Are there any significant differences between these authors?What are Wilson’s teachings on natural rights and his contributions to the Republic?

Postulates on Natural Law and Natural Rights

AM A C/B STUDENT, PAPER MUST BE AT A B or C GRADE LEVEL. USE ONLY THE THREE ARTICLES AS SOURCES, NOTHING ELSE

In the three assigned articles the authors cover the conceptualization and application of natural law and natural rights. Brian Tierney, examines the relationship between natural law and natural rights and wonders whether the two concepts are logically incompatible with one another, or whether natural rights were derived from natural law. Eduardo A. Velasquez’s article looks at the application of natural rights with the founding of the
American Republic through the works of James Wilson – one of the least known of the Founding Fathers of the Republic – and his modern liberal principles and natural law
teachings. Finally, Randy E. Barnett considers the legal application of natural rights in today’s world identifying not only its intellectual construct but also how they are used by individuals in the pursuit of their objectives.

Your task is: 1) to read the three articles, and 2) use the book and the articles to answer the following questions:

After reading and analyzing these articles are you able to identify how these modern scholars have conceptualized natural law and natural rights? Are there any significant differences between these authors?What are Wilson’s teachings on natural rights and his contributions to the Republic?

Outline and discuss two policy challenges covered in class and/or in the course materials.

Question and answer for my course

Course name: International Digital Political Economy.

Course Description: Digital technologies and changing attitudes toward surveillance and the commodification of knowledge has made the control of knowledge an increasingly central aspect of the exercise of power and wealth creation in the global political economy. In this seminar, we will examine the theoretical underpinnings of what Susan Strange calls the “knowledge structure,” and how the control of knowledge is increasingly shaping our lives. This course will be based primarily around the discussion of key texts and articles that focus on specific parts of the global knowledge economy

Question 1(‘Use the taking knowledge seriously’ pdf and ‘what is knowledge’ pdf for this question):1. Describe the knowledge structure. In your answer, define the knowledge structure, drawing on the theoretical framework used and developed in class, and refer to all of the main books covered in this course (for the weeks where we relied on journal articles or other documents, your answer should draw on these as well). Your answer should include the key actors (dominant and challengers), organizations, and institutions, as well as the dominant and oppositional policy tendencies (i.e., the views/ideas of challengers). Include also a discussion of the relative importance/power of state and non-state actors. This question is worth 60% of your exam grade.

Question 2 (you can use all the other pdfs I uploaded, Theyre all about Intellectual Property) : Outline and discuss two policy challenges covered in class and/or in the course materials. What are the issues at stake? What recommendations can you make in these areas? What principles should be applied to address the problem(s)? This question is worth 30% of your exam grade.

Are anti-immigration party voters in France influenced by anti-immigration views or is it just ignorant and veiled anti-islamist views?

France’s veiled islamophobia

Instructions: approximately 500 words introducing 1. the topic, 2. Research puzzle or research question that will guide your research on the chosen topic 3. reason why your research question is relevant and worth researching. Find Ideas or inspiration in facts, data, and discussions in class.
No answering your own question (not directly anyway)! Your essay should just involve the significance of the question and the reason behind it? As well as why the readers should care. All should be supported from course readings as well as your own individual research.

Research question: Are anti-immigration party voters in France influenced by anti-immigration views or is it just ignorant and veiled anti-islamist views?
OR
Are voters of anti-immigration parties truly anti-immigrants or is it blatant islamophobia ?

Context, ideas, and outline:
France and French citizens have not had many problems with welcoming non-muslim, non-Arab, and/or white westerners. White-European immigrants are especially welcome with open arms. It only raises radical right-wing ideologies and right wing party voters when muslim or arabs are involved.
2 course readings (uploaded on files down below)
online research on:
Find:
1. Percentages of Islamophobic French people in France, percentages of anti-immigration voters, and the voting for people in parliament and right and extreme right parties in France.
2. Islamophobic rules and regulations, the shutting down of how many mosques.
3. Islamophobic online posts, tweets, hashtags, organizations, and movements in France that represent the majority of French voters’ islamaophobia.
4. Voters of anti-immigration parties actively advocating for, specifically, islamophobia.
5. Voters of anti-immigration parties and the parties themselves actively welcoming non-muslims.

To what extent is it still accurate to argue that we lack a generally accepted (or even acceptable) definition of the concept of right-wing extremism/radicalism?

Right-wing extremism/radicalism: reconstructing the concept

Of course, most authors have better things to do than devote half of their article to questions of definitions and, by their moving swiftly on, we have learned much about the phenomenon of right-wing extremism/radicalism, its complexities and its ever-changing nature. What is more, a perfunctory mention of the absence of agreement on definition is quite rational given that a number of scholars have devoted considerable attention to definitional issues and still, so we are told, no consensus emerges. In short, given an apparent lack of success to date, there seems little incentive to embark yet again on what Gerring calls ‘the Sisyphean task of legislating a “good” definition’.


But are we in fact over-egging it? That is, to what extent is it still accurate to argue that we lack a generally accepted (or even acceptable) definition of the concept of right-wing extremism/radicalism?

Has there not been some growing consensus in this field of study over how to define this concept? If not, then why not? What is it that we continue to disagree about? And how might we move forward in searching for a consensus,if one is even possible?

Identify those concepts associated with attaining food security and food justice within an intergovernmental framework and the different stakeholders involved in food policy.

Reflection Paper: Food Security & Justice

Objectives:

At the close of week Seven, you should be able to:

Identify those concepts associated with attaining food security and food justice within an intergovernmental framework and the different stakeholders involved in food policy including the USDA, FEMA, State and local governments, private industry, NGOs and communities

Apply the core concepts of food security and justice in analyzing a specific intergovernmental context.

To-Do List:

Review module objectives.
Complete the assigned readings.
View the Guest Lecture:
Deliver Reflection Paper

LINK FOR VIDEO: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F1f-VH8JmCjhQMjYW3x1D2eO8__AJLD-/view?usp=sharing

What points from the textbook and discussions can you use to substantiate your position?

Some scholars of international relations believe that democracies are less likely to go to war than other types of states. Assess this claim. Do you agree? What points from the textbook and discussions can you use to substantiate your position? We have addressed several potential causes of war in this course. Try to incorporate those causes into your answer and evaluate them. There is no “wrong” answer, but you will be evaluated on how well you support your positions.

Contains a wealth of facts that are both accurate and relevant, fully develops complex ideas, and explains phenomena adequately. The paper remains focused on the issue and avoids straying into tangential subjects. The paper observes the minimum requirements for length, style, and citation.

Why should your audience care about this topic?What future implications resulted from this event?

Boston Marathon bombing

Summarize the event
Write 2-3 or more sentences for each of the following:
What happened?
Who
What
Where
When
Why.

Significance (no sentences limit).
Why should your audience care about this topic?
What future implications resulted from this event?

Conclusion (no sentences limit)
What were the lessons learned from this emergency or disaster?

Identify the socio-cultural consequences which could promote “unraveling”?

Brexit Final prompt

Brexit Prompt: While scholars broadly characterize Brexit as “far-reaching” (Gamble 2016; Jones 2018;
Sanders 2018), some have argued that “[post Brexit] [t]he breakup of the UK has become even more likely, if not yet certain, than it was before.” (Gamble 2016, pg. 19), suggesting that Brexit has made it more likely that a second Scottish independence referendum will not only be called, but will also pass. Based on your understanding of the British state, do you agree that Brexit has made it more likely that the United Kingdom will
“break up”? Why/Why not?

To address this prompt, your paper should course readings and lecture material to do the following:

1. Briefly explain why the Brexit referendum was successful (i.e., Which factors contributed to
its passage? Who voted for Brexit? Who opposed it?).
2. Identify the institutional attributes of the British state which could promote unraveling in the
aftermath of Brexit (i.e., HINT: How does the political context of the UK as a
“multinational/centralized” state shape prospects? How does devolution shape post Brexit
political realities?)
3. Identify the socio-cultural consequences which could promote “unraveling”?
4. Use the above to make an argument for whether Brexit has made it “more likely” that the
United Kingdom will “break up”.

Requirements: The essay should be 6-8 (double spaced) pages in length, use 12-point font, apply standard
margins, use course readings to support your argument, and should contain a bibliography.

How does this source connect with themes or ideas you have learned in your history or political science courses?

Choose ONE primary source from the provided list of options. Read through the source and any contextual information that is provided about the source. After you have carefully read the source write a 575 word essay in which you address the following questions:

What is the source’s central? How does the author argue for this?

What is the context of the time period in which this piece was written?

What potential biases might the author have and why?

How does this source connect with themes or ideas you have learned in your history or political science courses? Be specific and give examples.

The goal of this assessment is to demonstrate comprehension, historical connections, and the use of proper citations. You should not do any any additional resource for your essay and utilize only the one selected primary source from the list below. Essays must be typed, a minimum of 575 words, and use proper citation. You may use MLA style in-text citations. A works cited page is not necessary.

Essays will be evaluated on the following criteria:

Knowledge and understanding of source as well as bias (6a, 6d)

Ability to place the source in historical context & provide specific evidence (6b, 6e)
Critical analysis of the source by drawing comparisons to themes learned in social science courses (6a, 6b, 6c)

Use of frequent and direct references to the source (6d).

Use of proper citation (6e)

The topic I chose was:

Topic: Political polarization and identity

The source you may use:

Barack Obama’s 2004 DNC Keynote Speech

http://p2004.org/demconv04/obama072704spt.html

Just utilize the link above.

Description: Speech given by then Illinois State legislator Barack Obama outlining a vision of America.