially, I frame my argument by defining populism and showing how both campaigns meet the definition. Next, I compare the Leave campaign with the Trump campaign and explore the similarities and differences in the demographics and opinions of their supporters. I determine that while the Trump and Leave campaigns certainly have differences, they should ultimately be treated as two branches of the same movement. Finally, I conclude that both campaigns are more motivated by versions of cultural resentment than economic anxiety.
ContributorsDunning, Alexander Chase (Author) / Lennon, Tara (Thesis director) / Simhony, Avital (Committee member) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
148343-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

This paper is an in-depth analysis of the actions and rhetoric of Donald Trump’s presidency from the perspective of Machiavelli’s most famed work, 'The Prince'. Its premise is born from two articles claiming Donald Trump was either the American Machiavelli or the Anti-Machiavelli, and sets out to find out which title

This paper is an in-depth analysis of the actions and rhetoric of Donald Trump’s presidency from the perspective of Machiavelli’s most famed work, 'The Prince'. Its premise is born from two articles claiming Donald Trump was either the American Machiavelli or the Anti-Machiavelli, and sets out to find out which title is the most accurate. The end findings suggest that President Trump did not follow enough rules in 'The Prince' to be Machiavellian, but that Trumpism as a political doctrine has the potential grow into a modern day Machiavellianism.

Created2021-05