Category: Political Party

Introduction:

A political party and army that give another hope for Kurdish people. It was established in the late 1978, the man, who established the PKK and then became the most recognize leader was ((Abdullah Ocalan)). Both of the united states and EU recognize PKK as an international terrorist organization, but it’s not the same things for the Kurds. In the past until now have many issue and conflict between Turks and Kurds so why the Kurds made a political party hope this party save ethnics of the Kurd. In the past arrant in 1923 Kurdistan was scattered for four part (Iran, iraq, Syria, turkey) under Lausanne treaty, also the majority of population in their four countries are Kurds. What are the advantages of established Kurdistan worker’s party (PKK)? PKK one of the best political party and necessary for Kurds because their works for agonize both male and female, remain the Kurdish language, limited of many cruelty and iniquity.

Work and agonize both male and female. In the past until now on someone’s ideology or in somewhere not is a very easy to have a woman it means woman cannot be out her home and she has usually can cook, clear their home or child’s nurse and no more. Based on, of the one interview with leader Ocalan he said that ‘’ each times the remembered his sister, he was upset about her ‘’ because in her marriage, she just sale for amount of corn and crop with some money instead of dowry. Because of this and something like this, based on Ocalan decided all marriage that like this, it’s just become the death for women, and he decided if one day he become leader he will work for this reason, and prohibited discrimination between man and woman. So now in his political party have both genders, working together without any discrimination between them.

PKK during activity and their works can remain the Kurdish language. Because this activity and agonized, the Turkish state cannot act like the past or haven’t a big hegemony and authority, because in the previous period (Mustafa Kamal Atatürk) has been many bad influenced over the Kurds in the northern, as long as he didn’t let the Kurdish people speak for won language, also he prohibited the Kurdish language in all place. Because the attempt and ruling PKK and the other political party group inside turkey like AKP can work together and finally both of them could have a membership and parliamentarian inside the parliament, also could defense of the rights of the Kurds, now speaking of the Kurdish language is a very normal, because of the abilities the PKK that possess in the country, turkey cannot do genocide against the Kurds. Also, PKK can stop and limit the bad step’s turkey against the Kurds. it is all because this political party (PKK), because this party always try to save and remain a culture and the language of the Kurds.

PKK can limit of many cruelty and iniquity’s turkey against the Kurds. From the established PKK, Turkey state cannot be like the past and cannot punishment the Kurds without any reason, because in each plan’s turkey, PKK preparation and do not let come the rampant over the Kurds by turkey. Also, PKK has two way for limited the cruelty and iniquity’s turkey state one of them is the physiologies, because of excited the PKK, turkey cannot hurt, prison, and cannot torture the Kurdish people like the past or before excited PKK. Another way for limit of many cruelty and iniquity’s turkey against the Kurds is about side of the Kurdish nationalism and rights of live, although until now some of these rights are not available, but it isn’t nothing for Kurds, it is better than before, because of PKK ban the turkey for cruelty of prohibition language and writing in Kurdish language.

After a confine leader Abdullah Ocalan arrant in 15/2/1999 in Greece’s consulate in Kenya, without He, same issue came in to the PKK, one of the issues is PKK fall in to critical management until 2004 for 2005, after these, some of the famous Person that having the role for improving PKK became the leader of PKK, after rolling these some person, didn’t seen another issue inside the PKK, including these famous person and also manager (Murad Qarilan, Jamil Bayk, Duran kalka, Bese Hozat ). After come out diligence’s PKK also, membership taken refuge toward Syria, their political emblem had changeable, PKK under the emblem of achieve the right of Kurds in all four parts of Kurdistan started politic diligence and army, it was very important because in that period didn’t a Kurdish party and army that under these emblem and politics. After taken refuge’s PKK toward Syria (Hafiz Assad) father’s (Bashar Assad), the previous leader ship of Syria, because had same issue and conflict with the governments of turkey about some terrain, Hafiz Assad wanted to depress on turkey, for this reason let the PKK established their office in Syria, also exercised military for their soldier as well onrush against turkey. In addition, with turkey, also Iran’s government let the PKK established just some office in boundary between Iran and turkey, in specially in region (Qutur and Sallmas), Iran wanted onrush on turkey via the PKK. After this PKK established some own political party that approach the PKK, PKK wanted via this party achieved the rights of Kurds, like (PYD, PJAK, YPG).

PKK was established for return the rights for Kurds in turkey, it worked for save, pugnacity for the rights of Kurds. Works for prohibited discrimination between male and female. Also want to remain the Kurdish language in turkey. Finally, working to limit of this cruelty and iniquity in turkey. PKK is not a terrorist, PKK the hope of Kurdish people for right to national and freedom.

References

1. Marcours A, (2014), The history of PKK, war’s PKK and Kurds sake independence, Sulaymaniyah, Chapmany Ganj.
2. McHugh R., (2020). Kurdistan workers’ party (PKK)|History & Ideology. [online]. Available from: https://www.britannica.com/topic/kurdistan-workers-party
3. Euro news (2019), Turkey vs the PKK: What’s behind the lasting feud? [online]. Available from: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.euronews.com/amp/2019/10/16/what-is-the-pkk-and-what-s-behind-turkey-s-war-in-syria-euronews-answers

Introduction

Political parties formed to accommodate opposing views, enhance the policymaking process, represent people’s interests, and provide an oversight role. The history of political parties in the United States goes back to 1783 during the time of federal constitution ratification (Bonica, 2013). Disagreements over the proposal to have a centralized government led to divisions and the formation of an anti-federal faction that sought to promote states’ rights over the centralized government. Thus, the basic reason for the formation of political parties is to accommodate differences in opinions and allow freedom of expression and legislation. Vested interests also explain why political parties form and why they persist. Political parties are obsessed with appointing candidates who would use a particular political party as a vehicle to propel them to political positions. In the United States, the two dominant political parties (Republican and Democrat Parties) represent citizens’ interests. The conservative Americans are more likely to vote for republican leaders, while Democrats attract those with liberal views. The following discussion seeks to establish the reasons behind the formation of the political party system in the United States and why they have persisted.

History of Political Parties in the United States

The Federal party controlled the United States politics and the policymaking process, particularly during George Washington’s tenure. Americans began to feel the need to have political parties where the winner represented the wishes of the majority (Aldrich, 1995). Thus, the proposed ratification of the American constitution in 1783 provided the ground for the formation of different factions, which later culminated the modern political parties namely the Republican and Democrat. The founding fathers were opposed to a partisan America, explaining President Washington’s reservations and attempts to prevent political factions (Bartels, 2000). At one time, for instance, he appointed two political rivals into the office (Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson) in an attempt to minimize internal conflict.

The growing tension within the Federal party led to the formation of the anti-federal faction (Jeffersonian-Republican Party) led by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. The formation of the alternative party could be explained by the suggestion to have a centralized government system in the United States (Campbell, Converse, Miller, & Stokes, 1980). This kind of system gives absolute power to a central government to control power and resources. Jefferson and Madison were opposed to a centralized government. Instead, they proposed a system with where powers were distributed to states’ governments. They were opposed to the elitist kind of government that the Federal political party had managed to establish. Thus, there was a need to have a party that was more in touch with the issues affecting common Americans.

Between 1854 and the mid-1890s, the United States witnessed the splintering of the Democratic-Republican Party. Thus, the two-party system was established. The Republican Party is remembered for its anti-slavery campaigns (Bartels, 2000). The two parties agreed or disagreed (even now) on certain political, economic, and social issues. From history, the following are the major reasons why political parties formed:

Represent Group Interests

People are more likely to support a political party when they feel that their political, social, and economic interests are served (Aldrich, 1995). Unfortunately, members of a political party might have different opinions on social issues, which could lead to internal frictions and dissatisfaction. If the internal disagreements become unmanageable, the formation of different factions might ensue. As demonstrated above, the formation of political parties in the United States did not occur by accident. The process occurred because certain people (Like Jefferson), felt that their interests were not well served within the ruling party. It is vital to note that the federal party represented the values, beliefs, and wishes of the elite. There was a disconnect between the party and the common American citizens.

Jefferson and his like-minded politicians represented the will of the people; for instance, he supported the agrarian agriculture, leading to the protection of the small-scale farmers. Thus, with the proposal to establish a centralized government, those seeking to enhance the interests of the ordinary citizens opposed that amendment (Poole & Rosenthal, 2007). The anti-federalists’ interest was power distribution to all states. This was, in their opinion, one of the ways to put the federal government on the check, to enhance the equitable distribution of resources, and to encourage the political participation of the ordinary citizens.

In modern-day America, interests also explain why the voters would jump from one party to another (Campbell et al., 1980). People do not feel like either of the two dominant political parties represent their interests fully. Therefore, there is a growing lack of faith or loyalty to any of the parties, particularly following the contentious elections of Donald Trump and his ideologies. Various social issues divide the United States constituents including gun laws, abortion, and gay rights. Those opposed to such contentious issues are more likely to support the Republican Party. The rationale is that the Republican has a conservative ideology and a significant number of politicians oppose LGBTQ and abortion rights. Thus, a voter might change party depending on the current personal values on various social issues.

Policymaking

While the political parties do not have the power to make policies, they remain very influential on the kind of policies needed. During campaigns, political parties prepare their manifestos, indicating their proposed political, economic, and social changes. Political candidates also propose programs that they would establish to address social issues. Thus, when the political party wins an election, it means that it has been given the mandate to execute the proposals within its manifesto.

Political parties form to propose, formulate, and execute alternative policies that lead to social and political changes (Fiorina, 2002). In the United States, for instance, there has been a heated debate and legal battles over President Trump’s plan to block undocumented immigrants. While he attracts opposition from the Democrats, many of his supporters stand with him because they elected his and his ideologies. Political parties gather people’s opinions and develop their manifestos within such politic, social, and political views. They seek to represent the will of the majority, which enables the implementation of proposed policies. However, it is vital to note the role of the Congress, the Senate, and the Judicial Systems in influencing policymaking process (Poole & Rosenthal, 2007). Therefore, it is one thing to have proposed policies and it is another to execute them owing to various forces at play.

Informing the Public

A political party seeks to present itself as the better alternative government over the other by mainly disseminating negative, but important information to the public. Citizens need information about plans, use of public funds, injustices, mismanagement of public resources among others (Aldrich, 1995). The information plays a vital role in shaping people’s opinions on their party and the opposition. For instance, Trump administration faces impeachment trial over allegations of abuse of office and selfish political interests. The information came into the public domain largely because of the Democrat Party’s disclosure. The party, which seeks to regain the political control in the next election, has played a vital role in disclosing many alleged misconducts within the Trump administration. Thus, the country is polarized, with some supporting the government and a majority that thinks Trump’s administration should be impeached.

Political parties, therefore, formed to play an oversight role and keep the government on the check. Without such roles, the government might engage in conspiracies that would never be known by the public. However, it is important to note that what might be considered as misconduct by one voter could be perceived in the same way by another. That explains why the United States constituents, even within the Republican Party, are divided.

Reasons Why Political Parties Persist

Political parties, as demonstrated by the perceptions of founding fathers (George Washington and Thomas Jefferson), are not ideal and can sometimes lead to social disharmony and infighting (Mann & Ornstein, 2016). In his Farewell Address, Washington warned Americans to avoid “the baneful effects of the spirit of party.” His rationale was that political parties were ill-founded as they sought to achieve vested and jealous interests. Washington saw political parties as being inciting and bent on perpetuating discord among the citizens. Thomas Jefferson’s assertion that “If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all” also confirms his opinion on political parties. Thus, the two founding fathers had a negative perception of partisan politics in the United States. Given a chance, they would not wish to have a multiparty system. ‘

Despite the feeling of the political parties as being dishonest, creating division among citizens, and failing to fulfill their promises, political parties have persisted. In fact, third parties, including the Libertarian Party, Green Party, and Constitution Party, also exist, though they have an insignificant following. Thus, political parties remain relevant in the United States, and they are influential in the day-to-day running of the government.

The same reason discussed above explains why the political parties have maintained their relevance. Politicians are still divided on various social, political, and economic issues. The constituents, because of their experiences and value systems, also want to have a government that protects their interests (Mann & Ornstein, 2016). Thus, political parties might be perceived as a necessary evil. While people have reservations about them, they are still needed for a government check, policymaking, and informing the community. Having a political government that can form an alternative government will enhance democracy, equitable distribution of resources, and the rule of law. In addition, the minority rights to participate in political matters and to exercise their rights is also enhanced. For instance, as indicated before, most Republicans are opposed to LGBTQ rights and abortion. Therefore these groups can only hope to have their interests advanced by the Democrats.

Conclusion

Political parties remain relevant because the core reasons why they were formed are still rife today. Divided political opinions and the need to have an alternative government explain the need for political parties. None of the political parties in the United States can serve all the interests of the constituents. Therefore, people have the right to join a political outfit that they feel will better represent their values. The political parties still play the role of representation, policymaking, putting the government in check, and keeping the citizens informed.

References

1. Aldrich, J. H. (1995). Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Political Parties in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
2. Bartels, L. (2000). Partisanship and Voting Behavior, 1952-1996. American Journal of Political Science, 44(1), 35. doi: 10.2307/2669291
3. Bonica, A. (2013). Mapping the Ideological Marketplace. American Journal of Political Science, 58(2), 367-386. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12062
4. Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. (1980). The American Voter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5. Fiorina, M. (2002). Parties and Partisanship: A 40-Year Retrospective. Political Behavior, 24(2), 93-115.
6. Mann, T. E., & Ornstein, N. J. (2016). It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism. New York, NY: Basic Books.
7. Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2007). Ideology and Congress: Second Revised Edition of Congress: A Political Economic History of Roll Call Voting. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Norris (2004) argues that political campaigning during the election period has shown great transformation over the years; from pre-modern, to modern and then postmodern campaigning. In a study steered by Harris, Perrin & Simenti-Phiri (2014), it was evident that South African politics is contributing to that transformation in political marketing, as confirmed by the growth in the use of political marketing consultants and advertising on various media platforms such as billboards, television and social media by many political parties. McDaniel (2012: 479) defines advertising “a form of impersonal paid communication,” which organizations use to communicate information about their brand, service or product to a large number of people at a time.

Norris (2004) and Raknes (2007) describe pre-modern campaigning as the form of promoting a party where party members and politicians directly and personally communicate with citizens and is normally a low budget strategy that uses media platforms such as printed posters and advertisements and direct communications, which involved organizing rallies, holding party branch meetings and conducting door to door campaigns in communities.

Historically, political parties practised campaigning by focusing solely on direct forms of marketing communications between themselves and the citizens (Norris, 2004). Direct forms of marketing communication would undertake a more personal approach in order to better reach and influence voters. Many political parties still prefer pre-modern political campaigning to effectively target the rural communities (Dabula (2016). Moreover, in the pre-modern times, the main objective of campaigning was to invigorate, motivate and retain the parties’ loyal members as opposed to gaining new members.

In contrast, post-modern campaigning can be distinguished by tactics that include communication on a broader and wider scale for increased reach (Norris, 2004), especially to gain new members and influence their voting decisions. Raknes (2007: 94) describes these tactics as having a larger budget because they aim to convey specialized “narrowly casted, targeted micro messages,” with the assistance of external stakeholders such as celebrities and marketing or public relations consultants. The post-modern campaigning strategy includes the multiple media channels, particularly the various news television channels, radio stations, telemarketing and direct email. In addition, Dabula (2016) highlights that the arrival of the internet and social media offers political parties the opportunity to interact with their voters, instead of one sided communications.

When political parties are campaigning, these are marketing activities which are taking place. In this regard, says Kumar and Dhamija (2017), political parties operate similarly to market-oriented organizations. Likewise, the political party needs to persuade the voters to support their manifesto, which is considered as the product or service, and the voters buying into this product thus resulting in the purchasing decision – voting for them in the election. Similarly to Durmaz and Direkçi’s (2015: 3) view; “political marketing literature accepts the analogy of parties as business engaged in a competitive relationship aiming to secure an “exchange” with consumers.”

By campaigning, political parties are applying marketing principles in order to positively appeal to the community at large, which Dabula (2016) argues is to gain numbers and grow their ‘political market share’ and ultimately increase their votes at the polls. Furthermore in marketing principles; the volunteers working in political party structures are considered as the distribution aspect of the marketing mix in the case of a political organization (Kumar and Dhamija, 2017).

Researchers such as Akyuz (2014) and Pich and Dean (2015) suggest that the transformation of political marketing should employ the fundamentals of Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) to guide the party towards creating and maintaining valuable relationships between the political party and the voters and other stakeholders that will contribute towards achieving the party objectives.Copley (2014: 445) defines IMC as “the cohesive mix of marketing communications activities, tools and techniques that deliver a coordinated and consistent message to target customers and consumers synergistically in order to achieve organisational goals”. Copley (2014) adds that the key principle in IMC in any marketing activities is that the brand message must be aligned to the brand strategy across all media channels in order to maintain a consistent brand identity.

While many scholarly articles provide different descriptions and meanings of what political marketing is, it has been noted that ultimately political marketing is based on applying the fundamentals of marketing to political parties and political party leaders. Typically, “for political parties and candidates, political marketing is done through communicating messages and building image and credibility” (Dabula, 2016: 48). Essentially, the two common characteristics of political branding is identification and differentiation (Nielsen, 2015). In other words, in order for political parties to brand themselves, they need to be both identifiable and present different offerings from their competitors; such as their policies and manifestos.

A party’s manifesto defines and frames the main campaign themes that a party aims to address once it becomes the government party (Eder et al, 2017). Secondly, a party’s manifesto helps a party preserve its distinct brand and can be used in the campaign to gather votes. (Eder et al, 2017).

Political party manifestos play an integral part in what democracy represents. In addition, political analysts can use manifestos when analysing political parties in comparison to each other (Eder et al, 2017). Potential voters can also use party manifestos to identify which issues and policies the party considers a priority in the country (Odmalm, 2019). Eder et al (2017) argue that although research has emphasised the content of party manifestos, much less has been written about how parties produce manifestos and the function of manifestos in campaigns. Nevertheless, Eder at al (2017) maintain that the manifesto should be a means to provide candidates with information of the party’s intentions; the manifesto should always be in line with the campaign’s strategy.

However, not all literature considers political marketing as essential in politics. Durmaz and Direkçi (2015) highlight that marketing has in some instances been seen as unethical and superficial in politics; “the real substance of politics would suffer under the candidates’ need to concentrate on only simplified and popular topics.” (Durmaz and Direkçi, 2015: 3). Milewicz and Milewicz (2015) also recognize that there are positive and negative impacts to political branding, stating concerns regarding the top-down nature of the political sphere which may be effective for the politician but the opposite for the political party.

A political party is an organization of people with common goals and similar political practices. These behaviours are guided by sets of beliefs on how a country should be governed, political ideologies that differ from each other depending on each political party classified in different political positions in comparison to each other in what is known as the political spectrum. The Conservatives lie on the center-right of the political spectrum, the New Democratic Party, however, is on the left side of the spectrum, and the Liberals lies on the center-left of the political spectrum. The left side of the spectrum favours an activist and social reform government, as they want to make fundamental changes to better suit each and every individual. On the other hand, the right side favours limited and social tradition government, as they want authority only to a limit, while still being organized in the way the country is accustomed to. Their differences in thinking is essential in determining the party that is deserving of a vote, as it is crucial that one must understand what each political party stands for.

The Conservatives believe in individualism, placing them more towards the right side of the spectrum. They value the individual over the collective, as they trust that by letting the individual flourish, the population as a whole benefits. The Conservatives favour in less government intervention when it comes to economy and social affairs, as they want the individual to have control over their own money, instead of the government having to regulate it. This is seen in their desire to lower business and personal taxes, also lowering the social services provided to citizens. They believe in capitalism in which the country’s industry and trade are controlled by private owners instead of the state. As individualists, they also focus on smaller government. This is seen from their desire of decentralizing the federal government power to the provinces. They believe that the government should only enforce the basic rules of life in society and that each smaller group should be responsible for making decisions for themselves. They also aim for a more individual freedom, as they believe that that people can decide things for themselves. In issues regarding aborstion for example, they believe that each individual can choose for themselves, whether they are for or against abortion. They also trust that each individual should have the responsibility to manage their own money with less social services and that each individual is able to succeed with their help by creating more jobs through training and trade, which in the end contributes greatly to the general population. They value the idea of giving each individual a chance to thrive on their own to benefit the society as a whole. However, they are placed slightly towards the center of the spectrum, as they believe in social welfare. They are like the left wing in that they provide tax incentives and financial plans for families in order to help them succeed. The people’s wellbeing is ensured by the many programs provided to the citizens of Canada for those who are in need of assistance. The Conservatives fit the values of a right wing, a group that prioritizes a government that is limited yet traditional. However, they are lie in the center-right, as they consider public assistance.

The New Democratic Party is different from the Conservatives in that they believe in egalistarism, which lies in the left side of the political spectrum. Their ideology is based on the belief that all individuals are equal, therefore, everyone is deserving of equal rights and opportunities. They do so by making life more affordable for the average everyday person and advocating for the eradication of homelessness and poverty. The NDP highly believes in equality and that everyone should be given the same treatment whatever their race, culture, or gender. This is why they greatly support the equal rights for LGBTQA Canadians, workers rights, gender rights, and rights for people with disabilities, whether it be physical or mental. These examples demonstrate that the NDP very much value equality amongst all individuals. They also believe in socialism, as they advocate for the idea that all things given to citizens should be regulated by the government. They do so by giving more social services at the cost of higher taxes. They believe that corporates with bigger business should therefore contribute more to taxes than those of local businesses, as they plan to make those who can afford to pay taxes pay more in order to make them more equal to those who are not able to contribute as much. The NDP values a nation that understands and accepts diverse traditions. This is seen in their advocacy for peacekeeping and humanitarian aid for foreign countries. Equality overall is their main goal as a political party, which puts them on the left wing of the political spectrum.

The Liberals are more towards the center of the political spectrum, as they possess traits that both socialists and individualist acquire. Their ideology is based on the idea that consent is needed from the government, however, equality should be before the law. They are near the center of the political spectrum, as they support capitalism. They believe that not everything should be run by the government. For example, they think that the country’s industries should be controlled by its private owners for profit instead of the state. Their way of thinking is based on liberty. Their philosophy is based on the idea that the nation should be free of harsh restrictions that imposes on the daily lives of the citizens and how they want to view the political system. They value autonomy and freedom for each individual, that it is essential for each individual to be recognized in this democratic society of Canada. This way of thinking is very much the same as a right wing, one that favors a state that is not so restricting. However, they lie closer to the left side of the political spectrum, as, like the NDP, they also believe in equal opportunities for all genders, races, and cultures. They advocate for fairness for the middle class, as they support moderate measures to limit the economic gap between the rich and poor, by including tax break, which allows reduction in taxes for those who need it most. They also do so by ensuring that health care is available to every Canadian and that the citizens should also have access to affordable child care. They believe in the universal common good by honoring diversity and equal opportunities for all, to provide an environment that is both fair and impartial. Their way of thinking is for the people, as they believe that each individual should be able to make their own decisions. For example, they are for pro choice when it comes to the abortion debate and they are also for utiansia. They trust that all should be able to voice their own opinions, and be allowed to follow through with their decisions. Overall, they work within the established systems to further improve social justice, to ensure that the opportunities provided, the wealth, and privileges are distributed equally within the society.

The different ideologies of each political party shows what each of them stand for. It is critical for each individual to have an understanding of how each political party thinks, as each one is unique in its own way. The Conservatives are more right side, as they care more for the overall population, while the NDP are more towards the left, as they care more about equality. Since the Liberals possess both qualities it is somewhat in the middle of the political spectrum. The set of ideologies that each political party value defines who they are as a group and it is their values that helps the citizens of Canada to decide on who they think is appropriate to govern their country.

The distinct perspective of each faction and group lead some conflict and tension over one topic; the Democratic party and Republican party are raising a discord on immigration policy. While the aspect of the conflict seems extremely hard to understand, the psychological concept provides a reliable approach in comprehending the divided political parties.

Several fields in psychology can explain some extreme tension between each political party; first to mention is that the Learning. The Associative Learning might be applied in the members of each political group. Associative Learning is a change in behavior by a connection of stimuli (Learning Lecture, 1/01/19). Especially, the Operant Conditioning which directly shapes one individual’s future from the result of the behavior. The result can be increasing money which will reinforce the behavior, or it can be a losing a vote or support which can be a punishment. The senate or congresspeople might have been changed behavior from the reinforcements and punishments in the political party.

Additionally, Social Psychology clarifies the rising tension in each group of members in a limited boundary. Group Polarization might be achieved in the group of people who have the same ideation or objective (Ch 13 Social Psych Guided Notes, p. 12). The offensive attitude might be reinforced by discussion or disclose within a group member while it “strengthen the group connectivity.” The leaders of each democratic and Republican party may be manipulated and exploited this psychological phenomenon to consolidate the bond with each member.

Some concepts in psychology might yield a resolution and mitigation over the conflicts in society. The Psychological aspect “Intelligence” can be highlighted as one solution for understanding the attitude of individuals’ behavior in the political party members. The Social Intelligence and Emotional Intelligence are highly related to the social skills since they are an “[a]bility to manage emotions and reason about mental states of other” (Intelligence, 20/10/19). With a comprehension of Social Intelligence, each political party might able to learn each other’s ideation with a “mental states of other” political party, leading an appreciation of each group’s ideation and ideology. Not only the political party but also all Americans can utilize this concept to accept each other’s ideas.

Finally, the approach suggested in the Psychological Disorder Lecture might be beneficial for reducing the tensions. According to Dr. Miller (personal communication, Nov 14, 2019) changing perspective over a situation is applied in therapy for people who suffer psychological disorder; this shifted view to positive way can be applied to make an agreement on important issues; especially, this strategy can be useful in persuasion of pessimistic opponents.

The general knowledge acquired from the Psychology 1100 altered my perspective over understanding different perceptions and aspects of various people in the world. Social Psychology enables me to critically analyze the different biases in varying cultures while the Lecture on “Personality” provided me with distinctive characteristics of people. Finally, the discussion had been conducted in the Activity Journal session provide me to share my opinion with others, leading a more holistic understanding of another person’s idea. Overall, the Psychology 1100 class opened a new mindset on comprehending other people’s attitudes, opinions, and beliefs in general, guiding me to respect other people ever than before.

References

1. Lisa, M. (2019, October 1). Learning Lecture Psychology 1100. Lecture presented at 2019 Ohio State University Autumn Semester, Columbus, United States of America.
2. Lisa, M. (2019, October 20). Intelligence Lecture Psychology 1100. Lecture presented at 2019 Ohio State University Autumn Semester, Columbus, United States of America.
3. Lisa, M. (2109, November 5). Ch 13 Social Psychology Guided Notes.
4. Lisa, M. (2019, November 14). Psychological Disorder Lecture Psychology 1100. Lecture presented at 2019 Ohio State University Autumn Semester, Columbus, United States of America.

In a society filled with dominant figures such as males and most often white males, it is hard for the minority groups such as women, other upcoming ethnic minority groups such to be represented in the politics of the country. Its different electoral systems that allow for these minority groups to either rise and have their values heard or be overpowered and silenced. The two types of electoral system will be discussed in the essay will by the proportional representation and the majority rule – first past the post. The successes and failures of each electoral system will be highlighted and the preferred electoral system will be argued based on the above analysis. The countries used will be South Africa and Rwanda for proportional representation whilst Kenya will be used represent the majority rule electoral system.

Electoral systems differ in each country due to the wars encountered and or because of the want to transition to a different and more inclusive or exclusive system. The differences in electoral systems is occur though how a vote is casted, the number of seats that are allocated and the electoral formula. The first electoral formula discussed will be about proportional representation that is implemented in South Africa and Rwanda. Proportional Representation is the allocation of seats based on the percentage that an individual or political party obtains in an electorate. The main purpose is to represent the different opinions of the voters and to ensure that citizens feel as though their vote counts and that individuals are represented in parliament. The reason in which why South Africa implemented this type of electoral system in 1994, was to make sure that everyone’s vote was heard, especially since some people were voting for the first time. South Africa prior the 1994 elections had excluded black people as well as women in the voting system during the apartheid regime. The threshold in South Africa in order to receive a seat in parliament is 0.25% in the national electorate. “Thresholds make for larger parties, which in turn is the operative variable in increasing women legislative representation” (Lindberg S, pg 34). The African National Congress is good example of a large party in which is now making active steps to include minority groups to represent a more diverse political party. The ANC has made a self-imposed gender quota that must be met. From the introduction of the proportional representation in 1994, the number of women in parliament has grown steadily. The quota is that 30% of women must make up the ANC. Majority of the women in parliament come from the ANC. 47% of ANC are currently filled by women. Due to the gender quota, ANC dominated whilst DA only has 28% women (People’s Assembly). This also applies pressure to other political parties to improve on the ratio of women to men. In the recent candidates, women in political leader positions can be seen in the DA, and EFF. Canidates include women such as Patricia Buyisile Baloyi, Bontle Veronica Moaji from DA and Busisiwe Gladys Mafareka, and Mpho Desieree Thari in the 2016 Municipal Elections. This high number of number of women in parliament has resulted in South Africa to be ranked 4th in the world of women representation. Although the focus on women is great, it can be said for other minority groups to get representation in parliament. The proportional representation allows for ethnic groups to also arise and be represented in parliament especially in a diverse society such as South Africa. South Africa has roughly 7 ethnic groups – black, white, Indian, colored, Asian and mixed races between the 6 ethnic group. In proportional representation, although small, the minorities of the countries are represented. PR “increases the likelihood that smaller parties are able to secure seats” (Ishimaya T, pg 167). Political parties such as the VF who are primarily concerned with protecting Afrikaans rights, freedom and protection have a low number seats in parliament. Another minority party is the Minority Front – which initially wanted to represent minority ethnic groups but now primarily is concentrated with Indian support. There is however a great concern that extremist groups may be able to obtain seats in parliament. Although no quota has been expressed to the amount of different races in the group required, it is evident that in such a diverse country in order to maintain power, one must branch out to groups outside the party. Another country in which uses proportional representation is Rwanda.

Rwanda is ranked number 1 in the world for the amount of women that are represented and elected into parliament. In the aftermath of the genocide between the Hutu and Tutsi people of Rwanda, active steps were made to make governance to be more inclusive of women by the Rwandan Patriotic Front. This political party was led by Paul Kagame in trying to put women in high level positions such as ministers, secretaries of state, Supreme Court justices, and parliamentarians. A gender quota has too been established in Rwanda which states that 30% for the inclusion of female representatives in all decision-making bodies. Rwanda has broken the record of women to be represented in parliamentary levels. Women are currently sitting at 64% representation in parliament (Eweniyi O). In both case studies although both have been dominating political parties show that larger political groups tend to make their values more inclusive of women although they differ in how women were brought into parliament differently. While this is a huge celebration for both South Africa and Rwanda, there still hasn’t been a female president. Another electoral system that has shown improvement in the representation of women is show in Kenya – through the first over the pass electoral system.

Kenya currently has the first over pass system – which is done in which a political party or individual must win majority national electorate. The first over pass system may sometimes occur in more than one round if there is no clear winner in first round. After the first round if there’s no clear winner, then the candidate with lowest vote gets removed and re-voting occurs again. Women have been under-represented when it comes to political due to the country being stuck in the ideologies of what a women and men should be doing – men working whilst women stay home and look after the children. Because of these views women have are less educated than the men. “Customary and statutory laws continue to discriminate against women”. (Lindberg S, pg 30) There are however steps being made to increasing the amount of women being represented in decision-makings of the country. In 2010, an addition to the constitution was added in order to provide a framework to address the gender inequality in the country. The constitution made it that men could not have more two –thirds of the parliament.(Akech A) For the first time in Kenya’s history of voting, women were allowed to be elected and to serve as governors and senators. This raised the levels of women in parliament to now hold 172 of the 1,883 elected seats in Kenya, up from 145 after the 2013 elections. (News24). Despite the gains the first-past-the-post electoral system has made it hard for women to step into higher positions and breakthrough the patriarchal system. There have been considerable debates and delays regarding the issue of allowing women to have more than a third of seats. “Moreover, the First- Past –the- Post (Single Member District) electoral system have not only engendered an overly adversarial political contest, but also a violence prone electioneering, which favor men who can hire and retain violent gangs and run nocturnal campaigns.” (Akech A) Under the majoritarian rule, these traditional outlook of the “roles” of women in a society make it hard for new parties to enter into the electorate and challenge the ideologies of the winning party. “… Exclusion of minorities from power and a lower incentive for participation” (Lindberg S, pg 33) may be a result if Kenya continues to have the majoritarian electoral system. The delay in increasing the bracket in which the amount of women that can be represented shows the resistance of the patriarchy in the society to increase representation of women (Frykberg M). Although Kenya still has a first pass the post electoral system, the ideas of proportional representation are being introduced slowly. With these thoughts and ideas in mind. Kenya currently has the lowest female representation, and with the analysis of comparative politics, the correlation between the electoral system and women representation. The only issue with the winner takes all electoral system is that it makes individuals feel as though as though their votes are wasted. This can cause for a political parties to remain in power as people who belonging to the losing group feel as though they should waste their votes anymore and therefore the participation rate declines.

It is clearly evident that electoral systems have an impact on the different ideas of representation and who will enter into these competitive spheres. Through the proportional electoral system, it is seen to be easier to represent the people more effectively as the more of the minority achieving seats the more it will create awareness and encourage the participation. The difficulty of representation can be seen in the majoritarian rule based on the inequalities of the passed in certain countries (e.g.: lack of education offered to women) and the dominances of certain gendered groups. The views of the other 49% of the country are not represented which discourages lack of participation of minority groups and women in parliament. “Electoral systems also impact voter behavior…” (Ishimaya T, pg. 167). The majority of these electoral systems are dominant by the patriarchal system. With proportional representation, it makes it easier for women to get noticed and when women notice other women in electoral systems it encourages the participation of women. It also makes for the political party to target a broader spectrum allows for the winning political party to continue to win and make it more inclusive of the people within the society. First to pass system allows for the patriarchal system to continue to dominate and makes it harder for women to break through the barriers an obstacles in order to have their voices heard. “The voter turnout is generally more higher in countries that use PR systems when compared to countries that use FPTP” (Ishimaya T, pg. 167) It is believed that in order to make more inclusive parliamentary system that represents the people, different genders and ethnic races must be included. Proportional representation shows a better success rate at being more inclusive of women and minority ethnic group. This is evident in the seeing the rise of the EFF political party lead Julius Malema. The EFF has managed to obtain 25 seats in Parliament. Which currently higher than the other parties such as COPE who have been in the running for a longer time period.

South Africa and Rwanda are good examples of the proportional representation and the successes of women representation increasing over the past years. Majority – winner takes all electoral system in Kenya shows that the challenges for women to be represented in parliament is harder due to the inequalities of the past and the patriarchy system that strongly influences the decision of the people. The active steps made in proportional representation seem to show higher results than that of first past the post. Minority ethnic groups are underrepresented in first past the post and women have to work harder time getting recognized. Infiltrating dominating societies is better to do when quotas are established and met.

The Political Party System is commonly found in democratic system of government. Through the political system the running politicians use this to compete for certain positions. Political party system can have positive and negative functions in our society.

On the bright side of political party system we could have an organize groups of politician in competition during elections, this can help the voters to easily determine and decide what politicians to vote since political parties have their own titles and platforms , and after that there are different politicians that came from the different political parties who have won the election this will make them combine their various political party’s platform in governing the society so that they could easily make an abrupt productivity in the society On the other hand in order to win the elections politicians have to do some dirty ways such as bad mouthing politicians from other political parties so that they could encourage and gain votes from the people, some politicians create political parties for their own personal interest and if there are politicians from different political parties who have won the elections and since they have different perspective and platforms they will have a conflict of interest that will goes out of hand that might affect the productivity of the country.

Political Party system without a doubt holds the potential in making our society productive. In the condition that the political party system is part of a democracy which means it will affect the stability of the democratic government that will make democracy either become stable and unstable. Therefore, people should handle political party system well so that we could achieve stable democracy where there is a civil power among the people, consistent economic growth and development which is the total opposite of the unstable democracy

Philippine Democracy aims to let the voice of the people be heard. People also have the right to participate in political issues. Under the 1987 Philippine constitution Article 6 section 32 The congress gives the people a chance to practice plebiscite and the referendum. The people will be given an opportunity and an initiative to participate in implementing laws at the same time.

This is where the interest groups come into action . In general, these interest groups are composed mostly of policy specialists or lobbyists that have the same interest and they come together in order to influence the people and especially the congress in making a public policy. Furthermore, the interest group has 3 basic theories that were stated by the political scientist: The pluralism theory, elite theory and hyperpluralism theory. In the pluralism theory everyone has the access to fairly compete and will create a one resource that will get the attention of the policy makers. Elite theory on the other hand is the total opposite of the pluralism theory, this is only applicable for few groups or individuals that are wealthy in terms of business conflicts the government will immediately listen to them since the wealthy can fund them during their campaign election. Moreover, with hyper pluralism all the people have the access to participate and the government will implement the laws the people wanted, this will result in countless laws and will not balance the government. Furthermore, interest groups can be beneficial in terms of helping the people to actively be part of solving political issues through making use of their freedom of expressions. Since, interest groups enable the voice of the people to be heard over a particular issue so that the government will be able to recognize the problem and pass the laws that could promote public good in the society. People could come together to share and exchange information that will help improve the development of our nation. It enhances an individual’s potential in becoming one of the political leaders . There will be a balanced relationship between the government and the people to avoid the abuse of power.

Interest groups can be so powerful, through the use of it we can immediately implement laws that will benefit us. Therefore, let us work together and make sure that our common interest will never destroy our society.

Quickly after the political realignment of the last 1890s and the finish of the Populist party, new social events of American occupants saw the necessity for change. Far from stopping to exist with the Populist party, the enthusiasm for an adjustment as per the genuine elements of an erratic, current America spread over the United States. The new reformers, known as Progressives, were fundamentally city inhabitants and very not exactly equivalent to the farmers of the nation demographically, occupationally, socially, etc. Regardless, they bestowed a conviction to their Populist progenitors that the free undertaking government approach that overpowered Americans first century was obsolete and unequipped for dealing with the issues of a urban and present day America. From 1900 to 1920 the Progressives winning concerning requesting their solicitations and changing American government at all levels.

The breakdown of the impact and the falling expenses of provincial things compelled various farmers to search for mitigation through political movement. In 1888 and again in 1890 this discontent was imparted through close by political social occasions, usually known as Farmers’ Alliances, which promptly spread through bits of the West and in the South, where money related issues had been exasperated by the move following the Civil War from a farm system to sharecrop and trim lien structures. The conspiracies won some close by triumphs and added to the failure of the Republicans in 1890. They were not, regardless, a suitable vehicle for composed political movement, and in 1891 the pioneers of the intrigues molded the People’s (Populist) Party.

In 1891, the People’s Party (in any case called the Populist Party, or the Populists) was surrounded as an ideological gathering addressing the interests of the nation’s cultivating portion. The Farmer’s Alliance was a noteworthy bit of the Populist collusion. The People’s Party allowed James B. Weaver, a past US delegate from the region of Iowa, as its candidate in the 1892 presidential political choice. Crusading on a phase expected to sustain farmers and incapacitate the monopolistic power of enormous business, banks, and railroad organizations, the People’s Party aggregated 8.5% of the standard vote, passing on the states of Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, and Nevada.

The Populists attempted to transform into a national assembling and needed to attract help from work and from change packs all things considered. Before long, regardless, they continued through their short calling to be altogether a social occasion of Western farmers (Southern farmers, startled of separating the white vote and thusly allowing blacks into influence, as it were, remained devoted to the Democratic Party). The Populists mentioned a development in the streaming cash, to be practiced by the unfathomable coinage of silver, a graduated individual obligation, government duty regarding railroads, a toll for money specifically, the quick arrangement of U.S. agents, and various appraisals expected to strengthen political vote based framework and give the farmers fiscal balance with business and industry. In 1892 the Populists assigned Gen. James B. Weaver of Iowa for president. The People’s Party continued working and took care of rivals in both the 1904 and 1908 presidential races, anyway the prime of the social occasion’s effect was done. In spite of the way that the People’s Party was authoritatively disbanded in 1908, the Progressive advancement would take up countless the goals and purposes behind Populism, including against trust institution, increasingly critical government rule of private industry, and more grounded help for the nation’s cultivating and normal laborers.

The hour of US history from the 1890s to the 1920s is for the most part suggested as the Progressive Era, a period of outstanding social and political change made arrangements for making progress toward a prevalent society. Dynamic Era reformers hoped to harness the power of the national government to discard deceitful and unmerited key strategies, decrease pollution, and equalization the negative social effects of industrialization. During the Progressive Era, protections for workers and customers were fortified, and women finally practiced the choice to cast a polling form. Regardless of the way that industrialization in the United States expanded desires for living for a few, it had an obfuscated side. Corporate chiefs, a portion of the time implied as ‘raider nobles’, looked for after untrustworthy and outlandish vital methodologies anticipated killing competition and growing advantages. Mechanical production system workers, countless them progressing pilgrims, were once in a while presented to extreme and unsafe working and everyday situations. Political debasement propelled administrators to the hindrance of the lower and normal laborers, who fought to get by. The opening between ‘the rich’ and ‘the individuals who need riches’ was extending. The Progressive advancement developed as a response to these negative effects of industrialization. Dynamic reformers attempted to coordinate private industry, fortify affirmations for workers and purchasers, reveal corruption in both government and huge business, and all things considered improve society.

Presumably the most acclaimed Progressive reformers were Jane Addams, who set up ‘Hull House’ in Chicago to help outsiders with acclimating to life in the United States, Ida Tarbell, a ‘maligner’ who revealed the ruffian vital methodologies of Standard Oil and transformed into an early pioneer of shrewd detailing, and Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt, who both broadened the power of the administration to constrain rules on private industry and realize protections for workers, purchasers, and the basic natural surroundings. Dynamic reformers successfully influenced the passage of much significant establishment, including a couple of changes to the US Constitution. The Sixteenth Amendment developed an administration individual cost, the Seventeenth Amendment mulled over the prompt arrangement of Senators, the Eighteenth Amendment prevented bargains from claiming alcohol, and the Nineteenth Amendment guaranteed women the choice to cast a polling form. Establishment got ready for fortifying protections for workers and purchasers fused the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which made the Food and Drug Administration to guarantee the prosperity and flawlessness of all food things and pharmaceuticals, and the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which attempted to check vital strategies got ready for covering contention.

Regardless of the way that Progressive reformers achieved various basic destinations during this period, they also progressed severe methodologies and maintained extremist considerations. The Wilson association, for instance, paying little heed to its hold of headway and progress, looked for after a racial arrangement that completed in the disconnection of the national government. The significant stretches of Wilson’s organization (1913-1921) saw a recuperation of the Ku Klux Klan and a savagely extremist response against the money related and political increments of African Americans in the post-Reconstruction period . Laborer’s organizations , which were incredibly powerful in Progressive authoritative issues, reinforced confinements on development and spewed xenophobic talk that reprimanded outcasts for low wages and unforgiving working conditions in handling plants the nation over. Government relocation game plans in the Progressive Era, including the Immigration Act of 1917 and the National Quota Law of 1921, genuinely compelled development subject to nationality, and restricted in every practical sense each and every Asian outsider.

As per their point of view on human intuition as fit for being structured and controlled, various Progressive reformers bolstered explicit raising, or particular reproducing. Specific reproducing was considered ‘the investigation of better raising’ and intended to improve the genetic idea of the human masses through procedures that would empower the more ‘charming’ parts of society to have more children while hindering ‘annoyances’ from duplicating. Specific reproducing relied upon a racial and class levels of leadership that put white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants at the top. Lower classes, ethnic minorities, continuous pariahs, the mentally wiped out, and the developmentally crippled all included lower rungs on this hierarchy. In 1907, the United States transformed into the fundamental country to pass a compulsory purging law. The ruinous methodologies of Nazi Germany in the long run stigmatized the ‘science’ of hereditary advising, anyway not before in excess of 60,000 American individuals were influentially cleaned to shield them from having children. Instead of the to some degree obliged casting a ballot open of Populism, the Progressives were unquestionably progressively different. The sheer broadness of Progressivism was one of the most huge clarifications behind the achievement of the turn of events. They were actually a cross-portion of America. While the Populists had been viewed as devotees and radicals, the Progressives were seen as moderate and better than average because of what their character was. One might say, the moderate democratic open of progressivism credited their tolerability to a noteworthy number of the Populist demands and as such winning concerning authorizing them into law.

The Progressives winning mostly considering the way that nature for switch had been set up by the exercises of the Populists during the 1890s. The Progressives were not the first to demand changes in the free undertaking government plans of the United States. Finally, the Progressives moreover prevailing in light of the fact that they worked inside the two party system instead of picking a pariah test. This made the Progressives give off an impression of being less subverting and their solicitations thusly progressively commendable.