Electoral College

Electoral college gives power to smaller states and large primate cities: 

• In the 2000 election a candidate, George W. Bush, became the president by winning a lot of small and medium states 
• the electoral college system gives a bonus to the small states. no matter how few people a state has, it gets two extra electoral votes according to its senators, therefore it is not proportional to population size of the state. 
• bush won the majority of the small/ medium states and only won 3 of the bigger states ohio, florida, and texas. While Gore won the majority of large electoral states such as california, New York, pennsylvania, and illinois. these states alone earned him half of the electoral votes he needed to win, but because Bush had the support of the smaller states the power shifted and Gore lost the election
• in 2000, Wyoming only had a vote turnout of 213000 but still got 3 electoral votes, while in California, nearly 11 million people voted...more than 50 times greater turnout than wyoming. But California (Gore), got 54 votes which is only 18 times as many as wyoming
• During the course of the 2012 election Romney v. Obama, primate cities controlled the voting patterns in various states, leaving little to no power for the rest of the state. 
• in 2012, obama only won Washoe and Clark county out of the 17 counties in Nevada and still won the state. This shows that the primate city of the state, Las Vegas, which is located in Clark county is essentially the only city of the state that matters. ~700,000 of the total ~900,000 voters are located in clark county this is more than 2/3 of the votes in large thanks to Las Vegas.
• in Maryland, obama won 10 electoral votes by winning the state. however, he only won a few counties but won baltimore city and baltimore county giving him ~400,000 votes of his 1.5 million...thats about 1/3 of his total in one location
• in 2012, obama won only 12 counties in the state of pennsylvania, yet he got 52% of the votes because he won the 2 major cities and the counties they fall in, philly and pittsburgh 
• The electoral college gives disproportionate voting power to states, favoring the smaller states with more electoral votes per person
• small states have the power! 

Religion

Religion does not play an important role in my life or in the decisions I make on a daily basis. I think that it is nice that some people believe that there is a higher power that can save them of their sins and help them in critical times, but as peaceful and good as it may sound religion is the core of many conflicts though out history. The Catholics and Protestants fought for 500 years over which religion was  hierarchical of the two. I believe that religion hinders rational thought for example modern medicine can cure or help many diseases, but some religions do not allow the use of modern medicine and believe that the decision on whether a person lives or dies is in God's hands. That is absolutely ridiculous and irrational that someone would allow themselves or their love ones to perish for their beliefs or because it is in God's plan. The idea of religion is nice because it creates a commonality and trust between people that would otherwise not engage in these personal relationships. It can sometimes be the basis of trade agreements, but can also lead to tension and ultimately the split of otherwise perfectly stable countries. I cannot deny that religion plays a huge role in many people's lives and that it will continue to but however in my own personal life it is not as much a factor in my decisions but I feel that we're all able to coexist.

Terrorism

Terrorism can be defined in many ways, this is dependent on who is defining the word. Many definitions include the words fear, intimidation, civilians, threats, and demands. In my opinion,the bombs that were placed along the finish line of the Boston Marathon in Massachusetts on Patriot's day is considered an act of terrorism. The act instilled fear and intimidated many civilians in the United States, other large cities are temporarily on higher alert and have amped up security precautions for fear of their citizens safety. I do not believe that this holiday has fundamentally changed. Boston is a city that rallied together and handled this tragedy with grace. although I do believe that this attack will be remembered for years to come, I think that Patriot's day will still be a celebration of American people's beliefs and their ability to stand together to inspire a  Revolution. This attack to me showed that American people can come together in times of tragedy and put aside their differences for a bigger purpose, just as they did in the American Revolution. As President Barack Obama stated people will gather in Boston next year not to grieve for their losses but to run in the 118th annual Boston Marathon, and prove that in spite of this attack we are going to resume our lives commemorating the battles of Lexington and Concord. I believe that in years to come more athletes will show up to participate in this event and run for a purpose, for the support of America. Attacks like these do sometimes work in changing America or other countries as a whole because of the high number of casualties and the extensive media coverage in current times. The attack on 911 changed America into a country involved in a "war on terrorism", with maximum security and has imposed the invasion of privacy and government interference onto its citizens. Post 911 fear has been the most severe consequence of these attacks, but I typically believe that attacks such as the one during the Boston Marathon do not work in the long run to achieve the goals of the terrorists. 

Supernationalism

Supernationalism is the transcending of national boundaries, authority, or interests for a greater cause. According to supernationalism a collective good is  the greater cause for each member state. Many pacts, such as NAFTA, the EU, NATO, and the UN,  have led to regional integration and proven that supranationalism is a benefit to those nations that enter into well organized agreements. Supernatuonalism benefits small states in agreements such as NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which provides small or devlopeing states with protection from attacks by other nations or non-members. Super nationalism can also benefit larger states as well by providing cheap unskilled labor and  lower environmental regulations. This benefit is shown by NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, between Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The exploitation of cheap labor in Mexico allowed the United States to compete with Japan and the European Union for economic supremacy. Unions like the European Union are also formed to protect the member states from a bigger issue like the "red scare" the soviets. After the end of World War 2 the European states felt that unification was necessary to stabilize their countries and prevent something like the "red scare" from happening again. Many member countries of the EU have established a fixed monetary exchange rate and stabilized their currencies with the establishment of the Euro. Supernationalism, although criticized by many, has led to prosperity, peace, and free markets among many nations throughout the world. 

Colonialism

The justification for colonialism to many is the obligation that superior states, such as the United States and Britain, should help humans living in inadequate positions.  Yes I agree that this is a justification and through this process the areas that are colonized by superior states may be more likely to become peaceful and prosper. The colonialization of some undeveloped nations could reduce ancient acts such as tribalism, cannibalism, female bondage, and illiteracy.  This being said, I also believe that larger countries may justify their actions by stating that colonization is their moral duty to "help" these countries, when in reality colinazation may be for the superior country's profit or benefit. In many cases superior countries exploit the resources found during colonization, these resources consist of: gold, silver, silk, spices, slaves, etc. Although colonialism may increase the standards of living in certain areas by incorporating democracy, capitalism, liberalizing education, enhancing medical technology, and creating a free market, many other areas of the world may not be receptive to these ideas. As demonstrated in class, when a westerner came into an undeveloped country and tried to introduce modern medicine that would help those suffering from health problems, some welcomed the idea while others, no matter how much they were coerced, would not take the modern medicine. These people were content living in their current conditions. Therefore, I do not believe that a global community with one set of living standards could be reached in reality. This idea sounds great in theory, but there are too many varieties of cultures and ethnicities to come to an agreement or follow one such as this.

Role of the United States in the World

The role of the United States in world affairs has drastically shifted since it took a leading role in the events of World War II. The establishment of the United States as a major world power started with its involment in the war and culminated in the establishment of the US as a major seat of power in the UN. The United States has adopted and interventionalist foreign policy and regularly involves itself in the affairs of countless other nations, resulting in a myriad of detriments from our floundering economy to the breakdown of foreign relations. This involvement has cost the United States in more than just money, the result of this constant intervention has strained our country's relationships and damaged our credibility as champions of liberty and freedom. Our latest involvement in the affairs of the Middle East is a perfect example of that last point. By funding groups that are affiliated with Hezbollah and other notorious organizations, we lose the moral high ground and instead of being seen as liberators, we are viewed as merchants of death. Our recent trend in foreign policy has been that of an hegemonic power, and while there may have been periods of time in which this would prove beneficial to our country, sadly today is not one of them. The breakdown in our perceptions around the world has had severe reprecussions for our country, and is a direct result of our role in international affairs. We are slowly losing our position as a global superpower, and when that happens our foreign policy must shift to match our new role. This transition would be desirable and vastly beneficial to both domestic and foreign relations and have an ameliorating effect on our country.

War & Conflict

Pros about war and conflict:
As stated in the debate on war and conflict during times of war spark new technicological advances would not have been made possible that quickly without the investment of the military.  The  microwave, the radio, planes, and other technological advances that have made American lives easier were fueled by war. I also agree with the pro war argument the fact that conflict is SOMETIMES resolved by war because it is the last option that a region has to gain peace. Many revolutionary wars have brought about peace in times that conflict would have been dragged out for many years to come.
Also, a pro in my opinion of war is the decrease in population from war casualties. This might be a harsh and cruel statement but our population is expected to reach 9 billion by year 2050 and our world is starting to be more crowded than it has the capacity to handle. war is a means that can possibly decrease our total world population. A case was made that the point of war is to put people in their place and prevent additional wars from happening. This has worked in countries such as Japan and Germany.

Cons for war and conflict:
 As far as the environment goes many nuclear products have been made during times of war that effect the environment at extreme levels. Even the testing alone has negatively impacted the habitats of many different oceanic species. A problem I have with war is how the governments budget is no longer focused on other economic or social issues but changes to almost solely allocate its money towards the war effort. War creates a false sense of economic growth due to inflation.

Who should vote?

In the United States everyone who excedes the age of 18 and is a US citizen is allowed to register and vote for whom they believe would best represent their interests. I personally believe that there should be extra criteria required for those who choose to vote. A person should have the resources and skills necessary to vote, they should have an interest in the issues and be informed on those that they are voting to enact. The citizen should have concern over the political outcome and not just vote on appearances of the candidates alone. If asked questions about the senators or the members of the house, the citizen should be able to recall the names of their state representatives and the way in which they typically vote (whether that be conservatively or liberally).

Many people in recent years, some of my conservative family members included, only turn out to vote because they do not want the opposite parties candidate to win. This is not a sufficient reason to vote, one should have a stance on the issues and know exactly why they do not or do like a candidate. They should be well-informed and not just get information "on the cheap", by using their psychological connectedness to a party identification to vote the same zombie like way each time they enter a poll booth.

In conclusion, when it comes to felon voting laws I do agree that the decision to reinstate these citizens right to vote should be left to the States. Whether it be that the right is lost permanently, is restored after term of incarceration, parole, and probation is completed, or is completely unrestricted. These citizens should be able to vote if their State believes that this right has been earned.

Introduction into Political Geography

Hello My name is Candace Applewhite. I am taking a course called Political Geography at Florida State University, which is how I found myself writing this blog. I was born in Panama City, Florida but grew up for the most part in Tallahassee. You can call me a towny. I am studying to get my degree in Political Science and Environmental Studies. This class is an elective for both categories so I am killing two birds with one stone. Upon graduating I plan to move to out of state(FINALLY!) to either North Georgia, North Carolina, or Tennessee. I would like to work on a river such as the Ocoee River, testing the pollutants of the river or working with others on the hydroelectric power. Growing culinary herbs and starting my own wine business with irregular wines such as blackberry, blueberry, watermelon etc. is a passion of mine as well. I am hoping during the duration of this course that i will discover many things I formerly did not know about political geography and the impacts it has on my personal life and global issues.  The meaning of the world geography itself is enticing Geo- Earth and Graphy - writings. So buckle your seat belts and come join me on this bumpy ride into the world of geography of politics, power, and the political division of space.  

Impact of Borders

As we look at the different divisions in political geography you begin to look at things such as political

spaces, borders, and geopolitical aspects of states. Borders can have significant impacts such as the splitting of cultures, races, and religions, as well as the differences in landscape. 

Formal and functional spaces are the building blocks of political spaces. Formal spaces being defined as a space that must be demarcated, delimited and defined. For those who do not know the meaning of these, each space must be able to be mapped out, there must be writing on the landscape, and the space needs to be documented. Some examples of these spaces are Appalachia and as well as any state in the US. A functional space is missing one aspect of a formal space, like the basque country in France or Spain. Sometimes these spaces do not coincide like the turf wars going on between gangs in places like Los Angeles, California causing heavy impacts on all citizens of the state not just the partaking gangs. 

Borders are both based on formations or boundaries of establishments and on the time in which the boundary establishment or formation was created. Descriptive borders are the borders based on the features, boundary establishment, or formation. There are three basic types of descriptive borders: physiographic (geomorphic)which is based upon the physical geography features, anthropogeographic follows human or cultural geography features, and geometric following latitude or longitude. Genetic borders are based on the time of boundary establishment or formation. Antecedent(pioneer) are created before human settlement, subsequent boundaries are created after significant human settlement, superimposed boundaries are placed without concern for the preexisting human settlement, and relic which are boundaries that no longer exist.