This week you will learn about the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the of

This week you will learn about the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the often vexed relationship it has with sovereign states. The United States, in particular, has taken a very hostile stance towards the ICC which is currently investigating the possibility of atrocities in Afghanistan. The US argues that because it did not ratify the Treaty of Rome (which established the ICC), the ICC should not be allowed to exercise its authority over US soldiers, even if they are found to have committed a war crime, and has imposed sanctions on members of the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor.
This controversy speaks to a larger question about what the proper relationship should be between international organizations (IOs) and their member states. Should IOs always be subordinate to the interests of their member states? When, if ever, should we invest independent, supranational authority in IOs, especially those dealing with atrocities like genocide and crimes against humanity? What are the risks and rewards that delegating independent authority to an IO creates for governments and for individuals? In light of these questions (and your answers to them), do you think the US should become a full member of the ICC?
example example 
International organizations that specifically deal with atrocities should not be subordinate to the interests of their member states. That causes them to lack authority and prevents them from taking action that would go against the interests of their most powerful member states. Genocides and crimes against humanity need to be addressed by a supranational authority/IO as that is the only option to ensure justice for the people or minorities affected. Otherwise, member states could interfere with the process to either protect themselves or cover for their allies, who might be engaging in criminal behavior. When genocides and atrocities are concerned, I believe it should be the global community’s responsibility to intervene and help, regardless of the state sovereignty concept. Rewards include universal justice and the upholding of human rights, regardless of the state and political regime. Recent developments in international politics are showing a shift from states to individuals. Therefore, I would argue that when a state is mistreating (genocide, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity) its citizens, a supranational body should be able to step in.
Apart from atrocities, the risks of independent, supranational authority in IOs outweigh the benefits. Powerful states, like the USA and China, will be unwilling to delegate such jurisdiction. When it comes to IOs that deal with trade, finance, diplomatic relations, they naturally are subordinate to their member states. Risks include a tyrannical supranational structure that makes decisions for the member states and their citizens. Individuals can suffer from imposed decisions with no state to protect their interests. I support that framework in relation to human rights violations; however, I do not see states delegating such authority to an IO regarding all aspects. The EU, UN, WTO all have some sort of supranational degree and states are already hostile to them. The USA is critical of the UN. European countries are questioning the power of the EU. I do not feel that a completely independent and supranational IO can exist peacefully. The only exception would be to address atrocities. 
Whether the USA should become a full member of the ICC is a complex question. I would personally support the decision; however, I have encountered many convincing arguments against it, as well. These include a violation of the Constitution as the trial of American citizens, committed on American soil, is a judicial power of the USA. Furthermore, leaving American soldiers open to global standards of justice, as well as American politicians. With the Biden Administration, a change could be possible.

Watch the following videos on environmental issues in international politics (al

Watch the following videos on environmental issues in international politics (all together they take up less than an hour to watch, so watch them all).  Discuss what you think are the major contemporary international or global environmental problems.  Give at least two reasons why environmental issues are exacerbated by the anarchical structure of the international system.  Optional: Can you propose solutions to some of these problems from what you saw?   
CONTENT WARNING: Elephants are murdered throughout the first 45 seconds of The Economist video.  
If these videos don’t link up, just copy and paste it into your favorite search engine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojvy4njnDQg&ab_channel=TheEconomist (Links to an external site.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c7AuSQdvow&ab_channel=Vox (Links to an external site.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKEEzW0IiV4&ab_channel=CaspianReport (Links to an external site.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQY7VOQF8sY&ab_channel=CaspianReport (Links to an external site.)
Guidelines
Watch the videos in the links provided.
Work in groups of 3-4.
You will receive up to 10 points for participation and up to 10 points for the material.
Your essay should not be less than 400 words.
You are not required to read any other material, but if you cite the videos, give the minute and second that your reference begins so I can check it.
Give a reference page so you can practice referencing videos.
Remember that everybody should read it and check each other before submission.  If my two eyes catch something your 6 or 8 eyes didn’t, it means your teamwork needs work.
Only the SGT submits the assignment.  No one else should upload it. 

*ONLY USE THE SOURCES PRESENTED/ NO OUTSIDE SOURCES* What is the mercantilist ec

*ONLY USE THE SOURCES PRESENTED/ NO OUTSIDE SOURCES*
What is the mercantilist economic theory?  Explain what mercantilists understood as wealth.  What are the implications for this perception of wealth when it comes to things like trade, and the acquisition of goods for trade?  From the two short reading excerpts provided in module 9, explain the economic justifications provided by the pro-slavery lobby for the continuation of the practice. Since sugar was the commodity produced by the Caribbean plantations and it was a commodity in great demand in Europe, could we argue that Caribbean slave plantation systems were promoted and protected by the European states partially as a result of mercantilist beliefs (you need to basically connect, sugar, mercantilism, slavery…)
To avoid having you drift off-topic, I have devised a series of questions that will hopefully make sure you are on track. If you have completed the essay you can use these as a checklist.
1- What are the basic economic principles/features of Mercantilism? What did it recommend a government do? Use our lecture on mercantilism to answer this question and define mercantilism very clearly. Make sure that you highlight how mercantilist measured wealth.
Do not turn this into a discussion about the place of the colonies in the mercantilist system (that is a different issue outside of our scope.)
2- Once you have spelled out the basic economic features of mercantilism, consider the following questions: Where the sugar colonies profitable? Did they add to a nation’s wealth? You can use lecture as well as assigned readings to answer this and to find evidence and numbers.
3-If sugar is a valuable and sought-after commodity, what happens if a nation does not produce its own, but has to import it? 
4-Starting with the Portuguese what model of sugar plantations had they established that had proven to be very profitable? In the planters’ minds were there alternatives different from slavery to get the labor force that plantations needed? Why did they consider African slaves the ideal workforce for these plantations?
Make sure that your thesis statement clearly makes an argument for a connection between mercantilism, sugar and the acceptance of slavery as, at the very least, a necessity. 
As always be sure to cite and quote, and for the love of all that you hold dear, do submit unoriginal work, you will most likely be caught and accordingly sanctioned!
Instructions:
Your essay should be no longer than 4 pages.  Use 12 point script and please double space.  Please utilize normal pre-set (1 inch) margins.
When citing the material, especially when using direct quotes, please use footnote citations.  (In Word go to References and Footnote and then type your source information.)  Works cited page is not a substitute for footnotes.  If you need guidance or help with this please do not hesitate to come to visit with me or the TA’s.
Use Chicago Manual of Style for referencing.  You can find brief guides readily available online.
Please use your textbook, your notes and the Wilberforce article for this essay. Do not use outside sources.

Homework: for next class complete the “King Leopold’s Ghost” article assignment,

Homework: for next class complete the “King Leopold’s Ghost” article assignment, and make sure you are up to date with the colonial Africa textbook reading (Africa section of “Africa, Islamic heartlands, and India 1800-1945”) from the textbook
Read attached article from “King Leopold’s Ghost” and type answers to the following questions, have MS word document with your answers ready and I will have you send the assignment at the beginning of class on Wednesday 2/10. Students must use in-text citations and detail/evidence for full credit, one complete paragraph per answer.
1. Describe the conditions in the Belgian colony in the Congo.
2. Describe how indirect rule was used to manage the colony, especially through the Force Publique.
3. How did the Belgian government portray the colony to the rest of the world?
4. Describe examples of African resistance to Belgian colonialism. 
5. How did the world learn about atrocities committed in the Congo during colonialism?

Hindu iconography contains symbolic references to animal forms, often in combina

Hindu iconography contains symbolic references to animal forms, often in combination with divinities. Look at this article to get an idea of some of the animals Hindus revere: The Sacred Animals of Hinduism. Select one (1) specific animal to highlight in the context of Hinduism, doing additional research beyond that website. You should title your initial thread with the animal you have chosen, and address the following in your post as appropriate:
– What does your chosen animal represent for Hindus?
– Is there a story behind the animal that explains its importance for Hindus?
– How is the animal included in Hindu art?
– Thoroughly explore this animal in the context of Hinduism, providing specific examples to support your conversation.
Please note: You are required to do research in association with each of the discussion topics so that you can provide accurate information. For example, in this topic you would want to explore your chosen animal and its symbolism in the context of Hinduism. Ensure that you provide original writing (do not copy the words of your sources) in 200 words and that the citations are in proper MLA (Modern Language Association) citation format: MLA Format
https://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/essays/sacred-animals-of-hinduism.asp

We are using the Statecraft simulation in this course to help us understand some

We are using the Statecraft simulation in this course to help us understand some of the concepts we have (and will) explore in the course, and to give you a sense of some of the difficult trade-offs that decision-makers must confront in dealing with global problems.  As complex as the simulation may be, however, it remains only a simulation. 
What are the limits of simulations in helping us understand world politics? In other words, in what ways can we usefully think of world politics as a game or simulation? In what ways is world politics different from a game?
Example
I personally believe technology and simulations are a great way of letting students experience the dynamics of real-life world politics. We can usefully think of world politics as a game when introducing key concepts of peace and war, cooperation and isolation, allies and enemies. Simulations help us emulate world leaders’ decisions, envision the consequences of our choices, and explore different policies. World politics can resemble a game on a basic level – there are multiple actors, global rules/norms, winners and losers. The biggest similarity between world politics and games would be the competitive nature – actors aspire to be victorious.
However, on a deeper level of analysis, simulations are just simulations. Therefore, there are various limitations when using a game/simulation to understand world politics. Simulations, no matter how complex, do not carry heavy implications. Yes, our grades may be at stake. But that is no comparison to international security being lost. No matter how realistic simulations are, people’s lives and welfares are not on the line when we create policies and execute them.
World politics are different from a game because students (actors) are more likely to engage in risky altercations because we know it is a simulation and mistakes can be tolerated. World politics has no safety nets. In world politics, actors strive to avoid mistakes at all costs because the implications are real, and the loss of human lives is often the cost.
To conclude, the main limitations pertain to the human brain and how morality is perceived when we know we are in a simulation versus when it is real. Today, a student might launch a nuclear attack in a simulation just to test everyone’s limits and cause an entertaining dispute. The same student, in 20 years working as a politician, will most likely avoid complications that threaten the established order out of goodwill.

As you will learn this week, Constructivist theories of international institutio

As you will learn this week, Constructivist theories of international institutions place a great deal of emphasis on legitimacy in global governance arrangements. Legitimacy concerns the perception that an institution and its rules are normatively appropriate and/or practically necessary.
What are some of the standards by which we do and should evaluate the legitimacy of international organizations? In other words, what are some of the norms, values and practices that we use to evaluate whether an international organization and its policies are legitimate?
250 words 

Week 4 Discussion 1.) Following Pogge, how do some of the world’s largest Multin

Week 4 Discussion
1.) Following Pogge, how do some of the world’s largest Multinational Corporations (MNCs) violate international human rights standards?
2.) Explain negative duties-–i.e., to avoid certain actions, and their role in human rights protection.
3.) Define the elitist perspective of Cultural Relativism . Do you agree?
4.) Explain Kanarek’s attack of cultural relativism e.g., what are its deficiencies.
answer only 1 question of the 4 
250-300 words.
please cite
students examples 
4.
As cultural relativism being the way of sense, instincts, and opinions that come from our experiences and culture, Kanarek argues that it lacks 1. reason, 2. identity, and 3. reality”. This is due to having cultures that, even though it is normal to have preferred opinions, choose to decide which views and actions are the best and which ones are invalid, when all perspectives should be treated with merit. It brings the idea that one’s identity is wrong for having certain practices, for seeing something differently than somebody else. The problem with that is that not only are practices neither “good” nor “bad”, it is completely against many of the human rights that we, as people, are entitled to. Cultural relativism also lacks standards and places horrible actions onto others, such as every act committed by the Nazis in World War II, from Germany taking over Poland, they believed that there was a moral claim to conquer and to not respect Poland’s sovereignty. This could also explain why Hannah Arendt had called the holocaust “banal”, for having a lack of humanity with nothing to defend everyone else that was not of the same belief, practice, and culture.
—–
1.) Following Pogge, how do some of the world’s largest Multinational Corporations (MNCs) violate international human rights standards?
A  challenging problem which arises in Multinational Corporations is the debate of profit vs exploitation of humans. Today a lot of developing countries are rich in resources and population. Hence, multinational corporations take advantage of this due to their advantage of capital. The governments of these developing countries usually lower the barriers for these multinational companies to bring in income therefore the people may work lower wages, long hours and in unstable conditions. Pogge states “ Being illiterate or uneducated, they may not know what their legal rights are, or they may lack either the knowledge or the minimal economic independence necessary to claim these rights through the proper legal channels.” This illustrates that the people being taken advantage of due to the economic pressure because having low wages is better than having no wages. Additionally, the people who live in poverty are often too uneducated to work on the enforcements of their rights. Instead they rely on government officials or state representatives which are usually corrupt and take bribes from the multinational corporations. Pogge writes “In the existing global order, which allocates property rights in natural resources territorially to the various states or their governments, hundreds of millions suffer severe poverty and malnutrition and all the associated, easily and cheaply curable but still often deadly diseases.” Governments have a lot of control when it comes to the rights of their citizens, they are the ones who determine how the people live. Pogge suggested a “Global Resources Dividend” which is an initiative to secure the poorest people their fair share of the benefits from natural resources. With this program, governments are required to pay a proportional dividend on any resources they decide to use or sell. The word “dividend” indicates that the proposal regards all human beings, including those whose access to resources. I believe this a good plan because then the people who work will earn higher wages not only profiting the country as a whole but also the quality of life for the people. 
——-
2.
The fundamental trouble in talking about everyday freedoms starts with the purpose of takeoff. What do individuals mean when they speak about fundamental liberties? Is it the option to cast a ballot in a political race? The opportunity to say practically what we pick? The choice to love however we see fit? Is it the privilege not to be victimized due to race, sex, sexual direction, ethnic source, or age? These rights? An essential inquiry concerning any conversation about fundamental liberties includes the meaning of everyday freedoms. Exactly what do we mean by legal privileges? In the United States and without a doubt in different nations, individuals throw out the expression of everyday freedoms frequently, as though it is obvious what they mean. The truth, however, is that this suspicion of information can be deceiving. Do we truly understand what we mean when we talk about fundamental liberties? Maybe we have some thought of what we are discussing, yet doubtlessly, we are summing up. When we have gotten some information about fundamental freedoms, we experience a mental blackout. 
Again and again, the expression “basic liberties” gets thrown around like a verbal football, as though everybody naturally understands what everyday freedoms mean and can intuitively play the game with no training. In actuality, fundamentally understanding freedoms require much more exertion than essentially alluding to nations like China, Cuba, or Iran and their apparent common liberties infringement. Everyday releases incorporate a wide assortment of ideas and cover numerous zones of the human condition. While no single definition might cover the whole extent of what fundamental liberties are included, the possibility of basic freedoms can, for the most part, be characterized as those rights, which are inborn in our inclination and without which we can’t live as individuals. Common liberties and essential opportunities permit us to ultimately create and utilize our human characteristics, knowledge, gifts, full heartedness and fulfill our otherworldly and different requirements. The dependence on humankind’s expanding interest for a day to day existence in which the characteristic pride and worth of every person will seldom ever get regard and security.

This week you will learn about the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the of

This week you will learn about the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the often vexed relationship it has with sovereign states. The United States, in particular, has taken a very hostile stance towards the ICC which is currently investigating the possibility of atrocities in Afghanistan. The US argues that because it did not ratify the Treaty of Rome (which established the ICC), the ICC should not be allowed to exercise its authority over US soldiers, even if they are found to have committed a war crime, and has imposed sanctions on members of the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor.
This controversy speaks to a larger question about what the proper relationship should be between international organizations (IOs) and their member states. Should IOs always be subordinate to the interests of their member states? When, if ever, should we invest independent, supranational authority in IOs, especially those dealing with atrocities like genocide and crimes against humanity? What are the risks and rewards that delegating independent authority to an IO creates for governments and for individuals? In light of these questions (and your answers to them), do you think the US should become a full member of the ICC?
example example 
International organizations that specifically deal with atrocities should not be subordinate to the interests of their member states. That causes them to lack authority and prevents them from taking action that would go against the interests of their most powerful member states. Genocides and crimes against humanity need to be addressed by a supranational authority/IO as that is the only option to ensure justice for the people or minorities affected. Otherwise, member states could interfere with the process to either protect themselves or cover for their allies, who might be engaging in criminal behavior. When genocides and atrocities are concerned, I believe it should be the global community’s responsibility to intervene and help, regardless of the state sovereignty concept. Rewards include universal justice and the upholding of human rights, regardless of the state and political regime. Recent developments in international politics are showing a shift from states to individuals. Therefore, I would argue that when a state is mistreating (genocide, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity) its citizens, a supranational body should be able to step in.
Apart from atrocities, the risks of independent, supranational authority in IOs outweigh the benefits. Powerful states, like the USA and China, will be unwilling to delegate such jurisdiction. When it comes to IOs that deal with trade, finance, diplomatic relations, they naturally are subordinate to their member states. Risks include a tyrannical supranational structure that makes decisions for the member states and their citizens. Individuals can suffer from imposed decisions with no state to protect their interests. I support that framework in relation to human rights violations; however, I do not see states delegating such authority to an IO regarding all aspects. The EU, UN, WTO all have some sort of supranational degree and states are already hostile to them. The USA is critical of the UN. European countries are questioning the power of the EU. I do not feel that a completely independent and supranational IO can exist peacefully. The only exception would be to address atrocities. 
Whether the USA should become a full member of the ICC is a complex question. I would personally support the decision; however, I have encountered many convincing arguments against it, as well. These include a violation of the Constitution as the trial of American citizens, committed on American soil, is a judicial power of the USA. Furthermore, leaving American soldiers open to global standards of justice, as well as American politicians. With the Biden Administration, a change could be possible.

Watch the following videos on environmental issues in international politics (al

Watch the following videos on environmental issues in international politics (all together they take up less than an hour to watch, so watch them all).  Discuss what you think are the major contemporary international or global environmental problems.  Give at least two reasons why environmental issues are exacerbated by the anarchical structure of the international system.  Optional: Can you propose solutions to some of these problems from what you saw?   
CONTENT WARNING: Elephants are murdered throughout the first 45 seconds of The Economist video.  
If these videos don’t link up, just copy and paste it into your favorite search engine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojvy4njnDQg&ab_channel=TheEconomist (Links to an external site.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c7AuSQdvow&ab_channel=Vox (Links to an external site.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKEEzW0IiV4&ab_channel=CaspianReport (Links to an external site.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQY7VOQF8sY&ab_channel=CaspianReport (Links to an external site.)
Guidelines
Watch the videos in the links provided.
Work in groups of 3-4.
You will receive up to 10 points for participation and up to 10 points for the material.
Your essay should not be less than 400 words.
You are not required to read any other material, but if you cite the videos, give the minute and second that your reference begins so I can check it.
Give a reference page so you can practice referencing videos.
Remember that everybody should read it and check each other before submission.  If my two eyes catch something your 6 or 8 eyes didn’t, it means your teamwork needs work.
Only the SGT submits the assignment.  No one else should upload it.