There are many theories to power, be they liberal, socialist or otherwise. Many have been developed over centuries of thought, which pick apart the very nature of our society and world order. But of all the theories that I’ve come across, one sticks out more than any other, and it is the reason I hold such strong free-market/anti-state views. It’s called Public Choice theory, but don’t ask me why, because it seems to explain why any one but ’the public’ makes choices today.
Public Choice theory is modern, having only really taken off during the 1960’s, but I believe it grants a very realistic and worrying view of Britain’s power structure, and exposes many very deep scars which socialism and Keynesianism unintentionally inflicted on our country. It was heavily developed by the US economist James Buchanan, who won the 1986 Nobel Memorial Prize for his work, and who advised Margaret Thatcher through the Institute for Economic Affairs during the late 1970′s.
Just like capitalism, Public Choice theory is based on two simple assumptions about human nature. Firstly, that humans are principally self-interested. That’s not to say we’re selfish, which is somewhat more immoral, but rather that we will always aim to fulfil our wants and desires, economic or otherwise. Secondly, that humans are rational; when presented with a series of options, we will select whichever makes us the most happy for the least cost. Rational Choice theory, as it is called, has come under substantial intellectual attack in the past, and I don’t personally believe that all humans act completely rationally all the time, but as a model for human behaviour, I’d say it provides a pretty good analysis.
Answer:
E. Original intent
Explanation:
Bork, simply, believed that unless the Founders declared something to be true, it was not Constitutional. So, if the Founders wanted a right to privacy, they would have explicitly stated it.
Three-Fifth Compromise is your answer
In an effort to garner more congressional members, the South came out with the <em>Three-Fifth Compromise</em>, which means that slaves count as 3/5 of a person, which can greatly increase the population of the South.
~
<span>It's truly dependent upon the area represented. Smaller-level governance is definitely focused on the individual and small group, since the representative is directly responsible and able to communicate openly with their constituents. When the levels reach state and federal representatives, it becomes tougher to directly communicate because of the greater distance (and more levels) between the representative and the constituent.</span>
Answer:
Isolationism is described as <u>D.internally focused foreign policy</u>
Explanation:
Isolationism is a foreign policy that believes in the government having an 'internal focus' where the government should try to improve to solve national problems before taking care of issues that are far from home.
Isolationism can be both political and economic. A isolationist political policy would mean that a country decides not to take part in world events and instead use their funds and energy internally.
An example of this can be countries like Switzerland, which do not take part in international wars and missions and only recently joined the UN.
An economic isolationist policy is when a country decides to not trade freely around the world. This might be to safeguard local natural resources or against foreign competition. There have been many examples of such countries, one of the best known being Japan in the early 15th century.
