Answer to peer VillalobosDo you think there are shared benefits in such alliances? Considering the history between Great Britain and the U.S, “U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron ceremonially reaffirmed the American-British “special relationship” at meetings in Washington in March 2012.the 2 nations.” “U.S. President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher represented the “special relationship.” Both admired the others’ political savvy and public appeal.” I think they had “special relationships,” I believe they all had their perks that would benefit each of the nations.How might the alliance between U.S. and Great Britain and France impact the future? The 2 parties have an agreement from the past until forever to remain in standing and against all other powers. The United States will work with the United Kingdom to build back better together from the impact of the global pandemic including through cooperation to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to future infectious disease threats, secure our global supply chains, and restart travel and tourism as soon as it is safe to do so.Does it impact U.S. politics and society? Why or why not?I do believe it impacts US politics and society, the United States has no closer Ally than the United Kingdom. Making them that much stronger, joint as a force. References:The United States and United Kingdom: Reaffirming Our Alliance – United States Department of State. (2022). Retrieved 16 August 2022, from https://www.state.gov/the-united-states-and-united…
Lenora WI think there are no shared benefits in the alliances between great Britain and the U.S. The United States and Great Britain concluded no formal military alliance during the 19th century. There were several disagreements, some severe enough on occasion for both sides to contemplate war prior to what historians have called â€œThe Great Rapprochementâ€ between the two beginning in the 1890s. Even before that, there was also complementarity in their actions that accorded with the principle of eternal interests rather than eternal allies. For example, the Monroe Doctrine, set forth by President James Monroe in 1823 to prevent European nations from colonizing territory or threatening states in North or South America, might have been largely impossible to implement given the Royal Navyâ€™s ability to intervene when and where it chose. Britain, however, elected not to challenge the Monroeâ€™s policy because it accorded with Britainâ€™s interest in ensuring that the disintegrating Spanish empire in the Americas did not fall piece by piece into the hands of its imperial rivals. America has chosen to engage in or refuse alliance depending on its interests. The alliance between U.S. and Great Britain and France impact the future by the French and Indian War began in 1754 and ended with the Treaty of Paris in 1763. The war provided Great Britain enormous territorial gains in North America, but disputes over subsequent frontier policy and paying the war’s expenses led to colonial discontent, and ultimately to the American Revolution.
W2Disc COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Considering the history between Great Britain and the U.S., and between France and the U.S.,
do you think there are shared benefits in such alliances? How might the alliance between
U.S. and Great Britain and France impact the future? Does it impact U.S. politics and society?
Why or why not? Be sure to share your thoughts based on the assigned readings, your
personal experience, and observations.
You are required to make at least two posts that respond to your classmatesâ€™ or your
instructorâ€™s posts. Your response posts should add value to the overall discussion, such as
adding your personal views or observations, thoughts, etc. Your posts must be of quality and
Origins and Evolution of Democratic Thought
As we learn about this moduleâ€™s materials on Industrialized Democracies, in particular, the
United States and its allies, you should be mindful that democracies exist in many countries
around the world. Although the theory of democracy began centuries ago, the theory has
evolved and the application of it may be different in each democratic country.
Here are some famous philosophers and their principles on the history of democracy.
Thomas Hobbes (1586-1679) is famously know for his thoughts of “war of all against all.”
Hobbes was concerned that anarchy would be the result if people were left with total
John Locke (1632-1704) is known to view the government’s role was to protect life, liberty, and
property. Locke supported freedom, but not a supporter of abolishing government.
Montesquieu (1689-1755) was a French philosopher about separation of powers within the U.S.
federal government. This led the way to the division of powers, where powers are shared with the
Great Britain and Its Political Systems
Remember, when studying Great Britain, plan to stay abreast of the news about Britain’s government
plus its people and politics. Keep studying in order to improve your understanding of how the British
system works. In the middle of 2005, the issues to watch were the Euro, the EU Constitution, the war on
terrorism, the effects of globalization, Blair’s successes and failures, and the process of selecting Blair’s
successor. What has been important to watch since then?
During this module, plan to visit the website of the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)
(http://news.bbc.co.uk) to catch the latest news.
To learn more about Britainâ€™s political system, visit the following resource.
United Kingdom: Government and society. (2020). In Encyclopedia Britannica.
Some misconceptions exist in our interactions with others, especially with someone from a different
background. The concept of American Exceptionalism is a mix of patriotism and arrogance. As you
read more about American Exceptionalism, you will see how realistic or idealistic the concept is in
this era, and evaluate whether this idea is beneficial or detrimental to U.S. interests.
Read the following article to learn the details about American Exceptionalism.
Kupchan, C. A. (2018). The clash of exceptionalisms. Foreign Affairs, 97(2), 139.
Vichy France – or the Vichy regime – represented the French government during the Nazi occupation of
the country in World War II (1940-44). Charles de Gaulle was the French leader who led the resistance
against Nazi occupation during World War II and then headed the Liberation government from 19441946. De Gaulle retired but became President again for 11 years after 1958 when he created the Fifth
Republic, France’s first stable democracy.
France uses proportional representation, which means that individuals are not elected as they are in the
U.S. Instead, parties receive a number of seats in parliament that is proportionate to their share of the
vote. As a result, it is possible for small parties to win seats, which has led to fragmentation and division,
causing instability in the republic. A grasp of such political reality is important to understanding
France’s volatile political history.
Another reality of French politics is constitutional engineering. Is it possible to change the behavior of
citizens, politicians, interest groups, and parties by restructuring the political system? Superficially, the
answer would seem to be obvious. The structure of the regime and its processes will determine the ways
in which the participants act. The question remains whether the changes in behavior will be substantive
or just superficial. The question for France after 1958 was whether a political system had been
engineered to reduce partisanship and create stability. The new system was to encourage compromise
by sidelining ideological disputes and enhancing executive powers.
You might want to make note of not only the importance of the leadership of the socialist and
communist parties in France, but also the roles they played in the World War II Resistance. Not only did
the active leadership of the Left create legitimacy for them after the war, but their cooperation with
Catholic resisters helped bridge the clerical/anti-clerical divide in the center of French politics.
Mitterrand’s steering of the French Socialist Party (PS) in the direction of becoming a “catch-all” party is
The Elite, the Bureaucracy, and the Economy
People have long been intrigued by the concept of the ENA (initials for Ecole nationale d’administration
or National School of Administration) and its graduates. The Economist magazine, both British and
conservative, regularly seems to enjoy bashing the ENArques with narratives of their privileges, their
short work weeks, and their marvelous retirement options (pantouflage or putting on silk slippers).
For Further Study
As always, be sure to catch up on today’s news of this module’s countries. Consider reviewing the
international coverage of The Economist Magazine (http://www.economist.com).
Purchase answer to see full