Pseudo-Democratic Social And Political Parties: Limitations Of NAPEC

Dr James Hansen’s argumentative essay, “A Solution to the Climate Problem,” discusses his premise that it is imperative for humankind to deal with carbon dioxide emissions, which he believes needs to be phased out by the mid-21st century. He begins with the current paradigm in government efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and claims that so far it has been a lot of talk and action in the other direction. Dr Hansen argues that while governments pay lip service to agreements such as the Kyoto Accord, they are going full steam ahead with projects that will result in increased carbon dioxide emissions, such as going forth with coal-fired power plants, coal-to-liquids, hydraulic fracturing, and tar sands oil extraction. Dr Hansen believes

The UNFCCC is working with the various governments around the world to stabilize the amount of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere to keep the planet from warming more than 2ºC above pre-industrial temperatures (Watts, 2015). The most noted of the work is the annual Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings that began with COP1 in Berlin back in 1995. The COP3 adopted the Kyoto Protocol, even though it wasn’t fully accepted by all member nations. The COP21 was an effort to legally bind members to their submitted plans of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), defining what level of greenhouse gas production each nation would commit to not exceeding from 2025-2030. Prior to the INDCs, a bleak outlook was forecast in 2009-2010 of global temperature rising between 4-5ºC. That figure was restated by the UNFCCC prior to the COP21 in Paris, to below 3ºC, due to the commitments of the INDCs (Watts, 2015).

The argument about man’s role in climate change and the role of government, the role of industry and the role of citizens is a significant challenge that crosses all levels of government, crosses all geopolitical boundaries and crosses all sectors of business. National governments across the globe are dealing with the issue in different ways, but one overarching aspect of control and mitigation can be seen in the oversight and regulation of the electric energy industry. One significant challenge facing each nation is the cost to lower carbon emissions and the question of who will pay the additional cost for compliance. Though the cost issue is significant, a much more difficult question is whether any decision on lowering emissions can make

The Third Party System was a Democratic Party that was not able to maintain the alliance that was formed with the southern and western farmers once slavery became the main problem in America. The Third Party was created after a sectional dispute that was about slavery that led to the collapse of the Second Party System back in the 1850s. The Third Party divided into two with the Democrats in the South being proslavery and the Democrats in the North being antislavery. In 1860 the party selected two different presidents that represented each of the two divisions and they also found themselves having disagreements on slavery. After the death of Webster and Clay, there was a lack of leadership that was having a big impact. The Republicans, on the

Patterson expresses a fear that “Man will be convinced by these climate cultists to turn his back on the very political, economic, and scientific institutions that made him so powerful, so wealthy, so healthy”. By framing his argument in a way that transitions from highlighting the scientific ignorance of global warming to the policies that such a worldview could impact, Patterson attempts to establish a chain of logic that justifies his concern for global warming as an influence on government. The language used in the sentence (“climate cultists” trying to convince “Man”, turning their back on beneficial institutions) also implies to the reader that the proponents of global warming are actively attempting to undermine the institutions that have allowed humankind to thrive in the modern world. This opinion is underlined later in the article, when Patterson contemplates why many “hope” for climate change catastrophe.

In recent years , there is a colossal upsurge in the number of environmental concerns with climate change being a pivotal one. Although convergent efforts, be it an individual , company or a government, are made to ease this concern. I think government play a vital role in this regard.

Global climate change has been an unresolved issue since the 1970’s. Despite the facts presented by scientists, the governments refuses to take action. It has been estimated that the global mean temperatures have already risen by 0.8°C and the current amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will cause the temperature to rise by another 0.8°C, whereas 2°C is considered the maximum rise which the earth will be able cope without any major catastrophes (Mckibben, 2012). At the present rate of climate change we are already experiencing a shift in seasonal patterns. The governments’ inability to make strict laws regarding reduction in emission, therefore, stirs the controversy that what is stopping them and why do they refuse to do anything about it.

The main claim of Pamela Chaseks’s presentation was that through government and industry climate change can be stopped. Chasek discusses several instances when governments united regarding climate change as well as how these governments have impacted climate change, if at all. For example,a successful negotiation was Lima 2014, the United States and China agreed to reduce emissions; however, at the Copenhagen Climate Conference in 2009 developed countries made an agreement that left developing countries out of the loop. This caused smaller states weary of states who hold more power. This displays that government cooperation and communication is needed to successfully execute the issue of climate change. Without concise agreements and negotiations

When I drew up this map on Friday, there was a part of me that was hoping to be proven wrong on election day. At the same time, the plausibility of a Republican win was in the realm of possibility for me because of the people I have seen supporting the now president-elect.

It would only make sense that half of this class is on political parties and the other half would be about interest groups. They are both inherently different and fundamentally similar at the same time. Both work to sway the pendulum of public policy in the direction they believe in (Alexander, 2015). The main difference is that political parties attempt to gain political office, where interest groups are not in that business. Interest groups are in a sense a key part of a pluralistic society. They allow for everyday people to lobby and petition government. While it is true that we have interest groups in existence today, it has not always been that way. Up until the 1960’s, the power of politics was in the hands of the parties (Cigler, 2015). Many factors, such as television, a more educated electorate, etc, contributed to the creation of a power vacuum in the 1960’s. Interest groups swiftly and aggressively took the role that had formerly been that of the parties. As we have seen this power shift, so have we seen an explosion in the number of organized interests. In 1900, there were 200 registered groups in Washington D.C. Today there are 15,000. It is reasonable to be both intrigued and horrified by the concept of these groups. On one side, they are like anybody else who cares about the direction of the country. On the other, they are unelected, unrepresentative impactors of the system I must live in. While I am not trying to say they are a god send or evil, my point is

At first, I thought that they had the potential to rebel but everything turned upside down. I realized that they cannot oppose the Party. The Party’s effective way of oppression affects their attitudes and keeps them away from the idea of rebellion. The proles are happy under the conditions of Big Brother and they are obedient to him. If a rebellion were to happen, they would need a leader to take them to a revolution because they are not smart enough to think for themselves and make a plan against Big Brother. They are good at obeying orders, so if there would be a great leader, that person could tell them what to do. The Party is aware of this situation that's why they take all the intelligent people into the Party. So, there would be no

Lust for power is most commonly seen in businessmen or politicians and in today's world money is power. Recently, politician’s desire for power can be seen in the global climate change issue. Many U.S. officials, including our current President, do not believe in global climate change, or are ignoring this large issue because of the immense amount of money they receive from one of the main causes of climate change: fossil fuels. In 2014 oil, gas, and coal companies spent a total of $151,437,335 on Congress’ campaigns (“Funding Fossil Fuels”). The people involved in our government system are letting their lust for money and power cloud their judgement on the future of our planet.

This paper will examine the history of political parties in the United States, and also the importance of platforms in those political parties. Research was conducted on internet resources along with books written by political scientist.

Have you ever wondered how many people there are in the world? This beautiful place called earth is home to billions of humans, and human-kind is not alone. Although at times we may forget that we have several different species living with us, not only do different species live with us but they are part of the circle of life that is the root of our existence. For many years’ people have been releasing excessive amounts of CO2 into the earth, with little to no consideration of the effects it may have on surrounding environments. Exploiting natural resources to leave nothing behind except for oil spills and other environmentally dangerous components. Corporations need to be held to higher expectations with more regulations, there needs to be a government that will enforce these regulations. Who decides our government? People do, local communities vote for who runs their city, state, and country. Communities can help spread awareness and demand cleaner energy, stricter laws, and reduce their carbon footprint.

Over the past century, the Earth has experienced a dramatic change in temperature and we need to work to reverse it. Politicians have debated the idea of climate change for years now and nothing has really been done to improve the situation. Some politicians have been exposed to the facts about climate change, while others believe in a hypothetical theory that the Earth goes through “cycles”. The government needs to stop arguing and act now, to educate the public and regulate the phenomenon of climate change, before it is too late.