Summary Of Us And Them By Jerry Muller

The Israel-Palestine conflict is one of the most long-term, pressing, and largely confounding social, political, and national quandaries of our age. Since we have been moving with surprising velocity into the vast horizons of globalization, the conflict has built up tremendous momentum and has called into question the adequacy of our current attempts at coming to a peaceful resolution that can simultaneously and successfully address both sides of the struggle. The purpose of this paper has been to understand the prospect of a two-state nation solution for Israel and Palestine. The discussion arises a retrospective view of the context behind the present analysis. We begin with a discourse that informs the reader of the historical narrative between the Jewish inhabitants of Israel and the Palestinians who also seek to live in the lands which comprise Israel. At the forefront of the discussion are some key issues such as trends in Israeli settlement expansion over time, the manner in which these settlements create political challenges towards the prospect of a two-state solution, and the fragmentation of power within Palestinian political parties which inhibit the opportunity for proper negotiations amongst the two parties. Finally, we delve into a discussion on nationalism, it’s importance in the discussion of a two-state solution, and the challenges posed when trying to formulate US Foreign Policy towards the matter.

The Untouchable by Thomas L. Friedman speaks about the world being flat, which is “the stunning rise of middle classes all over the world (pg. 323).” He explains how the American society is becoming global. This globalization that is occurring in today’s society is leading children in America to have a competing mindset against cultures such as the Chinese. We have to begin to think wise and know what route we have to take in life in order to flourish or survive. There will plenty of jobs out there; however, they will only be open to those people with the right knowledge, self motivation, ideas and skill.

In the story “Us and Them” by David Sedaris, the narrator doesn’t live a life like a normal child. The narrator’s family moves very frequently. Currently they're living in a rented home, and will be moving shortly. So they don’t bother making too many neighborhood friends because then they're going to have to say goodbye in a few weeks. They did make one friend in their neighborhood, but the narrator’s mom believes one friend is good enough. She heard that someone in the neighborhood, named the tomkeys, don’t believe in tv! “The only place that seemed truly different was owned by a man named Mr. Tomkey, who did not believe in television. This was told to us by our mother's friend, who dropped by one afternoon with a basketful of okra.”

However, today I will be arguing against this concept as a suitable method of dealing with issues as I believe that identity politics encourages segregation in society. I will let you know that I am not against the concept of identity politics as a whole because there are benefits from the idea. But I am against how it has been executed since it encourages division based on personal factors, dismisses individualism in situations and promotes the idea of only being able to contribute towards an issue if part of a specific group.

The questions Varshney at the end of the first paragraph which ask, “Nations building encountered serious ethnic resistance from within. Why was that so? Why could smaller ethnic identities not subsumed under larger country-or state-level identities that the governments were ostensibly seeking to create?”(Varshney 280). The answer to these questions is probably best way to sum up essentialism. The given answer states that ethnic groups have a stronger bond which was a better motivator than then the ties formed by the new

Even today, divisions in groups have been as a result of continued differences among the uniting groups. Humans have a tendency to incline towards the protection of their interest’s aid favors of their perceived groups. Such favourism makes them advocate fully for their interests posing a challenging opposing side to the interests of their unperceived groups. Many nations today are faced with such opposing groups having differing interests and ideals. People advocating for similar ideals tend to create strong ties of

When I started to read the section on groups a term came to mind “imagined communities”. In the book it defines a group as consisting “of two or more people, united by a shared sense of identity or purpose, who interact with each other over time in ways that distinguish them from outsiders” (Witt, 2016, p. 101). The concept of an imagined community looks to analyze nationalism and what better example of nationalism can we analyze than the 2016 election? Donald Trump broke away from the normal Republican party platform and ran on a nationalist platform instead. In the article he speaks on Trump’s rise to nationalism. Trump fueled his campaign with rhetoric of nationalism, playing on our doubts of globalization. Trump was trying to bring together

When examining the differences between ethnic conflict and genocide one must first analyze the operational definitions. Ethnic conflict can be described as the hatred that forms when two or more cultures reside in the same area and disagree over power distribution (Barkan and Snowden 2008: p.131). This power struggle often begins on a smaller scale, most commonly in the form of a single hate group, and gradually cultivates into a larger one, as in a national or international organization. It often begins as prejudicial views inherited during primary socialization. These negative views often construe distrust for a certain group. When dislike is based upon one’s ethnicity, ethnocentric opinions are formed and lead to stereotyping and discrimination.

Identity politics is an undeniable twenty first century paradigm among minority groups, sparking discourse across political and social spheres. According to philosopher Cressida Heyes, identity politics is the range of political activity founded in the shared experiences of injustice of members of certain social groups. Members of this group assert their distinctiveness, challenging dominant oppressive characterizations of a white hierarchy in order to gain political support. This paper will argue that identity politics is a detrimental ideology to the American political sphere. While identity politics seemingly allows for traditionally marginalized groups to voice their concerns, it actually serves to further limit minority groups by ignoring intersectionality and promoting an “us against them” mentality. The motto of the United States has always been E. Plurbis Unum, or “out of many, one,” describing America as a melding of many cultures and peoples into one identity--American. Recent times, however, show social and political progression, as evidenced by identity politics, to “many, out of one.”

The relationship between Israel and Palestine and its corresponding history is a long narrative of power dynamics, nationalism, and mutual aggression. While the interactions between these two groups cannot be easily simplified, this narrative and its themes are ever present throughout this conflict and in the ways that the people of these populations represent themselves. This sense of dissonance and this constant defensive state are rooted in the historical foundation of this conflict but have in a way also become a major part of the identities associated with Palestinians. Distinctions between national identity as it is geographically oriented and national identity as a shifting role affected by this conflict are important to recognize

There are plenty of interesting videos on the YouTube that attract people’s attention every day, but there are still some strange videos try to let people step away from this digital world. “Look up” might be the most famous and persuasive one of those special kind. The interesting things is that the author Gary Turk describes the world inside the internet “is just an illusion”, and the reality is indeed “a world of confusion” (Gary). In this spoken word film, Gary Turk argue that people should look up from their virtual world and engage more with their actual life. Gary Turk is not only build trust on his audiences by using his precise observation of the technology problems happen in the real life, but also successful appeals to audiences’ emotion with a common aspiration to love.

Each emerges out of encounters with colonial understandings of the other, in which Palestinians and Jews being defined as others, the judge of the other, being the ‘enlightened’ European. Furthermore, the events and encounters that shape Zionism and Palestinian nationalism can be understood at various moments as the ‘same’ events. Neither Zionism nor Palestinian nationalism is destroyed by the sharing of these events in the name of nationalism as “political ideologies do not recognize nor reconcile with each other, nor do they determine who recognizes whom and who reconcile with whom.” Put another way, political ideologies, here nationalism, are capable of fully existing without the acknowledgement of the other, nor the ability to compromise with the other. Instead, both Zionism and Palestinian nationalism continue to claim legitimacy in the face of opposition and strive to be understood as legitimate heirs to the land called Israel, called Palestine.

Unanswered assist among co-ethnics and the emotional power of ethnic conflict have been time-consuming and difficult to evolutionary science ( J.P. Rushton’s theory of ethnic nepotism, 2016.)

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate Henry Hale’s article “Divided we Stand: Institutional Sources for Ethno federal State Survival and Collapse”. Hale’s attempts to respond to the criticism leveled against ethnofederalism, which posits that ethnofederal institutional arrangement leads to secession and consequently failure of central state. He argues that existence of a core ethnic region facilitates separatism and secessionism, which if addressed will resolve the misconception about ethnofederalism. His theory of a state’s collapse is solid and well argued. However, there are some contradictions in its casual mechanism, which can be perfected with further research. This review proceeds as follows. The first section provides a brief summary of the article. The second section discusses the articles methodology, and the last section provides critique of the article.

On the other hand, Anthony Smith, for example, illustrates that identities have clear deterministic characteristics that shape both small societies, nations and states. There are four major determinants that Smith illustrates in his work: distinguishable characteristics of national as opposed to other kinds of collective cultural identification; the role of ethnic bases in the formation of new nations; the nature and impact of different nationalist ideologies and symbolism of the formation of ethnic political identities; and last, the political consequences of different kinds of national identities (Smith, 1991, p viii). These four aspects are helpful in the explanation and determination whether communities are indeed “imaginary”. Anderson points out that "communities are to be distinguished by … the style in which they are imagined”, imagined because, “in fact, all communities larger than primordial villages of face-to-face contact (and perhaps even those) are imagined, (Anderson, 2006: 6). However, Smith suggests that it is not only the “style” of other communities that can be different. For example, Friedrich Meinecke (1919) made a distinction between “largely passive cultural communities”, from the “active, self-determining political nations”. Indeed, Ancient Greece, for example, was not a well-determined nation despite the cultural mutuality, it was a well-organized collection of city-states which had common external and internal threats that with the strong