MONARCHIES, by Anonymous

Monarchs may not have the power over their countries like they used to, they seem to have become sort of culture icons now more than a serious power.

 British people say that they like to keep the royal family around for tradition. With having no real power you think that they would have just done away with them years ago.  They are not the only ones who have kept their monarchs around for the tradition other places like Netherlands, Thailand, and Norway still have the royal blood lines running strong.  Since our country was founded on the point of getting rid of the Monarchs and having a free democratic system it may be hard for many Americans to understand why keeping the Royals around would be such a big deal to everyone. Since wasn’t the point of our revolution to get away from the British Monarchs?
British Royal Blood Line

Why is this so important to the people of those countries to keep their royal blood lines? A lot of people from these countries with such strong blood lines think that it brings them together as a country, that it shows unity and a strong sense of Nationalism. Nationalism in the United Kingdom has been around and has been really strong since close to the beginning of the U.K..  As far as other countries like Norway and Thailand, their sense of Nationalism developed later on throughout the course of the country’s history, so it’s understandable why they would want to keep the blood lines going to make the country’s national identity stay strong.

Maybe Monarchs are the best thing for these types of countries. If the country can have a strong functioning government and keep a strong form of national identity with their Monarchs, more power to them.

  

  

Combining Politics With Culture, by Stacia Berg

            Here’s a question; to what extent does our culture have an effect on our politics, and vice versa?  Obviously there are a lot of different ways to go about answering this question, but I think that the best way is to focus on how beliefs and values are reflected in the way national opinion is presented. 

            In the United States, we have separation of church and state.  However, there are many cases in which the two overlap.  The entire point of Europeans coming to America was to escape a governmental rule over their religion, and their values, which have been passed down through generations, were shaped by their respective religions. Now we see evidence of religious ideas becoming evidence for political arguments.  Should this be happening?  Are arguments based on religion universally valid?  It’s interesting to contemplate these questions, and to narrow our view of current issues to see the extent of how personal values have encroached on political territory.

            One of the main issues where I see this is in the argument over marriage rights.  Those with more liberal leanings argue for civil liberties for homosexuals, saying that the ability to marry is a right of all citizens.  On the other hand, those with more conservative political ideals argue that allowing homosexuals to marry would undermine the tradition of marriage.  To back this up, they take evidence from the bible or other religious texts to show that marriage should be between one man and one woman.  The two sides are backed by incredibly different arguments taking proof and ideas from very different places, and both are supported by large amounts of people.  I think this is a great example of how beliefs and values have an effect on the political sphere of a nation.

            We talked in class about the idea of a divide between traditional and secular values.  In traditional societies, religion is an important part of life, and most values are based off those beliefs.  Due to this, there are strict rules on childrearing and issues of divorce, abortion, etc.  In these traditional societies most everyone holds the same ideals, or at least similar ones.  This shows quite a bit of unity in how people act and think.  Thus, it would seem that there is little room for variety in a traditional culture.

            In a secular culture, however, religion is really pushed to the side in the focus of how people should behave.  Childrearing is much less strict, and focused on allowing for self-expression and development of individual ideas.  There is a much more lenient view toward tough issues such as divorce and abortion.  Overall, the main consensus would be that people can make choices based on what is best for them, rather than what would traditionally be seen as right or wrong.  A secular culture provides for a lot of diversity and self-exploration.

            In the U.S., I believe that we have developed from a primarily traditional society to an increasingly secular one.  When the first settlers came to America, they came in groups based on their religions.  Thus, it only seems fitting that religion would be the basis for governing the individual colonies.  However, with the separation of church and state as we became a nation dealt a blow to that traditional culture.  Industrialization and modernization saw people focusing less on their spiritual well being and more on their material desires.  With industrialization came a consumer society, which in turn produced a consumer society focused on material goods.  This led to the diminishing focus on traditional values for controlling how people should act. 

            It is important to remember, however, that transforming into a secularized nation does not mean that everyone has lost sight of traditional values.  There will always be a divide between traditional and secular minded people, as is clearly illustrated in the debate over marriage equality.  The overlap of church and state, formed through maintenance of traditional as well as secular values, obviously has an effect on politics and how decisions are made in this country.  The question is to what extent do the different values have an impact on the making of big decisions?