optional short but "big-picture" take-home essay

Final Exam “big picture” essays OPTIONAL. Write essay(s) that play with the concepts below.
You won’t be able to cover everything so pick neat examples and make it tight
Make an outline. Don’t just throw anything you can remember at me in no particular order. Simplistic generalizations without qualification & good examples will get low grades. Anticipating counterarguments is very good. Mail to my e-mail by Sunday night. Bring a hard copy if you can. Abbreviations (B43, JFK, LBJ, JFD for Dulles) are fine. 2 page maximum unless you absolutely need
Foreign policy.
That brilliant geopolitical thinker Mark Twain (someone today's anti-imperialists can legitimately claim as an intellectual and moral forebear) once said "Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest."
Jimmy Carter generally agreed with Twain, and said "Human Rights" were primary. Whenever possible / practical we should be on the side of good. Clinton agreed and apologized for when we hadn't lived up to our principles of "all men =" "rule of law" etc. Both Clinton & Bush 41 (New World Order) tried to stop genocide & mass starvation in Somalia (& Clinton later in Bosnia & Kosovo.) Clinton apologized for not stopping Genocide in Rwanda.
A Pure "Realist" looks only
at American interests (Oil or military balance of power) and makes decisions just on that Basis. Nixon was mostly a realist, concerned with American/ world balance of power (with Kissinger). Almost everyone compromises with "realism" even if they have an ideological disposition to do otherwise. We can't fix everything.
Condi Rice wrote a "realist" essay in 2000 which disapproved of Clinton's humanitarian interventions in Somalia, Bosnia & Kosovo.
Some foreign policy thinkers believe America does not have to "do right." We can torture or overthrow or support thugs either because America is "a city on a hill" & uniquely "holy" or because the local situation (Vietnam, Guatemala, Iran) is part of a "good versus evil" struggle like the Cold War or the “War on Teror” so we can do anything in the name of this "good vs evil" struggle. If Guatemala or Iran or Vietnam are not "with us" in this big struggle they're "against us" so ....
•John Foster Dulles (FD), Ronald Reagan (RR), Bush43 (B43) under Cheney, and Nixon (NX) (in a different way but same results in Latin America & Vietnam) had strong commonalities in Foreign policy. They saw the world in certain ways and acted accordingly. Their outlooks often combined $$$ interests or oil and the rhetoric of America’s unique holiness.
Their actions contrast strongly with Jimmy Carter (JC), Bill Clinton (BC), JFK (usually except Cuba) & Bush41 (B41)(usually). Try to explain the “big picture” using Latin America perhaps with the most extreme contrasts. Mention carefully selected example(s) for every generalization. Talk about views (A) that emphasize “good vs evil” “with us or against us” “enemy of my enemy is my friend” “must not talk to evil” & US right to overthrow other governments & impose our values
Analyze & give cogent examples of the competing "Human rights" views (B) which generally include trying to understand the history & cultures of others & their grievances & respect their views “do unto others …” “all men are equal”, Internationalism & international law.
How have the paradigms worked in Vietnam?
North Korea recently (including Plutonium & Jimmy Carter in 1994 and B43 after 2000) Cuba?
Afghanistan since late 1970’s (including Bin Laden)?
Latin America vs Europe & Japan?


Economic “Big Picture”
Economics
The richest Americans (top 1/10 of 1%) now pay much lower tax rates than you will. CEO’s get hundreds of $$millions for bad performances while the companies with lower skews between top CEO and average workers make the best profits. Most Americans worry more about inflation from raising the minimum wage or moderately high taxes on the VERY rich than they do about millions of children in poverty or radically decreased opportunity for working middle class & poor. Congressional and B43 Republicans are passionately determined that Paris Hilton & Frist & Bush kids get many unearned $$millions tax free while low-income-3-job families pay high payroll taxes on their first dollar.
The New Deal created a huge middle-class in America. The Reagan Bush-43 tax revolution has radically changed the “shape” of American wealth distribution and opportunity. They have also had huge implications for future generations
Talk about why and how this happened. Mention as many important details as you can. You could include “state versus federal progressivity”, social security “reform” under Reagan, deficits, “two-free-lunch-economics” “Laffer curve”, Milton Friedman and Hayek, any illusions Americans might have