The Effect Of Third Party Candidates In Presidental Elections Essay exa

The Effect of Third Party Candidates in Presidental Elections Although citizens of the United States have the opportunity to vote for many different offices at the national, state, and local levels, the election of the president of the United States every four years is the focal point of the American political process. The American political system has maintained a two- party system since its inception. Political scientists argue that a two-party system is the most stable and efficient means of running a democratic nation as a mono-party system leads toward tyranny, and a multi-party system creates over- diversification and gridlock (Mazmanian 6). The Constitution of the United States does not in any way limit the structure of the political system to two parties. In fact, there has been no presidential election where there were only two candidates; however, third-party candidates are rarely represented in a majority of the states, and those that were on the ballot in a majority of states have never been successful. However, on a few occasions, third party candidates have been able to make a significant impact on the presidential election process such as George Wallace in 1968 and H. Ross Perot in 1992. Through nineteenth century there was little deviation from the traditional two-party system. Until then, political candidates were utterly dependant upon the political infrastructure of an established party for their campaigns. Until the development of mass media technologies, including radio and television, political candidates had no direct means of communicating with the public and were thus dependant on the communications systems of the major parties. Thus, third party movements lacked the capabilities to run an effective campaign against the major parties. However, mass media has changed the scope of the election process and brought about the demise of the major political parties (Robinson 147). Candidates who run a television dominated campaign have hurt their parties in a number of ways. The media specialists who manage such campaigns tend to be loyal to a candidate rather than to the candidate's party; as a result, the campaign supports a single candidate and not the entire ticket of the party. In addition, the heavy reliance on television allows a candidate to reach voters directly, thereby weakening the traditional function of the party as an info... ...eed, Ross Perot and George Wallace had a profound effect on the outcome of the elections they participated in, but Perot had a more lasting effect. Ross Perot proved to the world that it is quite plausible for a completely independent candidate to "walk into center stage and steal the show" (Robinson 141). With the decline of the political parties and their role in the campaign process, the possibilities for more successful independent candidates can only increase. Eventually an independent will go farther than swaying the outcome. One day an independent will win. Works Cited Brown, Gene. H. Ross Perot: Texas Billionaire. Vero Beach: Rourke Enterprises, Inc, 1993. Goldman, Peter and Tom Mathews. "The Manhattan Project". Newsweek (Special Election Issue) November/December, 1992. pp.40-57 Jackson, David. "3rd party chances gauged" Dallas Morning News. November 5, 1992. Mazmanian, Daniel A. Third Parties in Presidential Elections. New York: Franklin Watts, 1974. Murr, Andrew. "Superhero". Newsweek (Special Election Issue) November/December, 1992. pp.70-77. Robinson, James W., ed. Ross Perot Speaks Out. Rocklin: Prima Publishing, 1992. .

Life of Pi book

In the book, Life of Pi[1], Yann Martel proposes many religious differences, and similarities from religions located around the world. These questions ask such things as, is it possible to be a multi-religion person? Are all religions different? How are some religions the same? Life of Pi was written in 2002 and is a fascinating story of how a young man, Pi Patel, makes it in a world with his own personal beliefs. He adopts the three major religions of the world being Hinduism, Christianity, and Islam.Life of Pi is a very questioning book at times and has the capability of persuading nonbelievers to re-evaluate their religious thought process and beliefs. After reading this book you will be comfortable in the knowledge that you will have on other religions, and just may judge them differently. One of the questions that surfaces in this book is â€Å"can a person believe in more than one religion? † The author uses the Christian, Islam, and Hindu religions all in one character to represent the different struggles that Pi Patel is facing within him self, just as animals were used as symbolic representation for people in the first story. As for the question itself, a person cannot believe in more than one religion at a time. This is shown when the three holy men meet Pi in the park and they argue over his religious practices. While arguing Pi’s father reminds the three holy men that â€Å"there is freedom for practice of whatever religion in this country†[2]. The holy men screamed in unison, â€Å"Yes! Practice-singular†[3]. This point supports how even the three major holy religions of the world believe that you can only have one. However, it is possible for people to change religions throughout their lives. As religions are faith based through personal convictions that come from within, you have purpose in what you believe, and therefore are only able to believe in one at a time. To say you believe in Christianity and Hinduism would be like saying you are both a communist and a progressive conservative, which are different philosophies. You have to choose one religion or another, just as in this story you need to believe the first story or the second story, and you cannot believe that both of these events occurred. A person cannot believe two tales of the same legend. The second story with people resembles culture within North America and how everything in the North American world is looked at as bare facts. Most people only believe things that they can see with there own eyes, or feel with there own hands. Starting from our education as children, to jobs in adulthood, knowledge of bare facts measures how much we are capable of doing. In math you add numbers that have relevance to our society, in science pre-determined experiments with actions or re-actions occur, as well as predictions and conclusions. Everything MUST have an answer. If there is a topic to which we do not have an answer we dig for scientific answers, and refuse to accept folk tales or stories from higher powers. In an area of the world with steadily declining religious numbers[4], we need to exercise our faith and imaginations. We all need to have an open and searching mind like that of a younger child. Pi Patel shows just how blunt and â€Å"factual†[5] North America people are by telling the second story, including the murder of people on a lifeboat. Murder is something we can all relate to, thus making the second story â€Å"the right story†[6] to most people. After the second story of realism, many people feel the first story to be a waste of time, showing again just how North American people struggle to explore the imaginative or symbolic side of things. Everybody justifies their respective view by saying, â€Å"that’s not even possible†[7] or â€Å"I’d have to see it to believe it†[8]. The first and second story connects in a way of showing resemblances between the two major religions of the world, Christianity and Islam. The purpose of this is to show how alike Islam followers are to Christian followers. They share most of the same religious views, with very minor differences in stories of interpretations. They also share many of the same characters, such as Jesus, who is God’s son. Jesus sends messages from God and heals people in Christianity, and in Islam a prophet shares the word of God. These two parts in the story show just how different the two religions are, yet are so similar. The first story also shows how, in the eastern world, the people are much more imaginative, by using Hindu and its animals to add a twist to create the first story. It uses the animals to also describe the real people that were on the boat such as the Orangutan, Pi’s mother. In Hindu a person who is caring and involved in religious studies has the possibility of becoming a monkey after death[9]. Pi’s mom was a very caring person who was against the eating of the zebra, or the young sailor. A zebra is looked at as an honest, friendly, and creative person because of his stripes[10]. By using these animals he is trying to show just how North American culture is so bare factual. This story parallels our own personal internal struggles as well as the struggles of different cultures and religions in the world. We begin to understand we have to ultimately face and deal with our own struggles, allowing us to come to terms with our own beliefs, where we are at in our own lives and how we fit into our culture. This story could be interpreted with different meanings by different people, but ultimately causes the kind of thought that moves us forward in terms of who we will become. The purpose of this story is to show the similarities of some religions, and also to show that the things that are different, are not so different after all. This is a book attempting to change minds on religious discrimination and indifferences.Reference http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm

Glory Review - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1128 Downloads: 7 Date added: 2018/12/27 Category History Essay Type Book review Level High school Topics: Civil War Essay Film Analysis Essay Movie Essay Did you like this example? The American Film, Glory of 1989, is based on the actual historical story, of the 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry, seen through the eyes of the commanding officer Gould Shaw who was a white officer during the American Civil War. The story is told by Kevin Jarre the author of Glory who was walking in Boston and came across a Civil war memorial, and this became the inspiration forGlory. The war was characterized by both white and black soldiers. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Glory Review" essay for you Create order The officers were the white while the African Americans were the soldiers. The central theme as I observed in the film is racism and discrimination and biases attitude from the whites towards their fellow black soldiers. Amongst these officers, Colonel Shaw was unlike his fellows who were racist and devoted most of the time training the African-Americans how to fight restlessly in the civil war. The blacks were more than determined to fight for their country and more so against injustices. The whites doubted or didnt believe in the blacks making good soldiers or submitting to the discipline of the war, but the likes of Fredrick Douglas believed in the chance of winning for the black regiment. The Glory therefore openly exposed different and multiple aspects of civil war as it occurred. It displayed the cruel realities that the soldiers went through during the war. The film also revealed how man to man fights was brutal and barbaric as practiced during the civil war. For instance, the 54th exposed one of the bloodiest action in the war which was an uphill attack in a muddy terrain running against a Confederate fort in Charleston. This attack was somewhat suicidal having the battlefield strategies involving the black troops being disciplined by matching into the contemptuous fire. The 54th soldier remained strong enough as well as disciplined till the end of civil war. In my opinion, the purpose of Glory was to expose the victory and courage of the soldiers in the war who fought against racism, prejudice and discrimination and later achieved their goals. Although the back regiment was unskilled, they gave their best to provide the Norths with a victory on proving to be real heroes. Watching Glory, I am convinced that the director Edward Zwick, brings outs a lot of lessons that we can draw from the movie. It gives a clear historical description of the experience of the soldiers in the war. Racism had been a real challenge that the blacks faced, and he brings out this aspect in the film. For instance, there was a decision that was made to pay the blacks less than the whites. They were not believed to be good enough to fight in the civil war, and more so the civil war was against slavery in the south where the blacks had been enslaved. Therefore the black soldiers through the help of Shaw, they gave the best, they fought, bleed and died as they fought against these forms of discrimination. It is also clear that as much as racism was intense a few like Shaw were ready to the unit with the blacks to end slavery which I believe is one its strength. Glory therefore brings out a clear experience of the civil war. It displays the courage the soldiers had to win the figh ts despite dealing with prejudice from their fellow white soldiers. The zeal Gould had as a commander to help the black soldiers gets to question why they were much different in the relationship between the soldiers and the difference in how the slaves were treated. Was the slavery and racism attitude intense only in the southern region? Ironically, the northern abolitionists were antislavery, but the film does not consider the blacks as equal to the whites through the way they were treated in the film which I believe is a weakness. In my opinion, the movie unfolds the true historical experiences during slavery because the southern economy was highly based on cotton and the political leaders were therefore against antislavery as they needed cheap labor that could only be provided by the blacks. They, thus, had to fight their way through this prejudices as shown by the 54th regiment. They had been considered inferior. The film as it was experienced by the blacks projected the fact th at the blacks had to be paid less and also did not deserve to be trained in the war. Though Shaw was biased towards the blacks, with time he relied on the blacks were no different from them and offered them full support to get admiration and glory. Watching Glory, I am left with the mixed feeling, why because the story is primarily about the blacks, but their top leader or officer is a white. We had to see the blacks through the 54th white commanding officer and not the other way. Well, I believe the reason to these could be because the whites were considered the superior race against the blacks or could the blacks be in a land that is not theirs? Were their zeal self-determined or the commander instilled the enthusiasm in them? In my opinion, it bothered me that being a film centering their focus on the black regime then, the blacks should have been the leading actor and more so as a commander. Again, I wonder could that be possible if the blacks did not know how to fight and needed training. This makes me conclude that the purpose of the 54th was to indicate and show the public that slavery and civil war was a blacks journey to fight. Sadly, the fact is, the blacks only saw themselves in the eyes of the white, and since the b lacks were the ones just suffering under the white regime, then the perception of the whites towards the black is what had to change, for slavery, racism and other forms of prejudice to change. Having the director giving the movie in a more focus of the blacks but seeing it through the eyes of the white, I think he could have given us a different view like white seeing the blacks through their(black) eyes and this also proved to be a weakness. Compared to other war films, Glory brings out the other aspects apart from war and training like comradeship and togetherness, courage and the zeal to achieve goals without giving up. It is one of the best films that shows a true history of the civil war as given in the books. It instils a change in the minds of the public on their views towards the black as equal members of the society. Glory therefore is one of the strongest movies and a valuable movie in giving a clear description and understanding the experiences of the civil war.