POLI 330N Final Exam 4- Question with Answers (Graded A+)
1. (TCO 1) Historians & political scientists are different because historians & political
... [Show More] scientists . Chapter 1, P 5 (Points : 2)
A. Are reluctant to generalize; look for generalizations
B. Look for generalizations; are reluctant to generalize
C. Are more likely to look for comparisons; focus on differences
D. Tend to focus on nature-based explanations; focus on nurture-based explanations
2. (TCO 1) The notion that politicians think practically & political scientists think abstractly is indicative of which of the following? (Points : 2)
A. Political scientists often train politicians.
B. Politicians often train political scientists.
C. Political scientists & politicians are different in that the former studies the latter.
D. Political scientists & politicians are often indistinguishable.
3. (TCO 1) Voting for someone who is charismatic but whose policies might not benefit you would be considered
behavior. (Points : 2)
irrational rational legitimate selfish
4. (TCO 1) is the use of public office for private gain.(Points : 2)
Sovereign Corruption Authority Legitimacy
5. (TCO 1) The notion that we acknowledge the rightful roles of our leaders or our laws is known as . (Points : 2)
Sovereignty
Authority
Legitimacy
Monarchy
6. (TCO 1) Relating concepts in a way that connects them in an empirical manner is the basis of building (Point . 2)
Scholarship
Theory
Power
Culture
7. (TCO 1) The term for measuring with numbers is . (Points : 2)
quantifying hypothesis qualifying empirical
8. (TCO 4) The English common law stressed the rights of free & equal men & was developed on the basis of precedent set by earlier judges, known today as . (Points : 2)
judgemade law judicial precedent example by trial court generated
9. (TCO 4) Which of the following issues is a civil concern? (Points : 2)
Extortion Theft Divorce Trafficking
10. (TCO 4) The concept of judicial review falls under which article of the U.S. Constitution?(Points : 2)
Article I: The Legislative Branch Article III: The Judicial Branch Article VI: Debts, Supremacy, Oaths
Judicial review is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution.
11. (TCO 4) Who nominates & approves federal judges in the U.S. court system? (Points : 2)
A. The president & the Senate
B. The Senate & the House
C. The president & Speaker of the House
D. The Senate & the Secretary of State
12. (TCO 4) Which of the following was an argument against granting the U.S. Supreme Court the power of judicial review? (Points : 2)
A. Many feared that such a power would give the court a double check & compromise its neutrality.
B. Some thought that such power would create untrustworthy judges.
C. The founders argued that judicial review would lead to undue indictments by the court.
D. Drafters of the Constitution feared that few laws would ever be set in stone.
13. (TCO 4) Examine the ideal role of American judges. (Points : 2)
Judges should intervene frequently, interpreting the law according to their expertise & ensuring a fair trial.
Judges should act as umpires, passively watching the legal drama & ruling only on disputed points of procedure.
Judges should not intervene unless attorneys object, at which point they may either overrule or sustain the objection.
Judges should take an active role, questioning witnesses, eliciting evidence, & commenting on procedure.
14. (TCO 4) In Lombard v. Louisiana (1963), the Warren Court supported , ruling that blacks who had refused to leave a segregated lunch counter could not be prosecuted. (Points : 2)
Boycotts sit-ins picket lines protests
15. (TCO 5) Why do the responsibilities of legislative & executive powers often overlap?(Points : 2)
A. Separation of powers is rarely clearcut.
B. Separation of powers is rare among industrialized nations.
C. Separation of powers is absolute.
D. Separation of powers grants obtuse levels of power to the executive branch.
16. (TCO 5) How often does the cabinet change in a parliamentary system? (Points : 2)
Every 4 years
Every 6 years
Every 8 years
When the cabinet is voted out or resigns
17. (TCO 5) Because of the separation of powers inherent in a presidential system, some scholars think that executivelegislative is common in systems like that used in the United States. (Points : 2)
Cooperation
Stagnation
Deadlock
Insolvency
18. (TCO 5) Who directly calls forth the leader of the largest party to take office with a cabinet & become the prime minister? (Points : 2)
The voters Parliament The monarch
The House of Commons
Final Exam Page 2
P 2
1. (TCO 5) When it comes to electing officials, which factor matters the most to voters in both presidential & parliamentary elections? (Points : 2)
Party affiliation
Political ideologies
Money invested in campaign
Personality
2. (TCO 5) Who receives the most attention in both parliamentary & presidential systems? (Points : 2)
Head of state
Chief executive
The legislature
Voting citizens
3. (TCO 5) Describe how the United States exp&s its cabinet. (Points : 2)
The president can create a new department at his or her will.
Congress must agree on the new department & provisions for its funds must be made.
In order for a new department to be developed, a former one must be deleted.
New departments are no longer developed.
4. (TCO 7) Radicals use the term political economy instead of to describe their critique of capitalism & the inequitable distribution of wealth among nations. (Points : 2)
Marxism laissez-faire public choice Keynesian
5. (TCO 7) How do Keynesian economic policies differ from the traditional laissezfaire policies developed by Adam Smith? (Points : 2)
Laissezfaire advocates for “cutthroat” capitalism, & Keynesian policies seek to spread wealth equally among a nation’s citizens.
Keynesian economics advocate for increased government control of economics, & traditional laissezfaire argues for a h&sfree approach.
Smithian policies advocate for increased spending & stimuli for governmentrun businesses, & Keynesian economics argues for a h&sfree approach.
The more liberal Smithian economies distribute wealth more evenly among society, & Keynesian economics tends to distribute wealth among the top 1%.
6. (TCO 7) What event is largely considered responsible for deterring Johnson’s War on Poverty? (Points : 2)
Great Society
Vietnam War
Middleclass entitlements
Tax expenditures
7. (TCO 7) Which of the following is an increasing financial concern of the Medicare program? (Points : 2)
The proportion of older people in American society is increasing steadily.
Every American citizen on reaching 65 obtains Medicare, regardless of class.
Economic inequality renders Medicare more necessary for some than for others.
Wealthy Americans are taking advantage of the Medicare system.
8. (TCO 7) Why are many politicians wary about limiting Social Security & Medicare expenses? (Points : 2)
Many would be left without enough to support them.
Caps to these programs would undermine the welfare state.
It can cost them votes.
Both are primary social safety nets.
9. (TCO 7) How does the American welfare state compare to those of other industrialized nations? (Points : 2)
Much less is allocated to welfare in the United States.
Other nations allocate less to welfare than the United States. The United States allocates about the same to welfare.
Few nations besides the United States maintain funds for welfare.
10. (TCO 7) Theoretically, what are the consequences if the government assumes the burden of bad loans? (Points
: 2)
Citizens will default on their mortgages.
Banks will learn from their mistakes & pay back the burden with interest.
Ultimately, the government will profit.
Firms will be encouraged to continue their risky behavior.
11. (TCO 9) What is the most common response to serious domestic unrest? (Points : 2)
Revolution
Coup d’état
Military takeover
UN diplomatic action
12. (TCO 9) Riots triggered by police beating youths, protests against globalization, & labor strikes against austerity are all examples of . (Points : 2)
Purely traditional violence
Issue-oriented violence
Violence carried out by civilian institutions of government coups
13. (TCO 9) What is likely to happen if the people are unhappy & there is no organization to focus their discontent? (Points : 2)
They will almost surely turn to violence.
Not much will happen.
The people will organize themselves, regardless.
They will eventually find other means of achieving contentedness.
14. (TCO 9) What about U.S. agencies such as the Department of Homel& Security, the FBI, & the CIA make them so ill prepared to fight terrorism? (Points : 2)
They have extremely different missions when it comes to terrorism.
They are poorly funded.
They have a great deal of red tape to get through in order to be able to communicate.
They are often unwilling to communicate with each other.
15. (TCO 9) According to Hannah Arendt, the American struggle was indeed a revolution, perhaps history’s only complete revolution, .(Points : 2)
Because it alone ended with democratic institutions.
Because it became an example for other nations.
Because it managed to route what was then the great world power.
Because it alone ended with a new foundation of liberty instead of the tyranny that came after other revolutions.
16. (TCO 9) Does terrorism work? (Points : 2)
Rarely, & seldom without political &/or economic pressure
Rarely, but primarily when brought against democratic nations
Often, & without much need for political pressure to aid it
Often, but only with the assistance of economic &/or political pressure
17. (TCO 9) Hannah Arendt pointed out that rage is the fuel of revolution, but what is now the greatest cause of rage?(Points : 2)
The low level of education in developing nations
The enormous economic mismanagement in industrialized nations
The extreme violence utilized by industrialized nations against developing nations
The massive corruption now found in developing l&s
Final Exam Page 3
1. (TCO 2) What types of states are most likely to become authoritarian? Why? Along the same lines, what authoritarian states have been most likely to democratize? Under what circumstances does this democratization occur & why? Based on previous findings, describe one country you think is likely to democratize in the near future. (Points : 40)
Answer:
States that suffers from frequent wars & political pressure is most likely to have an authoritarian government. A good example in current times is the case of Burundi & Syria. The most likely governance to calm down the situation involves authoritarianism. Besides that, states that suffer from economic turmoil also have a higher likely chance of suffering from authoritarianism. A good example of authoritarianism resulting from economic pressure occurred in Germany in 1919. In this case, allies of Germany respond to the situation by preventing the nation from recovering. This led to Germany being an authoritarian state. A nation with strong nationalism ideology also has a higher chance of turning out to be an authoritarian state. During the reign of Hitler, the core concept was a nationalism that made Germany community feels they are superior to other nation, particularly Jewish community.
Egypt & Libya are a most recent nation that considered democratizing. The possible reason for such move is to fight for equity, improve governance & enjoy political freedom.
Uganda is a nation located in East Africa, & President Yoweri Museveni rules it. Museveni uses the authoritarian concept to rule which is subjected to frequent threats & mistreatment of opposition. However, the citizen is pressuring for the need for freedom & democracy in that state for equity & betterment of services. Besides that, in February 2016 there will be an election & change might occur since different organization & group are encouraging the people to exercise their right that for a long time have been violated.
2. (TCO 3) Compare & contrast interest groups & political parties. In your response, be sure to provide examples their similarities & differences. In addition, please assess what advantages interest groups offer that political parties don’t & then what advantages d political parties offer that interest groups don’t. (Points : 40)
Answer:
The way of association of vested parties varies from that of political gatherings. As it were, the association of vested parties is to some degree free. They are a gathering of individuals working for a shared objective. That does not as a matter of course imply that they ought to have a constitution thus on for their work.
The contrast between political gatherings & vested parties comes from the reasons for each. Political gatherings st& in the races & attempt to win the votes cast by the general population & speak to them in the chambers, parliament, or some other representing body of the state or nation. Then again, intrigue bunches don't remain in the races. They don't try for the votes from the general population as well. This is the primary distinction between political gatherings & vested parties. There are some other fascinating actualities additionally about each of these gatherings that we will examine in this article before we go to the contrasts between political gatherings & vested parties.
A political gathering more often than not has an appropriate constitution that clarifies why they have met up, the elements of their gathering, parts of the individuals, & so forth. They are extremely composed.
With regards to regular great, political gatherings tend to work a great deal more as one than the vested parties who appear to work for particular interests as their name recommends.
3. (TCO 6) Since the end of WWII, international relations have been framed by the conflict between liberal governments & communist ideals. Compare & contrast the features of these systems & assess their continued impact on the global community. Please be certain to explain classical & modern liberalism, socialism, & communism within your responses & provide examples to support your points. (Points : 40)
Answer:
Communism in about the majority of its notable & current signs has conveyed what needs be as solid, incorporated dictator control of the economy, business, managing an account, the political framework, allotment of assets, & the engaging of the common laborers with the point of a "raunchy" society. Further, property of assorted types is held in like manner (by means of the state), as opposed to separate as private & open property. Marx had a substantially more vote based perspective of how such a general public would work & advance after some time (see his dialog of the Paris Commune, for instance), however Stalin, Mao & others utilized socialist standards as a revitalizing cry to take single gathering control of government (& whatever is left of society), wrestling it from the decision first class (& laborers committees & assemblages) in unfathomably fierce ways. I'm sure Marx & Engels would have been frightened by what these "progressives" did, yet there you have it. Regardless, what separates socialism by & by from different types of communism are these components of tyrannical ideological unbending nature, compelling nonappearance of vote based system, & state responsibility for about everything. Obviously, on the grounds that comrade states needed to exist inside globalized private enterprise, they basically have worked by means of an especially vindictive type of state free enterprise, & never achieved the "destitute" social orders at first imagined.
Modern non-comrade types of communism are distinctive in that they look to architect square with access to circumstances & assets for all nationals, as gave by unified &/or appropriated equitable components for overseeing creation, as opposed to tyrant state control & foundations. In like manner, there is about dependably procurement made for both private & open property, & albeit a few commercial ventures might be "associated" to convey square with baselines of fundamental staples & administrations to everybody in that society, the impulse to control all undertaking through the state is truant. In spite of the fact that there have been numerous types of communism proposed, the most widely recognized by & by is some type of law based communism, where other political & financial philosophies exist together with communist ones. Truly, communism flourishes in pretty much every present day society, including the U.S., where the military, the postal administration, national parks, interstate expressways, Medicare & a large group of different establishments speak to an "associated" model for aggregate advantage. In this sense, it is somewhat funny that a few Americans rail against "those communist elitists" in Europe, & so on., since Europe & the U.S. simply actualize communism to somewhat changing degrees. Likewise with socialism, be that as it may, almost all communism on the planet works inside the system of true state private enterprise.
Despite befuddling talk from the right-wingers, progressiveness has no immediate connections with communism, socialism or radicalism. Rather, progressives are worried with propelling society for the advantage of everybody in the most even minded & inventive ways that could be available. This implies a dynamic supporters progresses in everything: innovation, well-being & prosperity, more impartial laws & social liberties, a more extensive use of science in cutting edge basic leadership in all levels of society, & frequently more libertarian access to assets & opportunity (i.e. social, political & financial force). It's this last thing - populist access - that gets them in a bad position with "hostile to communists," since communism has demonstrated itself an exceptionally successful method for accomplishing that end for specific things. In any case, a dedicated dynamic would not waver to drop communism like a hot potato if something better - that is, something all the more logically compelling in raising the personal satisfaction, social standing & open door for everybody - tagged along. What's more, since private enterprise, when unregulated, has had a tendency to make more disparity & classicism in the public eye, & has likewise tended to endeavor individuals & regular assets instead of shield these from misuse, progressives are for the most part very wary of traditionalist cases with respect to automatic free undertaking & stream down advantages for poor people.
Liberalism presents us with some extremely cloudy & evolving waters, & most likely merits significantly more exchange than a minor section here. Since radicalism champions the standards of freedom & fairness, it conveys what needs be in various courses relying upon how somebody trusts freedom & equity can be accomplished. So while the neoliberal supporters liberated free endeavor & exchange, & a seriously decreased part & power in focal government, a "social liberal" may trust government is fundamental to upholding individual & aggregate flexibility (social liberties), & that social equity (as upheld by the standard of law) is basic to keeping up individual freedoms. Social liberals additionally have a tendency to trust that entrepreneur endeavor & markets oblige control to secure laborers & customers. Libertarianism, is doubtful that the State plays something besides a severe part with respect to freedom. As anybody watching American governmental issues in the course of recent decades can confirm, these different types of progressiveness can be at incredible chances with each other. At the end of the day, however, both closures of the radicalism range work inside the structure of true state free enterprise.
4. (TCO 8) Today’s world seems to be moving beyond sovereignty & toward supranational leadership to cooperate on issues of global importance. What are some of these issues? How might they be solved through supranational cooperation? Does such cooperation impede the sovereignty of independent nations? Please sure to include specific examples in supporting your points. (Points : 40)
Answer:
The sovereign obligation emergency & the euro emergency have incited heads of state & government in Europe to heighten supranational collaboration. Be that as it may, some political pioneers & arrangement producers go for additional. They propose the presentation of a typical European monetary government that would keep Europe from encountering further financial dangers & settle national spending plans & financial markets, & the euro. The consequences of a review among well informed individuals infer a fairly undecided state of mind towards this endeavor. While a thin dominant part supports the general thought of incorporated monetary administration in Europe, or in the Euro zone, the solid thoughts for the configuration of such a legislature are not famous among the respondents.
A unified macroeconomic approach, a typical spending plan that is set midway & utilizing Euro-bonds as a typical method for obligation financing in the Euro zone all get restricted endorsement. In this way, on the off chance that they are going for more supranational collaboration, open & corporate approach producers need to make obvious strides that offer substantial benefits that influence general feelings favorably. [Show Less]