The introduction of the Internet to the mainstream world has brought with it a new way of distributing information. This new distribution of information over the Internet has created a power struggle between some states and their citizens. The basic definition of power is the action of a person over another person to force the submissive person to do something he would not ordinarily do. Brian A. Connery, a professor at Oakland University who has studied power, defines power as, "Any capacity to get people to do what you want them to do." Power is evident in the relationship between a state and its citizens. The government has power over its citizens to enact laws and regulate society. In many societies, such as the People's Republic of China (PRC), the government maintains most of the power over its people.
In a powerful government, such as China, its citizens may not believe that their regime is legitimate. John Harrigan, a political science professor, declares his definition of legitimacy as, "The willingness of people to accept that their government has the moral right to govern." (12.) A legitimate government is a political term to explain citizens' support of their governing officials because the public deems these people fit to rule. An illegitimate government, on the other hand, is a government where the people do not agree that the regime has the right to govern them.
The power relationship between the people in China and the government ruling them is being altered by the growing amount of available information to the Chinese people. This new information is being shown to Chinese citizens on the Internet and it has created a growth -- as the Chinese government sees it -- of re...
... middle of paper ...
... and the American Future. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1996.
Hayward, Clarissa Rile. "De-Facing Power." Polity. 31 (1998) 1-22.
Keohane, Robert O. and Joseph S. Nye, Jr. "Power and Interdependence in the Information Age." Foreign Affairs. 77 (1998): 81-94.
May, Greg. "Spamming for Freedom." Washington Post. 19 Feb. 1999. 1 Mar. 1999. <http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/Wplate /1999-02/ 19/0711-021999-idx.html>
Nye, Joseph S. "Redefining the National Interest." Foreign Affairs. 78 (1999): 22-35.
Russell, Betrand. Power. 6th ed. London: Routledge, 1995.
Sherman Arnold K. and Aliza Kolker. The Social Bases of Politics. California: Wadsworth, 1987.
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary. Plainfield, NJ. MICRA, Inc. February 3, 1998. 12 Apr. 1999.<http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-in/dict.pl?db =web1913&term=control&config=define>
Many people believe that felons do not deserve the right to vote. For these people, voting is not an inherent right; rather it is a privilege given to deserving people that wish to make a positive change to their lives. Some believe that, “…there is no reason for a felon to vote or to debate about whether or not they have that right…they made the choice to break the law, so why should they have any say in making it?” {Siegel} In this point of view, giving felons the right to vote is similar to rewarding them. With the right to vote, felons are still able to sway decisions regarding the lives of a society they are no longer a part of. Felons are meant to be punished, stripped of numerous rights including that of voting. Punishments, then, are made to restrict a person, not give them more freedom and decision.
Felon voting laws limit the restrictions for a felon to vote on any election. “Felon voting has not been federally regulated because some people argue that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act can be tied to felon disenfranchisement and the Congress has the authority to legislate felon voting in federal elections.” Felon disenfranchisement is excluding people otherwise eligible to vote from voting due to conviction of a criminal offence, usually restricted to the more serious class of crimes, felonies. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures and The Sentencing Project, 1 in 40 adults were unable to vote due to a felony conviction in the 2008 elections. One purpose of the felon voting laws is the uncertainty of trusting
2.Omar Saleem. Establishment of a U.S. Federal Data Protection Agency to Define and Regulate Internet Privacy and its Impact in U.S.-China Relations: Marco Polo Where Are You? The John Marshall Journal of Computer & Information Law. The John Marshall Law School. Fall 2000 [2]
26, 2007 editorial "Another No Vote on Felons," published in the Washington Times: “Even in nearby Massachusetts, no stranger to progressivism, voters in 2000 supported a constitutional amendment to bar inmates from voting. The reason is clear: Most people think perpetrators of serious crimes have violated the public trust and cannot be permitted to help determine the future of the communities they harmed”. This view point is helpful to help undecided people see the potential harm of letting free convicted prisoners vote. Also, it is interesting how the very thought of convicted felons vote places such concern in the law abiding citizens’ thoughts. One may notice that particular past criminals may not have the best interest in what best for the community. Furthermore, one may notice that prisoners may be cut off from the events of the world, and wouldn’t have information to help them elect officials for the communities they may harmed. In, addition this may be true under the circumstance that some felons are not capable of making great choices for the community as a whole. As well as, if they have harmed the community they shouldn’t be able to vote on the wellbeing of the people they have
China joined the global Internet age in 1994, and has been commercially available since 1995. Since then, Chinese Internet usage has seen explosive growth, doubling every six months, and the number of online users is only second to the US. The Internet age ushered in the information age with a new world of freedom and expression for the Chinese. However, soon after its inception, the Chinese government has reined in the free wheeling Internet users and has imposed new laws and restrictions to access and content on the Internet.
The topic of felon disenfranchisement has become a highly contested topic as of late. The current Presidential Administration in what would appear to be a hollow declaration and political posturing has recently directed Attorney General Eric Holder to decree the racially motivated and archaic Jim Crow driven practice be restructured or more likely abolished. And in what would appear as the trump card in an already racially sensitive society Atty. Gen Eric Holder states in his address to the Georgetown University Law Center on criminal justice reform that “although well over a century has passed since post-Reconstruction states used these measures to strip African Americans of their most fundamental rights, the impact of felony disenfranchisement on modern communities of color remains both disproportionate and unacceptable. Throughout America, 2.2 million black citizens – or nearly one in 13 African-American adults – are banned from voting because of these laws. In three states – Florida, Kentucky, and Virginia – that ratio climbs to one in five” (Eric H. Holder, 2014)
Everyday people in China are suffering from their government. From being wrongly accused to being executed for petty crimes. In a country where you cannot speak your opinions, talk poorly about government officials, speak about Chinese communist failures, or even browse the internet freely. China has kept its citizens in the void. One example is the great firewall of china, which sensors most social media and other sites. This essay will go into some individual stories of the Chinese government's unfair social injustices towards its people.
The root of Felon Disenfranchisement can be traced back to Greek and Roman laws. Where any person convicted of an infamous crime would lose his or her right to participate in polis. In Rome they would lose their right to participate in suffrage and to serve in the Roman legions. With the founding of the United States of America, the US Constitution gave the right to establish voting laws to the states. From 1776 - 1821 eleven states included felony disenfranchisement in their laws (Voter Registration Protection Act). By 1868 when the fourteenth Amendment was enacted eighteen states had adopted disenfranchisement laws. After the Civil War felony Disenfranchisement laws were used along with poll taxes and literary test to exclude African Americans from voting. The right to vote is considered to be one of the fundamental rights of citizenship in the United States. This right is more than just the right to mark a piece of paper and drop it in a box or the right to pull a lever in a voting booth. The right to vote includes the right to have a ballot counted for as a legal voting citizen. Although this right is considered fundamental, restrictions have been placed on this right. The main restriction is placed on persons convicted of a felony conviction all felonies not just infamous ones. Today on Election Day, as Americans wait in line to cast their vote over 4.65 million people are denied this most fundamental democratic right because of a past or present felony conviction.
What if one day you weren't allowed to voice your opinion about the people who run our country your country in other words if you couldn’t vote? A lot of people don’t vote, but what if you didn’t even have the right to do so? In 12 states, ex-felons aren’t allowed to vote even after serving their prison time. When you think of a felon you probably think of someone that has done terrible things and shouldn't have a voice in politics but that figure should be changed. One lady, by the name of Leola Strickland, isn’t allowed to vote because she has a felony on her record for postdating a few checks and having them bounce because she lost her job(1). Some people in our country can’t vote because they have felons for the same reason. They aren’t violent criminals, they just made a small mistake or two and now can’t
Growing up in an American society citizens tend to take for granted the freedom and other personal liberties that are granted in their Constitution. Even though most Americans acknowledge that they are fortunate, it does not mean that other nations should limit their people's rights. China is one example of a nation that displays civilian limitation. China's constitution outlines specifically their people's civil liberties, granting them more freedom than the American Constitution provides. Most of these rights are either neglected or repressed (Bradsher, 2009). The Chinese government needs to omit corruption and make longer strides in their attempt to provide better rights for their citizens. Chinese citizens are becoming more aware of human right abuses, and the People's Republic of China can only prolong the issue for so much longer.
A principle aspect of democracy is that the rulers are accountable to the ruled. The people must be engage with the political system. China is gradually gaining this engagement within its citizens instead of repressing it. This has occurred with the help of new media, and cellphones, which limited the Chinese government ability to oversee its citizens and what information they had access to. In May of 2007, citizens were outraged over the construction of a chemical plant. With the assistance of cellphones, they were able to voice their concerns to mass quantities quickly, and started a peaceful protest, and although many deemed the protest illegal, the government did nothing to stop it (Thornton 10). They allowed their citizens use their voices, and showed the government that they do have the
...cation in China is also impacted by its strict censorship. In China, the government restricts information given and taught in schools. For example, on January 11, 2011, China banned the Bayesian statistics textbook written by Andrew Gelman (Doctorow, 2011). The book was believed to contain examples of election polls and one being on testing for election fraud. China also monitors, filters, and restricts information in the internet. Chine had made an agreement with search engine companies such as, Google and Yahoo to ensure that they block access to sites such like BBC and Voice of America (Sheets, “Internet Edu. And Censorship”). Along with blocking and restricting information on the internet, school textbooks are often altered. One Chinese textbook claims that the main reason for the victory of World War II is because of the Chinese Communist Party (French, 2004).
Thornton, P., (ed.) (2010), ‘Censorship and Surveillance in Chinese Cyberspace: Beyond the Great Firewall’ In Gries, P. H., and Rosen, S., (eds) Chinese Politics (London and New York: Routledge).
Rosenthal, Elisabeth. "China Lists Controls To Restrict the Use Of E-mail and Web." The New York Times, 27 January 2000. Retrieved 26 April 2004.
Stress is defined in the dictionary as “state of mental tension and worry caused by problems in your life”. Everyone encounters stress in their life caused by many different variables in life and we all cope with in different ways. The way one copes with the stress is how it can affect our body. Some take to working out, eating healthy, take breaks from what is stressing you out and getting plenty of sleep which are good ways to cope with it. Some take to other coping mechanisms that are not very great for the body. Some examples are stress eating, abuse of drugs and alcohol, bottling up the stress, and depression. These bad methods can cause serious damage to one’s health on the body.