Thomas More’s Utopia and The Prince by Machiavelli are clearly different texts, especially in their approach towards political and governmental reform. This distinction is made apparent through More’s idealism versus Machiavelli’s pragmatism. More’s political reform suggests a utopian, ideal, and almost perfect society governed by an equally good governmental system which is based on high moral standards and human happiness. On the other hand, Machiavelli suggests a government where those in power take advantage of the circumstances, manipulate society, and take advantage of their power in order to ensure security, peace, and well-being. Although Machiavelli’s approach does not meet the Utopian moral standards and seems to be unethical, I think that his views are superior to More’s because it deals with the real and practical rather than the imaginary and the ideal.
A nation stems from a pre-existing history. It does not require that all the members be alike but they must have a bond of solidarity to the other members of the nation. Nationalism is a movement for the attainment and maintenance of unity, identity and autonomy of a population that its members consider a nation. Nations are a product of modernity but it is likely to find ethnic elements that exist in these nations. He notes that nations are a continuation of culture, territory and the heritage of communities that existed before the modern nations.
Mr Deloria warns us against thinking that no government sovereignty have no limitations. He also discusses about the notion of defining cultural sovereignty from a cultural construction because it leads us to conclude that, " sovereignty for Indians is conditional upon cultural distinctiveness, in which way no other sovereignty is." Also, Dennis Kanahele critiques about the domestic dependent nation model of sovereignty, stating that it claimed to restore the Hawaiian nation. Therefore, he suggests us to integrate the perspectives of the Native, colonializing and the international community for a better understanding of what cultural sovereignty really meant. In addition, Professor Porter critiques how a distinct Indigenous ideas of Indigenous nation sovereignty may be revitalized?
Another important aspect to the study of the mythic West and its function in America as an imagined community is that of a ‘shared history’, “elements of a past remembered in common as well as elements forgotten,” (Glassberg, Public History 11) as it makes the cultural ties and unity among the nation’s members stronger. David McCrone prefers the concept of “myth-history” instead of “shared history” to characterize a community’s history (51; 59), because the notion of ‘history’ is subjective and can easily be shaped by a community according to its interests and wishes. By using ‘myth-history’ instead, McCrone demonstrates that a nation’s history should not be interpreted as an factually account of its historical past but as a narrative told
“Enlightenment is the liberation of man from his self-caused state of minority. Minority is the incapacity of using one’s understanding without the direction of another. This state of minority is self-caused when its source lies not in a lack of understanding but in a lack of determination to use it without the assistance of another”. This is an important ideal that has many benefits to the wellbeing and future of mankind and therefore should still be abided by in the 21st
Introduction What are modernisation theories? Wilbert E. Moore defines modernization as ‘total transition of traditional society or pre-modern society into the types of technology and associated social organization that characterize the advanced, economically prosperous and relatively politically stable states of the Western world”. Modernization theory is therefore a description and explanation or a conceptual framework that articulated a common set of assumptions about the nature of developed societies and their ability to transform a world perceived as both materially and culturally deficient. The theory explains how the society changes from a traditional society to a modern form, by striving towards a modern society of such as Europe and USA. The theories; popular in the1950s and 1960s holds that development takes a linear stage kind of progression.
In this paper Modernization theory and World System theory will be covered. In my opinion, for the explanation of development, social and economic progress, Modernization theory more emphasize on individual level and sociological level. While World System more emphasize on state and system level which is highly political. In order to evaluate the validity of 2 theories, China is used as a case study. Details will be mentioned below: The function of development Modernization Theory Evolution of world Development is related to the evolution of societies from traditional to modern.
Scholars such as George Orwell who a society derived from several forms nationalism, which has one point – to isolate the individual citizen to achieve unwavering allegiance to the Party; Anthony Smiths with his primordialist approach and Benedict Anderson 's constructivist approach, Eric Hobsbawm have tried to define nationalism but haven’t been able to define the define in its entirety. Nationalism to many people varies slightly in definition and perception but basically it is a political or social philosophy in which the welfare of the nation-state as an entity is considered paramount. Thus, nationalism differentiates itself from Patriotism. Patriotism is fundamental to liberty because pride in one’s nation-state, and a willingness to defend it if necessary, is the basis of national independence. Patriotism is the courage of national
Contrarily, if one believes in a "cautious if not dark, human nature" but remains optimistic about man 's ability to evolve through reason ,then "individual reason and political institutions develop slowly" , through a gradual evolution thus ,accordingly, military intervention cannot "hasten democratic governance" . In other words, offensive liberalists assume that the reason can come quickly to all individuals making a revolutionary quick change of the world, considering military intervention an efficient mean to achieve a more peaceful world , while defensive liberalists believe not in revolution, but in a evolution, a gradual institutional development which cannot be easily reached through an
BODY Advantages of a Federal form of government Government has dependably been an essential element in light of the fact that while political scholars have not concurred in the matter of what is the best methodology of government, they all accomplished the simultaneousness that legislature is fundamental for humankind to live calmly in an acculturated society. The administration of any nation on the planet ought to have the capacity to manage different and impossible to miss issues of various gatherings under fluctuating motivation. The administration then is responsible for managing these issues which implies that the legislature perceives that methodologies which rely on upon culture, assets and abilities must be connected. The issues