America claims liberal democracy its label, with the American dream, and the electoral fallacy idealized in American society. However, I then debunk the two fallacies: The electoral fallacy which promises democratic free choice through elections, and the fallacy of the American Dream which promises merit-based economic and social climbing within capitalism. These fallacies miss the reality that democracy requires meaningful and impactful exercise of such freedoms, and how the context of capitalism has constrained and seeks to limit this. I argue that the understanding of liberal democracy as simply the exercise of elections deemphasizes the other rights required by a liberal democracy. The negation of the meaningfulness of liberties and free choice, which is promised within a liberal democratic system leaves them open to constraints and lacking protection. I also argue that the installation of capitalism without enough regulation creates ripple effects of the wealth gap so that the power of wealth contaminates the American political system and corrupts how liberal democracy operates in America. More specifically, I present three capitalist-affected realms related to the intersection of liberal democracy and capitalism. First, I argue that capitalism widens the wealth gap and corrupts liberal democracy; elected officials need capitalists' funds to campaign and stay in power. The political freedom to vote and impact policy is limited because wealthy citizens and corporations have more influence than ordinary citizens. Second, I argue that, in the new realm of the internet, capitalists use social media and commodify personal information in order to exploit consumer demand and influence opinions about the capitalist system. Thirdly, I argue that the elite use the media as a tool of social influence for their wide reach of audience and oligopolized structure. They buy these companies to socially manipulate the opinions and behavior of consumers and advance capitalist profits, using it as a cathartic release for the public's grievances. I end with a third section, in which I propose tangible steps to restore the values of liberal democracy in America and better protect the proletariat masses and their interests. For the political concerns, I propose replacing the first-past-the-post voting system with ranked choice voting system in order to elect a representative with the greatest overall support to better represent their population of voters. I also propose greater restrictions on the amount and anonymity of campaign donations, which has been proven to lessen the power of the wealthy on the political system. Then, in order to combat the control of economic decisions by large corporations, I propose we take inspiration from the European Union’s restrictions on the collection/use of personal information: General Data Protection Regulation, Privacy Shield, and the Right to Delisting. Lastly, I advocate for larger, intangible changes to curb the overextension of capitalism’s effects and the subversion of democracy, like education that exposes the veil of American Capitalist Democracy, promotion of a level of responsibility by the privileged, and a shift of values away from profit and control/power to liberal democratic equality.

In this project, I aim to provide a comprehensive account of the acceptability and utilization of capital punishment through the lens of retributivist and consequentialist ethical theory. After determining the moral justification for the use of the death penalty, I conclude that there is not enough theoretical ground to claim that capital punishment is ethical or morally justifiable on the basis of theory alone. It is necessary to account for the practical, empirical evidence when making policy decisions, rather than basing them on theory alone. I propose various alternative methods of reaching collective unity and establishing justice in the form of restoration and rehabilitation.

Since the global financial crisis of 2007-8, interest in worker-cooperatives and alternative forms of organization has surged. Mondragon, located in the Basque region of Spain, represents the largest federation of worker-cooperatives around the world, consisting of 98 cooperatives and 143 subsidiaries, which earned a total revenue of $14.5 billion in 2019. While previous attempts to establish a similar model have historically reached limited success, Mondragon has achieved a unique balance of remaining economically viable, on the one hand, and staying true to its founding principles of democratic governance, on the other. This paper sets out to analyze the democratic structure and the cooperative culture at the heart of the Mondragon model, as well as the new type of human relationship that it fosters. In particular, this relationship is one in which individual well-being is bound up with communal well-being that avoids the antagonistic clash between the capital and labor.

Inspired by John Rawls and his life's work Justice as Fairness, I sought to measure how much political empathy a person has and then compare this to decision-making styles in search of any relation between the two. Political empathy is a term to refer to one's willingness to utilize governmental policy to help those who are the neediest because of the understanding that humans deserve equal treatment since no one is more human than anyone else. Because of current research I found that I can test political empathy because of empathy’s correlation with political ideology; specifically, that those who are more liberal have more empathy. I test participant’s ideology in a normal setting and then present them with the concept of Rawls’ Original Position to see if they shift more one way when presented with this idea which is supposed to make them think more empathetically.<br/>I have two hypothesis that I cover: first, that more people will shift in a more liberal direction between the two tests, and second, that those who have more political empathy make political decisions based more on emotion rather than facts and reason. I tested decision-making through a myriad of tests within a focus group so I could get multiple angles at the issue. My first hypothesis was proven incorrect and while I didn’t have enough participants in my focus groups to make a clear determination, it didn’t look like there was any correlation between political ideology and decision-making styles.

This thesis is about how Liberian activists were able to help Liberian immigrants under Temporary Protected Status and Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) to convince President Trump to extend DED policy. They also lobbied members of Congress to pass the Liberian Relief Immigration Fairness Act, which granted permanent legal status to TPS and DED recipients. My research questions were: How did advocacy groups influence politicians? How did the media cover the narrative that advocacy groups crafted? How was the battle to get an effective resolution accomplished? I interviewed advocacy groups and a congressional staffer and analyzed various primary and secondary sources in order to gain historical context. This case study will provide the reader deeper understanding about the complexity of the broken immigration system in the United States that has been ongoing for many years. I will also discuss the Constitutional debate on prosecutorial discretion that continues to raise the alarm on many issues that complicate the process. Additionally, this study will benefit other countries hoping to solve their immigration crisis and more importantly, it will bring awareness to the general public in the United States and help hold elected officials accountable when discussing the betterment of immigration issues. I found that Liberian activists, TPS and DED recipients were very influential in getting favorable legislation passed.

This paper is an in-depth analysis of the actions and rhetoric of Donald Trump’s presidency from the perspective of Machiavelli’s most famed work, 'The Prince'. Its premise is born from two articles claiming Donald Trump was either the American Machiavelli or the Anti-Machiavelli, and sets out to find out which title is the most accurate. The end findings suggest that President Trump did not follow enough rules in 'The Prince' to be Machiavellian, but that Trumpism as a political doctrine has the potential grow into a modern day Machiavellianism.