Colonization

In class we discussed the different ways in which strong powers go into a country to colonize it for their benefit: you can simply integrate your people into their society & attempt to set an example to act more like you, convert your people into your culture, militarily overpower the locals and set up trade groups, contact the local leadership and attempt to set up trade groups (minus the use of guns), or basically militarily go in and begin mutilating the locals. It's understandable why states would do this; more land means more power and more resources mean more wealth. I'm not sure any large power can attest that they have never colonized a weaker state throughout history, and this is still going on today. Even if it is not a direct takeover, the influence a power can place on a state says a ton. Part of the reason the United States is so powerful (and so hated) is because our sphere of influence knows no bounds. People across the globe mimic the way Americans dress, eat, act, etc. or are dependent on our economic systems or businesses. This can be considered neocolonialism; the creation of colonial dependency using the free market capitalistic system to dominate a country economically and (as a natural progression) eventually culturally. An example used in class was the American company Nike and its massive presence in Vietnam. Nike uses Vietnam as a base for its production because of the large amount and exploitation of cheap labor, but it does help out the country too. The company boosts the economy in a way that the state government would simply not be able to do on its own; and Nike plans on being there for the long-haul, they're not going to pull out when they find a location with cheaper labor. In this way it can be seen that colonialism (of any kind) is not necessarily a bad thing. Though there are certainly more examples of the terrible ways poor countries have been treated or neglected by their colonial overlords. Thankfully today this is not the case as commonly but it's not to say it doesn't happen. It's difficult to have a 100% positive or negative reaction to colonialism, it really depends on the case and the entities involved and how they interact. I would have to say in most cases it's a negative thing, at least in the past.

The Electoral College

The United States Electoral College has a 200 year mixed history of both positive and negative critics. It is made up of 538 state electors that officially decide the outcome of the President & Vice President positions. In class we had a group debate about this topic; the pros vs. the cons, & both sides had very good points.

The Electoral College setup does have many good points to it (this is not an exhaustive list); it contributes to the cohesiveness of the country, makes minority interests prominent & encourages a two-party system which helps maintain political stability. Essentially, the College makes electing the President an easier process. There are no national recounts (usually) because of it, it helps equal out extremely close population votes in states, puts minority issues to the forefront, and with the two-party system decisions can be easily made without including multiple party issues into the mix.

Negatively, it is seen as undemocratic.The United States is a standard of democracy for the rest of the world, so it's interesting that we allow our President to be elected with potentially less than half of the popular vote in his favor. Basically, he/she can win merely 13 (larger) states votes & still be elected as President; this ignores over half the country! This means it can ignore the will of the people and legislatures can still get their way. This can be seen during the 2000 election between Bush & Gore. The people wanted Gore but the College voted for Bush & that's who became out President. Also, due to the College many people thing their vote will count less, particularly in larger states, so it stops the flow of voter turnout. Again, an undemocratic trend.

I'm not saying one way is better than the other, but I do think the system is broken in some sense. We need to revamp the electoral system in order to make it more fair and consistent with the people's will. Everyone may be idiots, so perhaps they shouldn't decide the President, but then maybe that means our education system is failing us which is an entirely different problem. Perhaps one the President should solve...?