Digital Commons Network^™

The Truth About Partisan Affiliation: Fear, Trust, And Media, Hailey Merin

Student Scholar Symposium Abstracts and Posters

As the father of Western logic, Aristotle's research of the scientific method of analysis, biology, and psychology has been adopted by present-day America. If America has openly accepted an array of Aristotle's teachings, why have they ignored his observations that political parties are non-Democratic?

This research explores the relationship between political party affiliation, sentiment toward the government, and media influence on fear of corrupt government officials. Firstly, this paper examines the idea that sentiments toward the government are influenced by partisan affiliation. Secondly, it determines that after the 2020 election, Republicans fear corrupt government officials more than any other major …

Sovereignty, Statehood, And Subjugation: Native Hawaiian And Japanese American Discourse Over Hawaiian Statehood, Nicole Saito

Student Scholar Symposium Abstracts and Posters

Although discourse over Hawaiian statehood has increasingly been described by scholars as a racial conflict between Japanese Americans and Native Hawaiians, there existed a broad spectrum of interactions between the two groups. Both communities were forced to confront the prejudices they had against each other while recognizing their shared experiences with discrimination, creating a paradoxical political culture of competition and solidarity up until the conclusion of World War Two. From 1946 to 1950, however, the country’s collective understanding of Japanese American citizenship began to shift with recognition of the community’s military service record and an increased proportion of veterans elected …

Political Theory In Institutional Context: The Case Of Patriot Royalism, John Compton, Karen Orren

Political Science Faculty Articles and Research

In the aftermath of the Stamp Act, prominent American thinkers of otherwise unquestioned Whiggish affiliation adopted an expansive view of the king’s prerogative powers while simultaneously denying Parliament’s authority to interfere in the internal governance of the colonies. Scholars have generally attributed this stance, known as “patriot royalism,” to political necessity: with no other means of disputing Parliament’s oppressive actions, desperate pamphleteers sought to revive the discredited constitutional ideas of the Stuarts. In contrast, we argue that this position was deeply rooted in the institutional context of colonial governance. More specifically, we show that revolutionary Americans directly experienced lawmaking by …