Category: Political Science

Length: 24 pages total, double spaced, 12 pt Times New Roman, 1 inch margins, page numbers

Citations: APA

What you are doing

You will answer two questions using current events and all three course scholars:

• Beverly Daniel Tatum
• Robin DiAngelo
• Eduardo Bonilla-Silva

Both questions must use all three scholars.

That means: in Question 1 and Question 2, you must bring Tatum, DiAngelo, and Bonilla-Silva into the analysis.

Article requirements (2 total)

You must use two articles total:

• One NYT or WSJ article for Question 1
• One NYT or WSJ article for Question 2

Rules:

• Must be from The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal
• Must be published within the last 2 months (as of March 18, 2026)
• Must be reporting or analysis, not opinion/editorials/newsletters

Quote requirements (simple and enforceable)

Across the whole midterm, you must include 9 to 12 direct quotes total from the assigned books.

Minimums you must hit:

• At least 3 quotes from Tatum
• At least 3 quotes from DiAngelo
• At least 3 quotes from Bonilla-Silva

Per-question requirement (this is the all scholars in both questions rule):

• Each question must include at least 1 quote from Tatum, 1 from DiAngelo, and 1 from Bonilla-Silva.

Rules:

• Every quote must include a page number
• Every quote must be followed by 23 sentences explaining what the quote means and how it supports your claim

Required structure (copy and paste this format)

You must answer both questions using Parts A through G below. Use the headings exactly. This keeps your argument clear and makes grading consistent.

For EACH question, include:

A. Claim (12 sentences)

State your main argument. It must answer the question directly and be arguable.

B. Two reasons (24 sentences each)

Reason 1:

Reason 2:

C. Course Scholar Lens: Tatum (1 quote minimum)

• Quote with page number
• Explanation of what it means
• How it applies to the articles details

D. Course Scholar Lens: DiAngelo (1 quote minimum)

• Quote with page number
• Explanation
• Application to the article

E. Course Scholar Lens: Bonilla-Silva (1 quote minimum)

• Quote with page number
• Explanation
• Application to the article

F. Article evidence (at least 2 specific details)

Use concrete information: actors, institutions, policies, dates, decisions, outcomes, conflicts, enforcement, or political messaging.

G. Counterargument + rebuttal (57 sentences)

Present a plausible alternative interpretation, then rebut it using evidence from the article and at least one of the scholars.

H. Media framing check (46 sentences)

Explain how the article frames race and politics:

• What is treated as the main problem?
• Who is treated as responsible?
• What solutions seem reasonable or realistic?
• What is missing, minimized, or treated as normal?
• Then connect that framing to at least one scholar.

Note: You can place the Media Framing Check before the counterargument if your writing flows better. It still must appear.

Questions

Question 1 (100 points): Racial identity, conflict, and political meaning

Choose a recent NYT or WSJ article and analyze how the event or controversy reveals something important about racial identity and racial politics today. Use Tatum, DiAngelo, and Bonilla-Silva to explain how identities are formed, defended, and politicized in the situation. Your goal is to show how the three scholars together clarify what is happening and why it matters.

Question 2 (100 points): Racial hierarchy, denial, and policy discourse

Choose a different recent NYT or WSJ article and analyze how contemporary political discourse or policymaking sustains racial hierarchy. Use Tatum, DiAngelo, and Bonilla-Silva to evaluate how identity, defensiveness, and color-blind ideology appear in the debate. Then explain what the readings suggest about what disruption would require.

Grading rubric (200 points total)

Question 1: 100 points

Question 2: 100 points

For EACH question (100 points):

1. Claim quality (20 points)
2. Clear, arguable, directly answers the question.
3. Use of all three scholars (30 points)
4. Accurate concept use, strong quote choice, quotes explained and applied. This is not a quote dump.
5. Use of article as evidence (20 points)
6. Uses specific details from the article. No vague this shows racism statements.
7. Media framing analysis (20 points)
8. Identifies problem definition, responsibility, solutions, and omissions. Connects framing to the scholars.
9. Counterargument + rebuttal (10 points)
10. Plausible alternative explanation, rebutted with evidence.

Automatic deductions (objective and fast)

• Missing page number for any book quote: 4 per quote
• Missing required scholar coverage per question (no Tatum/DiAngelo/Bonilla-Silva quote in that question): 15 each missing scholar per question
• Fewer than 9 total quotes: 10 per missing quote
• Article not NYT/WSJ: 25 per article
• Article not within last 2 months: 25 per article
• Opinion/editorial used: 15 per article
• Missing APA References section: 10

Final checklist (students should confirm)

• I used two NYT/WSJ articles, both within the last 2 months
• Each question uses all three scholars with at least one quote each
• I included 912 total quotes with page numbers and explanation
• I used at least two concrete details from each article
• I included a media framing check and a counterargument + rebuttal for each question
• I used APA citations and included a References section
• Total length is 23 pages, double spaced

PERSONAL REQUIREMENTS : I AM NOT A STUDENT WHO WRITES ESSAYS WITH CRAZY GRAMMAR, LARGE WORDS, DRAMATIC SENTENCES, AND IM LOOKING FOR A WRITER WHO CAN MATCH MY WRITING STYLE SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS THAT I NEED A REGULAR TONE ESSAY WITHOUT THE LARGE AND OVERLY EXAGGERATED SENTENCES AND WORDS AND STILL GIVE ME A GRADE A ESSAY

im looking for a writer who can follow the exact directions as given when it comes to citation style when it comes to referencing page numbers and everything that comes with the instructions.

I will be attaching all of the book links that are required for this midterm essay as well

PART 1

In readings and discussions of Aristotle and Thomas Hobbes we have focused on their understanding of what politics is. Using the readings, answer the following questions in essay form 2 pages long . Be sure to have some brief introduction where you note what you will be arguing and a brief conclusion where you summarize your main points. Answer the questions as fully as possible but do not include information and ideas that are not directly relevant to your answer.

READINGS;

• Aristotle, Politics, Book 1 Chapters 1- 13. Book 3.
• Thomas Hobbes Leviathan, Chapters 13- 19

1. What does it mean when Aristotle claims that humans are ‘political animals’? Why, according to him, are we destined to live in political communities? In what way is the household different from the city? Who does Aristotle consider to be citizens of the city?
2. For Hobbes, why do we live in political communities? For him, what are the values that we seek through our political associations? Should we be afraid of the state? Is it good that people are afraid of the state and obedient to its commands? Are there any doubts, for Hobbes, regarding what the best way to live together is?
3. What are the key differences between Hobbes’ and Aristotle’s understanding of politics? Do we have a political life today according to Hobbes’ understanding? Do we have one according to Aristotle’s? If, for Aristotle, being human means having politics, are we fully human in this society or have we retreated into the non-human/animal side of our nature? If you had the choice, would you rather live in a society that embodies Aristotle’s understanding of politics or Hobbes’?

Part 2

The various ways that the notion of ‘politics’ has been understood has included three theorists that are decidedly a-liberal or anti-liberal in how they understand politics: Karl Marx, Max Weber, and Carl Schmitt. 2 Pages

Readings:

*Karl Marx, Alienated Labour in Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts

Karl Marx, On the Jewish Question

Mar. 4 Karl Marx, Machinery, Automation, Free Time, and Communism in

Grundrisse

Max Weber, Politics as a Vocation

Carl Schmitt, The Concept of the Political

Explain how each of the foregoing is critical of the liberal notion of politics.

1. Why does Marx draw a sharp distinction between human rights and political rights? What does he think the problem is with the modern split within us as members of civil society on the one hand and as citizens on the other? In his opinion, what should political emancipation entail?
2. For Weber, why does he think that the state dominates us? Is the use of violence the core or only a tangential source of political power?
3. For Schmitt, how is politics different from economics and aesthetics? Why is it important for him to know who it is that decides who the enemy is?

write this assignment please like in English level like international student and please dont use very hard and advanced vocabulary .

Political Science 3120, Political Parties

Spring 2026

Paper / Presentation Assignment (100 points)

Individual paper option

Length: Approximately 8-10 pages, Times New Roman 12 point font, double-spaced with standard 1″ margins, no extra spacing before or after paragraphs, and left justification only.

Congratulations! As a soon to be Utah graduate, you have just been hired by a prestigious political consulting firm. The first job your new firm has given you is to write a report for a client outlining possible options and recommending a strategy for future success. The client is a political party [Democratic / Republican / Libertarian / Green / or other; choose one party as your client]. With the 2026 midterm elections approaching and the 2028 presidential elections starting soon, the party wants to take stock of where it stands currently and consider how it can best position itself for success in future elections. Party leaders are seeking advice from your highly-regarded political consulting firm and have asked your firm to prepare a strategy paper for their party.

Using your knowledge of political parties and contemporary American politics, your task is to write a strategy paper for the party to help it strengthen the party as an organization while simultaneously helping the party to achieve its paramount goal of electing its candidates to office. Your strategy paper should accomplish three tasks: first, provide a realistic assessment of where the party stands now; second, based on that assessment, identify a clear path to future electoral success for the party; and three, summarize a set of actionable recommendations for party leaders to achieve electoral success. Be sure that your recommendations are politically feasible, practical, and well supported.

As you think about how to advise your client, consider the following questions:

What is the situation of your political party in the United States today and why? Is your party effective at rallying voters in support of candidates? What are the strengths and weaknesses of your party given the circumstances in contemporary American politics?

How has the party done in recent elections? Is the party doing well at the presidential level, the congressional level, and the state level? Is the party competitive in all states? What is the party doing well to attract support for its candidates? What is the party doing that may lose voters? What can or should the party do to improve nationally or in specific states?

Are there specific actions the party could take to improve its electoral chances? Are there specific issues that your party should seek to solve, prolong, or avoid in the future? Does your party need to change its image among voters? Should it target all citizens or are some potential voters more important than others to the party? Does the party need to recruit better candidates and, if so, how could this be done? Does it need to have more “grassroots” volunteers? What can or should the party do to attract more financial or volunteer support?

Of course, you should not try to answer all of these question in your paper. These questions are suggestive and designed to prompt your consideration of relevant issues. Think about the problems facing contemporary American parties and be creative in putting together ideas for how your party might try to improve itself. Above all, you should organize the content of your paper in the manner most conducive to an informative and persuasive strategy paper. You should present your paper as formal, professional writing. That is, your paper should be written clearly and concisely using standard English intended for a professional or academic audience. Your goal is to assess the current political situation of your party objectively and, based on that assessment, identify a strategy and recommendations for winning future elections. Most importantly, your paper should communicate the assessment, strategy, and recommendations convincingly.

To create a convincing professional strategy paper, you must provide proper citations for any sources that you use. Please use Chicago style in-text citations that include the author’s name, date, and (if needed) the page number (this is called the author date style). For example:

The Republican party will benefit from emphasizing this issue because the party “owns” this issue and “the theory of issue ownership suggests that candidates have a built-in advantage with voters on issues ‘owned’ by their party and it is thus beneficial to the candidate to frame the election debate in terms of those issues” (Burbank, Hrebenar, and Benedict 2012, 89).

Voters who identify as independents rather than as Democrats or Republicans, primarily see themselves as moderates in terms of ideology (Brenan 2025).

The first example use a direct quote and so must include the page number in the citation. The second example refers to the point of the report generally and so does not require a specific page number. The full citations for each source must be identified in a list of references arranged in alphabetical order by the authors name at the end of the paper:

References

Brenan, Megan. 2025. US Political Parties Historically Polarized Ideologically. Gallup News, January 16. https://news.gallup.com/poll/655190/political-parties-historically-polarized-ideologically.aspx

Burbank, Matthew J., Ronald J. Hrebenar, and Robert C. Benedict. 2012. Parties, Interest Groups, and Political Campaigns. 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press.

If you have questions about proper citation format, please ask me or consult the style guide for the University of Chicago author-date citation system (shown in the examples above):

Papers will be evaluated based upon the following criteria: 1) Does the report clearly assess the current political situation for the party? 2) Does the report present a politically viable strategy and recommendations that the party could implement? 3) Are the assessment and recommendations supported by evidence from opinion polls, media reports, election results, scholarly writings, relevant examples from American politics, or other sources? and 4) Is the report well written and free from errors of usage that hinder its clarity or substance?

Pick one country and write about the following about it:

My research topic examines drug-related violence and its effects on the strengthening of democracy, particularly exploring how organized crime takes control of local governmental institutions. The main research question I aim to address is: What conditions lead to the entrenchment of municipal-level criminal governance systems, where gangs take over or supplant state functions and what impact does this have on voter behavior and democratic legitimacy? This subject is closely tied to Latin America by exploring the “hybrid” form of governance in regions dominated by cartel-local gang coalitions in Mexico (such as Guerrero and Jalisco) and in Colombia, where criminal organizations are progressively influencing electoral procedures and threatening local leaders, evident in the period leading up to recent regional elections. Through this analysis, I seek to comprehend why conventional military strategies in the “war on drugs” frequently do not strengthen democracy, but instead tend to undermine it by facilitating the criminal takeover of local security and justice systems.

The first 4 images are the instructions for the assignment. Attached is a document that I have said my topic was going to be.

Incorporate the Ricardo finer model and the stapler Samuelson theory. Milner and Rogowski. (Lecture 2/25) TALK A LOT ABOUT RELATIVE GAINS.

• attached is a photo of my meeting notes as well for authors that I need to use and suggestions.
• The 2 attached files from osgood are to better help citrate the 3 memo assignments that I submitted. Try to incorporate the memos into the research topic that i proposed.

This is my topic that I need to write about:

Who Controls the Future? Technology, Power, and Inequality in the Digital Age

If technological progress is supposed to make societies richer and more equal, why has the

digital age instead produced rising inequality, concentrated power, and declining economic

mobility in many advanced democracies?

My argument would be that technology itself isnt the problem the key factor is who controls

and shapes technological development. When innovation is guided by powerful corporations

and elites rather than public institutions and broad social interests, technological change

increases inequality and weakens democracy instead of spreading prosperity.

Inequality is caused by globalization, not technology

Historical cases of past technological revolutions

POSSIBLE SOURCES:

Acemoglu & Johnson Power and Progress

argue that technology only benefits society when power is balanced and workers have

political voice.

Zuboff Surveillance Capitalism

if you cant access these let me know and i will try to provide screenshots.

I also attached photos of the book like war by singer and brookings.

This is the instructions:

In a total of approximately 1,5003,000 words (for UHP students 2,0004,000 words) of writing, please

answer the following question.

Question. Explain trends and patterns in international trade. Why, within a country, are some industries

protected and some not? Why have national trade policies varied over time? Why do some countries have

higher trade barriers than others? Why has the world trading order been more or less open at different

times?

Be sure to offer concrete examples and illustrations to support your arguments wherever possible,

referring to course materials such as the readings, notes you have taken, and the film assigned so far in

this class. In other words, you must make and support your argument with logical explanation and

empirical evidence referring to the readings, lectures, and the film.

There are many ways you can answer this question, but no matter how you answer it, your discussion at

least needs to include the following points:

1. Virtually all economic analysis concludes that free trade is good for all countries all the time. On the

other hand, Krasner argues that states will not embrace free trade all of the time and that the

international trading system will be open only under particular conditions. Which sides arguments do

you find more convincing, and why? What are the conditions for the international trading system to

be open? And how do global value chains matter?

2. To what extent is the openness of the world trading system best explained by international factors

(i.e., hegemonic stability theory) vs. domestic factors (i.e., the Ricardo-Viner model and the Stolper-

Samuelson theorem)? Are these arguments contradictory, or can they be used to complement one

another? And how do global value chains matter for firm-based theories?

3. How are firms made to serve the government in China? Why does China find it difficult to take

economically optimal policy of free trade? How is it related to that Chinas political regime is not

democratic but authoritarian?

While discussing the above points, you should clearly link your discussions to your overall argument on

why free trade is so controversial.

You have to discuss at least FIVE of the following terms and their significances in the study of

international political economy:

Comparative advantage

Hegemonic stability theory

Mercantilism

Optimal tariff theory

Prisoners Dilemma (PD) + Repeated PD

Private firms vs. State-owned enterprises (SOEs)

Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act (RTAA)

Relative gains problem

Ricardo-Viner (R-V) model vs. Stolper-Samuelson (S-S) theorem

State-business relations

Visibility projects

Please underline these terms every time when they appear on your essay.

In writing this essay, you should remember that a good essay has several features:

a) Make sure that your essay has:

a logical structure, including introduction, body, and conclusion,

a summary statement of your argument, which should appear in the introductory paragraph, and

clear, direct sentences and coherent paragraphs.

b) Your essay should make a clear, coherent argument. While you have to discuss several issues and

events, your treatment of each issue and event should support the overall argument. Your argument

should be clearly stated in the first paragraph.

c) When you have to summarize the argument that an author has made in the reading, we do not want a

blow-by-blow (e.g., first he says this, then he says that…) or extensive direct quotations from the

author. Rather, we want you to put the authors main argument in your own words.

d) You should support your claims by evidence. An effective analysis will juxtapose your claims with

passages from relevant readings and lectures. Avoid unsupported assertions.

1. This exam is due on Friday, March 6, 5:30pm on Canvas. Exams submitted after that time will be

subject to penalties. There will be no extensions granted, except in the most serious cases (e.g.,

serious illness, death in the family). Any such extensions must be requested before the due date.

2. You are expected to rely on the readings and the film as well as your notes from lectures. The

most effective answers will combine course material from a variety of sources. There is no need to do

outside reading or to have a bibliography. If you wish to quote directly from a lecture, the citation

should be: (Lecture, Date). When citing from a reading, use short-form citations. For example:

Leng says that SOEs, extensions of the states economic function, have ties with not only a selected

groups of individual state agents, but also with the state as a whole (Leng, p. 22).

The Stolper Samuelson theorem shows who benefit from free trade and who suffer from free trade

(Rogowski, pp. 11221123).

3. Because you have plenty of time to complete this exam, we expect that spelling, grammar and

punctuation will all conform to standard practice. Be sure to proofread your work

Assessment Description This assessment is meant to get you to reflect on what academic research has to say about a question involving Global Politics. You will do this by comparing this type of research with Artificial Intelligence platforms answers to the same question. The goal of the assignment is to have you critically reflect on 1) what existing academic research has found on a particular topic, and 2) be able to identify the strengths and weaknesses of relying on AI to answer challenging political questions involving Global Politics. This task is directly linked to Assignments 2 and 3. The question you chose to analyse in this assessment will be the same as the one you will address in the next assessments. Course Learning Outcomes addressed in this task: CLO3 : Critically evaluate the key structures and processes of the global system CLO4 : Evaluate the impact of globalisation on world politics Relevance This task begins to prepare you for future learning by developing the skills needed to evaluate the information generated by Artificial Intelligence in the context of current issues involving Global Politics. Not only will you help you learn about a particular topic in depth, but it will also help you understand the pitfalls of only relying on AI tools to understand politics and policy-related issues. More importantly, this task will also help you develop/strengthen a skill that many employers value: critical thinking skills something AI tools cannot replace.

Assessment Description This assessment is meant to get you to reflect on what academic research has to say about a question involving Global Politics. You will do this by comparing this type of research with Artificial Intelligence platforms answers to the same question. The goal of the assignment is to have you critically reflect on 1) what existing academic research has found on a particular topic, and 2) be able to identify the strengths and weaknesses of relying on AI to answer challenging political questions involving Global Politics. This task is directly linked to Assignments 2 and 3. The question you chose to analyse in this assessment will be the same as the one you will address in the next assessments. Course Learning Outcomes addressed in this task: CLO3 : Critically evaluate the key structures and processes of the global system CLO4 : Evaluate the impact of globalisation on world politics Relevance This task begins to prepare you for future learning by developing the skills needed to evaluate the information generated by Artificial Intelligence in the context of current issues involving Global Politics. Not only will you help you learn about a particular topic in depth, but it will also help you understand the pitfalls of only relying on AI tools to understand politics and policy-related issues. More importantly, this task will also help you develop/strengthen a skill that many employers value: critical thinking skills something AI tools cannot replace.