Political Discussion Assignment: Course Name, University Name

This political discussion assignment presents a student's analysis of their political views, informed by a survey and course readings. The student reflects on questions related to abortion rights, same-sex marriage, taxation, government spending, and immigration, revealing their stance on these key issues. The assignment connects these views to relevant articles, discussing economic paradigms, the role of government, and the impact of terrorism and immigration. The student's responses to the survey, including their economic left/right wing and social libertarian/authoritarian scores, are used to understand their political perspectives. The assignment concludes by emphasizing the importance of government action on various fronts, including environmental protection and social issues. The assignment is supported by cited sources and provides a clear understanding of the student's political ideology.

Running head: Political discussion
Cover Page
Political discussion
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

Political discussion 2
Result of the survey:

Political discussion 3
8 questions those were interesting and relevant to me:

Political discussion 4

Political discussion 5
Two page response of the survey:
The isidewith survey interests me a lot with the set of questions that made me realised
about my thoughts on politics and political ideologies. The set of questions were mainly
related to one’s thought about the legalisation of certain things those have been in debate
since a long time. For instance, the right of abortion, same sex marriage or celebrating the
marriage ceremony in the church are in the news and debate on political forum since a long
time now (Hoffarth & Jost, 2017). At the same time, the quiz also highlighted on the issues of
taxes on the rich and the poor and the role of government in fighting against the increasing
global warming. In fact, the vital issues of terrorism and legal/illegal immigration have also
been discussed in the quiz.
If the response of the quiz is related to the readings of the course, it can be said that in
the article, ‘It’s Time for a New Economic Paradigm’, Suzuki (2009) talk about the nature
stating “Nature degrades the carcasses of dead plants and animals and disperses the atoms
and molecules back into the biosphere” (Suzuki 2009). According to the authors, it is the
responsibility of the humans to thing about the survival on earth and we have clearly
contributed in degrading the nature; one of the major reasons is the manufacturing and the
use of plastic. As per one quiz, I do not support those materials those are not bio-degradable.
It is important that the materials should be at least 75% bio-degradable to make sure that we
are not harming the nature and there is enough scope for the nature to recycle and revive its
characteristics.
In the article, ‘What is politics … and who cares anyway?’, Herman commented that
“Racialized individuals, women, those living with disabilities and indigenous peoples
experience the highest levels and most extreme forms of poverty in Canada” (Herman 2009).
Considering this context, the quiz highlighted about the issues in taxes that Canadians face.
There were questions in the quiz that asked if I believe that the taxes among the rich should
be increased. I have stated that increasing the taxes among the wealthy should not be one of
the vital reasons to overcome the present issues that the people in Canada face. However,
increasing taxes on the poor or the middle class is never a feasible option at all. In addition to
this, the quiz also asked if the government should increase their spending on the public
transportation. Here also, I excused the statement because I completely believe that the
government should think of other areas to increase their investment, most importantly the

Political discussion 6
higher education in the colleges and Universities. I have also agreed to the chartered
educational institutes only if those institutes do not work for profit purpose.
Referring to another article, ‘war what is it good for?’ by Morris (2014), talks about
the increasing terror in the world and the insecurity and tension as a result of more
immigration and infiltration. It has been a common observation that Muslims are targeted
first for any reason related to terrorism or violence in the society. However, I do not
completely agree to the fact that all Muslims should be held responsible for the nuisance in
society. The permission to immigrate in a new land should not be based on one’s religion, but
it should be based on policies and security checks. “This dark outlook seems confirmed not
only by the daily barrage of headlines from war-torn regions around the world — Iraq,
Afghanistan, Congo — and the seemingly endless threat of terrorism, but also by findings
from primatology, anthropology, and other fields” (Morris, 2014). From the line, it can be
said that terrorism is a worldwide threat and people around the world are equally afraid of
such violence and crimes happening in their country or with their family members. For this,
the government have to take a major action in order to overcome the issues and create a better
place for the people to live in the society.
The quiz and the readings of the module have given a clear understanding of the
expectation of the people from the government. The result of 1.38 in Economic left/Right
wing and 0 in Social Libertarian/Authoritarian has helped me to understand my political
views. The government have to show its presence in all the fields and have to come up with
all the suitable plans and actions that would benefit the nation and the people. Right from
considering legalisation of marijuana to the abortion or same sex marriage, to thinking of
better ways to protect the environment and the planet should be the overall political work.
The political party working for the people should be selected by the people.
’

Political discussion 7
Bibliography:
Herman, A. (2015) What is politics … and who cares anyway. The American Interest.
Hoffarth, M. R., & Jost, J. T. (2017). When ideology contradicts self-interest: Conservative
opposition to same-sex marriage among sexual minorities—A commentary on Pinsof
and Haselton (2016). Psychological Science, 28(10), 1521-1524.
Morris, I. (2014). War! what is it Good For?: Conflict and the Progress of Civilization from
Primates to Robots. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Suzuki, D. (2009, August 21). It’s time for a new economic paradigm. David Suzuki
Foundation. Retrieved from
http://davidsuzuki.org/blogs/science-matters/2009/08/itstime-for-a-new-economic-
paradigm/