Politicians and their Promises

The way to achieve political success is to promise people that their lives will be better.
Describe a specific situation in which the way to achieve political success might not be to promise people that their lives will be better. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the way to achieve political success is to promise people that their lives will be better.
___


When a nation struggles with an economic crisis, its citizens feel the effects in various ways. They lose their jobs, struggle with paying the bills and mortgage, and experience an overall low morale. While people have mostly blamed Wall Street bankers for the financial meltdown, they have looked to politicians to resolve the problems and set the country on the right path. Specifically, in 2008, American citizens became mesmerized with the charismatic senator, Barack Obama, and voted for him as president. He campaigned under the mantra of change and in a sense, promised to "revolutionize" the ways of Washington and bring the country out of its economic misery. Two years later, the United States is struggling with a 9.2% unemployment rate with no tangible sign of future improvement. Indeed, a politician may initially be successful by promising people that their lives with will be better; however, if those promises are not followed up with positive results, citizens will veer off to another candidate come election time.

Politicians who wish to compete against incumbents gauge the temperature of the constituents and analyze what issues push their buttons. Specifically, the candidate attempts to take advantage of what upsets voters and how they can offer a viable (if not better) alternative at the polls. The last few years have been especially chaotic given the economic crisis and wars being fought in several fronts. In 2008, voters became disillusioned with the seemingly never-ending wars and the accompanying thousands of men dying in uniform. They looked to Obama as a representation of diplomacy and answer for ending the wars. Indeed, he partly based his campaign on his opposition to the Iraq war and placing emphasis on diplomacy as a means of conducting our foreign affairs. Obama served as a conduit of change in several levels--as reflected by his campaign messages, his racial background, etc.

When the Obama administration appeared less and less capable of bringing down defense spending, as well as turning the tide on economic ruin, a movement of "Tea Party" politicians burgeoned and were voted into office. These Tea Party members broadened the conversation of the US financial problems by focusing on "big government" and overspending as the culprit. They successfully painted a picture of Obama and the democrats as profligate politicians who are leading the country down the wrong path by further exacerbating the country's economic woes. The Tea Party voice has been quite influential in highlighting this year's deadline to raise the debt ceiling and encouraging debate regarding the size of government and implications of US economic policy for future generations. Indeed, candidates will always look to the incumbent's weak points and then claim to offer solutions to people's problems.

Politicians may win elections after promising to improve their constituents' lives; however, they must follow through on those promises in order to find continued success in office. When a politician fails to provide results in a given time, voters become disillusioned and look elsewhere for a solution to their problems. Candidates who successfully position themselves as "different" from the failing incumbent may then be given a chance to improve a dire position. Indeed, politicians are not solely responsible for a nation's path; for instance, cyclical economic fluctuations and powerful private actors and businesses may greatly influence how citizens experience life. However, politicians---especially the President-- are the most visible actors in the nation and citizens will inevitably attribute success and failures in their personal lives to these elected officials. For this reason, people will listen carefully whenever candidates make grand promises to improve their lives.

Do these Jeans make me look Fat?

Some dishonesty is necessary to keep a friendship strong.
Describe a specific situation in which some dishonesty is not necessary to keep a friendship strong. Discuss what you think determines whether or not some dishonesty is necessary to keep a friendship strong.
___

People around the world carry different perceptions of what constitutes an offense against moral (or religious) law and whether that action is absolutely unacceptable in any situation. Dishonesty is commonly cited as a cardinal sin but can be justified by many as an appropriate action depending on the purpose. Young children learn from parents, teachers, and Pinocchio that one should never lie. However, as these children grow up, they realize that being dishonest is sometimes necessary to be accepted socially and more specifically, to keep friendships strong.

People have seemingly infinite thoughts running in their mind when interacting with others. When encountering new people, they focus mostly on physical features and the overall vibe detected from the person. When dealing with friends, thoughts are often deeper due to a greater amount of information about the person. While one may regard his friend very highly, he will be aware of the faults and weaknesses. An ideal friendship consists of two people who can be completely honest with each other and not be afraid about hurting feelings. However, a majority of friendships cannot be sustained in a utopia of absolute honesty. The reality is that most people cannot stand being criticized or told things that hit at their fragile egos. When a woman asks her friend if her jeans make her look fat, the friend will usually say that she looks perfectly fine despite thinking otherwise. People want to be with those who make them feel good all the time. A person that cannot tell white lies or withhold truthful comments will not be able to maintain friendships.

Dishonesty is not necessary to keep a friendship strong in a case where the "receiver" of the truth is well grounded and truly confident in himself. This type of person is not the least affected by judgment of his looks and abilities and in fact, appreciates being told the truth about himself no matter how ugly that truth is. Unfortunately, this type of person is rare and most people will learn that their friends lack the self-assuredness to deal with the truth.


Of course, friendships are not kept strong with any type of dishonesty. Lies meant to cause harm or told without regarding the best interests of the friend can kill the friendship. There exist white lies, however, that are told to save the friend from an embarrassing situation. Indeed, one can question how true or strong a friendship is if friends feel the need to be dishonest (even in the most superficial context) in order to continue the friendship.

Responsible use of Power= Greater Power

In politics, the responsible use of power is rewarded with greater power.
Describe a specific situation in which the responsible use of power might not be rewarded with greater power. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the responsible use of power will be rewarded with greater power.
___


Prominent leaders of nations can greatly impact the lives of their constituents. They make key decisions, such as deciding where public funds should be appropriated and enacting laws that ideally serve to protect citizens from harm. Unfortunately, not all politicians enter office to act in the public's best interests. They use their power to enrich themselves and their associates and amass control over resources without regard to the needs of the poor. However, in countries with more transparent systems of government, politicians are often rewarded with greater power through re-election when the people believe that they are using their power in a responsible way.

Government corruption exists in every nation--developed and developing countries alike. The extent of corruption, as well as the people's tolerance for it, varies, and undoubtedly, developed countries do not face the endemic corruption plaguing poorer countries. When a politician is perceived as honest and makes decisions according with the needs and desires of the people, his constituents will likely re-elect him. The opportunity to serve more years in office usually adds to the credibility of the politician, as well as the accompanying privilege of more power. These politicians are also able to take on leadership positions among their fellow lawmakers by serving in special committees and leading negotiations.

In developed nations, the people are more likely to find out about abuse of political power and will emphatically take measures to make sure the politician pays for his crime. When a politician misappropriates public funds, he ends up in jail. Furthermore, countless politicians have also been forced to resign or punished in the polls when their sexual misconduct has been revealed. These same allegations of adultery, "sexting," and flings with teenagers would probably gain little notice in developing countries that deal with leaders who steal public funds and associate with drug kings. However, in nations such as the US, even sexual misconduct is viewed as an irresponsible use of power and offending leaders find their political futures destroyed upon media revelations.

In developing nations, the responsible use of power is often not rewarded with greater power. This is due to the endemic nature of corruption in the system. The abuse of power is plainly accepted (by both leaders and constituents) as a normal occurrence in political affairs. Politicians may enter office with the magnanimous intention to bring the people out of poverty. Eventually, they find that surviving in office and even protecting their own physical safety means paying off the "right" people and accepting bribes. A politician that does not play the game of corruption finds himself unable to maintain his position. In these nations, voters suffer from lack of basic needs that they do not have the wherewithal or desire to challenge the system. In most cases, leaders are able to suppress any factions of opposition to their system through threat of jail time or physical harm.

Ideally, the responsible use of power is rewarded with greater power. Constituents see that the leader is acting in their best interest and then they, therefore, re-elect him back to office. Granted, voters cannot observe all actions of the politicians and the latter may get away with some misuse of power. Therefore, the reward of greater power may have a lot to do with the perception of the politician in the eyes of voters--not necessarily whether he is, in fact, using power responsibly. Furthermore, in some nations, the responsible use of power is not encouraged due to a culture of corruption where the powerful can rightfully take any means to protect their power.

Art as enhancing the Quality of Human Life

The arts do not significantly enhance the quality of human life.
Describe a specific situation in which the arts might significantly enhance the quality of human life. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the arts significantly enhance the quality of human life.
___

The creation of art is possibly unique to human kind. Art has been primarily a vehicle of self expression and interpretation of the world through a certain lens. Some art has also been said to exist for no particular reason at all---it just IS. Indeed, art cannot be whittled down to a single purpose in the presence of human kind. It is not a basic need on par with water, food and shelter; however, it can serve to enhance the quality of human life by adding deeper meaning and experiences in living.

Art cannot significantly enhance the quality of human life when a human is struggling to survive. For example, if a man learns he will be indefinitely stuck in a deserted island, what would he wish to bring with him? He will want food, a filter to purify water, materials to build shelter, etc. The stranded man will not be thinking about surrounding himself with beautiful pieces of art. He will not be composing sonnets or choreographing a jazz number. Humans are born with the instinct of survival and in a situation that requires us to contemplate our mortality, we are most likely not considering loftier concepts, such as art and beauty.

When human beings need not worry about survival, art may take a part in significantly enhancing the quality of life. Indeed, art can add beauty to otherwise mundane lives by challenging creators (as well as audiences) to view ordinary things in front of us in a different light. The process of creating art also provides a sort of catharsis to those who need to express themselves and share their views of the world. Art also forms part of people's culture and those who appreciate art can elicit interesting information on how a group of people viewed their lives. In a society, such as the United States, where most people spend their time wasting away in routine jobs just to pay the bills, art can provide a sort of relief and change in life. Especially in developed nations where survival is not at issue, art can add a certain joie de vivre.


Granted, art comes in a myriad of forms and they are not all equal. Some art that has survived through history (e.g., Mona Lisa) carries with them a sort of mesmerizing aura that attracts viewers from around the world and even inspires the creation of new art. Other art may appear to lack technique and provoke statements, such as "I could have painted that myself and I'm not even an artist!" As said many times before, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. While a certain work of art may cause life changing perceptions in one viewer, the same piece to another person might as well be a grain of sand on a beach. People will be affected by art in different ways and it is essential for societies to encourage the creation of art as way to potentially enhance life experiences.

Abuse of Technology

Technology may be increasing faster than our ability to use it wisely.
Describe a specific situation in which a new technology might not be beyond our ability to use it wisely. Discuss what you think determines whether or not a new technology can be used wisely.
___


Since the beginning of time, human beings have invented tools to adapt to their environment. Inventions, such as the use of fire and hunting tools, helped people survive in settings lacking warmth and vegetation. Humans also created weapons to defend their land from those seeking to take over. Inventions of today's age have taken on a new dimension with the wide availability of the internet. Unlike the basic tools concocted by early inhabitants, the digital technology of today's world do not serve humans' basic needs, such as nourishment and shelter---they, however, allow people to improve their quality of life by providing efficient ways of completing work and daily tasks. These new tools (as well as old tools), however, can be abused to the point that some people are really better off without them.

The internet has greatly facilitated globalization--or rather, the shrinking of our world where physical distance and boundaries become erased. People from opposite sides of the world can interact with each other on real time with a click of a button. In the last five years, social networking sites, such as Facebook, have virtually become staples in the lives of young adults in developed countries. Facebook has allowed people to connect with others in an unprecedented way---from long-lost relatives and high school classmates to random people in the street. While these connections may help build relationships and networking opportunities, Facebook has been misused by many members. Some have developed an addiction to the site, spending an inordinate amount of time reading updates of "friends" and stalking profiles. Instead of completing useful daily tasks, they fill their minds with useless information and become intrigued by the daily activities and thoughts of others who provide them with no real value. In a sense, people have used Facebook to replace real interactions with people and distract themselves from important tasks.

The internet has also been abused in a myriad of other ways. People have profited by taking advantage of human weakness in running gambling, prostitution, and pornography sites. Others see it as an opportunity to steal money and run scams. Indeed, all communication technologies that have preceded the internet (e.g., telephone, pager, television, radio, etc.) have been used for these same base purposes. All these technologies carry value in allowing more people to communicate with each other and spread information in a more efficient way. As the concept of yin and yang illustrates, there is a bad that accompanies every good.

One way to help people use technology wisely is through education. For instance, teenagers can be shown how social networking sites can be abused to the point of affecting their studies. Schools can focus on inculcating "values" in students and teaching them how to defend themselves from negative influences in life. The government and the FCC might be able to step in and regulate more activities in the web. Granted, free speech activists will take issue with this. However, someone or some entity should be taking steps to prevent people from abusing the internet to further their base purposes.

In viewing the ways technology has been misused, it is important not to forget about its positive effects and contributions to human life. For example, the internet has helped people organize their finances and effectively conduct honest businesses. People who are educated and understand how to use the internet to enhance their lives will, of course, benefit from greater advances in the technology. However, it is inevitable that new technologies will be used in malevolent ways. Some people in the world lack self-discipline or a conscience to do the "right" things in life. It is important, however, to not allow concern for the actions of bad apples to stifle innovators' abilities to create new technologies in the service of human kind.

The Strength of a Democracy depends upon each Citizen's Respect for the Ideas of Others

The strength of a democracy depends upon each citizen's respect for the ideas of others.
Describe a specific situation in which the strength of a democracy might not depend upon its citizens' respect for the ideas of others. Discuss what you think determines when the strength of a democracy depends upon its citizens' respect for the ideas of others.
___


Leading democratic nations, such as the United States, espouse democracy as the highest ideal in governance where citizens are treated equally with each having a say in decisions affecting the community. This is accomplished in a system where citizens (upon reaching adulthood) have the right to vote for their representatives and elections are determined by the majority. Indeed, upholding this type of system entails each citizen respecting the ideas of others. Citizens acknowledge that there are several paths to go about solving problems and that options considered most feasible or agreeable by the community will reach the representative. He or she will then vote accordingly with the constituents' wishes. A society where citizens do not respect each other's differing ideas are plagued with violence and filled with people who fear expressing personal opinions.

In a democracy, decisions are most often made by majority rule. That is, governments--through decisions made in the legislature-- act on options most palatable to the majority of the citizens. Granted, this type of system stifles the will of the minority and this might be conceived as a democracy's lack of respect for ideas of the minority. However, these ideas still receive an extent of respect in a democracy in that people usually do not fear for their lives after expressing an unpopular opinion. True democracies encourage different opinions to float around and be debated in public and private forums. In contrast, people of many authoritarian nations are regularly killed (by the government and private citizens) for being activists and expressing dissenting beliefs.

Nations are more likely to flourish when people can express their ideas without recrimination. More ideas and different ways of thinking encourage national debate. When people intelligently argue with each other about their points of view, they refine their arguments and perhaps reach new realizations and better ways to solve community problems. When only certain viewpoints can be expressed, a nation's development is hindered; people are unable to reach outside the box and fully participate in a debate that could use contributions from sharp, innovative minds.

The freedom of speech---which necessarily entails the government's and each citizen's respect for ideas of others-- serves to strengthen a nation. Unpopular opinions may enter the public forum and citizens may support or reject these thoughts by personally participating in the debate, voting for leaders who reflect their views, supporting advocacy groups through donations, among other things. In general, democracies have more to gain when people can express what they wish so long as those ideas do not harm others.

Nations that Resist New Approaches to Solving Social Problems

Nations often resist new approaches to solving social problems.
Describe a specific situation in which a nation did or might attempt to solve a social problem with a new approach. Discuss what you think determines when a new approach would be the best way for a nation to solve a social problem.
___

Developing nations are plagued with a multitude of social problems-from malnutrition and lack of natural resources to suppression of civil rights and widespread violence. It is very difficult to solve these issues--which are often inextricably related---and most of these nations will likely stay impoverished through time. More wealthy and stable nations give humanitarian aid and start programs to improve human capacity and development in these nations. Unfortunately, nations often grow dependent on these foreign handouts and do not take serious measures to solving systemic social problems.

Part of the reason why developing nations seem resistant to new approaches in solving social problems is that they are usually run by corrupt leaders. These leaders horde available funds for themselves and associates and/or refunnel money in ways that do not benefit the general population. In almost all developing nations, leaders and a few business owners lead incredibly luxurious lifestyles while most of the citizens struggle to survive each day. Some of these leaders may enter office with the sincere desire to bring many out of poverty; however, corruption may be so endemic in the system that these leaders cannot help but tangle themselves in corrupt deals to maintain their power and influence. When leaders lose focus as to what would best serve the people, they cannot even begin to take the first steps to alleviate social problems in society.

Some developing nations and their people have become so dependent on handouts from wealthier countries that they do not come up with their own innovative ways to solve social programs. Indeed, food donations by USAID and other such organizations are designed to help the most impoverished people of developing nations. Often, however, corrupt leaders reserve this aid for supporters of their political parties and not necessarily for those really needing help. Unfortunately, regular handouts from wealthier nations cause governments of developing nations to become dependent and not invest properly on their people---for instance, on education and programs that would develop their citizens' ability to help themselves.

In rich and poor nations alike, citizens struggle with the problem of bureaucracy and red tape in government. Paperwork and decisions move slowly through the system. Since they do not operate on a for-profit basis, workers have less incentive to be as responsive and accountable as their private sector counterparts. Government workers also need to follow certain procedures when doing their work, which often contributes to the red tape. For all these reasons, it is difficult for governmental departments to plan and implement new approaches to solving social problems.

As long as corruption remains endemic, nations cannot begin to tackle their wide range of social problems. In order to implement new approaches to improving the state of the nation, a government must somehow rid itself of corruption to divert funds in ways that invest in the education and development of regular people. Furthermore, wealthier nations should take measures to ensure that their aid reaches the most vulnerable people and also consider alternative ways (i.e., other than handouts) to help people help themselves.