Sunday, March 10, 2019
Discuss the future role of the United States in the twenty-first century
The eccentric of the United States in the 21st Century will more than likely remain the aforementioned(prenominal) role that is has been since the end of World War Two which is it retain its role of power and the epicenter of much(prenominal) of the world economy. Of course, this role could very good change or at least be altered. Case in point, when the Soviet Union detonated a successful atomic bomb and wherefore launched Sputnik into orbit the face of American society changed and the Cold War began. Similarly, the events of home 11 changed much of the foreign policy (and even domestic) policies of the United States.This, much like Sputnik, came as a surprise and without warning (granted Sputnik was non an attack, only it did increase paranoia) and it led to major changes. As much(prenominal), since the future is impossible to anticipate it would be difficult to fully say what roles the US will play. objet dart at that place will definitely be an increased an active ch arge of the United States in the Middle East, how this will be carried out is pendent on who will be writing the foreign policy decisions. If there was one area on contention worth examining it would be the US role in the world in regards to the development of China as a superpower.China as a nuclear armed economic superpower could raise levels of nervousness in countries such as Taiwan and Japan, only when what role will the USA play in Asia? Will it be active or isolationist? Again, time will tell. Regarding the difference in the midst of and old system of politics vs. a new system of politics, the policy-making system has not changed in over two hundred years. Granted, political parties and ideologies may change the political system hasnt. The nation exempt has a legislative branch, an executive branch and a supreme court.Additionally, there still remains a certain level of federalism in the United States so the political systems remain fairly the same decade to decade. Ther e unfeignedly is no fate to American res publica because it is highly unlikely the democracy will be replaced with another form of government considering that 99. 9% of the people seems to like the notion of a democracy. Changing the war paint is a turn point as the vast majority of the amendments to the opus occurred within the outset ten years of the nations birth.In fact, there has not been an amendment to the constitution in over 30 years. Considering that the means of changing or amending the constitution requires a super majority of the Congress and the Senate as well as a 2/3 majority of the states, it is next to impossible to pull in support for a single amendment much less a serial publication of radical changes to the amendment. As such, the constitution isnt going to change. Similarly, the need for the magnification of public social welfare vs. the ability to pass legislation that would expand welfare is extremely far apart from one another. Welfare can not be expanded by fiat.Also, if welfare expansion occurs there is the likely for a backlash from the electorate and this would make politicians very unlikely to advance such legislation when both parties are highly reliant on wavering states and tight election victories. Keep in mind, Bill Clinton reluctantly sign welfare reform legislation under the notion that he would recede re-election if he did not sign it. The United States is not a collectivised system and the voting public will not get screwing an expansion of welfare in light of the 15 year rollback. As such, it is best to examine a cure for poverty outside of the welfare system.