US Politics – Why are they so different?

What do the comments made by Clinton Rossiter in the 1960s and Mark Shields in the 1990s tell us about what the two major parties in the USA used to be like?

From the comments they made, it suggests that the two major parties in the USA used to be so similar; they were dubbed as “two republican parties” within the US. They therefore were both mostly right winged, however the issue that separated the two would be to whether to have abortion as a pro-choice or not.

In what ways have US voters been re-sorted?

Voters have switched parties just like some politicians have. Examples of this would be Southern states such as Mississippi used to be solidly Democrats after the civil war, however from 1960s onwards they became solidly Republicans.

What have been four results of this ideological re-sorting?

* There are now clear divisions between the two major parties, issues such as abortion and gun control.

* The way people vote and what party they indentify them self to be, however is they identify themselves to be a Democrat, does not necessary mean they will always vote for Democrat candidate. An example of this would e in 1972 where 33% of Democrats voted for Republican President Richard Nixon.

* Swing-Sates: to an extent this can be seen on a nation scale wise as in 1964 the country voted for Democrat Lyndon Johnson then in 1968 they voted for Richard Nixon.

* Split-ticket voting: There has been a decline in this which means there is also a decline in split districts.

How was senate in 2011 different from the senate in 1993?

In 1993 the senate had a range of conservative senators, from really conservative to more liberal conservatives like James Jeffords of Vermont. Whereas in 2011 there is no overlap at all between the two parties in the Senate. This means that they all seem quiet liberal compared to how they used to be in 1993.

What does proposed legislation face greater difficulties in Congress than in the UK Parliament?

Due to the large population of America, this can already be seen as a difficulty as there would be a mass of Bills that has been proposed compared to the UK. As Congress is bound to have a load of Bills that are pigeonholed, they have a Rules Committee which decides what Bills to be debated. Unlike the UK, US Senate does not have unlimited debate and discussion on a Bill, therefore there must be conditions and limitations set and that is performed by the rules Committee. This could count as a great difficulty as a Bill can be left considered whilst others goes on to debates.

One other great difficulty for a proposed legislation to be successful in US politics would be the bicameral houses in Congress. In the US, where the numbers of people are much larger; each (within the two-party system) usually have the majority in one of the houses – an example of this would be currently Democrats hold majority in Senate and Republicans hold majority in the House of Representatives. As in the timetabling process; in the senate there must be a unanimous consent agreement that is stated by the senate majority and minority. As they are from two different parties, this may be a difficult process to receive – Bills such as abortion and gun control is something the two parties are on the opposite side of the line to each other, therefore would be extremely hard to get a unanimous consent agreement among it. Whereas in UK Parliament; House of Commons has more influence in legislations as House of Lords only review legislation that has been initiated by the House of Commons. However House of Lords are able to propose amendments on it and also veto.

Both in the US and UK, a filibuster can arise to get their chance to speak to block or bring forward a bill – An example of this in the US would be Wendy Davis, Texas on Abortion. A difficulty here would be that in the US; the senate are able to bring a cloture motion or through with 60 votes. An example of this would be the military sexual assault bills that are set for senate votes; if it receives 60 votes, then it is able to go to into the vote for the final passage of the bill – this only requires a simple majority. A roll-call vote takes place if the measure is controversial.

Another great difficulty would be that during the third reading in US; Congress is given another opportunity for debate even though the debate must be brief. A further vote is then taken, which means that decisions of congressmen could be changed within this debate. In contrasts with the UK as in the third reading there is only a general discussion, where no amendments are allowed therefore just to confirm what the Bill.

Unlike the UK, when one house (of commons) where most decisions such as amendments are made and are then past onto the other house (of lords) to review it; in the US, both houses have two separate debates on the bill and come together in the Conference Committee process. If there is a significant difference between the two versions then there would be a conference committee that consists of members from both chambers. The Freedom of Information has got the House of Representation’s version of the Bill and now they are just waiting for the Senate’s version. When the Senate releases their version of the Bill, the HOR are able to finalise their version; however is there is a significant different then a conference committee will be called.

To conclude; proposed legislation face greater difficulties in Congress than in the UK Parliament due to factors such as the large population and strong ideologies of the two party systems; this makes it harder to gain super majority’s in sectors needed – such as deciding on issues to do with taxation.

Metaphor in Never Let Me Go.

Boat. During the last part of the novel, the three main characters Kathy, Tommy and Ruth go see an abandoned boat that has been an exciting topic among most of the other donors. When the three finally get to see the boat, it is abandoned on the sandy beach and described as wearing away its colours (also in the film it is old and rusty looking). The boat could be a metaphor for the donors as the boat’s true nature is to be off shore and sailing, which would be fulfilling its purpose to existence. Yet, it is left abandoned on shore as it is finished its duties to be off shore and now time to “complete”. Just like the donor’s true nature is to live a good life, as humane as possible but then there will be a time when they will eventually have to “rust”, in their case would be to do their donations and once they have fulfilled their purpose; like the boat, they will “complete”.

The boat could also be a symbol of morality. As the three friends sit there, just looking at the boat alone; Ruth has a sudden confession and apologetic speech for Tommy and Kathy. She expresses how sincerely she is about how she knew it was Tommy and Kathy all along, as though she had been waiting for a long time to say this to them. Throughout the novel, this is a completely different side to Ruth that we see as we see her more to be arrogant. She then pleads the two to take a piece of paper that she has; written on it is Madam’s address. Since all talks about Madam in Hailsham was all serious and no joke, this is where it shows how sincere Ruth is being for Tommy and Kathy to be together. (go to Madam to get “deferrals”)

Norfolk. Norfolk is introduced to the students at Hailsham to be a place that was mysterious and unknown, as there was no pictures of it when being taught the geography of the country. The students often came up with theories of everything; Norfolk’s theory was that it was a place where all lost things were placed. Ishiguro uses layered imagery to enforce this vision, from the ongoing metaphor of Norfolk being home to lost things. An example of this would be when Kathy lost her tape. Later when they decided to take a trip to Norfolk, Kathy was able to find (in a shop) the tape that she had lost when she was in Hailsham; making the characters continue to believe how Norfolk is home to all lost things.

However, Norfolk can also be a place symbolising hope but also holding the truth. We discover this from their whole purpose to visit Norfolk in the first place; to see Ruth’s “possible”. At a glance, the characters got ecstatic about how it might be Ruth’s possible. When they greed for more knowledge, to fully confirm that it was Ruth’s “possible” – such as following the lady right into the gallery; this made all of them eventually find out that she was nothing like Ruth, and it was just some random lady. While in the gallery, the characters also discovered how they were not as different as they were told to be within an environment with humans. An example of this would be when they were in the gallery; a lady approached Tommy thinking he was some sort of art student.

Field. The field, the spacious area around Hailsham and nature described within the novel is often portrayed positively and brightly (especially in the film). Yet, it could have symbolising negative aspects. A way this can be read is that the field and Hailsham being in the middle of nowhere would show how isolated and alienated the donors/clones and Hailsham itself is from society and normal humans. Although within the film, the scenery is shown beautifully with bright green grass and leaves; yet there are also barbed-wire surrounded the open field; both when the characters were at Hailsham and at the end of the film when Kathy is standing by herself. This can show how oppressed they are within their fate. Although when they were at Hailsham, they lived their daily life as usual and felt like it was normal therefore continued to do so without any problem.

The Remains Of The Day: from a Marxist and Feminist perspective.

 

The Remains Of The Day is a novel that can be seen with from many perspectives such as with a Marxist and Feminist point of view. It is a novel like many that has a vast amount of hidden ideologies and layers of meanings behind the texts; an example of this would be a Marxist perspective where one of their ideologies is that the super structure is determined by the economy. There are a numerous of ideologies, where one type of people overshadows the other. For Marxist critics it would be the bourgeoisie that are significant within society, while the proletarians are portrayed as less important.

From a Marxist perspective, Stevens will be seen as a largely, marginalised protagonist. This can be seen from his personality and what he displays for the reader to know; an example of this would be his loyalty to Darlington Hall and his employer, both Lord Darlington and Mr Faraday. Steven’s have had a mindset and idea of to be a “great butler” from the start of the book, which he had pulled together many situations and definitions to define it. He always believed that a dignified butler is to never let go of his facade, in other words; never let go of his professionalism no matter the circumstances.

This marginalisation is also shown within his relationship with Miss Kenton, who was also a staff at Darlington Hall. Throughout the duration of the novel, the two kept their relationship extremely formal, from when they were upset with each other, right up to the end when they no longer worked together. An example of this would be in Day Two – Morning, where Miss Kenton said “In fact, Mr Stevens, I would ask you from now on not to speak to me directly at all” – Even though she is upset with Stevens to an extent she no longer wishes to interact with him directly, she still keeps the conversation formal including stating his name before her expressing her wish. Even so, for the reader, this can be seen as an excuse to talk to each other but due to the mass alienation of Steven’s true nature of social life and work life he does not know how to separate work from anything, whereas Miss Kenton does. Although this can be read as a tremendous way to show how desperate Miss Kenton is for attention, yet Stevens is still unable to fulfil Miss Kenton’s true intentions.

The reader is able to figure out that Stevens is deeply in love with Miss Kenton, even though he does not and in his mindset, cannot express it. One scene within the novel where this can be seen is their cocoa sessions where Stevens’ is willing to spend some time in the evening with Miss Kenton to talk about “work” – However one day Miss Kenton does not give her full attention and says she is tired. Stevens’ then suggests they should stop doing this cocoa sessions and talk within day time or through written messages instead. This can be seen as Stevens’ scared of entering the non-professional territory as he has no experience within it, yet clearly realises it. This also applies to when Stevens’ walks in on Miss Kenton crying; as he has no experience within comforting others outside work facilities, he avoids it altogether. One of the reasons could be due to his belief of falling in love with someone that is below him within the staff plan, would be improper. Moreover, because he believes that love would be a distraction to his performance and goal to be a “great butler”.

Stevens is so alienated because of his work life that human qualities such as “banter” or to joke/tell jokes is absent within his personality. He is therefore unable to communicate efficiently with his new employer, Mr Faraday. An example of this would be when Stevens’ shared with the readers; “Embarrassing as these moments were for me…. I am sure, merely enjoying the sort of bantering which in the States, no doubt, a sign of a good, friendly is understanding……. I remain rather unsure as to how I should respond”. This may also reflect on how he is unable to communicate efficiently with people in general, as he always has the worry to say certain things.   Reasons to this could be due to his willingness to pursue the “great butler” status which leads him to deny his feelings and “human” emotions; this can be seen as Steven’s taking the concepts to an extreme or how alienated from his true nature he is.

Throughout the duration of the book, Stevens’ never tells anyone what he is truly feeling by re-quotes or lives by what his employer feels. This is something Miss Kenton also notices other than the reader as she says; “Why, Mr.Stevens, why, why, why do you always have to pretend?” – At this point even Stevens’ is unable to answer. When Lord Darlington wanted to get rid of the two Jewish Maids; at that time Stevens’ did not express his concern for the two girls and just took out the orders. A year later after Stevens’ had dismissed the Jewish maids, Lord Darlington wanted to find them again, Stevens’ also mentioned to Miss Kenton that he had felt the same way. Another human quality that Stevens is limited with is judgement; the most oblivious one to Stevens, although opaque to the reader would be his judgement about Lord Darlington. Despite Lord Darlington coming across as an important and pleasant man, he makes some very poor choices which affect his life drastically.

Stevens’ is thoroughly influenced by his father. Within the book Stevens’ mother or a mother figure is not mentioned therefore the reader assumes that father had brought him up by himself. Stevens’ father can be seen as a typical father figure to him, since he constantly speaks of his father’s greatness and what he would expect out of Stevens’ performance. With this, it is clear that Stevens’ wishes to be like his father. Even the stories Stevens’ father has told him, he re-calls it carefully to the reader too, example of this would be when the staff are gathered for a meal and his father tells a story about a butler handling a tiger. Steven’s inheritance of his father’s formal interactions with other people ends up limiting Stevens’ personal growth and relationships, including his own relationship with his father. Within Stevens’ and his father interactions, there is no sign of any familiar warmth but always stay formal and professional (regarding work life) no matter the situation; example of this would be when Stevens’ father was on his death bed as Stevens’ maintains his “duty” and “profession”. There is also no re-call of any personal memories such as his childhood or growing up as a young boy, only professional memories. This questions his communication skills with others in general. Since he and his father seem so distant when they speak, it is therefore easy to come to a conclusion of how difficult it is for him to break away from the repressed formality that he has grown up with.

As this novel was set in 1950s in Britain, a period where patriarchy was solidly at work although women’s rights were slowly rising with women teachers and civil servants paid the same salary as men. Miss Kenton can be seen as the only female Stevens’ allows into his life, although it is all part of the staff plan within Darlington Hall, she is the one female that he mentions most consistently throughout the novel. In Remains Of The Day, the roles and characteristics that women have can be seen traditional and typical; an example of this would be taking orders from the male, working in the kitchen and finally, as Miss Kenton demonstrates perfectly and boldly, is leaving her career to get married.

Miss Kenton can be seen as equal to Stevens when looking at their ability to run Darlington Hall, and their intelligence to do so, but Miss Kenton has a warmth and personality that can be seen more familiar to reality, whereas Stevens’ never shows that.

Miss Kenton and Stevens’ are figuratively equal within this novel, yet in a Marxist perspective they can be read as representing the class differences; Miss Kenton as the bourgeoisie with her warm personality and familiarity with reality and Stevens’ as the naive proletariat who never shows his familiarity with reality. In this novel, for Miss Kenton to be one of the few to have those characteristics while in the Lord Darlington household, she can be seen quiet peculiar. The first example of this would be when Miss Kenton brings flowers into Stevens’ room, Stevens strongly rejects them even though she insists to leave them in his room; Miss Kenton and Stevens’ disagreements can be seen as the highlight to their affection for each other.  Throughout the novel, there are several times when she tries to get Stevens to see or admit something that are important both for her and for him, however she gets ignored. As a Marxist, this can be read as Miss Kenton trying to get Stevens’ to develop his own conscious rather than being condition from people like Lord Darlington or his father.

As the years progress, Miss Kenton grows increasingly tired of Stevens’ behaviour towards her and his unwillingness to show “human quality” (displaying emotions). Despite this is the only way Stevens’ knows how to communicate with her, but since it is such an unusual attitude to have towards work and women, Miss Kenton moves on with her life. Miss Kenton finally decides to leave Darlington Hall to get married. Unlike Stevens, Miss Kenton is able to make decisions based on her own thoughts and beliefs. In this sense, she displays more real dignity and personal integrity than Stevens’ ever does By the end of the book, Stevens’ feels regret and remorse for all the wrong doings and chances missed as they reminisce old times making Miss Kenton spell out the relationship they had and the feeling she had for him. Even though he never admits to it, e finally shows some personal emotion as the man he sits with offers him his handkerchief towards the end of the book. In a Marxist perspective, this may have been a shock to him also as he apologizes to the man and adds how he is “over-tired”. In addition shows emotion when recalling the last conversation he had with Miss Kenton as he said “My heart was breaking”. This can be seen as a moment when Miss Kenton could be a figure that Stevens deep down wishes he could become.

 

Describe the fieldwork and research you would undertake in order to investigate why some rural areas are in need of rebranding.

There are two ways which information can be gathered; field work gives primary data that is collecting information yourself (e.g questionnaires and photographs) and research gives secondary data from other sources (e.g cenus, acorn profiles and google earth). Both of these can be quantitative (numbers, easier to graph) or qualitative (opinions, gives a broader view). The area we studied for rebranding was Stokely farm.

Good intro, this would be 4 marks already, especially if you said stokely farm is in Devon

A fieldwork that can be carried out to investigate the need of rebranding would be a bipolar analysis; this would review the area from terms of accessibility to pedestrians. This can then be compared to areas that have been rebranded, to see whether it was successful or not; an example of this would be in Dartington where it is now easily accessible for the disabled, whereas before it had uneven stairs. Another type of fieldwork that could be carried out would be a pedestrian count, within an area for a certain time; notes would be taken on which age group the people walk by are. From this, you can then research on whether the age group is getting the right services within their area or not; to find results of this would be having a survey of businesses. For example, services within the area may be for the elderly as there are pubs and bingo clubs; when there are more young people in the area. This would suggest strongly that the area needs rebranding. Excellent point, well made and explained with a good, relevant example!

For research, there are a number of things that can be done which involves searching the internet; one technique would be looking for historical photographs of the area. This can then be compared to what was seen when we went to Stokely farm, and also the photos we took while we was there. Sites such as “upmystreet.co.uk” would be useful as it would show if there has been any changes in house prices, if it seems to be dropping more and more everyday; this would suggest that rebranding is needed to make the house and area more attractive therefore having more people wanting to get a house within Stokely. You could also research the employment of the area to see how many people are employed full time or seasonally. If the proportion of seasonal employment is high then the rebrand should include something to provide jobs.

To conclude, there are a variety of ways to investigate whether an area needs rebranding or not through research and fieldwork; but they would be best to see a before and after a rebranding to see the successful or failure of the project. However, there are also limitations to the fieldwork and research of this.

I think you have done a really good job here, especially on the fieldwork. This would be a top level 3, about 11/15. To get level 4 you’d need to be more careful with terms (pollution?) and maybe get in the balance of research, as with the added paragraph I put in.

Suggest how melting ice in the Arctic might –a. Bring advantages and –b. Create problems for people there and elsewhere (10)

Arctic’s ice melting will bring advantages and disadvantages to the people who live there and possibly worldwide too. Due to climate change, the temperature at the Arctic is expected to rise at least three degrees over land and seven degrees over the oceans; which means definite melting ice in the Arctic will happen. Excellent intro – sets the tone well

An advantage of the ice melting in the Arctic would be the Northern Sea Route. At the moment, this is not available to access all year around, however when it can be used; it is the quickest route to travel from Europe to the Pacific and Asia. Good! Due to the melting ice in Arctic, there will be a few changes in some food webs such as the fishes; this could lead to new species being created or having species living in the Arctic where they have never lived before. Link back to people – could mean more possibilities for farming, fishing etc

Disadvantage about the ice melting in the Arctic would be that it will cause the vegetation to shift. It has been predicted that the tree line will move in the northern direction, which will make forests moving into the ice areas. This will lead a decline in certain species that would live in the forest which will then make hunting decline too which to a few people in Arctic is their source of food. I’m not sure this is the best negative, some might say its a positive that trees can grow because of the increased biodiversity etc, which is what you used as your previous point. I’d rather go with the eustatic sea level rise and associated flooding and erosion, which you mention next

This also causes indirect impacts to other countries around the world because it will raise sea levels. Mega cities such as London and New York will be at huge risk as the melting of ice will eventually reach land and have most of the city possibly under water. Good

To conclude, melting ice in the Arctic will bring both advantages and disadvantages for those who live in the Arctic and around the world; however there will be more disadvantages for the majority. A neat conclusion, you might be able to say that another positive might be that the potential oil under the arctic might become available.

PS. TEACHERS COMMENTS IN BOLD.