Friday, January 31, 2020
Transcendental Deduction Essay Example for Free
Transcendental Deduction Essay Kant’s Transcendental Deduction of the categories of the analytic concepts presents an analysis of the mental activities as well as the analysis of knowledge and self. Kant discussed these mental activities using two sets of terms such as manifold representations and intuition as well as understanding and sensibility (p.76).            Representation to him means the various concepts pulling together into unity and can be given in an intuition that is merely sensible. For Kant, intuition means a perception or knowledge (a priore) or insight.  Kant associated knowledge to intuition and also to perception (p.82). He said, â€Å"The pure concepts of understanding even when they are applied to a priori intuition provide knowledge only to the extent that these are priori intuition, and through them, the concept of understanding is applied also. He further noted that â€Å"empirical intuition serves only for the possibility of empirical knowledge. Sensible on the other hand, means either having or demonstrating sound reason and judgment or able to be perceived through the senses. Synthesis is the result of combination, a process of combining different ideas, influences or objects into a new whole. In view of transcendental deduction of Kant, the combination of concepts is act of â€Å"active department†of understanding which disguised it from the passive department which he called sensibility. He concludes this statement that â€Å"all combining is an action of the understanding whether or not we are conscious of it†(p.75). Kant further discussed the understanding self using another set of terminology.            The â€Å"I think†which refers to that something was represented that could not be thought at all; He introduced three bits of terminology in order for us to grasp of the self-awareness (p76), that is expressed in the representation â€Å"I think.† These three bits about self-awareness according to Kant are: (1) the pure self-awareness which presupposed by all thought and intuition; (2) the basic self-awareness which is the self-consciousness that produces the representation of the â€Å"I think;†(3) Transcendental which is the unity of self-awareness. Clarifying the Aim of Transcendental Deduction of the Categories of the Analytical Concepts            Kant’s aim of transcendental deduction is to seek to generalize what he has said about self-awareness to all conceptual thinking. The author pointed out that what Kant must have meant is that, â€Å"a property combines with other properties†or that a â€Å"representation of a property combines with the representation.† This according to him, Kant infers about analysis is being possible if there has previously been synthesis. In the discussion of analytic concept, Kant used such terms as I, I think, I can, I couldn’t do it. He said that each of this representation is accompanied with consciousness that when combined with different representation can on finally say â€Å"I can†that means he is now aware of the intended action or he calls it â€Å"self-awareness. In his discussion of synthesis, he said that it is an act of the mind. Here, what he meant is act of mentally combining distinct intentional representations. Important Argumentative Elements             The first argumentative element about transcendental deduction is that, our concept about an object is associated with self awareness. The mind must have representations of that concept to make it pure concept. In my own interpretation, this representation could be experiences that connect representation of concept, since self has one identity. Therefore, all other perception must be belonging to one consciousness or attributing to one identity in which the central grip is the self-employed knowledge. In this sense, we can conclude that the self identifies object based on consciousness and awareness. Usually, the experiences help shape the self’s concept of things. Kant emphasize that there must be a unity of consciousness and self-awareness which underlies the relations of representations to an object, which makes their objective validity and consequently their status as an item of knowledge (p.78). What he meant by this is that the unity of self consciousness and the synthetic unity of self awareness are the bases for all uses of the understanding and it has nothing to do with any sensible intuition. Kant also emphasized that â€Å"understanding must related through more understanding to objects of intuition (p.83). In other words, concepts that are not sensible cannot be transformed to reality and cannot be understood. An act of the understanding results from self-awareness that leads to thinking something that is necessary condition not only for our identity as experiencing minds, but also for anything that is to be an object of sensible intuition (p.83). These forms of thought of thoughts must come to have objective reality. In my idea, Kant is discussing these matters for us to understand how our thoughts are formed and come into reality. The object is self-awareness and self-consciousness of our actions, thoughts, and words. On of the argumentative elements in Kant’s discussion of deduction of pure concepts of understanding that I find is his statement about the multiplicity of intuition which he labeled synthesis. He said that it reminds us that we cannot represent to ourselves anything as combined in the object unless we ourselves have previously combined it. I find this statement somehow contradicting in a sense that synthesis is natural work of the mind which we may not be conscious how it is working. He said synthesis is â€Å"mind self activity†(p.75), and can only be carried out by mind itself. In this case, it appears that we have no control of this activity. If what he meant is that we can be aware of all these intuition pure concept and synthesis. Then, we can guide our thoughts towards right expression of reality. If this is the case, the expression of self-awareness and self-consciousness would have high effect. But since this is a mental act, it can only be carried out by the mind itself which we are not conscious. There I would say that it certainly cannot represent to us anything. Kant presented another interesting discussion of the pure concept and forms of thoughts. He said that â€Å"pure concept of understanding is related through mere understanding to objects of intuition of any kinds as long as it is sensible†(p.103). Here, Kant relates pure concept of understanding with intuition of any kinds as long as it is sensible regardless of the nature of those objects whether they are corrupt or bad character. He pointed out that because of this application; the intuition become a form of thoughts convey us information about determinate object. What quite interesting in this is that, he said that pure concept of understanding is related to intuition which is sensible. The pure concept to intuition is mere forms of thoughts with no determinate object related to intuition which is sensible. Thus, the discussion centers on how our mental faculties are working in so far as to have self-awareness which must be the basis of all these. Kant pointed out that there is in us a certain basic form of a priori sensible intuition that depends on our passive faculty representation. What he meant is that we have intuition of space and time which is also the pure intuition. But this intuition according to Kant is either pure intuition or empirical intuition. The pure intuition is about space and time while empirical those sensations that immediately represent to us as real in space and time. Kant noted that â€Å"thing in space and time are given as perception†(p.82). Conclusion            Kant’s discussion of transcendental deductions was quite very difficult to understand. But in so far as my understanding is concerned, Kant presented a detailed discussion of how our mental faculties are working towards a formation of thoughts about the self from what he calls manifold representation. He said that we have basically a priori knowledge yet it needs to be combined to the manifold representations which he calls this combination as synthesis or synthetic unity. This according to Kant leads to self awareness or self consciousness.            Kant also discussed pure concept of knowledge which according to him is related to understanding objects of intuition. Here he discussed that before a concept becomes a thought it has to be identified with intuition of any kinds as long as it is sensible. In other words, a concept that is identified with sensibility can be concrete and can be grasped.            But what is important in this discussion is the aim of this presentation. Kant was able to clarify to us how our mental faculties are working towards the making of mere thoughts and concepts to become words and pure concepts of knowledge to express consciousness and awareness.            I would say that knowing all these, must help us to be more careful of our self-expression as well as of our attitude in dealing with others. The transcendental deductions has helped us know our selves, therefore it must help us too in expressing our own selves in the everyday events and circumstances of our lives.
Wednesday, January 22, 2020
Freudian Psyche in Geisels The Cat in the Hat Essay -- Cat in the Hat
Freudian Psyche in Geisel's The Cat in the Hat  "Then we saw him step in on the mat! We looked! And we saw him! The Cat in the hat!" (Seuss 6)  Through the years, many parents have read the children's book The Cat in the Hat to their kids. Written by Theodore Geisel, otherwise known as Dr. Seuss, The Cat in the Hat is a lively and wonderful book to read to children. No only that, but also it helps teach children about right and wrong through fun and exciting characters. But many kids and parents alike are missing a piece of the puzzle. Not only is The Cat in the Hat a fun-to-read children's book, but it is also a play on the Freudian psyche.  Freud's perception of the human mind splits it into three separate sections: the id, the ego and the superego. The id is purely primal instincts; it is based on the mind's pleasure principle and is present in babies when they are first born. All the id wants is to have its needs fulfilled-no matter what the consequences. The ego is a balance; it works on the reality principle, and, while it works with the id to gain pleasure, it is constantly wary of the consequences. The superego is the id's opposite. Its main objective is to maintain morals, and it is the effective counter to the id. For instance, if the id wanted the person it inhabits to get some money, the superego would counter the id and make the person earn the money legitimately because stealing is wrong. The superego is split in two sections: the conscience and the ego ideal. The conscience differentiates between right and wrong, while the ego ideal works with morals instilled by society, such as prejudices. The se three sections of mind balance each other in order to k... ...ish does throughout The Cat in the Hat.  Freud understood the mind as constantly in conflict with itself. He saw children so accurately that he knew what they wanted to say and thought of what they wanted to hear. It is because of this factor that The Cat in the Hat is one of the most popular children's books ever. The reader of The Cat in the Hat understands the book as a fun read on a rainy day. However, the more educated reader sees it as a Freudian allegory. Theodore Geisel was brilliant in this area because he exposed a common incident that happens, one way or another, in every child's life.   Works Cited Seuss, Dr. The Cat in the Hat. New York: Random House, 1957. Stevenson, David B. "Freud's Division of the Mind." Brown University. 11 November 1999. http://landow.stg.brown.edu/HtatBrown/freud/Division_of_Mind.html. Freudian Psyche in Geisel's The Cat in the Hat Essay -- Cat in the Hat Freudian Psyche in Geisel's The Cat in the Hat  "Then we saw him step in on the mat! We looked! And we saw him! The Cat in the hat!" (Seuss 6)  Through the years, many parents have read the children's book The Cat in the Hat to their kids. Written by Theodore Geisel, otherwise known as Dr. Seuss, The Cat in the Hat is a lively and wonderful book to read to children. No only that, but also it helps teach children about right and wrong through fun and exciting characters. But many kids and parents alike are missing a piece of the puzzle. Not only is The Cat in the Hat a fun-to-read children's book, but it is also a play on the Freudian psyche.  Freud's perception of the human mind splits it into three separate sections: the id, the ego and the superego. The id is purely primal instincts; it is based on the mind's pleasure principle and is present in babies when they are first born. All the id wants is to have its needs fulfilled-no matter what the consequences. The ego is a balance; it works on the reality principle, and, while it works with the id to gain pleasure, it is constantly wary of the consequences. The superego is the id's opposite. Its main objective is to maintain morals, and it is the effective counter to the id. For instance, if the id wanted the person it inhabits to get some money, the superego would counter the id and make the person earn the money legitimately because stealing is wrong. The superego is split in two sections: the conscience and the ego ideal. The conscience differentiates between right and wrong, while the ego ideal works with morals instilled by society, such as prejudices. The se three sections of mind balance each other in order to k... ...ish does throughout The Cat in the Hat.  Freud understood the mind as constantly in conflict with itself. He saw children so accurately that he knew what they wanted to say and thought of what they wanted to hear. It is because of this factor that The Cat in the Hat is one of the most popular children's books ever. The reader of The Cat in the Hat understands the book as a fun read on a rainy day. However, the more educated reader sees it as a Freudian allegory. Theodore Geisel was brilliant in this area because he exposed a common incident that happens, one way or another, in every child's life.   Works Cited Seuss, Dr. The Cat in the Hat. New York: Random House, 1957. Stevenson, David B. "Freud's Division of the Mind." Brown University. 11 November 1999. http://landow.stg.brown.edu/HtatBrown/freud/Division_of_Mind.html.
Tuesday, January 14, 2020
The Death Penalty: Right or Wrong?
The Death Penalty: Right or Wrong? The death penalty is one of the main solutions to prevent crime rates in different states. It should be legalized in all fifty states, to avert from crime, keep repeat offenders off of the streets, and to reduce taxpayers the cost of keeping those found guilty of immoral crimes in prison low. The death penalty can, in fact, prevent outrageous crimes from being committed when it is lawful in a state.Social scientists have stated, â€Å"The act of general deterrence, which is when the punishment dissuaded potential criminals from committing crimes, keeps criminals from going through with crimes†(Baird and Rosenbaum). Heinous crimes have been reduced highly in the states that have a capital punishment law such as Texas. Not only does it keep criminals from going through with the crimes, it causes the offenders to suffer for their wrong actions. Many states have passed the law of the death penalty, while other states, such as New York, claim tha t it is morally wrong and does not solve the problem.Though I can concur with the states that have not passed the law, by putting these deviant people to death, it will cause safer environments for the innocent. For a particular state such as Texas to be able to say they have less crime due to a solution is impressive; every state should want to have the ability to say the same. In Austin, Texas, the population is 768,970, the violence crime is 5. 23, and the murder and nonnegligent manslaughter is 0. 03 (Miller).Though the population is less in Buffalo, New York, with a population of 268,655, there is more crime here. The violence crime is 14. 59 while the murder and nonnegligent manslaughter is 0. 22 (Miller). There has to be a reason why crime is so high in New York and not as high in Texas; the answer is most likely the death penalty. Though it is a very dirty job to execute these criminals, it is ultimately more helpful then harmful. Part of what the death penalty is doing is s etting an example for those people who are also doing crime to consider their actions first. Evidence for capital punishment’s general deterrent effect comes from three sources: logic, firsthand reporters, and social science research†(Cassell and Bedau 189). Logic supports the conclusion that the death penalty is the most effective deterrent for some kinds of murders, those that require reflection and forethought by persons of reasonable intelligence and unimpaired mental faculties. Firsthand reports from criminals and victims confirm our logical intuition that the death penalty deters (Cassell and Bedau 190).Senator Dianne Feinstein recounted her experience in the 1960s sentencing of a women convicted of robbery in the first degree. She asked the women why was the gun that she brought unloaded, the women replayed, â€Å"So I would not panic, kill somebody, and get the death penalty†(Cassell and Bedau 190). This is a great example of how the death penalty does cause people to question their actions before they go through with them. Even if this was the only case where a life was saved, one innocent life is worth putting to death a psycho killer.Texas is one of many states showing the greatest relative improvements overtime due to the death penalty. Not only does the death penalty deter crimes but it also saves innocent lives. Individuals against the death penalty argue that it is not the cause of less crime, all the death penalty is, is murder. In reality, it has been proven otherwise that it does, in fact, save innocent lives. By keeping the criminals in prisons their whole lives, we are faced with other possible problems such as: breaking out of jail, killing of prison guards or other inmates. Statistical studies and common sense aside, it's undeniable that the death penalty saves some lives: those of the prison guards and other inmates who would otherwise be killed by murderers serving life sentences without parole, and of people who m ight otherwise encounter murderous escapees†(Stuart). States such as New York believe it is immorally wrong to execute criminals and they are better off â€Å"rotting†in prison. Yes, in certain cases, they deserve life in prison with no parole over the death penalty, but they are those other cases that deserve more harsh punishment.While capital punishment is a good thing to have, it is also not something we can mess up to wrongly accuse someone. In the movie Green Mile, crazy Bill deserved to die. He was evil and always trying to plot a way to break out or attack one of the guards. If he was successful in doing so, one of them could have been killed, or he would have been free to hurt and kill many other people. The way he raped and killed those girls was disgusting and he should never be able to affect any others. John, on the other hand, did not deserve to die.His whole case was a misunderstanding; he was caught trying to save the young girls while everyone thought he was the murderer. John’s case is exactly why the government needs to look deep into every situation before putting them on death row. Being put on death row is a long and dreadful process. In spite of this, â€Å"Public polls regularly reveal that at least fifty percent of the American people are in favor of the death penalty for crimes of murder†(Cassell and Bedau 20). The other fifty percent needs to look past the killing of one deviant person and look at all the lives that are being saved.John McAdams said it perfectly, â€Å"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call. †He is basically saying that by executing murderers to deter crime, it is better to kill them with no affects th en not kill them and allow criminals to go through with their crime.Many Americans argue not only about the death penalty not deterring but also the expense of it. A 1991 study of the Texas criminal justice system estimated the cost of appealing capital murder at $2,316,655 (Baird and Rosenbaum 109). Some expenses include money for the trial, state appeals, federal appeals and death row housing. In contrast, the cost of housing a prisoner in a Texas maximum security prison single cell for 40 years is estimated at 750,000 (Baird and Rosenbaum 109).Advocators that are against capital punishment argue that the death penalty is more expensive because of the appeals then life in prison without parole. Supporters of the death penalty, however, point out that, while they advocate proper review of the cases, both the lengthy time and the high expense result from innumerable appeals, many over â€Å"technicalities†which have little or nothing to do with the question of guilt or innoc ence, and do little more than jam up nations court system. If these â€Å"frivolous†appeals were eliminated, the procedure would neither take so long nor cost so much.After going over the math for the costs of both life with out parole and executions, there is still an issue with the space all of the inmates will be taking up. â€Å"The prison and jail population have risen to two million over the past decade†(Reynolds). By putting more and more people on life without parole is just causing there to be less room for people who did less of a harmful crime. What is the point of keeping them around when they are just going to die eventually anyway? If they did something really severe, then they deserve to die. They are waiting in rison for nothing, no hope to leave those prison walls. It might sound cruel to use that as a solution to the problem of an increasing amount of inmates in prison, but in defense, they are living for nothing. They wake up everyday with no goals , drive, or improvements that need to be made. They are not moving forward with their lives because they are only awaiting their deaths, while taking up space in the prisons that could possibly be for people that will eventually be free. Americans also argue that mostly everyone on death row is minorities.As of December 2005, there were thirty-seven prisoners under a sentence of death in the federal system. Of these prisoners, 43. 2 percent were white, while 54. 1 percent were African-American (Muhlhausen). The fact that African Americans are a majority of federal prisoners on death row and a minority in the overall United States population may lead some to conclude that the federal system discriminates against African-Americans. However, there is little rigorous evidence that such disparities exist in the federal system.African Americans make up thirteen percent of the nations monthly drug users, they represent thirty-five percent of those arrested for drug possessions, fifty-three percent of those convicted of drug offenses, and seventy-five percent of those convicted of drug offenses category (Cassell and Bedau 95). In reality, the reason African Americans are normally the ones to be in trouble with the government is usually because of the areas the majority of them grew up in. Racial minorities in the United States are also disproportionately poor.Because they are poor, they are faced with trying to survive and they will do whatever means necessary, including murder. Looking back on history, all executions were being done in public. They were hanged in the middle of the town for everyone to witness the killing of these criminals. The reason the executions were being done in public was because it was centered around the issue of deterrence. It was to inhibit anyone contemplating the same deed as the condemned (Baird and Rosenbaum 110). The people only saw what the government was doing, and saw it as cruel and inhuman.Because they did not also witness what t he criminal did they started to believe the government was wrong and it caused the government to look bad. â€Å"Granting his [Timothy McVeigh] request [for a public execution] allows the moral distinction between him and the rest of us to slip away. It makes it look as if we are all just as bloodthirsty as he†(ProCon). In other words, while this act is being done in the open, it makes the public believe that the government is just as much of a criminal as the one being executed. Now, we go about the death penalty in a different way.Today executions are done with a limited audience, the way it should be. Because the killer took a family’s loved one away, those family members should have the right to watch the criminal be persecuted. Opponents of Capital punishment are also wondering if state-sponsored killing is the best way for victims' family members to cope with their tragedy. â€Å"Life without the possibility of parole is severe, swift and less costly than the d eath penalty and allows victims' families to move on with their lives and healing†(â€Å"Death Penalty Cases†).Yes, it is a dreadful memory for the victim’s families to relive but it is worth the suffering for a little in order to make sure this criminal never has another opportunity to hurt another life. After the case is closed and the criminal is put to death the families of the victim will be able to have a sense of closure. Just like the sick man in Green Mile, Billy, raped and brutally killed two very young girls who did not deserve what he did to them. Although they killed the wrong man, John, the family of the two girls was there to witness it.While he was being put to death, the family was able to have a sense of relief that this man was not going to keep his life and get away with what he did. Though it does not bring the victim back, it is the next best solution and it will help the families sleep better at night knowing they got what they deserved, t he right consequences for their actions. In every murder case, the victims never have a voice to fight for themselves and to make sure the murderer gets what he rightfully deserves. It is the family of the victims’ responsibility to be that voice that fights for the victim, because their voice was taken from them.For example, Kenneth Allen McDuss raped, tortured, and murdered at least nine women in Texas in the early 1990s, and probably many more (Cassell and Bedau 183). The facts of just one such killing will reveal the horror of his crimes. On December 29, 1991, in Austin, Texas, McDuss and his accomplice manhandled 28-year-old Colleen Reed into the back of a car driven by this accomplice. Reed screamed in terror for him to let her go but McDuss forced her in the car and tied her hands behind her back. While the accomplice drove to a secluded location, McDuss began to strike and rape the defenseless women in the back seat.After he was done with the violation, he decided to puff cigarettes into a cherry glow, and inserted them into her vagina. Finally, as Reed begged for her life, he killed her by crushing her neck. He later says, â€Å"Killing a woman is like killing a chicken†¦they both squawk†(Cassell and Bedau 184). For a man to say that is utterly disturbing and horrific. Any man who violates and kills a woman for whatever reason deserves to have his own life taken away. Because of her aggressive family who became her voice when she did not have one, he was executed in 1998 (Cassell and Bedau 184).What exactly are we defending by abolishing the death penalty? States such as New York are allowing these monsters to go on living and possibly have the chance to walk free again. Twenty years prior to the rape and murder of Colleen Reed, McDuss was sentenced to death but was able to escape his sentence. He was released in 1989 by Texas authorities who indirectly caused him to finish his killing spree (Cassell and Bedau 184). If he was execu ted to begin with, all of the women he murdered would have been able to die normal, peaceful deaths home with their family and loved ones.By allowing sick criminals the ability to keep living, we are killing many more innocent lives, possibly one of our siblings, parents’ cousins or best friends. Bringing ourselves to agree to murder someone may seem unfair or morally wrong, but it needs to be our job to put the safety of our environment before our personal feelings. Some Americans view capital punishment as morally and ethically wrong; they equate the death penalty with legalized murder, and asks: â€Å"If the premeditated killing of another human being is wrong, how does the premeditated killing of the murderer make it right?Should not society repudiate the death penalty and emphasize mercy rather than revenge? †(Sarat 160). These questions asked by death penalty opponents are legitimate questions for society to consider. The debate surrounding the death penalty inc ludes discussion of the sanctity of human life, personal responsibility, and the role of the state in administering justice. Yet, for all this complexity, the death penalty remains primarily a form of punishment. It assumes that human life is sacred, and that the killers who take the lives of their victims forfeit the rights to their own.Capital punishment is viewed differently in every state in America. While states such as Texas are advocates of the death penalty, other states such as New York refuse to pass the law that allows the government to kill. Opponents of the death penalty argue about the affect it has on the victims’ families, the cost, deterrence, those wrongfully convicted and race discrimination. Though some of these are valid points, after doing research it is very fair and in all of these cases, they did not give the victim a choice so therefore we should not give them one.
Monday, January 6, 2020
Against Super PACs Essay - 1606 Words
The next presidential election will be one like no one has ever seen before in terms of campaign funding and expenses. Even now, the GOP Presidential Primary races are already showing signs of how money will not be an object for their presidential candidate. The seemingly limitless budget exists for these candidates thanks to the so-called Super PACs (Political Action Committees). These Super PACs are allowed to come up with independent financing for the presidential campaign, sans any budgetary ceilings. The inner workings of such a committee has left a bad taste in the mouths of the voters even though very little is known about the actual history and reasons for the existence of the Super PACS. This paper will delve into the committees†¦show more content†¦That is one reason why the public has come to reject the idea of the Super PACs. It has the turned the political campaign into a shallow, reality television, mud-slinging type of contest from which the candidates can nev er return. The ads being run in the newspapers, television, and radio stations cost these candidates and Super PACs money that could have been used for better political means such as contributions to charitable organizations by the candidates or their support groups on their behalf. That sort of act would have had a greater political impact upon the voting public than an ad campaign explaining the ills of Newt Gingrich. Even more sickening, is the fact that most of the candidates will feign knowledge of participation in any negative campaign movements because of the independent nature of the Super PACs. The candidate can deny any involvement in the act all the while coordinating with his Super PAC under the radar of mass media. These negative campaigns leave the candidate free and clear of any involvement as all the Super PAC has to do is run the ad with a clear disclaimer absolving the candidate the ad supports of any wrong doing because the ad was not sanctioned by the candidate o r political party. In other words, Super PACs gives a voice to people with money. All corporations that have money to give, are giving millions and millions of dollars to the candidates across the board. Independent voters dont have that money to donate, so theirShow MoreRelatedSuper Pacs : The New Kind Of Committee That Operates Politically945 Words  | 4 PagesBrianna Goodman Proliferated in 2010, Super PACs have played an immensely influential role in the outcomes of elections and collective action. Super PACs are a new kind of committee that operates politically. As reported by opensecrets.org, Super PACs acquire any amount of donated money in a phenomenon that aggregates towards a fund â€Å"to advocate for or against political candidates and must report their donors to the Federal Election Commission on a monthly or quarterly basis†. They are not allowedRead MoreThe Super Pac940 Words  | 4 Pagesfactors such as money, power, and connections that are questioned and accessed within these groups. PACS or Political Action Committees are involved. Yet, there is another form of PACs that are named â€Å"Super PACS†where unlimited funds are raised (We the People). The â€Å"Super Pac†strategy should be outlawed by the government so it will not abuse its devoted followers. The textbook, We the People defines a PAC as â€Å"private groups with that raise and distribute funds for use election campaigns†(pg. 245).Read MoreIs Voting The Only Way An Average American Can Vote Or Influence A Any Party?927 Words  | 4 Pagesshaped by Super PACS and Interest groups, and we see this all the time in the elections happening. A Super PAC is a political committee that is organized to raise money to support their candidate so they can pull ahead in the polls, and spend money to oppose the other candidates. An interest group supports a certain side on a topic and a candidate for a position in government would find it beneficial to appeal to interest groups in order to gain supporters. Interest groups and Super PACs has changedRead MoreThe United Vs Federal Election Commission1235 Words  | 5 Pagesas â€Å"Super PACs.†Super PACs are organizations that operate independently from any candidate or political party. These organizations are allowed t o receive any amount of money from any person or organization, which they can they allot towards their own support of a political candidate. A good example of this would be Mitt Romney’s Super PAC entitled â€Å"Restore America,†which spent over twelve million dollars launching an ad campaign that attacked Newt Gingrich (MacMillen). These new Super PACs haveRead MoreGlobal Economy And The American Dream1286 Words  | 6 Pagespolitics it’s easy to see today, that world politics are in turmoil. Oil prices have sunk to record lows, putting regions in the Middle East, Russia, and South America in economic crisis. On top of that the whole global economy is in a recession; pushing super powers such as the United States, China, and the European union to take action. All across the world the wealth gap is widening. It seems like for every new billionaire there are another million people in poverty dying of disease. Our one saving graveRead MoreThe Daily Show On The Congressional Record1258 Words  | 6 Pageshealth and financial aid to ill 9/11 workers, which was known as the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. However, the bill did not pass because Democrats were incapable to break a Republican filibuster against the bill. The vote was 57 in favor of closing the debate and 42 against, but 60 votes were needed for the bill to go to an up-or-down vote. Republican Congressmen were concerned about the $7.4 billion bill cost, and the way the money would be spent. John Feal was one of the firstRead MoreJudges Should Be Appointed For Preserve Judicial Independence1121 Words  | 5 Pagesshould have the right to choose who is best for them. An election by the people sounds like a fair and trustworthy method, but ultimately, large corporations pump millions into Super PACs to ensure their choice candidate is elected. Judicial elections are often exposed to attacks from special interest groups and Super PACs, thus sometimes making an uneven and corrupt playing field. The fates of fair and impartial courts are at stake, and they should not be for sale. The scary concept that courtsRead MoreThe Debate Of Corruption Versus Free Speech1594 Words  | 7 PagesOver time unions and corporations would evolve their tactics in financing campaigns by creating political action committees (PACs). These PACs were basically cooperation entities that developed separately but were funded by the corporation and employees of the corporation, in order to influence the outcome of elections. Throughout the second half of the twentieth century, PACs had a lot of power in influencing voters, and swaying elections (Hughes 1:25-3:10). In the early 1970’s the federal governmentRead MoreThe Court s View Of The Election Process767 Words  | 4 Pagesno evidence supports the idea that candidates bend to contributors’ pressure. However, as this law sets deeper in our jurisprudence and Super PACs feel more comfortable supporting candidates, some people might start suspecting that candidates are bending to donors’ pressure. This suspicion could arise simply from knowing the millions of dollars that Super PACs spend supporting candidates. The average person only has a limited amount of hard earned money to spend on goods and services. They onlyRead MoreMoney Politics : Finding A Fair Approach For Campaigns1319 Words  | 6 PagesNot only are these commercials annoying and help to create a negative connotation for the campaigning time, but give the people a false interpretation of different candidates. Most of these are not paid for by the prospective candidates but rather Super PACs that support the candidate â€Å"without other motives.†With the growing partisan between â€Å"ordinary†people and politicians it is of the upmost importance that everyone is fairly represented. But with the ever growing social, political, and financial
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)