Essay not a report
Travel Ban
Rawan Aljarki
Theme 1: Idealism vs. Realism
Overview: This issue is a very political topic and that means that there are automatically two sides of the coin. However, those two sides also come with one or the other of the two principles that will I will mention.
Idealists
Democrats, Liberals – This group is opposed to the travel ban, and see it as an attack on their ideas and principles. Liberals are so deeply offended by this because they believe in international law, globalism, and international organizations. Banning people coming in from other countries destroys their idea of free and open borders for all, and they believe that sovereignty includes immigrants from other countries coming freely. Liberals see an international system as a community of countries willing to work together to solve problems. They believe that everyone is morally good, and that countries should appease people migrate to them in order to make a more accepting community. This is why liberals don’t see this ban as morally good. Idealists first came into politics following Woodrow Wilson’s presidency, which created the League of Nations. The League of Nations, of course, was a failed experiment that was not very effective, but it did pave the way for the United Nations. While liberals seem to like the idea of the United Nations because it advanced their idea of world government, the other group, the realists, tend to believe that the U.S. is obsolete and needs to be changed.
Conservatives, Nationalists – This group fits closely into the realist idea of politics. Realists in this area believe that world politics is a struggle among self-interested nations for power and status. Realists have some logical thinking behind this. The U.S. funds international institutions more than any other country on the planet, and most of the other countries part of these institutions don’t pay what they are supposed to be paying. Because of this, there is a wide group of people in America who believes that other countries are using these international institutions as a way to drain the U.S. taxpayer’s money while strengthening their position in the world. President Trump’s pulling out of TPP is also another example of the fight between the realists and the idealists. TPP would have linked the U.S. to Asia, while pulling out of it would encourage sovereignty and bilateral trade agreements. As for the travel ban, the realists agree on the need for state sovereignty and making sure that immigrants hold U.S. values when they come in. This right here is the main cause of argument between these two sides. While idealists believe in world government, and that all cultures are created equal, realists believe that people need to come into this country as non-radicals. While liberals aim to appease, conservatives aim to make sure these migrants hold the values that are fit for the United States. Unfortunately, liberals think that this is racism and islamophobia, but Benjamin Franklin, thinks otherwise. Franklin believed that German immigrants could not conform to the set of values of America, and was afraid that German culture would soon grow larger than American culture. This is a belief that all immigrants are not created equal.
Players
President Trump: The President is fighting for the travel ban, and he is most certainly a realist. He is not for globalization, and doesn’t believe in multiculturalism. He believes in state sovereignty, and thinks that creating a system that can better people coming in from places that are home to many radical jihadists is rational.
The Liberals: These people are against President Trump because, he’s not only a Republican but he is also with their ideology of multiculturalism. It doesn’t take much effort to point out who these people are. Some examples can be seen such as politicians such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Chuck Schumer.
Theme 2: Utopias, Theories, and Ideologies
Ideologies
This issue demonstrated a shift in ideologies, and it’s rather refreshing that the one featured – Liberals vs. Conservatives – Now, there seems to be a fight between the globalists and the nationalists. The globalists believe in an open system and support strongly for world government. They have little respect for sovereignty and seem to want to impose their ideals on other countries. like Brexit, the EU doesn’t seem to want to help Britain with their plan to leave the EU, and they are actually planning to make it harder. It’s not a secret that the EU desires a “soft” Brexit so that the illusion of a Brexit is the only thing that comes from it. The nationalists believe in “fair” trade. This is a light form of protectionism, and rejects unilateral trade agreements. Nationalists believe that countries have a right to build their own borders, and are very skeptical of international institutions.
Utopias
The idealists, or the globalists or liberals, believe that world peace can be fulfilled by world government. The main idea is that when there is one ruler, there can be no differences, and thus no conflicts. This idea is flawed, but not exactly ignorant. For one, international institutions can help in world peace, but when a tyrannical system starts forcing people to conform to its belief system, violence will eventually break out. In order for their world government to be a reality, there can be no open borders or walls; there can be no travel bans. This is why this issue is only starting and won’t be ending anytime soon
Theme 3: Anarchy, Security, and Group Dynamics
There is a need for the two sides to join together and unite; it’s unlikely to happen. There’s just too much of a gap between these belief systems, and it seems like neither side is willing to make concessions to the other. In the end, both sides want security and neither wants anarchy. They both believe that their system is the best way to provide security, and that the other side is pushing a system of “fascism” or anarchy. While liberals believe that all immigrants are equal and should be welcomed with open arms, the other side seems to want immigrants to come and accept American values and not impose their own values on society. Because of this, the U.S. is at risk of destroying itself from within due to the divisions that have occurred over the past decade.
Theme 4: Controlling the Behavior of Individuals
There are two battles for leadership going on at the heart of the travel ban. The first is the battle between the Republicans and Democrats. Republicans, for the most part, are for the travel ban, and Democrats are against it. The Democrats are powerless right now, and they can’t do anything in Congress. However, the court system has struck down the travel ban several times. So how is this a conflict between Democrats and Republicans? The court systems that have struck down this ban have been from states like California and many of the big cities who oppose this President. The second battle for leadership is going on inside the White House, and it is between the nationalists and the globalists. These groups have been the source of all of the leaks, and seem to want to drive the other out.
The President’s reason for wanting this ban is for security and to impose an image of strength. This President has talked all about strength and power, so advocating for such a ban plays into his narrative of being strong and decisive.
Theme 5: Rational Choice and the Need for Regulations
The major actors are the President, the immigrants, the other countries, and the people inside the Whitehouse. The ban supports the President’s own self-interest because it keeps his promise to implement a ban on certain countries where terrorists seem to come from. The immigrants are against this ban, as it goes against their own self-interest of coming to the promise land and starting a new life. The other countries condemn this ban because most of their leadership are globalists who want free and open borders. The people inside the Whitehouse seem to overall support this ban because it helps their own standing with the President. As per multiple reports, there is rarely a time when anyone ever contradicts the President, and this is because no one wants to get taken down a peg. The ban was obviously created to prevent terrorism, and it promotes a system of protectionism.
Theme 6: Structures and Institutions
The basic government structures that play an important role in this ban are the Justice Department, the Executive Branch, and Homeland Security. Since this ban has been struck down in multiple courts, the Justice Department’s job is to defend its legality, and possibly force it to the Supreme Court where one of the President’s nominated and approved justices lies. The Executive Branch was in charge of the policy of this ban through executive order, and Homeland Security was in charge of implementing this policy at places like airports. One could argue that this is a system of totalitarianism, but another can argue that this is Democracy. For one, Congress isn’t involved, so it gives off the perception that it’s the President calling the shots. However, the people elected this President and he campaigned on this for quite a long time, so one can also argue that this is a representative democracy.
Theme 7: Institutions
The institutions involved can be seen as both some type of evil institution or representative democracy based on how it is portrayed by the media and who is watching it. People who voted against this President are more likely to say that this is not a system of democracy, while people who voted for this President will say the opposite. Identity politics plays a big role in this travel ban, and it’s important to realize that in the end what comes around goes around. There is no really evil institution, and there never will be. However, there will always be these perceptions of evil institutions as long as the partisanship imprisoning America never breaks.
Theme 8: The Imperfection of Institutions
This issue most certainly represents the realist perspective on government institutions, and seems the policy supports the idea that large bureaucratic institutions are ineffective and just bad at what they do. The implementation of the travel ban was sloppy and uncoordinated, and this led to the media completely destroying the President’s policy.
Theme 9: Courts and Law
This issue will most likely go to the Supreme Court because of the sharp divide between activist judges and constitutional judges. While activist judges will look at issues and adjust the Constitution accordingly, constitutional judges will look at issues and gauge them against the Constitution. Even the court system cannot escape the partisanship of the 21st Century.
Theme 10: The Democratic Ideal in Modern Society
This ban demonstrated that this is truly a winner-take-all system. The other side wanted nothing to do with the travel ban, while the side that won wanted it. There were very few people in between opposing this policy and supporting it, and this has led to a crack in democracy. However, this is the way the system has always worked, and the system of democracy has lived on, so there will probably be no civil war.
Theme 11: Media, Politics, and Government
On both sides, people view the elites as the enemy. For the Democrats, they view the people in power as the enemy and the other side views the “shadow government” and the other world leaders as the enemy. The one major trend in American politics is the hatred of the elite or “establishment.” In 2008 and 2012, Obama seemed to be running against the anti-establishment candidate, and won both times. Then in the 2016 Primaries, people were enraged that Clinton “stole” the election from Sanders for her collusion with the media and DNC. In the 2016 election, one again the anti-establishment candidate won in an electoral landslide. This hatred of the elites will only continue until the elites are destroyed.
