POLS 170 Blog Group 5

     An act of terrorism can be defined as unlawful, politically motivated violence and/or intimidation that is usually used against civilians. A person who does acts of terrorism is a terrorist. The definition seems simple, but who is really deemed a terrorist?      The word terrorist has been pinned to a certain stereotype through the use of media and the cultivation of the American enemy. The image that comes to mind (and in a quick Google images search) for the word terrorist is a Middle Eastern man. This stereotype has been fostered by influences ranging from movies continuously portraying brown Muslims as terrorists to the president of the United States’ words.       In March 2016, Donald Trump said “It’s very hard to separate (Islam and terrorism) . Because you don’t know who’s who” (Corbin. 476). Having these words come from the president of the United State’s mouth is extremely influential and detrimental to verity. As well as this, Trump and the United States’ government foc

  Eli Webb IR Blog Post #4 Global Justice The readings on November 15th about Global Justice were very intriguing as we discussed the role the United States has around the world and the power we have in terms of institutional, structural, and productive. In terms of Nhina Le’s article on whether or not human rights are universal or culturally relative, the United States many times has overstepped their powers and decided to interfere with other countries' cultural ideas. People might consider this a good thing, others might see it as bad. Considering the question asked for the second analytical paper about non-governmental organizations and if their benefits outweigh the problems they cause, I would view the United States in a similar category when they try to interfere with other countries. Some instances it is absolutely worth the interference, like in the case of the Muslim treatment in China today, or the apartheid in South Africa, however, instances like Vietnam and Cuba a

       In Nhina Le’s article, Are Human Rights Culturally Relative Or Universal, she lists and describes the ways in which the American Anthropological proves the proposed doctrine Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) to be culturally biased, and thus not universal. There were four claims made, and all of which have something to do with different people of different backgrounds seeing things differently. For example, one of the claims of culture bias pertained to culture practices which the article quotes, “Fourth, some rights that the UDHR recognizes, such as the right of private ownership of the means of production, equality, and marriage and religious freedoms, are at odds with traditional practices and norms in non-Western societies” (Le, 204).  This claim shows how the UDHR, based on American and Western European philosophies, values their practices as “proper” and non-Western as “improper”. I agree with the argument against the UDHR being universal rights, considering thi

  For this blog post, I wanted to further explore the question that I used in my last analytical essay: Is a world without nuclear weapons desirable?  In my essay, I concluded that a world without nuclear weapons is in fact desirable as it is impossible to remove the knowledge of their existence as an assembly, therefore a world without nuclear weapons cannot be undesirable, as it is impossible.  I also concluded that by removing these devices, it would only promote  their secret assembly and storage, which could lead to hostility and promote the misuse of nuclear power.  I felt like this question highlighted a lot of the problems that arise on an international scale and how difficult it is to implement global governance.  I think that this question also highlights how technological  developments can change how interactions between different nations occur and alter the way in  which nations act and react.  I feel like this question extends beyond nuclear power, as it shows the nuances

  Thomas White Professor Shirk International Politics 11-29-2021 Personal Experience with Terrorism     Terrorism is the greatest threat to immediate security in the 21st century. Defined by the FBI as two different concepts, there is both international and domestic terrorism. In class, international terrorism was obviously discussed more, and that is something that most in the US think less about, both because it less often affects their daily lives and also because the US government does not want to draw attention to actions they take that may be considered international terrorism. Domestic terrorism will be the topic of this Blog Post, both my personal experience with it and how a community can deal with its aftermath.     Terrorism is a concept that is impossible to fully understand until it affects you or someone in your community. Oftentimes, the media creates a narrative of sympathy for victims instead of empathy, where individuals are meant to feel bad for the victims of the t

  How will the US return to the World Health Organization affect the spread of the new  Omicron Variant of Coronavirus? In July of 2020, President Donald Trump drafted a letter to the United Nations declaring US intention of exiting the World Health Organization. Despite different claims of the reasoning behind the withdrawal, that the withdrawal had to do with the huge amounts of funding the organization required, it’s poor handling of the pandemic, or even just a protectionist attitude towards his own people, Trump’s declaration marked an important moment in the Pandemic. It pointed to the idea that the WHO had been “slow to respond to the pandemic,” and “too ‘China-centric,’” and that the US need not pay so much to be a part of such an organization. ( NPR ) But critics of this withdrawal, including Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey, claimed that all it did was leave “Americans sick and America alone.” Due to critiques like this, President Joe Biden moved to rejoin the WHO almost