Summer 2019 POL 241-Chap 10- Michael McFaul, “ State Power, Institutional Change and the Politics of Privatization in Russia”

Elayne Guzman

Chap 10- Michael McFaul, “ State Power, Institutional Change and the Politics of Privatization in Russia”
Quote:
“The degree of consensus within the state is a key determinant of its ability to define preferences independently of leading economic interest groups. The effectiveness and cohesiveness of government institutions are key determinants of the state’s capacity to implement these preferences; state power must as also be measured in relation to the strength of the leading interest groups in society”

Meaning/Chosen:
Society is the source of immense power. Humanity possesses the power and capabilities needed to fully meet the multi dimensional challenges confronting global society. People often think of power ins  society as shaping the results of political decision making; policies, laws, ruling decisions make by public of officials, legislators  and members of the executive and judicial branches of the government. The power to shape what gets on the political agenda, or what is kept off, is another less visible face of power. Behind the scene forces are at work to determine who gets a seat at a decision making tables and whose issues are addressed.

State power-dominant power are maintained through the power to shape people’s understanding of the world in ways that prevent them from asking questions or seeing any possibilities for change. Although there is a tendency in modern American political science to treat the political system as an abstract one of inputs and outputs, or of functions and institutions, we should not forget that a political system constitutes a balance among competing interests, capabilities and wills, and this is a balance among individuals

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Summer 2019 POL 241 Chap 4- Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games @ Robert D. Putnam

Elayne Guzman Summer 2019 POL 241 Chap 4 Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games @ Robert D. Putnam Quote: “The politics of many international negotiations can usefully be conceived by a two level game. At the national level, domestic groups pursue their interests by pressuring the government to adopt favorable policies, and politicians seek power by constructing coalitions among those groups. At the international level, national governments seek to maximize their own ability to satisfy domestic pressures, while minimizing the adverse consequences of foreign developments. Neither of the two games can be ignored by central decision-makers, so long as their countries remain interdependent, yet sovereign.”   Meaning/Chosen:     Putnam wants to model how domestic politics affects international relations, thus leaving purely statistic/realist perspectives. He assumes that international decision makers are concerned both with domestic...
Read more

T.H. Marshall, “Citizenship and Social Rights”; Michael Mann, “Ruling Class Strategies and Citizenship”; Charles Tilly “Where Do Rights Come From?

Elayne Guzman                                   Citizenship and Social Class by T.H. Marshall Quote: “ All who possess the status are equal with respects to the rights and duties with which the status is endowed” Meaning: It means that for Marshall a concept of citizenship bears a certain relevance to present day society. For Marshall as women are recognized in society as much more important and vital citizens, their status and therefore their rights increase; proven to be an excellent way in which citizenship is viewed. Chosen : I chose this quote because as men or women, we are equal to the rights and duties within society and those rights should be respected in every single citizen as long as that person is a member of the community and serves, respect and value the community.                   ...
Read more

The Moral Dilemma of US Immigration Policy: Open Borders Versus Social Justice? By Stephen Macedo

  The Moral Dilemma of US Immigration Policy: Open Borders Versus Social Justice? By Stephen Macedo. Quote: “Most people seems to accept that wealthy societies owe the first sort of concern to human beings generally, via humanitarian assistance, whether societies should pool their efforts and seek to lift poorer countries at least up to a level of basic decency; exactly what level is adequate or morally required is an important question” Meaning/Chosen: Humanitarian assistance to poor countries should be provided in an effort to ease suffering and provide a basic level of decency, especially when those countries have been exploited by richer countries. It’s true that American society should properly take care of their own less-well off, and then allow for distributive justice abroad. By doing this, immigration to US will decrease and people would not risk their lives leaving their countries, in an illegal and dangerous way, for a better life in US.
Read more