代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

The shortcomings of American two-party politics

2020-05-25 来源: 51Due教员组 类别: 写作技巧

网课代修,网课代写,作业代写,北美代写,代写

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- The shortcomings of American two-party politics,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了美国两党政治的弊端。中美之间最大的区别是政治和社会制度。美国人以“美国是当今世界上最强大的国家”为基础,吹嘘美国的政治和社会制度是世界上最先进、最杰出的。这种观点主要来源于美国的优越感,其中包含着许多偏见。一起来看看吧

 

The biggest difference between China and America is political and social systems. Americans boast that America's political and social system is the most advanced and outstanding in the world, based on the fact that "America is the most powerful country in the world today". This view mainly comes from the American sense of superiority, which contains many prejudices.

To understand the American political system, your countrymen need to know about America's political parties. The political parties in America are quite different from those in China. My American friends include both Democrats and republicans. According to them, there is no special procedure for joining a political party, just fill in the party column and vote for the candidate. If you want to participate in more activities, you can volunteer at the local party department. "Volunteers" perform well, gain the trust and appreciation of the party, and may be selected as party workers to enter politics. Ordinary party members have nothing more to do than vote for their party. Whether to attend the party's rally, whether to donate money when the party raises funds, but also by their own will, according to the effort. If you don't want to vote for your party's candidate, you can leave your party out at the voter registration. Thus, political parties in the United States can be said to be a loose "political club" operating around the election.

In the United States, there is no party that represents a single class, that is, there is no party of the working class or of the peasantry, and there is no party of the working people. Both the republican and democratic parties are political alliances representing many classes and strata.

The republican party is mainly represented by big entrepreneurs, big financiers, big corporations, church forces such as Catholicism and Christianity, and conservative people. So they are called "conservatives" and "neoconservatives."

The political platform of the republican party mainly includes the political and diplomatic aspects, maintaining the sole super position of the United States in the world, constantly developing and strengthening the military force, implementing the power politics, hegemony and unilateralism, and promoting the democratic and free system of the United States throughout the world. On the fiscal and economic front, we will safeguard the interests of large corporations, large entrepreneurs, large financiers and the wealthy, implement tax cuts and privatize social security funds. In terms of social policy, we should uphold the right of private gun ownership, oppose homosexuality, oppose abortion, advocate religious beliefs and value family values.

The Democratic Party represents mainly civilian businesses and small and medium-sized enterprises, white-collar workers, laborers, women, and minorities.

The Democratic Party's political platform mainly includes: in politics and diplomacy, it tends to be peaceful, is not as militant as the republican party, advocates multilateralism and attaches more importance to the international image and cooperation of the United States. In terms of financial economy, more attention is paid to labor interests and social welfare, and the tax cuts are opposed. In terms of social policy, it advocates strict control and control of private guns, safeguarding the rights of homosexuality and free abortion, safeguarding the rights of women and minorities, and advocating freedom of thought and sexual liberation.

Party politics in America is, in effect, a "bipartisan monopoly". The republican and democratic parties, founded in the early days of the United States, have a long history, social foundation and abundant political resources. They are like two big trees, intertwined and flourishing, occupying almost all of American politics. It is hard for other parties to get a foothold. American politics is a two-party monopoly with many drawbacks.

As American politics is dominated by two major political parties, there is a paradox in American politics: every citizen enjoys full political freedom according to the constitution and laws of the United States. This is what the American media is all about all day long. But in fact, political freedom for U.S. citizens is limited.

To participate in the political activities of mainstream American society, you have to join one of the two major parties, because it is useless to join other small parties. If one is not to participate, which party "solo" campaign, but in vain, like tang ? [as ridiculous. Once participating in either of the two major political parties, both must and can only obey their party platforms, and there is no "political freedom" one

Second, the platform of the republican party or the Democratic Party can only be accepted or abandoned, with no freedom of partial choice. Every presidential election is a choice between two candidates. When one of them is elected, the nation must "fully accept" all of his policies, whether or not it votes for him. This will inevitably appear unreasonable phenomenon. For example, surveys have shown that most americans are dissatisfied with the war in Iraq. In a new Washington post/ABC news poll, 57 percent disapproved of the President's handling of Iraq and 56 percent said the war was "not worth fighting." But that did nothing for bush. Mr Bush remains stubbornly persistent and propagandistic: his war in Iraq and his whole policy towards it were right, according to his re-election as President, as proof that the American people supported his Iraq policy. In fact, anyone who knows anything about American politics knows that's not the case. In the recent election, democratic presidential contenders John kerry won in both east and west coasts, while bush won in Central America. Most voters in the midlands voted for bush not for the war in Iraq, but for his social policies: for private gun ownership, for religious beliefs, against homosexuality and sexual liberation. This is just like Chinese people buying "round goods", good and bad match, buy not to buy at will, "want to buy take all, do not pick". After Mr Bush's re-election, many in New York were disappointed, especially in the lower and middle classes, to sigh: "the Iraq war has got to drag on! "" a difficult life will take another few years!

The republican and democratic parties of the United States, representing different classes and interest groups, have been engaged in a struggle for more than 200 years. They have formed a deep stereotype on a number of issues, which cannot be treated objectively and calmly and correctly. Private rearms, for example, is the leading cause of prevalence of violent crime in the United States, however, private gun ownership is the tradition of the United States, the United States constitution protection, the United States the rural has a large number of gun owners, the association of American gun has strong power, so when the session of congress, maintenance of the members of the private ownership of guns "unreasonable also want to get three points", make the ban on private gun ownership legislation to pass.

For another example, the tax cut is only beneficial to the wealthy because of the progressive individual income tax system in the United States. The poorest people are exempt from taxes. The low-income people pay less taxes and the wealthy pay more taxes. The United States also has a heritage tax system. The poor do not have much inheritance and do not need to pay the estate tax at all. The republicans' version of the tax cuts does not do the poorest any good, the lower-income ones very little good, and the rich pay much less in taxes. In particular, repealing the estate tax benefits only the wealthy. Tax cuts reduce the income of the country. In order to save money, the government must reduce social welfare at the same time. The people who suffer the most are the poor and the lower middle class. But as long as the republicans are in office, there will be talk that tax cuts are good for everyone, and that the President and majority in congress will be used to push them through.

There are some problems, as long as the Democrats claim, the republicans will oppose; Democrats, in turn, will oppose any republican claim. In fact, the objection may not be true. For example, the relationship between the United States and north Korea, which the Democratic Party's Bill Clinton advocates through bilateral negotiations; Mr Bush, a republican, is fiercely opposed. When he came to power, he declared that north Korea was part of an "axis of evil" and stopped negotiating with the north. We must return to the path of peaceful settlement, accept China's proposal and participate in the six-party talks.

During the campaign, the candidates announce their policy agenda, and voters decide who to vote for. As a matter of principle, every candidate should be responsible for the platform he or she announced, and carry out his or her promises carefully after being elected. When the circumstances change and the implementation fails, the voters should also be explained to account. But the lack of checks and oversight on whether candidates are serious about running their campaigns is a big hole in the American system. Therefore, hu boasted during the election campaign, making false promises and opening "empty checks", can not be prosecuted, and will not be punished.

The American campaign, in a sense, is about spending money. If the candidate himself has no money, he must find money and "donors" to support his campaign. Running for office in the United States costs money in the following ways:

Television is the most powerful propaganda tool. It is the most pervasive, swift and influential. People with low education do not like to read newspapers but watch TV. Remote areas do not read the newspaper in time, but can see the television in time. However, access to television is very high, in terms of seconds, the last television often tens of thousands of dollars, a large cost.

Advertising and printing campaign literature is also expensive. The New York times, for example, charges $150,000 for a full-page AD.

Hold a rally and make a campaign speech. It costs tens of thousands of dollars just to rent and furnish the venue. Not to mention the incalculable economic costs such as time and delay.

Campaign travel expenses for the candidate, his aides and entourage, including airfare, hotel rooms, receptions and so on.

Expenses of the campaign headquarters and its staff. During the campaign, these workers were hard workers, running around in the rain and sunshine, advertising on the street, visiting homes, handing out leaflets, and so on. Many of them were "volunteers", but they were not allowed to offer themselves to others, and they were given allowances. That's another big expense.

It is the "law" of the campaign to "elevate oneself and disparage an opponent". The more intense the campaign, the more repeated propaganda, formalism, ostentation, "exaggerating yourself, belittling your opponent" and so on, the more wasteful it is.

The so-called "political turmoil" means that with the replacement of the ruling party, the policies and guidelines are not necessarily changed, resulting in heavy losses and waste.

First of all, it is not conducive to the implementation of the correct policy and policy, so that it is subject to undue interference, even interruption and "premature"; Second, it is not conducive to the accumulation, summary and inheritance of policy experience and lessons. Many valuable experience and lessons may be dismissed as "worthless" by their successors. Third, it leads to adverse consequences and negative effects. For example, George Bush senior left office with a budget deficit of $100 billion. Eight years of the Clinton administration not only covered all the deficits, but also left hundreds of billions of dollars in surplus. Arguably, George w. bush took office should seriously review succession Clinton's successful experience, however, the republicans have the republican traditional finance and economy idea, George w. bush goes back to the Reagan and bush's finance idea, would rather borrowed heavily to cut taxes, four years, America's deficit has been up to more than $four thousand, more than twice as high than the bush era.

George h.w. bush was friendly to China. During his presidential campaign, Bill Clinton lashed out at George h.w. bush, saying that his China policy was "kowtowing" and so on. After Clinton took office, he relaxed his policy toward Taiwan, which led to lee teng-hui raising his head and setting off the 1996 Taiwan missile crisis. Clinton had no choice but to adjust the China policy, and proposed the establishment of "strategic partnership" between China and the United States and the implementation of the "three no" policy on Taiwan. For a while, Taiwan independence forces have been more restrained.

When George w. bush was running for President, he lashed out at Clinton's China policy, saying that China was a "strategic competitor" to the United States and had "three improvements" in Taiwan. Results "SanDiGao embolden the Taiwan independence", Chen shui-bian has thrown the theory of "one country on each side", pursuing ", name, constitutional referendum ", etc., to cross-strait situation worse, have the danger of war, the bush administration had to declaring "oppose unilateral changes in the status quo in the Taiwan strait", "Taiwan is not independent country, it is a part of China", "" the Taiwan relations act does not require troops to defend Taiwan in the", etc. The specific reasons and backgrounds of the American policy toward China have varied, but one thing is clear. Such "efforts" will not benefit either China or the United States, nor will they have a positive impact on the situation in the asia-pacific region.

The other drawback of American bipartisan politics is that "everyone is a party" and "one son of heaven and one courtier".

Elected officials and members of parliament of the state are paid by all citizens and are "public servants" of all citizens. However, as a result of the implementation of two-party politics in the United States, elected officials and lawmakers have a strong partisanship. Whichever party comes to power, it will only appoint its own people. People of the opposite party will automatically resign and "make way", if they do not voluntarily resign, they will be removed and vacated. Every President, governor, and mayor is a great shift, regardless of their accomplishments.

Not to mention, every mayor, governor, and especially presidential candidate has his or her own inner circle, "staff" and even "staff". These confidants and "" headliners" "were his" "staff" "and" "campaign staff" "during the campaign. If you are elected, you will be rewarded for your accomplishments, assigned your duties and appointed.

Of course, elected presidents, governors and mayors are generally cautious about the appointment of officials in crucial positions. We must elect reliable and competent people, otherwise we will not be able to deliver our achievements or even "poke our holes". However, when it comes to the appointment of personnel who are not in an important position, it is not uncommon to see favoritism, cronyism and the phenomenon of taking the appointment as "rewards" and "rewards".

 

上一篇:Analysis of the advantages and 下一篇:Disappearance