The peasantry played a critical role in the French Revolution by absorbing the heat of dissatisfaction. Although the bourgeoisie represented the revolution, peasants grasped the spirit, mission, and gravity of possible subsequent events (Moore 430). These ordinary citizens became drivers of the revolution. As such, the state had no control over the scope of the events. Therefore, people managed to compel the government to act in a particular way, thereby making it work for the common good. According to Barrington Moore, democracy could not be realized without bourgeois (414). Realizing this fact, the French people became determinants of their own destiny rather than passengers in a state control train. The origin and bearers of the revolution were the point of departure in France and such countries as Russia and Germany since they determined the scope of events and their overall impact.
Having suffered annihilation and external aggression from the Germans, the French people became extra careful in being in charge of their own affairs. They realized the limitation of the government to protect and champion for change. As a result, the French people prepared their own roadmap to change without the support of the military. Therefore, the economy of the country remained quite intact, even when the wheel of revolution gained a momentum. In contrast, Russia and Germany depended on the state machinery to compel citizens to shift their perceptions towards government liberation (Moore 430). As a result, the two countries invested in dictatorial fascism so heavily, where capitalists had their way, while peasants had no say. Consequently, Germany and Russia became more divided. On the other hand, France marshaled citizens to rebuild the country, resulting in a more integrated and united nation.
Legislators have vested interests in almost all pieces of legislation. Marshaling for support is quite inevitable when it comes to getting things done in the political arena. However, making legislators support particular courses may be an uphill task for lobbyists. By design, lobbying does not constitute getting legislators to change their preferences concerning a policy, but ideally subsidizing their resources. In some instances, the success of a lobbyist may not be forthcoming; hence, there should be a way out to ensure that expectations are still met despite the unwillingness of legislators to support particular courses that have far-reaching and beneficial public interests at the core (Hall and Deardorff 70). Provisions of legislative subsidy still make it possible for policy formulators to achieve the objective of their endeavors since support is guaranteed even without lobbying.
According to Hall and Deardorff, legislators have personal interests in some policies, guaranteeing their support with or without lobbying (69). Since they or their constituents institute legislations, they invest their time and resources in ensuring that bills see the light. Naturally, supporting such motions enhances rates of legislation approvals, without which any politician cannot do. It is in line with Quadagno’s argument that relates to health reforms. He notes that legislators are fundamental in the creation and implementation of reforms (Quadagno 128). They determine the direction of any action. Legislators are naturally endowed with limited resources. In a bid to increase their resourcefulness, they are bound to support any legislation or bill that will improve their economic status (Hall and Deardorff 80). Agents of the state in the Congress may use this bait to rally legislators in supporting particular causes. However, this may sometimes be used to pass unpopular legislations and policies. Therefore, with legislative subsidy, political bias is bound to occur since legislators represent constituents with various priorities.
The appointment of Scott Pruitt to head the Environmental Protection Agency has nothing to do with his waning scientific knowledge, but rather relates to his blindfold support for President Trump’s coal and fossil fuel campaign. Politics is the only arena in the world where professionals sacrifice their informed opinions and reasonability to support their political godfathers and sponsors fanatically. It can be seen in Scott’s claim that there is no relationship between global warming and the emission of carbon and its compounds into the atmosphere despite President Trump having done an about-turn and acknowledged the effect of humans on global warming (Daly and Jill). In this regard, Mike is definitely right when he claims that the appointment of Scott Pruitt is a reflection of the power of fossil energy lobbying. Technically, President Trump wants to surround himself with prominent and influential people who will promote the acceptance of his unpopular policies and remove any legal barriers that may cause inconvenience in the achievement of his dreams.
The Environmental Protection Agency is a very important and strategic institution that should champion against the extraction and use of fossil fuels due to the negative impact of such activity on the environment and its resources in general. Without having his henchmen at the helm of the agency, his policies are bound to be frustrated by the professional know-how of agency leaders. It is the main reason why the president handpicked his sympathizer and sycophant, Scott Pruitt. This appointment is just one technique of avoiding trouble with environmental experts since given his influence, Scott can frustrate and prevent any professional attempts to stop the exploration of dirty fossil fuels.
President Trump has accepted the validity of scientific facts about global warming. The White House is not void of environmental scientists who can advise the president of the detrimental effects of his political actions. According to the course reading, Moore (2010) notes that the powers of a president are vested in the constitution. However, technical and scientific knowledge of the general population can also influence how he uses his powers. Mitchell’s claim that such knowledge has been overstated is untrue. Furthermore, politics is a game using innuendos and propaganda to whip sympathy and emotions among the electorate in order to gain favor. Hence, the Republican president has used this technique to quash scientific facts of which he is well aware (Daly and Jill). His conscience judges him so harshly that he has to brainwash other people to disbelieve with him. As a matter of fact, even a third-grader is aware that the emission of carbon and its compounds into the atmosphere causes pollution, global warming and the deterioration of human health. The need to create more job opportunities through the development of fossil plants cannot and will not substitute the moral obligation of protecting human lives. Sustainable development is a monumental scientific principle that Trump and his artificially blind sycophants have deliberately decided to ignore.
Benefit from Our Service: Save 25% Along with the first order offer - 15% discount, you save extra 10% since we provide 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page
President Trump understands the secret power of lobbying, given his success as a real estate mogul and a reality show celebrity. Pulling strings in strategic locations ensures that the job is done without much ado. As much as one can castigate him for his unpopular and probably “un-American” policies and conduct, the success of these unorthodox administrative methods leaves much to be desired. Trump may be unpopular, but he really knows how to get what he wants. One noticeable method of doing so is appointing his adepts to positions in strategic institutions and federal bodies tasked with policy formulation, oversight, and ratification (Daly and Jill). For instance, if he did not act, his attempt to cancel the Paris Agreement would have been thwarted by January 2017. Hence, he has overcome all possible barriers and roadblocks to make his dream a reality. On the other hand, he appointed the Supreme Court justice to avoid legal barriers in the re-introduction of fossil fuels within 100 days of his ascension to power. Such is the power of political lobbying.
Related Political essays
- The Media and Democracy
- Domestic Commitment as a War Choice of the Minor Powers
- Hillary Clinton Strategic Plan
- Globalization and National Security
- US-Russia Relations: The Issue of Ukraine