As we read Hansons writing on how Donald Trump’s use of social media influenced the presidential election, it is necessary to recognize how this usage normalized day to day communication with a political candidate and later a president, and whether this is good or bad. Trump’s use of Twitter provided him free advertising throughout his campaign which had altered the run for political candidacy in 2016 entirely. In addition to this, it changed the way people were able to communicate with a political candidate. He would tweet multiple times a day during the race, almost putting him in constant communication with the American People. The number of tweets have only increased since then. Twitter now may even be considered as an essential part of his administration as he uses it as a resource to almost unfilteredly communicate with the American People. This reshaped how the Oval Office runs. Many white house aids wish to confiscate this resource and many have learned to embrace it. But there are both good and bad aspects of this form of communication. Yes, he can communicate directly with the American people, but it also presents many potential risks. So, is his newfound use of communication through twitter good or bad?
Author: Elizabeth Haley
In chapter 7 of The Case For Trump by Victor Davis Hanson, he highlights the ways in which political candidates have focused on the United States as having declined and the need to resolve this. He specifically focuses on Trump’s campaign as his campaign slogan was “Make America Great Again.” Trump, unlike most progressives, focused on a need for an increase in consumerism in hopes that it would provide the middle class with aspects that are typically only available to the wealthy. He further found that many issues stemmed from a lack of nationalist patriotism of capitalists, rather than inequality among capitalism itself. He focused on teh American focus on looking overseas as a cheaper alternative for trade and manufacturing. A potential source of this is that he found the elite and rich no longer cared about the Americans in teh lower classes that lost job opportunity as a result of this systematic issue. Additionally, he argued that there is an issue in which immigrants, sometimes illegal, often take jobs that Americans need as they are left lost in a system in which no jobs are available. Trump further argued that America essentially lacked not morality, but a sense of American pride and spirit. Hanson further argued that Trump did not argue that America was not rich, but that rather it deserved to be richer than it was and that many Americans who were not rich were yet to be and both should and could be. He finds Trump essentially hoped to instill a new “can do” confidence amongst Americans rather than a “don’t care” timid midset. Although, Trump’s focus on the cultural decline as a result of rigged economic, social, and trade policies stemmed from issues that were not only from those outside of the United States but to those who lived within its borders.
Categories
ERA: Kramer vs Kramer
Ted Kramer is a workaholic who spends his life focused on work. When he comes home to deliver the great news to his wife, Joanna, that he was given his companies biggest account, he finds out that she is leaving him. He had spent too much of his life focused on his work. He is left to raise their son Billy alone. He struggles with the tasks that Joanna had previously taken care of, such as grocery shopping and picking his son up from school on time. At first, he and Billy do not get along as Billy wishes for his mother as she gave him much more affection than Ted and Ted is constantly prioritizing work over his family. Eventually, he grows into the father figure role, rather than the role of a workaholic. He quits his high paying job for one then allows him to accommodate his son’s needs. Ted is eventually able to bond with a fellow single parent, Margaret, who has two children of her own. We begin to see the emotional bond strengthening after Billy injures himself and Ted runs him all the way to the hospital to ensure his health and safety. Eventually, Joanna returns home and wishes for her sone back. This causes a custody battle to ensue. Unfortunately, the battle for custody grows to be dirty and brings us many issues of the past. In the end, Joanna is granted custody, but it calls to question both the mother and father roles in the raising of a child. The court grants her custody not because she is necessarily a better parent, but because it is assumed that a mother would do a better job at raising a child than a father. Ted questions whether he should appeal the court’s decision but decides not to as he does not want to force his young child to take the stand. Thankfully, Joanna finds that Billy’s true home is with Ted, and allows them to stay together.
Categories
Short Essay #6
Mark Regnerus in Cheap Sex discusses the ways in which the market for sex has evolved. He highlights how the market has essentially made sex cheaper and overall more accessible. He expresses how women are more interested in pursuing a relationship on an emotional level rather than one that is purely physical, but modern social challenges. Men are more likely to pursue relationships that provide physical pleasure and satisfaction rather than that of emotions. With many emerging innovations that provide aspects such as online pornography, dating apps, and improved contraceptives, men have more access to pleasure and satisfaction without needing an emotional connection. This often forces women to have to settle and prevents them from finding the emotional attachment and long-term monogamous commitment they desire.
Modern technologies have allowed relationships to become overall less emotional and more gravitate towards satisfaction and physical desire. Porn is convenient and requires a low amount of effort to reach satisfaction and pleasure, which is statistically more often men than women. We view men such as Carlos, who places these desires over the happiness and comfortability over his girlfriends. He is more concerned with getting what he needs than the emotional commitment and relationships he has in real life with a real human being. His girlfriend stays with him, even though he frequently does things purely for sexual satisfaction that anger her or makes her uncomfortable. She is forced to have low expectations and settle, as there are fewer men available who put the needs of their girlfriends over their sexual desire. When males have porn it makes women almost replaceable, forcing women to be more accommodating to male needs and desires. According to Regnerus, 45% of women had sex in the first two weeks of their relationship, but expect nothing in return. The emergence of contraceptives allows men and women to have sexual relationships while lowering the risk of the future commitment of having to raise a baby, removing a great amount of commitment that was present in the previous years. Previously, men and women would often wait to have sex to avoid the risks of the commitment of having and raising children, but now, it can almost be guaranteed that the potential of having a baby is taken out of the picture. This removes a large amount of commitment to a sexual relationship. It makes sex both less serious and less attached.
In many cases, such as that of Alyssa, we see women struggle to settle down and find a man who wishes to do so with them. Although Alyssa began as a person who enjoyed having multiple partners and watching porn, she grew to wish for a committed relationship. Unfortunately, in our modern-day society, it is often difficult for women to find a man who desires the same. Men are so used to the accessibility of cheap sex that it becomes detrimental to females who wish to find someone to share a monogamous relationship with. Although those who are unmarried are still a minority, the number is higher than it has been in our modern society. Unless we fix the element of cheap sex, women will continue to struggle to find a life partner as highlighted by Regnerus.
In Chapter 9 of We Wanted Workers by George J. Borjas, he highlights how immigrants can be viewed from varying perspectives. Many people see them as people who affect our economy and workforce, which is not incorrect, but they disregard that immigrants are human beings. Borjas emphasizes how if this were true, that immigrants are only workers and not people, we would not need to worry about them outside of the workforce, but we do. They are not just robotic workers without needs. They must be recognized for more than just their fiscal impact. Borjas presents data that reveals that the wall built around the welfare state does not prevent many immigrants from entering, rather it highlights how immigrants who are likely to become a charge are already not admissible. In addition to this, the statutes that make up the wall also already specify that immigrants who become a public charge within the first five years of entry may be deported. Borja finds that it is necessary to view the long-term effect of the decision of whether or not to admit an immigrant, such as the number of dependents they plan to have and whether or not the government will have to fund these dependents as well. Additionally, immigrants use welfare more often than natives as the immigrant population is disproportionately low-skill and those that use welfare typically do poorly in the labor market. 46% of immigrant households use welfare to support themselves. This prompts the question as to whether or not immigrants pay their way in welfare and do their taxes make up for the expenditures they cause. It is difficult to accurately calculate and therefore we have no idea of the long term effect. It presents both positive and negative effects on the population as it presents different implications nationally, and according to Borjas, it may be viewed as just another government redistribution program.