Rosa Parks - Essay Example

Civil Disobedience Mack the turtle represents the most profound parallel with Rosa Parks. Mack who sat at the bottom of the King’sturtle stack instinctively knew that it was not right that he carried the burden so that the King at the top had a greater view of the land. Rosa Parks knew that it was not right that she give up her seat on an Alabama bus to a White man. Mack resisted this inequity by simply burping and dismantling the King’s stack of turtles. Rosa Parks responded to her feelings against racial discrimination, by refusing to surrender her seat to a white man. Mack, like Rosa Parks, takes the smallest of moves and starts a chain reaction that results in freedom for all regardless of class/race distinctions. Rosa Parks and Mack are further connected by virtue of the fact that they both expose social injustice and oppression from the bottom down. Like, Rosa Parks, Mack is positioned at the lowest stratum of society and yet, they both dare to challenge an established regime. Where Rosa Parks is arrested for her challenge, Mack is reprimanded and reminded of his rightful place in the social order. In other words, both Mack and Parks are reminded by established authority of their rightful place in society. However, both emerge heroic. Mack emerges as the real king of the pond whereas, Parks becomes an historical icon symbolizing the civil rights movement. Thus Parks is associated with freedom and equality and Mack is likewise associated with freedom and equality. Parks and Mack are further united by their observance of and displeasure of the disparity and oppression forced upon their peers. Both observe the reluctance and fear that accompanies obedience and both determined that something needed to be done to break the cycle. Therefore both Mack and Parks spoke out in different ways, but with the same outcome: freedom for all although Mack’s freedom came at lot easier and faster than Parks. Naturalize Me Naturalization is defined by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (2011) as the qualification process that non-US citizens must successfully complete before becoming US citizens. The qualifications are set forth by the US Congress and are reflected in the Immigration and Nationality Act (US Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2011). In other words, naturalization is a process by which foreigners obtain the right to be citizens of another country. In order to become naturalized under the US Immigration and Nationality Act, there are a number of qualifying factors. If the applicant has been permanently living in the US for a minimum period of five years and is eligible for citizenship, naturalization will occur. An individual is eligible for citizenship if the individual has had a green card for a minimum of five years prior to applying for naturalization. Other eligibility requirements are: resided in a state for a minimum of 3 months before applying for naturalization; is in the US for no less than 30 months of the five years prior to applying for naturalization; lives in the US between the time of applying and the time of naturalization; is literate in English and knows US government and history; and is of good character and adheres to the US Constitutions (US Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2011). An individual may also qualify for naturalization if that individual is qualified as a the spouse of a US citizen and has been permanently living in the US for at least 3 years. A spouse of a US citizen is qualified for naturalization if the foreign spouse had been married to and living with their US spouse for at least three years as a green card holder; is at least 18 years old; the US spouse was a US citizen for the three years that the applicant lived with him or her; has resided in a US state for a minimum of 3 months before applying for naturalization and all other qualifications applicable to the acquisition of US citizenship (US Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2011). In addition, members of the US armed forces, their family and dependants are also eligible for citizenship provided they are of good character, know English and US history and government and adhere to the principles articulated in the US Constitution. A child of a US citizen may also be naturalized provided they qualify under the general criteria for US citizenship (US Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2011). The list of possible questions that might appear on a Naturalization Test ranges from easy to understand to difficulty to understand and easy to answer, to difficult to answer. I found it difficult to understand one possible question: “what stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful?” To begin with I’m not sure what is meant by being too powerful. It could refer to decision-making within the US or decision-making and authority in relation to other states. Moreover, the multiple choice answers provided several answers that might have been correct, depending on how the question is interpreted. The multiple choice answers were: freedom of speech, checks and balances, the president and the people. Arguably, all of these answers may be the correct answer or none of them may be correct, particularly if the question relates to international rather than in-state relations. Another difficult question to answer was “What are two rights of everyone living in the United States?” As far as I am aware there are several enumerated rights of everyone living in the US and they cannot be reduced to two broad rights. The range of choices are even more difficult because if requires favouring one pair of rights over others, all of which appear to be a part of the rights conferred upon US citizens via the US Constitution. I am certain US citizens would have difficulty choosing among the pairs of possible answers because I am sure that US citizens believe that they are equally entitled to each of the rights expressed in this question (For more information see the Appendix at the end of this submission). Comparative Economic Systems Socialism is generally criticised on the presumption that it is the antithesis of individualism. Socialism is said to promote societal interests and the welfare of the public in general. Thus socialism is not constructed as a vehicle for serving individual interest. Thus individual expressions of individual interests and taking individual initiatives are discouraged (Mises, 1951/2009). It therefore follows that in a socialist market, the socialist ideology of the collective good of all will be reflected in the market structures and economic policies (Aslund, 1992). Critics assume that embedded within the socialist market economy is the ideology underpinning collectivism rather than individualism which invariably means excessive state intervention in the market. Thus, socialism would discourage individual initiatives including entrepreneurships which are the kinds of market conditions that can only flourish in the absence of government intervention (Aslund, 1992). These assumptions are valid because, socialism by discouraging individual initiative and by promoting the common good of society and the public welfare in general is not consistent with the liberal ideals that foster and cultivate open and free market economies. For instance, a entrepreneurship depends on the free exchange of ideas and information. Under socialism, where individual initiatives are discouraged, socialist governments contain the free flow of information and exploration of new ideas unless it is for the common good. An individual’s pursuit of the expression of his or her own ideas or the desire to freely pass and share information will be contained by a socialist state that is characterized by protecting the collective good of society and safeguarding public welfare generally. In safeguarding the public welfare and promoting the collective good of society, a socialist government might differ from a capitalist government in its treatment of unemployment. For instance unemployment can be expected to be lower in social welfare states where governments typically guarantee jobs for all of its citizens unlike in capitalist systems of government (Ferrera, 2005). Social security benefits are also paid by the hiring firm, unlike in capital countries where the benefits are taken directly from the workers’ salary (Ferrera, 2005). In other words, in socialist systems, virtually all businesses are state-owned or state-run or are subject to excessive state intervention. In this regard, states assume responsibility for the unemployed by providing jobs for all citizens and ensuring that employers (usually the state) provide for their employees once they are no longer unemployed. Moreover, the unemployed are guaranteed free education and healthcare services (Ferrera, 2005). I believe all states should offer free education and healthcare services for its citizens. However, private entities who offer these services should be entitled to be paid for these services as they do not have the resources available to the state for funding the provision of education and health services. Moreover, since citizens pay taxes, they are entitled to expect that these taxes are used in the provision of essential services. I do not believe that a dictatorship is necessary for sustaining a social welfare state under a communist regime. Socialist states such as Poland and many of the former Soviet-bloc states were characterized as “surpassing the state of the dictatorship of the proletariat” and moved toward a “national state” which was under the “direction of the working class” (Taras, 1984, 120). While, dictatorship may be more successful in a communist regime, it is not necessarily true that communism can only thrive under a dictatorship. As an ideology, socialism can appeal to the majority, which is typically the working classes and as witnessed in Poland and elsewhere in the former Soviet-bloc, the working classes supported communism as a political idea and not dictatorship. The Electoral College By virtue of the electoral college, US citizens only indirectly elect their president and vice-president. Although US citizens go to the poles in November every four years, it is the electoral college that elects the president and the vice-president in December. In other words, when voters elects a president and a vice-president, they are in reality directing the electoral college from their respective states to indorse that vote and to select the candidate chosen by the individual. For instance if a voter choses presidential candidate R, the voter is actually instructing the electoral college to elect presidential candidate R. Ideally, the presidential candidate who obtains the most votes should be elected by the electoral college (Burgan, 2007). The electoral college was established by Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the US Constitution. By virtue of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the US Constitution that electoral college consists of the state representatives in the US House of Representatives and one of its two Senators. Pursuant to Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution the electoral college will elect the president and vice-president of the US. The electoral college became a part of the US Constitution because it relates to how the government and more especially the executive branch should be elected, a key purpose of the US Constitution (Singh, 2003). Since there is nothing in the Constitution preventing an Elector in the electoral college voting against the popular vote, there is a risk that a “constitutional crisis” can occur (Singh, 2003, p. 81). These occurrences are known as “faithless electors” and have been known to happen (Faithless Electors, 2009). According to the article “Faithless Electors” (2009), there have been at least 156 faithless electors since college electoral was established. The most notable incident occurred in 1836 when 23 electors representing Virginia changed their votes. Aside from the problems obviated by the faithless voters, there is also another flaw in the electoral college that can cause a constitutional crisis. This flaw relates to the fact that even when the electoral college votes according to the popular vote, a president may be elected that does not have the majority popular vote. This occurred in the 2000 Presidential election in which George Bush became the president pursuant to the electoral college process although Al Gore won the popular vote. George Bush received 48% of the popular vote while Al Gore received 48.3% of the popular vote (Singh, 2003). Since democratic systems are intended to place all branches of the government in office on the basis of representation and full participation by all eligible voters, I would reform the electoral college so that it merely serves vote counters under the supervision of an election’s administration team. In this regard, the electoral college would consist of state representatives from each state and with the assistance of the elections’ administration team would count the popular vote and tabulate it on the basis of a majority vote. In other words, the electoral college will not be required to vote. They will simply be used to count and report the election results. By taking this approach, the president chosen by a majority of American citizens to represent them and to speak for them is elected by the American people directly and not by proxy vote. The electoral college with the assistance of election administrators would be used to ensure that the votes are validly cast and accurately counted and documented. Bibliography Allund, A. Market Socialism or the Restoration of Capitalism? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Print Burgan, M. The Electoral College. Minneapolis, MN: Compass Point Books, 2007. “Faithless Electors.” Web. (2009). http://archive.fairvote.org/e_college/faithless.htm (Retrieved April 14, 2012). Ferrera, M. Welfare State Reform in Southern Europe. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2005. Print Mises, L. V. Socialism. Auburn, Alabama: The Ludwig Von Mises Institute, (1951/2009). Print Singh, R. American Government and Politics: A Concise Introduction. London, UK: Sage Publications, Ltd. 2003. Print Taras, R. Ideology in a Socialist State: Poland, 1956-1983. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Print US Citizenship and Immigration Services. “Citizenship Through Naturalization.” (2011). http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=d84d6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=d84d6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD Appendix 1. What are two rights of everyone living in the United States? freedom to petition the government and freedom to disobey traffic laws freedom of worship and freedom to make treaties with other countries freedom of speech and freedom of worship freedom of speech and freedom to run for president 2. Who makes federal laws? the Supreme Court the President Congress the states 3. Name the U.S. war between the North and the South. World War I the Revolutionary War the Civil War the War of 1812 4. What happened at the Constitutional Convention? The Declaration of Independence was written. The Emancipation Proclamation was written. The Constitution was written. The Virginia Declaration of Rights was written. 1. What does the Constitution do? all of these answers sets up the government defines the government protects basic rights of Americans 2. What stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful? checks and balances the President the people freedom of speech 3. What happened at the Constitutional Convention? The Declaration of Independence was written. The Emancipation Proclamation was written. The Constitution was written. The Virginia Declaration of Rights was written. 4. What did Martin Luther King, Jr. do? became a U.S. Senator ran for President of the United States fought for women's suffrage fought for civil rights Taken from. US Citizenship and Immigration Services (n.d.). http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.d72b75bdf98917853423754f526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=afd6618bfe12f210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=afd6618bfe12f210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&print=0&print=0 (Retrieved April 14, 2012). Read More