Final Treatment

Today is Aaron's final treatment.  We are about to start 2008 as a family that is leukemia free!

Here is a copy of a note that I wrote on facebook at Aaron's two year anniversary this past Thanksgiving:

Two years ago, I was a junior in high school worried more about how difficult my school year would be.  Two years ago, I was sitting at STA youth group listening to the Knowles family explain how their little daughter's life was cut short because of cancer.  Two years ago, I was thinking to myself how lucky I was that I was healthy, my family was healthy, and my friends were healthy.

Two years, It's been two years.

Thanksgiving is supposed to be about family and friends, turkey and apple pie, Black Friday shopping and putting up Christmas decorations.  My Thanksgiving that year did not include any of those things.  Family and friends were replaced with immediate family, doctors, and nurses.  Turkey and apple pie were replaced with endless Friendlies sundaes and Pizza Plus bought to dull the pain.  Black Friday shopping and putting up Christmas decorations were replaced with a run to Walmart to buy a much needed PSP game and lots of medicine.  Thanksgiving 2005 was full of tears.

November 23, 2005.  We were supposed to go to New York to see the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade.  Instead, Adam and I headed off to Aunt Kristan's, while Dad headed to the hospital to join Mom and Aaron.  Thank you Jess and Mrs. Condon for trying to calm my fears on the phone that night.

November 24, 2005.  Thanksgiving.  By far, the worst day of my life.  The only day of my life where I cried more than I smiled.  That day I became addicted to Dunkachinos to dull the pain.  Dad, thanks for being so strong as you told Adam and I the news.  Kristan, thanks for not revealing anything until we got home and Dad could tell us.  Security guards at CCMC, thanks for letting me and Adam go up before visiting hours.  Walking into that room, I will never forget what Dad said, "Don't cry, if you do it will upset him".  I couldn't stand being in that room for very long at first.  I couldn't handle all of the wires, all of the IVs, all of the machines.  I couldn't handle your paleness, your utter helplessness.  I couldn't handle not being able to protect you like an older sister should.

Erika, you were the first person I called.  I knew you could help.  Thank you for listening patiently on the phone and consoling me like only another older sister in this situation could.  Your support and help throughout this whole process has made such a difference in my life.  Thank you also to the rest of the Hilborns.  You've shared your journey and experiences with us, as we have shared with you.  Thank you for your endless encouragement and comfort.  Thanks to Team in Training for all that you do.  Eventually, I hope to join your ranks.

Aunt Jana, Uncle Dan, Jake, and Matt, thank you for cutting your vacation short to come help us.  Aunt Julie, oh how I can ever repay you for how much you have helped my family on numerous occasions- that first week, Boston, and all of the other times you rushed to our family's rescue.  You were a loving comfort and when you left that first week, Mom and I remarked about how worried we were about what would happen next.

Thanksgiving 2005 came and went.  I spent the whole weekend rocking back and forth in the rocking chair by your bedside.  Tears were rolling down my cheeks as we drove away from the hospital.  For a whole week, I only slept when I napped in your room.  I couldn't handle being away from you, worried that something would happen if I wasn't there.  Then, back to school.

Mrs. Shand, thanks for helping my whole entire family through this process.  I also knew that I could come to your office and you would be there to welcome me with open arms.  Madame, how can I thank you enough.  You were the first teacher to know.  You helped explain to the class what happened.  You gave me breaks on homework and quizzes.  You were always there if I needed someone to talk to of if I needed some place to cry.  Mrs. Hostetter, thanks for always making sure that I was keeping up with my work.  Thanks for letting me just sit in your room alone and think sometimes.  Thanks for listening.

Sarah, thanks for always being able to keep my mind off of what was going one, if only for a few seconds.  Thank you for being patient with me when I got upset or could not hang out for weeks on end.  Jess, thanks for all of the food you and your mom brought me.  Thanks for the Cosi lunches that would brighten up my day.  Thank you both for being such great friends.

Erin, thank you for always being a comfort before school, during Latin, and any time that I needed you.  I always knew that I could come to you and just cry.  Thanks for hugging me when you could just tell that I needed it.  Thanks for getting my homework for me when I missed school.  Thanks for talking to other when you knew that  I would not be able to do so myself.  Thank you for being such a great friend

Kolby, I always knew that I could count on you to make me feel better.  You don't know this, but I loved when you and Max came to the hospital.  It was the only then that Aaron always smiled.

For a whole year, CCMC MS8 became my second home, or rather my first home.  I spent more time there than I would have ever imagined possible.  The doctors, nurses, other patients, and their parents became my whole family.  TO all of the friends I made- Laura, Lisa, Tristan, Cayden, Ben, Adrian, and many others - thanks for allowing me into your rooms to hang out and just have some good old fun.  To all of the parents who became my surrogate parents, thanks for always giving me a comforting hug.

My afternoons spent at the hospital after school and my weekends spent there were my most favorite times of the day.  In the face of all of the sadness, there was hope every where.  Sitting in the hospital was the only way that I could focus on anything.  I will always remember the comfort, Aaron, that you brought me as a I studied for midterms, AP exams, and finals by your bedside.  I loved just sitting in the rocking chair doing sudoku while you slept.  You gave me the comfort that I hope I gave you.

To all of the doctors that I stared down and questioned, thank you for explaining everything to my family.  Dr. Isakoff, Dr. Gillan, Dr. Hagstrom, Dr. Parik, and Dr. Altman, along with all of the nurses, thank you for saving my brother's life.  I owe you the world.

June 11, 2006.  We thought we had come so far.  You were still very sick, but getting better every day.  Thank you to the staff at Fenway Park, thank you David Ortiz for hitting the ball that saved his life, thank you to the doctors at Children's Hospital.  Grandma, thanks for taking me and Adam out to dinner every night for 5 days.  It gave me something to look forward to.  I never would have thought that picking out what to eat from a resturant menu would comfort me.  Thank you to all of my friends and teachers who were right there to comfort me.  Hon, I'm sorry that it was your worst birthday ever.  I hope that the one that you've had since has been much better.

Thank you to The Hole in the Wall Gang Camp for bringing my real brother back to me and for giving Adam a chance to just have fun without worries.  You have made such a difference in my life.  Going to camp makes me feel at home.  I hope to give back to you what you have given to me and my family.  Thank you for sending us to Hollywood.  Charlie Ebersol, thank you for sharing your stories with us.  Teddy is in our minds everyday, especially for me when I look at Aaron and realized just how lucky I am.  Make-A-Wish, thank you for an amazing All Star game wish.  It was just the type of vacation that our family needed.

Two years.  More than that now.  You're done!  You're really done!  Thank you for being so strong, thank you for enduring the pain, thank you for taking all of those pills, thank you for drinking the yellow paint meds!  Thank you for being luckier than some.

I will always remember the pain and hurt that my family suffered two years ago.  Two years ago when our life became encircled in on acronym- ALL.

For all of those who have not been as lucky as my family, especially Timmy, Taylor, Jacob, and now Adrian.  We miss you and we think about you every day.  You and the rest of those who have been affected are the reasons why much more research needs to be done.  We need to create new protocols that can help save the lives of other children.

Two years.  I am now a freshman in college.  Living up in Boston, in a dorm room with new friends and new classes.  I am living a life that is not centered around cancer 24/7.  It is a peaceful life, it is a relief from the life that I have become used to over the past two years.  To my friends here, Ciara, Kelly and Victoria, who have heard my story and have been there to offer support when I just needed to talk, thank you.  For those who have yet to year my story, thanks for not questioning.  I like my new life.  I like not having to think about what happened every day.  I like having weeks on end when I do not cry myself to sleep.

Often, however, I am reminded about what happened those two years ago.  My life was changed forever that Thanksgiving 2005.  Thanks for all of you who have stood by my side and supported me.  Thanks to my family for staying so strong.  And of course, thank you Aaron.  You have made such an impact on my life and I love you so much!

SCHIP

SCHIP- State Children's Health Insurance Program

Passed, finally, by President Bush who vetoed it twice already.

Take a look at this video for Jon Stewart's take on the first veto of the SCHIP bill.

This new version of the SCHIP bill only supports those already under the current program- children who's families' wealth doesn't qualify them for Medicaid but doesn't allow them enough money to pay for private insurance.  The bill extend the financial support of the program through 2009.

Originally, the Democrats had tried to pass the SCHIP bill with a new program that would allow for additional children to be placed into the program- an $35 billion dollar increase in the program financed by an increase in the tobacco tax.  These changes in the SCHIP program are what Bush originally vetoed.

The version that Bush has now passed- in keeping with the status quo - has been hailed by Bush administration as a way to provide healthcare for children while not progressing the country into a move towards socialized healthcare.

However, the Democrats, and I myself, have a different take on Bush's recent signing.  By passing a bill that stays with the status quo, and effectively saying that putting more children under a program that would be financed through an increase in the tobacco tax is a move towards socialized healthcare, which is unacceptable, should significantly hurt the Republicans in the polls- should this news story gain the reporting that it deserves.  I've said this many times, but I'll say it again: how can a "family values" Republican president justify not extending a children's healthcare program because it would lead America towards socialized healthcare.  You are increasing the tobacco tax for heaven's sake, to pay for healthcare for children who cannot afford it.  Children!  I don't know what Bush is thinking, but to me, providing children with the ability to be healthy is a necessary thing in the advanced society that we are living in today.  It seems unfair that these children should not be able to get the type of medical care that they need simply because doing so would possibly put America on the path towards socialized medicine (ha, probably not).

The extent to which Bush's lack of extension will hurt the Republicans in the 2008 Election will only be seen by how the media decides to cover this bill.  Also, the fact that many Republicans in Congress actually supported expanded the SCHIP program and voted for the expansions that were vetoed by President Bush, does not really help support any claims that Bush's lack of expansion will heavily influence the election.  I think that the most that Bush's signature on this bill could do in the way of harm would only be to hurt Bush's sagging approval rating.  But still, because of all of the hype surrounding the upcoming Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, this bill is not going to get the type of coverage by the media that it needs in order to have a strong influence against the Republicans and the Bush administration.

Students for Barack Obama

If you haven't realized by now, I am a huge Barack Obama supporter.  A week from today, I will be falling asleep after my second day as an intern with Obama for America in Nashua, New Hampshire.  I am working for one week- January 2-9- right through the Iowa Caucus (January 3rd) and the New Hampshire Primary (January 8th).

Watch this video it is amazing and it perfectly describes how Barack Obama is the candidate for my generation.  Barack Obama is a call for change - "Change that we can believe in" - change that America needs right here and right now.

Time Person of the Year

Time's Person of the Year: Vladimir Putin

My choice for Person of the Year, well there would be many.  Al Gore and the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change would top the list.  They won a Nobel Peace Prize working on a major issue that will affect the world for the rest of time, does that not scream Person of the Year?  Maybe the monks in Burma.  Standing up for democracy in a military dictatorship when no one else in the world will help, does that not qualify for Person of the Year?  Maybe we should stick to the United States.  Nancy Pelosi, first female Speaker of the House?  Well then again, maybe not as she and her Democratic partners did not do as much they had originally planned- that could have been because they lacked a significant majority in the House and Senate to override a Bush veto and they did not have enough seats in the Senate to end a Senate filibuster- but that is story for another blog.

As we have seen, Time's choices for Person of the Year have gone down hill recently.  Think 2006- "You".  Hmm, yes, You are the Person of the Year.  That is the best way to say that we have no freaking idea and are completely indecisive about who should be named Person of the Year.  

And now, 2007's Putin.  Of course, let's name Russia's new dictator Person of the Year, why didn't I think of that first?  Maybe because to me, Person of the Year is a distinction, or at least it has become one, that shows that a person has affected the world in a positive way.  Well, Time sees things differently, "Time's Person of the Year is not and never has been an honor.  It is not an endorsement.  It is not a popularity contest.  At its best, it is a clear-eyed recognition of the world as it is and of the most powerful individuals and forces shaping the world- for better of for worse".  This is the inherent problem with Time's recognition of Putin as Person of the Year.  How can a magazine as upstanding as Time have the guts to declare that Putin, who is hugely becoming a dictator in his own country, can be considered a Person of the Year.  Putin is a dictator, no ifs ands or buts about that.  But I guess, because the Person of the Year does not need to be good, as long as he or she is shaping the world for better or worse, it's ok.  

I guess what only disappoints me further than this is, why if under these circumstances, Osama bin Laden was not declared Person of the Year in 2001?  Now that is a question that the Time editors may have a hard question answering.  But then again, I guess Rudy Giuliani was a good pick for 2001.  Or maybe Time should have picked President Bush, the people of New York City, or better yet the People of the United States.  Come on Time, Putin is a very influential man, but seriously, find some better People of the Year.  Work less at getting your own name in the news with a controversial pick, and work towards picking people how have had an amazing positive influence on the world and who can be good role models for all generations.

Benazir Bhutto Assassination

If you have been living under a rock, or maybe haven't had a chance to watch the nightly news yet, you probably have yet to hear that Benazir Bhutto, the leaders of the Pakistani People's Party (PPP) was assassinated earlier today.

Why is this important?

Well first of all, in my own personal life this event hold a high significance.  This past fall, as I entered into my first political science class- Introduction to Comparative Politics with Sophia Perez- I learned that I had to read London's Financial Times newspaper.  Upon opening up the first newspaper, I began on a journey that involved exploring the up and coming problems and concerns in Pakistani politics.  After reading the newspaper throughout all of the fall semester, I began to become surprisingly attached to what was going on in Pakistan.  One can be sure, the events in Pakistan over the past couple of months- Bhutto's return, Musharraf's election, Sharif's return, problems over Sharif participating in the upcoming elections, upcoming Parliamentary elections, the State of Emergency, Musharraf stepping down as Chief of the Army, etc- have been heavily covered in newspapers throughout the world.  Pakistan became my little baby.  My developing democratic country to study and learn from.  Bhutto's death affected me like a little girl watching her baby fish die in her growing aquarium.  It will be interesting to see how Bhutto's assassination will affect, and it will majorly affect, Pakistani parliamentary elections and Pakistani politics in general.

Second, Bhutto's assassination will have a major influence on Pakistani politics.  Parliamentary elections in Pakistan are to be held on January 8th, 2008.  The major players in this election were to be Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif.  This election was supposed to determine whether or not Pakistan was truly on the path to democracy.  Now, one of the major players is dead- not just died out of the blue, but assassinated.  Assassination- the action that has a major effect on how well democracy will work.  Assassination does not bode well for a developing democracy, especially where the person assassinated was supposed to help in a power sharing agreement with Musharraf, who was slowly loosing support with the Pakistani people.  What happens next?  Only the January 8th elections will tell...

Finally, Bhutto's death influences how the United States will continue to deal with her Pakistani ally.  For CNN's view on this issue, check out this link.  The United States supports Pakistan as Pakistan support the United States in the War on Terror.  This relationship has had some rocky points.  Most notably- the relationship is strained because Pakistan is a developing democracy, not a true democracy (i.e. United States / Britain style).  Musharraf's personal election was a sign that the country was heading towards a more acceptable style of democracy, instead of rule by a military dictator.  When Musharraf declared a State of Emergency, arrested dissidents, and threw out the Supreme Court, Pakistan's relationship to the United States was tested.  How can the United States support a country that cares little about democracy?  Why?  Because Pakistan is an ally with the War on Terror.  Therefore, this relationship is way more important to war-hungry Bush than a developing democratic country.  And the Bush administration's latest response to Benazir Bhutto's death... "This latest tragedy is likely to reinforce beliefs that Pakistan is a dangerous, messy place and potentially very unstable and fragile and that they need to cline to Musharraf even more than they did in the past.... The weight of the administration is still convinced that Musharraf is a helpful rather than a harmful figure" (Daniel Markey).  Pakistan is still dangerous and unstable, without a doubt, and maybe Musharraf is a helpful figure for the United States.  Maybe he is helping Pakistan transition into democracy.  However, how can the Bush administration be sure that being an ally with Musharraf and Pakistan is the right idea?  Pakistan is still developing.  It's not fully there and it still has the possibility of reversing it's pathway to democracy.  Everything can change in an instant.  Does the United States want to be known for supporting anti-democratic countries that a just allied with the US's beliefs?  Well, obviously the United States does not care that much.  For the Bush administration, in the War on Terror, all that matters is that we have allies, no matter if they are democratic themselves or not.  And remember, we've done that in the past, supporting the Shah of Iran.

Benazir Bhutto's death has major ramifications personally, within Pakistani politics, and with United States relations.  It will be interesting to see where this assassination will take us...

"The Closing of the American Mind" by: Evan Thomas

Evan Thomas recently published an article in Newsweek entitled "The Closing of the American Mind".

According to Thomas, the partisanship found throughout American politics is based not on Republican vs. Democrat spectrums, but rather on the differences between political junkies and everyone else.

As a self-proclaimed political junkie, I agree.  There is a problem in the American system- people care more about sports, video games, and plain TV shows than about politics.  People do not pay full attention to politics.  This apathy comes from many sources: a lack of time, a lack of information, a negative view of politics, an idea that political life does not affect one personally, other things to do, or a view that one is satisfied with the status quo (highly unlikely now).

Our political system is now being run by those who give a damn about politics.  Following the Iron Law of Oligarchy, our federal government is now being controlled willingly by elites- those who gained the votes of their fellow elites, the only people truly caring enough to vote in elections.

This election has been a call for change in America.  Not only for change in the Iraq War, American foreign affairs, healthcare, Social Security, immigration, etc., etc, but also for change in the partisanship that is plaguing American politics.  However, as Thomas notes, the only way for this to be possible, is for more people to get involved in the political process.  We need this partisanship between the political junkies and everyone else to end and for everyone to become involved and knowledgeable about politics.  So America, get up, stop playing XBox 360 and register to vote!

New Changes in for the Candidates

We are right on the heals of the Iowa caucus.  For weeks, the polls have shown that John McCain has been basically going no where.  However, McCain has just kick-started his new three-day campaign push.  My bet, this final big push by McCain, in a field where all of the major Republican candidates have been fighting (think Romney dropping in New Hampshire, Giuliani stalling, and Huckabee's rise), will indefinitely help the faultering McCain  camapign.  I cannot wait to see how McCain will do in Iowa.  His position in the Iraq war is polarizing and his age is also a key issue that has not fully been discussed.  If McCain pulls through to at least place well in Iowa, as it seems very unlikely that he will take first- that's Huckabee's place, McCain seems poised to do well in New Hampshire.  A McCain success this late in the the primary season could seriously shake up the Republican nomination.  It will be interesting to see how McCain's three-day intense campaign in Iowa will affect the 2008 Presidential Nomination campaign

Christmas and Campaigning

I hope that everyone has had an amazing Christmas like I did.  For those out in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, yesterday was a day without the endless phone calls from campaigns, door knocks from canvassers, and mail from candidates.  For the 2008 Presidential Candidates, yesterday was a day that they had the chance, the ability, and the time to spend relaxing with their families.

Well everyone, Christmas is officially over.  Gone are the Twelve Days of Christmas, welcome is the one day Christmas Day event.  Our Christmas tree is down.  Yes, I saw it fully decorated for about a week!  In Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, the campaigners are back phone-banking, the canvassers are out knocking on doors, the mail is overflowing with campaign literature, and the candidates are back on the campaign trail.

The Iowa caucus is just over a week away.  The candidates are preparing for the final stretch before the big three (Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina).  That means all the stops are pulled out.  This people is campaigning at it's peak.  From now through the end of the major primaries (at least through Super Tuesday, depending on how much variance there is between the major three), every move will be calculated, every word will be tested and recorded, all eyes will be on the candidates.  

We're gearing up for one of the most exciting races ever seen.  The field is wide open.  There can be no frontrunners (as we have seen with Dean in 2004) and it will be interesting to see what happens next.  So fasten your seat belts and get ready to go!

Intro to Compare: Midterm-Final

Political Development Theories

Political Culture- attitudes about role in government, governments in general, and democracy

Britain- compromise on the part of elites

• Expanded the franchise- willing to give into demands
• Consensual culture
• Lost with Thatcher in 1970s

France- divided into camps that don't trust each other

• Conflictual culture
• Reflects history- French Revolution / Paris Commune- French elites crushed working class

Germany- authority-oriented

• Trust bureaucrats over politicians

Class Analysis- Barrington Moore- the way conflict between classes emerge and play out

Britain- conflict between aristocracy and monarchy

• Wool- land intensive
• Enclosure Acts- kick peasants off the land- monarchy does not want this
• Glorious Revolution- peasants are big losers, thrown off land and forced into industrialized cities
• Peasants are the democratic force always fighting for more rights

France- 

• Wine- labor intensive = wanted to keep peasants on the land
• Feudal dues were increased = peasants revolt
• French Revolution- Middle Class / Peasants vs. Aristocracy / Clergy
• Peasants Win = land goes to them
• Remain a rural society that doesn't have a great push for democracy because peasants are big winners

Germany- elites challenge traditional feudal political system

• Elite modernized economically without political change
• Prussian aristocracy
• Grain- labor intensive so wanted to avoid a revolution
• Put high tariffs to make industrialists happy
• Created a welfare state to make the workers happy

Sectors- conflicts between sectors of economy

Britain- agriculture sector vs. industrial sector

• Ag. didn't want to increase franchise because a call for cheaper food would hurt the ag. sector
• Industry wanted to increase franchise because lower food prices would mean that they could decrease wages and make more money
• Gradually increase franchise (reform acts)

France-

• Wanted laws to protect farmer and small shopkeepers
• Wanted to slow industrialization so that industry would not become a major power because that would increase competition
• Kept the industrial class from developing
• Missing the force to promote democracy

Germany-

• Marriage of Iron and Rye- conflict between agriculture and industry
• Kept tariffs on food = ag. happy
• Put tariffs on industry = industry happy because there is not strong foreign competition
• Can increase food prices because industrialists can afford to pay higher wages so that workers can buy more expensive food

• Within industry- export-oriented vs. import-oriented
• Modern- chemical / wanted government to abide by Versailles Treaty (ended WWI) because it was competitive and sold abroad / supported SPD govt. and small coalition parties
• Traditional- steel / didn't want government to abide by Versailles Treaty because wanted to keep Germany remilitarizing / supported Nationalist parties
• Support from chemical industry helped Weimar Republic survive for as long as it did

Timing of Development- Gershencrown- the later you develop, the less likely you are do be democratic / when a class needs protection it is not going to challenge an authoritarian state

Britain-

• Developed slowly without competition = democratic

France- too early to realize that they were late

• Small-scale industrialization
• Government protected farmers and small shopkeepers = created laws that delayed industrialization

Germany- 

• Marriage of Iron and Rye
• Industry was late and needed protection
• Led to tendency to favor authoritarian leaders who would offer this protection (Hitler)

Neocolonialism- Africa

Failures of Democracy- democracy brought down by military coups

Ethnic Reasons- faction of ruling military dominated by one ethnic group

Economic Reversal (1970s)- stagnation and contraction because of oil crisis and cheap credit

Colonial remainders hurt developing, former colonies:

Borders- cross-cut ethnic groups / colonial power favored 1 ethnic group

Ethnic rivalry- because of colonial favoritism

State structures- new systems that resemble that of old colonial power

• State-run economy
• Bureaucracies rule from the top

Economic dependency- 

• Developed to supply raw materials to colonial powers
• Highly specialized

Dependency Theory- Latin America

• Economic structures set country up for economic and political failure

Prebisch-

• Highly specialized economies- favor foreign capital and investors
• Late developer- specialized in areas where there is foreign investment
• WWI economy collapse- nation can't just develop trade, need to develop their own economies

Export Basics / Import complex-

• Theory of Unequal Exchange- price over time of exports falls in relation to the value-added imports

Import Substitution- need to start producing what you import

• Used tariffs
• Didn't work because when governments do this, they need to import technology
• Still depended on traditional exports
• Dual economies = inequality

Super-exploitation of Labor- still needed foreign capital

Washington Consensus Macroeconomic Policies- 

• Set policies to keep foreign investors
• Made best terms for creditors
• Place payment of foreign debt above all else

Alternative Explanations

Pathways from Periphery-

• Can get from periphery to core
• Failures of Africa / Latin America vs. successes of Asia

Ideology of Dependency Theory-

• Put blame on other countries
• Blame international economy, richer countries

Culture-

• Wrong culture = fails
• Latin America- Iberian Culture of hierarchy, mysticism, patronage, look to elites to give out favors
• But then why do periods of democracy exist?

ISI is the Problem-

• Labor becomes too strong / can't get capital = leads to authoritarian regimes

Export Promotion-

• Asian countries
• Produce exports with higher value-added

Strong States vs. Weak States-

• Latin America- weak states
• Asia- strong states

Distributions of Land-

• Asia- ISI and export promotion where equal domestic wealth
• Redistributed land = more equality in wealth
• Allowed for domestic market / can develop domestically

Bresser-Periera: New Developmentalism-

• Asia never did Washington Consensus
• Appreciation of Latin American currencies because of Washington Consensus = encourages consumption and less competitive industry

Transitions to Democracy

Causes- crisis in old regime

Ideological Weaknesses- need to justify themselves  = need to appeal to national interests, but they still favor international investors

Economic crisis- 1970s

External Context-

• External defeats- military government defeated militarily
• Argentina- Faulklands War- defeated by Britain
• Greece- Greek military government wanted to help Cyprus but defeated
• Portugal- tried to hold onto African colonies but military officers staged a coup
• Eastern Europe- Poland's solidarity movement- demonstration effect, Sinatra Doctrine- USSR does not want to intervene
• EU- businesses and multinationals want to invest in countries with EU membership
• Economic sanctions- lead to economic pain, worked in South Africa

Demonstration Effects-

• Russians did not stop solidarity
• French Revolution- republican government is possible
• Portugal- change with little violence (War of the Carnations) / Spain- when Franco died, regime negotiated transition with opposition

Elite Dominated? / Social Movement?-

• Elite led
• Spain
• South Africa- ANC and reformist sects negotiated
• Key elites control resources

Structural Factors? / Chess Game?

• Structure- culture, level of development / democracy needs to come out of a broad base consensus among the population
• Chess game- leaders make calculations about what will happen if they give up authoritarian government / democracy needs key players who decide that it is in their best interests to transition

Consolidation

Alternations in Power- stability

• Look at elections
• Spain

Economic Development-

• Poor- distribution conflict
• Rich- easier to compromise

Outcome of First Election-

• Better if it is won by forces that are close to segments of power that supported the former authoritarian regime
• Spain
• Problem- Eastern Europe- first elections won by anti-communists
• Need to build up trust that democracy does not mean dictatorship by the opposition

Institutions-

• Parliamentary- forces the new democratic government to continue working for compromise / Spain, Greece / leads to a smoother transition
• Presidential- government can rule without compromise / Portugal, Poland, Russia- semi-presidential
• Electoral system- everyone needs to feel secure
• Consociationalism- constitution designed to give access to different groups / Lebanon, Northern Ireland

Sequence of Economic and Political Reforms-

• Put economic reforms off until the political system is consolidated?
• Do economic and political reforms at the same time?- shock therapy

External Aid-

• Ease social dislocations
• Can help new democratic system provide better transitions
• Helps democracy build legitimacy

That's it for now... I won't bore you with current events around the world, but that's on the final too.  Last final- I'm almost there!

Dante's Hell: Midterm to Final- Canto XVIII to Canto XXXIV

If you have gotten bored of PO101 notes already, here's something to spice it up.  Nothing political (at least, not really), The Inferno of Dante!

Major Concepts:

Canto XIX: Simoniacs- burning in holes, upside down

• Like San Giovanni baptistry- all Florentines baptized there / servants of state had to swear an oath there - civic and spiritual unity
• D says he broke on hold b/c someone was drowning
• Greek- baptizeim- to drown
• Baptism- idea: drown to be born all over again as a new person
• Or... breaking an oath- idea that you can break a vow in favor of a higher one - Dante's case is higher than it used to be = forced to put violent hands on sacred

Canto XX: Diviners- heads turned around

• Idea that it is perverse to predict how divine providences works will free will
• Sexual imagery- souls can't see their sex

Cantos XXI-XXII: Barratry- boil in pitch

• Unbalanced similie: comparison to great Venetian arsenal where they built and refitted ships - like Dante's journey by sea
• Military imagery- Malacoda acts like a commander calling his troops, Dante associates moment with Battle of Caprona where losers (not Florence) came out under ceasefire
• Speed of fright
• Navarresse- tells whole life story to buy time / V plays into this by asking if there are any Italians / seizes the moment and escapes

Canto XXIII: Hypocrites- lead-laden cloaks

• Mouse and Frog fable- D and V are mouse, Malacoda is frog
• Virgil as mother- picks up Dante and takes him to saftey
• Caiphus- extra contrapasso- crucified
• Everything is hypocritical

Cantos XXIV-XXV: Thieves- snakes

• Better than Lucan and Ovid
• Vanni Fucci tells Dante of White Guelph defeat / curses God
• Metamorphosis- changed form (soul) and matter (body)
• D let pen run wild, will now hold back (he also said something similar to this in Canto XIX with the Simoniacs)

Cantos XXVI-XXVII: False Counselors- flames

• Theme: you can't got it alone- seen in transition, seen in what Ulysses did
• Peasant farmer- looks down to where he harvests and plows (left out ideas of sowing seed)
• Elijah taken up to heaven in firery chariot- similie from point of view of Elisha (one who avenged with bears)- Dante is like Elisha, Beatrice is like Elijah
• Flame hides sinner- each sinner is a thief but they hid it / fraudulent council-steal truth- flames steal sinners / sinner wrapped up in flame like in literature where truth is wrapped up in envelope called allegory
• Ulysses- Trojan horse, got Achilles into the war, stole Palladium / final voyage in malo because only took into account sensual (not spiritual) / uses language of hypocrite to explain how crew was so willing to follow him / sailed SE, past pillars of Hercules / shipwrecked as it pleased another (God), comparable to Paul's 1st Letter to Timothy- those who abjure their faith are shipwrecked
• Sounds from flames- human speech? flame speech?
• Sicilian bull- created as a torture chamber, 1st used against its creator
• Guido da Montefletro- became a Franciscan friar to make amends, gave false advice to Pope Boniface VIII b/c Boniface said that he would be absolved, wasn't = Hell

Canto XXVIII: Schismatics- all cut up

• 1st mention of "contrapasso"- law of retribution / derived from St. Thomas Acquinus- justice meated out with respect to community as well as the individual

Canto XXXI: Transition to 9th Circle of Betrayers

• Virgil's tongue compared to Achilles' spear- spear: inflict wound and cure it, tongue- chide Dante and apply cure
• Giants- rebelled against Heaven and were defeated, size has to do with enormity of sin / walls cover giants to the waist- like aprons- like Adam and Eve

Cantos XXXII-XXXIV: Betrayers- frozen

• Place where all the weight of the universe is- center of Earth is heaviest / St. Augustine- weight of evil weighs you down (weight of love weighs you up)
• Dante is fearless with what he chooses to put in speech
• Hell-mouth idea- eating / on top of / traitors are the worst / 9th circle- place on top of which all else leans / verbs in reflexive- self-invovlement in action
• Caina- betrayers of kin
• Antemora- betrayers of country/party
• Ptolemea- betrayers of guests
• Judecca- betrayers of benefactors
• Ugolino and Ruggeri- nature of eating is sometimes unspeakable / choice of how to eat, how to survive / bestial sign- sign that signifies that an act of eating is bestial / tells story to get more vengeance on Ruggeri
• Ugolino- doesn't have a clue about his kids, doesn't know what dream means, didn't know how to accept sacrificial gesture from kids / truth from mouths of kids- did this b/c they thought he was hungry (Ugolino's idea), did this b/c they recognized that he was spiritually hungry (Dante's idea) / Jeremiah- glosses Ugolino's entire story
• Choice in eating- cannibalism: eat each other, Dante believes we do this all the time  vs. eucharist: entering into a convenant with each other to end cycle of blood vengeance- always victims, always scapegoats
• Souls in ice like unpure ice with straw
• Satan- anti-king, anti-divinity, anti-trinity, anti-holy spirit, arms as anti-cross
• Dante's struggle for life or death here- like Christ's struggle on Holy Saturday- he overcomes and reigns alive
• 3 sinners- center in greatest pain, balance of power between secular (HRE) and sacred (Pope)
• Leaving hell- inversions, like Israel exiting from Egypt, climbing on Satan- tired, real conflict between life and death
• Come out and see stars, "stelle" ends all 3 poems

People:

Canto XVIII: Seducers and Panderers

• Ciaccimoco- sold sister to noble
• Jason- abandoned Madea after she helped him get the golden fleece

Canto XVIII: Flatterers

• Interminei

Canto XIX: Simoniacs

• Pope Nicholas III- extended papal control / shameless nepotism / predicts that Pope Boniface VIII (elected after Celestine V abdicated) and Pope Clement V (moved Papal See to Avignon) will join him here

Canto XX: Diviners

• Tiresias- male to female to male
• Manto- fortune teller

Cantos XXI-XXII: Barrators

• Navarresse- tells whole life story and admits crime (all to buy time), jumps off fork into pitch

Canto XXIII: Hypocrites

• Catalano, Loderingo- Florence podesta, betrayed Ghibellines, burned down Gardingo district
• Ciaphus- high priest, advised council of chief priests and pharisses to kill Jesus

Cantos XXIV-XXV: Thieves

• Vanni Fucci- stole holy objects and didn't confess when another was accused of the crime, gets back at Dante by announcing White Guelph defeat in 1301

Cantos XXVI-XXVII: False counselors

• Ulysses (and Diomedes)- Trojan horse, lured Achilles into war, stole Palladium, final voyage- just sensual reasons (not spiritual), shipwrecked
• Guido da Montefeltra- sly military leader to Franciscan Friar, Boniface VIII asks him for advice (he will absolve him) and he gives Pope false counsel

Canto XXVIII: Schismatics

• Mohammed and Ali- Muslim usurpers, religious divisiveness
• Bertran de Born- poet, rift between King Henry II of England and his son, Prince Henry

Cantos XXIX-XXX: Falsifiers

• Geri del Bello- doesn't want to speak to Dante because no one has avenged his murder
• Master Adam- falsifier of coins, made Florins with only 21/24 carats of gold
• Sinon the Greek- liar, lied to get Trojan horse into Troy

Cantos XXXI-XXXIV: Betrayers

• Bocca degli Abati- betrayer of country/party, Dante kicks him, Montaperti- Florentine Guelphs defeated by Ghibellines, he pretended to fight with Guelphs, but betrayed them = Guelph defeat
• Ugolino and Ruggieri- betrayers of country/party, Ugoline betrays Pisa, Ruggieri locks him and sons up in tower
• Fra Alberigo- betrayer of guests, body in Hell but alive on Earth, pretended that altercation with Manfred was forgotten, killed him at a meal
• Satan- betrayer of benefactors, rebelled against God, 3 faces and wings
• Brutus and Cassius- betrayers of benefactors, killed Julius Caesar- world's supreme secular leader
• Judas- betrayer of benefactors, betrayed Jesus

No more review notes for now, but look out for some Intro to Comparative Politics notes soon!

PO101 Major Topics- Beginning to Midterm

Some more PoliSci...

Democratic Theory

• Order- structure, laws
• Power- can be seized
• Justice- rights
• Hobbes- state of nature was state of war, form govt. to keep peace and order, monarchy
• Locke- private property leads to war, civil society needed rules, citizens give up liberty to commonwealth to preserve their wealth, constitutional democracy
• Rousseau- property led to inequality which led to a naturalized social contract, normative social contract- man has free will and chooses to create a society that is more just, politics restores freedom, direct democracy
• Federalist #10: need to control factions through rep. democracy
• Republic- enough representatives to guard against whims of few, but not too many, larger area = strength of majority unknown, govt. power depends on consent of governed, has: constitution, limits against absolute power, mechanisms of freedom
• Presidentialism- president elected, chooses cabinet from outside govt.
• Parliamentarianism- PM chosen by Parliament, party power stronger, cabinet chosen from MPs
• Constitutional democracy- adaptive constitution, minority rights, some centralized control, electoral systems, limits (check and balances, separation of powers, federalism, reelection, rule of law
• Dahl's characteristics: maintain system, protect rights, ensure fairness, encourage consensus, provide govt. that can solve problems

Nationalism

• Canada- short history, no authoritarianism, similar religions, British majority, 2 national languages (status for minority), no influence by other nations, everyone was an immigrant, 1 war
• Yugoslavia- long history, authoritarianism, various religions, various majority that share power, Serbs oppress others, impacted by WWI, WWII, and USSR, some people have always lived there, constant warring

Race

• Parties need to appeal to a moderate electorate to be successful
• Race and culture can be used as tools for political gain
• Ghetto underclass because of concentration effect in 1960s
• Plight deepens b/c of: concentration effects, unemployment, racism, incarceration, bad schools, breakdown of families, subculture that glorifies swagger over work, decrease in blue collar jobs
• Loury- Social Capital- need targeted performance enhancement, education, and training / problems need to be addressed as trans-racial

Civic Culture- civic culture, political socialization, social capital, public opinion, voting constraints

• Political socialization- good citizenship: identification with nation, actions, civic training, voting: minimum degree of invovlement, agents of socialization: family, school, religion, peers, media, workplace, gender, events
• Tocqueville- Americans volunteer
• Civic culture (Amond and Verba)- political culture (independent variable) affects effectiveness and stability of govt.
• Characteristics: orientation to political system, talk about politics, pride in nation, self-confidence in govt., involved in elections, participate, membership in voluntary organization, tolerance to opposition parties, civil cooperation and trust
• Parochial citizen- politically unaware / subject citizen- passive relationship with government / participant citizen- active with govt.
• Political cultures may or may not be congruent with political system
• Social capital- social organizations that work for coordination and cooperation for mutual benefits
• Putnam- "Bowling Alone"- b/c women working, mobility, TV, urban sprawl, decrease religion
• Lipset- criticism- more voluntary orgs., increase religion, increase charity, increase patriotism
• Institutional issues- SMD leads to decrease in social capital / PR increases
• Public opinion- intensity- how much people care / salience- how prevalent an issue is / volatality- how easily public opinion changes / political generations- ours vs. WWII / life cycle- changing views based on age or point in life
• Issue publics (Converse)- people know most about 1-2 issues
• Popkin- get info about other issues- delegation, heuristics (short cuts- react to policy), representativeness, incumbency, by-product theory of info, drunkard's search
• Politicians manipulate voters- crafted talk, priming (what they chose to talk about), framing (how they talk about an issue), media
• Voting constraints- doesn't want to vote, voter reg., civic engagement (social capital- b/c of socio-demographic, edu., age, income, employment, minority status), polling locations, absentee ease, ease of info, privacy, intimidation, eligibility, elite status needed?, primaries, voting legitimacy?, competitiveness of vote

American Exceptionalism

• Standard explanation- no monarchy or feudal society aspects, all "born free", Lockian liberalism (judicial review, constitutional emphasis), lack of socialist tradition
• Cultural explanation- influx of new vs. traditional, immigration, social change
• Double-edged sword (Lipset)- good: freedom, meritocracy, work and education ethic, bad: fewer obligations, Horatio Algerism, us vs. them, violence, imperialism
• Economic explanation- weak lower/labor class = wealthy dominate, unrestricted expansion = didn't have to deal with class conflict, liberal market economy
• Institutional explanation (Steinmo)- causes: federalism, separation of powers, fragmentation of powers, electoral systems, presidentialism, effects: character of legislature, bureaucracy, parties, voters, interest groups, public policy, political culture
• False idea?- unique things: egalitarianism, less govt. interference, less socialism and unions, higher pride and patriotism, more religion, constant immigration, but all countries have exceptional characteristics

Interest Groups and Pluralism / Social Movements

• Federalist #10- faction- groups who form to protect and promote their interests at the expense of the greater good, human nature makes factions inevitable, can't prevent so must control by: large republic, federalism, separation of powers
• Interest groups- access: lobby Congress, lobby Executive, courts, public, media, protest and demonstration, violence
• Pluralist theories- group formation is part of human nature, govt. should work to expand transparency (but elite interests don't want that), military-industrial complex, iron law of oligarchy, iron triangles (committee, bureaucracy, interest groups)- pros: stability, increase expertise, efficiency, cons: undemocratic, intertia, elite advantage: resources, access to leaders, shared group conciousness
• Social movement- want to change the nature of pluralism / work against interest groups and businesses
• Social movement theories- mass society- strange people do strange things, relative deprivation- increase expectations and inequalities = frustration, resource theories- how groups organize (material, solidarity benefits- meet people, purposive- feel good), process theories- systematic vulnerabilities, timing (come about b/c: pre-existing social networks, creation of an insurgent consciousness, shifting political opportunities, shifting social control response of other groups

Extra-Constitutionalism- activism to the extreme

• Occurs when democracy isn't possible (majority controlled by minority elite)
• Occurs when democracy doesn't work for your interests (minority in democratic world)
• Religion- Old Boston, Catholic Church ran adoptions
• Media- media as business driven by corporate interests, media as an opinion shaper, impact of blogs and internet
• Violence- types: premordial (quasi-nationalistic), separatist, revolutionary, coup, issue-based / military mutiny / guerilla / terrorism
• Terrorism- characteristics: deep-seeded grievances, mostly in countries struggling to modernize, rarely works and seldom as sole means / goals: demonstrate capacity, symbolic action or personal fulfillment, attempt to motivate action / response: swift, severe, lawful punishment, improve security and research into small group violence dynamics, address issues of contention
• Revolutions- reasons: political (system not working/dictator), erosion of legitimacy, regime lost effectiveness (inflation, corruption, unemployment) / characteristics: quick, dramatic system change, organization needed, types: agrarian, mass-based, elite-based, "Great", separatist, religious, peaceful / stage: old regime breaks down, mass mobilization, moderates take over first, then extremists, thermidor- purge extremists / problems after: one tyranny replaced with another?, end badly? / examples: separatist- Mexican Revolution, agrarian- China, Cuba, "Great"- U.S., France, Russia, Religious- Iran, Peaceful- Velvet Revolution / heading off revolutions: end injustices that cause them, hard to do

Parties

• Functions: bridge between people and govt. (linkage), aggregation of interests- bring together common interests, integration into political system, political socialization, mobilize voters, organize govt.
• Duverger's Law- SMD = 2 party system- need strong, centralized control
• Parties and govt. (schattschneider)- designed to take over govt. (organize, Duverger's law), govt. by consent of governed, what is the best system of govt.?
• Party strength- weak because candidate-centered elections
• Parties fail (Lawson and Merkel)- parties are arenas of elite decision process, substitute arrives - interest consolidation no longer occurs, other vehicles of mediation between state and society: environmental, supplementary (alternative party), communitarian (focus on regional communities), anti-authoritarian
• U.S.- increase independents in 1970s and 1980s / 1990s and 2000s- polarization of citizens, strong party cohesion- no
• Other views: parties weakening- since 1890s, weak overall, increase in candidate voting / parties stronger- surge of party power, increase ideological polarization, increase in unity in party voting in Congress

Campaign Finance

• U.S.- FECA (1971)- disclosure, media limits, contribution limits, allow unions and companies to get involved / Buckley v. Valeo (1976)- some restrictions are unconstitutional: can't put limits on how much candidates can spend, can't put limits on self-financing, can't put limits on independent expenditures (soft $) / 527s- issue advocacy ads, not related to specific candidates or campaigns, have odd names / PACs- strict $ rules, can be associated with specific candidate
• UK- weak / candidates have limits, parties have limits on spending but not on contributions / no disclosure- large influence of major newspapers, external donations allowed / free media time
• France- only public finance, limited private donations / extensive transparency / but govt. gives lots of $ to contractors and some $ is funneled back to parties
• Spain- public financing, loose reporting of contributions (lax enforcement), bank loan problem
• Considerations: is $ speech?, public financing or free airtime?, enforcement, other corruption mechanisms, how to pass CFR legislation, issue advocacy or soft $, internet, can society ever stop the $ flow?, do contributions affect legislation?, transparency, loans

Media

• How it affects political participation (Patterson)- creating cynical public that distrusts govt., destroying cohesion and social capital, increase in tabloid journalism, journalists hold politicians to standards that they never come close to keeping themselves
• Media-attack journalism (Sabato)- inquisition-style, focus on scandals, journalists: have to be more aggressive b/c of image makers and spin doctors, consequences: decreased access to public officials, decrease trust in media
• Mass media and politics (Graber)- functions: surveillence, interpretation, socialization, manipulation, greater media influence, freedom of press: is there a separate freedom, require less supervision b/c of journalistic ethics?, but they are a corporation, Supreme Court- media is no different than citizen critic / generate political action: prompt public reaction, prompt office holders to act, work with officials to generate actions, surrogates for public officials, mouthpieces for govt. or interest group, frame issues
• Concerns- selective coverage, non-comprehensive coverage, doesn't provide comprehensive picture, media oligopoly, too close or too critical of govt.

I hope you enjoyed some more PO101 notes.  Next, DANTE!

PO101 Major Topics- Midterm to Final

Final: Saturday, December 15th!

Voting Systems

• Proportional Representation- elected in large multimember district, # of seats proportional to # of votes
  
• Advantages: more accurate representation, better for minorities (gender, race, political), fewer wasted votes, increased likelihoood of majority rule, less opportunity for gerrymandering
• Disadvantages: closed list is inflexible, no local / geographic representative, coalitions can be unstable
• Party list- large district, voter votes for party / closed list- party chooses order / open list- voter chooses order
• Mixed member- 1/2 party lists, 1/2 SMD/ benefits of PR and SMD
• STV- choice voting (pick 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.)
• Pluralism (FPTP)- 2 party-voting
• Advantages: keep status quo, protect against extremist idea, stable, median voter
• Disadvantages: low voter turnout, "dominant" party, 2 parties can be too similar, extremism
• Bloc voting- Palestine / in candidate districts with 5 seats open- Hamas put up 5 people, Fatah put up 10 people = vote splitting and Hamas wins

Executives

• Coming to power- ascription (characteristics, criteria, bloodline), appointment (formal/informal), election, force (assasination, coup d'etat, revolution)
• Leaving power- violence, dying, term limits, vote of no confidence (parliamentary), impeachment, designated successor
• Executive power- create legislation, make appointments, oversee bureaucracy, guide public opinion ("bully pulpit")
• Neustadt- demands from bureaucracy, Congress, partisan, citizens, abroad / formal power- awarded by office, actual power- what he can do / tools- persuasive, professional reputation, public prestige, choice
• Barber- character, world view, and style help predict behavior and direction of policies / criticisms- simplistic, external variables? / how much energy do they put into it? how much do they like it? (active positive- JFK, active negative- Nixon, passive positive- Reagan, passive negative- Eisenhower)
• Federalist #70- need energetic president / unity, sufficient powers, some secrecy / no double presidency b/c need accountability

Bureaucracy

• Career civil service
• Weber- organized hierarchically (specialization), appointed based on qualifications (merit), official doesn't own office
• What they do: administration, services, regulation (create policy), licensing, advisory, adjudication
• Disciplinary implementation- decide when to implement more specific laws, how to implement / interpret, how to administrate
• US: 15 Cabinet (DOD, Sec. of State), federal agencies- specific purpose (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms ATF), independent regulatory agencies (FTC, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FERC)
• Communist countries: extensive power, control economy
• Western Industrialized countries: highly trained and educated, France and Japan- specific process, Germany and UK- civil service exams
• Less-developed countries: corruption, bad public services
• Good: rationality, uniformity, predictability, supervision, expertise, overall efficiency
• Bad: too bid hurts productivity and efficiency, corruption (revolving door and regulatory capture), independence vs. coordination, bad perception
• What to do?: ombudsperson (outsider), legislative oversight, privatization / decentralization, politicizing
• Regulation: law passed, regulatory agency sets up draft regulations, multiple stakeholders submit comments, regulations are re-written and passed
• FEMA- before 9/11- independence but no coordination, after 9/11- w/ Dept. of Homeland Security, coordination but no independence

Public Policy

• Deals in Congress (Milligan)- dracula Congress, power for lobbyists, rules committee- blocks votes on items supported by majority if they are opposed to president/party leadership, add amendments during conference committee, decrease in open rules, no time to review legislation, decrease in debate, revolving door, increase in pork
• Farm Bill (Pollan)- subsidies on corn, soy, and wheat, affects: obesity, world agri. prices, int'l policy, land use, beneficiaries: agri-business, no salience (no one cares), complex
• U.S. public policy- increase party power, increase centralization of power, decrease efficiency b/c increase in pork, increase corruption, non-alignment public policy

Laws

• Criminal vs. civil
• Constitutional law
• Administrative law- regulations
• Int'l law- enforcement problems
• Canon law- religious
• Positive law- man-made law (natural law is innate, social contract is common)
• Rule of law- due process, judicial review (Marbury v. Madison), precedent (stare decisis), judicial restraint, judicial activism (Warren Court in 1960s)
• Common law- judicial decisions based on tradition, precedent / written or unwritten / England / most consistant over time
• Civil (Code) law- legislature creates law, vague civil codes set out principles / Europe / up to date
• Influences of Judges: political socialization, geography, occupational background, party, concept of judicial role, collegues' opinion, public opinion

Unitary System vs. Federalism

• Unitary System (France)- centripital, centralized
• Good: efficiency (consistency), decreased regional tensions, can implement large-scale benefits (3 Gorges Dam in China)
• Bad: some districts lose wealth, no adaptation to regional or cultural differences, not connected to govt., loss of efficiency in big bureaucracy
• Federalism (Germany)- centerfugal
• Good: local power, limits centralized power, increase participation, efficient, policy experimentation
• Bad: expensive (2 sets of govt.), inefficient, unfair regionally, corruption, increase influences of interest groups, interstate conflict, federal-state conflict
• U.S. Balkanization of govt.- 80,000 local govts., jurisdictional conflicts, problems: Arrowhead-Transmission line, burden-shifting
• Federalism in U.S.- early (state power), modern (national dominance) contemporary (new federalism- power to states, devolution, block grants)
• Cakes: layer cake (separate powers), marble cake (mixed), fruit/birthday cake (shared programs under fiscal federalism)

Happiness

• Harvard study- focus on relative position in society
• How to measure?
• Mexico- GDP pc: 7,500 (low middle), but happiness: 90%
• Measurements: GDP pc, Gini Index (inequality), happiness indexes, non-regional differences (job satisfaction)
• Conspicuous consumption- rich accumulate wealth to display it- happiness fueled by neighbor's envy

International Organization

• Struggle for order and stability in unpredictable setting
• Multinationals- business, Exxon
• INGOs- Red Cross
• Supranational Organizations- EU, UN
• IGOs- NATO
• Multifunctional- funding, equality, new regional powers, meeting so many needs, increase importance for small states
• International law- rights and obligations of states (problem: no enforcement)
• Treaties: economic and trade (NAFTA), security (defense- NATO, peace- ABM), humanitarian (environment- Kyoto, democracy- UN Declaration of Human Rights), issues: lack of legislation and enforcement
• China and Environment: air pollution, desertificiation, water scarcity and pollution, acid rain / huge economic growth / world problem- air pollution and dust, trade, tragedy of commons / politics- political change or status quo
• Collapse (Diamond)- make bad decisions because: don't anticipate, don't percieve problem, fail to solve problem, try to solve but fail / problems because: tragedy of commons, bad reasoning, inability to agree who should pay, lack of education, complexity

Human Rights

• What are they?  Who defines?  How to enforce?  Contradictions/Impossibilities?
• Magnarella- cultural imperialism, religion, developed vs. undeveloped, group vs. individual interests, realism (nations will to what is in their best self-interest), cultural relativism vs. rights- how can same standard apply in different areas
• Cambodia- Khmer Rouge- utopian communist revolution, tried to achieve self-sufficient agrarian economy, killed 1.5 to 2.3 million

International System

• Problem: don't agree on what system is emerging
• Historical- 19th c. balance of power, interwar instability, bipolar Cold War
• Unipolar- 1 power (U.S.)
• Counterweight- group reaction to primary power (U.S. vs. China, EU, Middle East)
• Multipolar- regional, economic blocs (EU, ASEAN, NAFTA)
• Stratified- softer unipolar w/ second tier (US, EU vs. ASEAN) / 1st tier dominates, but there is cooperation
• Zones of Chaos- development (1st, 2nd, 3rd world) / some resources in 3rd world, but unstable / 1st- US, UK, France, 2nd- Brazil, India, 3rd- poor Asian, Middle East
• Globalized- economic interests / fair trade, WTO rules / economic heavy-weights can do thing to manipulate world trading system
• Resource wars- resource (energy and water) power / oddball countries- Brazil, Canada, Norway, Venezuela, Nigeria
• Clash of civilizations- cultural schisms / Christian vs. Islam / West vs. East
• Proliferation- nuclear / US, UK, Russia, France, China ... also, Israel, S. Africa, India, Pakistan, N. Korea, Iran
• Globalization- complete network, common thread of all models / culture, economics, information, trade, social interaction
• Interventionism- use military force in other lands / islolationism- minimized importance of outside world
• Klingberg's Alternationa Theory: 21 introvert, 27 extrovert

International Relations

• More complex, lack sovereignty, dependent on power, struggle of influence in unpredictable setting characterized by chaos
• Treaty of Westphalia- ends 30 Years War, nation-state as highest level of government, sovereignty of states, wars around issues of state, modern contradictions- no human/democratic rights, supranational organizations?, religious states, globalization
• National interest: vital vs. secondary, temporary vs. permanent, specific vs. general, complementary vs. confliction
• Realist school- Machiavelli, Morganthau, Hobbes / nations pursue interests, not ideas / elements of power: military, geographic, human / reaffirms sovereign nation state
• Idealist school (Cosmopolitanism)- Wilson, Carter, Kant, J.S. Mill / expect nations to be true to their values, ideals, and morals / image of world community
• International society- middle ground / international and supranational organizations mediate relations / compromise but focus on int'l practices and norms
• Issues: war, sovereignty, human rights, security (national and human), religion, democracy
• Microtheories for war- individuals / macrotheories for war- nation, history- balance of power, hierarchy of power, democratic peace / misperception, lost in translation
• Keeping the peace- world government, collective security (agreement to counter aggressor), functionalism (cooperation in specialized areas leads to overall cooperation among nations), 3rd party assistance, diplomacy (use envoys), peacekeeping (outside military force stabilize)

Transitions

• 9 Marxist-Leninist dictatorships- put tons of $ into military, didn't invest in infrastructure, 5-year plan, system broke and failing
• Now; 28 noncommunist states / 8 fully democratic- Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia / 5 emerging- Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia, Serbia, Macedonia / 5 transitional- Ukraine, Georgia, Albania, Bosnia and Herzogovina, Moldova
• Successes: break with past (mass mobalization, electoral revolutions), elites, former communist parties (evolve into Western-style democracies), media (free and diverse), civil society (need to increase # of non-profit NGOs), political parties (slow to develop), early economic reforms (property rights, entrepreneurship, individual wealth, Russia moving backwards), no essential preconditions, international community (EU, NATO membership, West not interfering with domestic affairs, stickiness
• Problems: dominant presidents (no counterbalance or constitutional limits- Russia, Belarus), resource curse (rich gas and oil reserves consolidated by state
• Transitions: single democratic standard?, do they occur similarly?, similar patterns across time and cultural region?, what political institutions are best (pluralism, PR / presidentialism, parliamentary)?, liberal democracy even when violate rights?, economic liberalization and democratic liberalization, are there pre-requisites (economic, culture, interest groups, meet certain threshold before transitions)?
• S. Africa- good, external pressure for democratic reforms
• Romania- good, closer to European tradition, better economics = easier
• Peru- still waiting, extensive Western invovlement during Fujimori's term
• Kazakstan- reversion, Nazarbayev president for life, resource curse, no political reforms/civil liberties

Russia

• Peristroika- restructuring, economic reforms
• Glasnot- opennes, transparency with govt.
• Yetlsin- elected in 1991, used force against dissidents in 1993, economic shock therapy = hyperinflation, loss of state supports, good: pro-democracy and ended communism, bad: quasi-authoritarian, badly executed economic reforms, loss of super-power status
• Putin- Federal presidential republic (PM under control of President), edict power, head of leg. and executive (no checks and balances), emergence of regional power
• Nikonov- no democracy to controlled democracy, need to pull back and take it slowly
• Rumer- only democracy in name, Yeltsin attacked opposition, skewed elections, removed checks and balances
• Problems: corruption, red tape, lack of accountability, health problems, inflation, unemployment, Chechnya, fragmented parties, politicized constitution
• Economic concerns- slow pace of privitization, no solid economic framework = decrease in foreign investment, privitization and oligarchs
• Issue: transition fast or slow?, economic or political reforms?, only Western-style democracy?

China

• Great Leap Forward (1957)- increase spread of socialism, planned economy, failed
• Cultural Revolution (1966-1976)- killed dissidents, intellectuals
• Communist party still in control / authoritarian- increase economic growth and globalization, increase inequality and social and environmental problems
• Economic growth- fastest in world, trade surplus, because of privitization and increase in domestic privately owned companies
• Problems: inequality (but decrease in poverty), shortage of workers (increase wages and middle class), environment, rising expectations (people get richer and want more- post-materialistic)
• 3 Gorges Dam- people used to govt. telling them what to do / bad: flooded cultural relics, 1.2 million displaced, silt, environmental impact / good: can control floods, electricity (!!!), supposed to increase river transportation
• Impact of authoritarianism: fragmented authoritarianism (negotiated state), created space for autonomy (loopholes for bargaining), party and state differentiated (local govt. power), corruption (shows lack of state power)

I hope you enjoyed all of these great note!