Arjuna Fournier
Bio
Political Scientist writing research proposals, theory essays, and sometimes your random short story.
Stories (19/0)
Ukraine, Russia, and The U.S.
The current Crisis in Ukraine can be explained in many ways. It can be seen as a potential conflict over material values demonstrating that the strong do what they will while the weak suffer what they must. Simultaneously it could be argued that the conflict is stoked by the flames of institutions. NATO being the main institution in question. NATO’s very presence in the Ukraine is causing a major upheaval in the peace in Europe. Russia being outside and opposed to this institution (NATO) is outside the realm of institutional moderation, showing how international institutions are key in maintaining peace but can also be the catalyst of conflict.
By Arjuna Fournier2 years ago in The Swamp
The Affect of Bureaucratic Authoritarianism
In Brazil the military dictatorship (Bureaucratic Authoritarianism) for all its ills was able to uplift large portions of society and start the shift of Brazil from an exporting agricultural economy into an industrializing consumer economy. It did this by nationalizing and funding country wide programs aimed at modernizing the economy (Petrobras, public education, and massive infrastructure projects to name a few). Primarily using borrowed money from the US, The new anti-communist regime could deliberate internally as to which portions of the economy would be stimulated. Central to the decision making process was the military, which was split into two major camps. The first one being hardliners which wanted to bolster the military budget/control of society and the second being those which were part of the military but, sought to liberalize/delegate/co-opt development projects. With this backdrop in mind, this proposal asks how then did the Authoritarian Bureaucratic regime in Brazil affect pension distribution for those who worked during the era? And what long term social economic effects did the distribution cause? Who got left out?
By Arjuna Fournier2 years ago in The Swamp
Locke, Inherent Value, and Labor
John Locke starts his Chapter on Property with a conversation about God. On the very first page of the chapter making a massive assumption. Not that god is real or that there are many or one. A much more simple and widespread assumption that nature is a gift to man-kind. It is affirmed immediately and is the start of all understanding of property and the world. The idea of nature as a gift is something which need not be paid back. Yet, gifting is a rather human conception is it not. Locke's starting common assumption beckoning some questions: Is this planet or nature even capable of gifting? And further how does the idea of something being a gift move it from having societal value to having inherent value? In order to explore the above questions the paper will follow a format which builds on our own assumptions. First defining the concepts of inherent value and societal value before tying them in with the ideas of gifting and transactions. Then flowing into a discussion on how this might affect humanities outlook on nature, by extension women's bodies, and then ultimately each-other. The idea of a gift is extremely powerful, it is by and large seen as a positive expression but, when used ideologically in a certain fashion it can be used to take things for granted, and justify the exploitation of a relationship that may not have the attributes of a gift but, are more easily explained away through the logic of gifting as to not have to pay the bill.
By Arjuna Fournier2 years ago in Education
Forms of Democracy and Bitcoin
Bitcoin has now been around for more than a decade and yet policy lags far behind. At first it was a gimmick. Even when it was worth a couple of thousand, the scoffs from the financial world were palpable. Regardless the social/economic experiment which is bitcoin has recently gained unprecedented ground. The point of mass adoption has been passed. Virtually every country on earth has the presence and is influenced by the Bitcoin market. By its very nature Bitcoin is a decentralized asset which lends to a global market. Anyone can get a Bitcoin wallet, which comes with a wallet address allowing one to, so to speak be off to the races. Anyone anywhere can send Bitcoins to a Bitcoin wallet address and on the flip side anyone can send from their wallet to another without any third party/ bank or financial institution. So far policy around digital assets like Bitcoin have been non-existent but, the more the value and use of Bitcoin expands the louder the grumbles from government institutions become. As always Uncle Sam wants a piece of the pie. The question is how big of a piece and how is it going to be cut? Does the type of democracy motivate different policy stances toward Bitcoin? More specifically will a majoritarian democracy seek to tax Bitcoin gains at a lower rate than a Proportional Representative democracy?
By Arjuna Fournier2 years ago in The Chain