In this documentary, democracy is viewed as something that can be taken for granted. Under the authoritarian state that the kids live in, they are unable to voice their opinions. Due to his incumbency, Lluo Lei, a strict and unforgiving leader, maintains an authoritarian state that the citizens tolerate more than they would from anyone else. The power of incumbency was shocking. Despite the harsh rule, Luo Lei still remained the class monitor even though his power and position were not taken in the right perspective.  From reading the Prince and discussing Machievelli’s point of view on government, it is clear to see that Xiaofei failed as a leader. Xiaofei would rather be loved than feared and in Machiavelli’s eyes this was a fatal flaw.

From Civil Wars to heart wrenching battles on foreign ground, from economic depressions to the huge industrial and technological boom, and now, having a political atmosphere so polar it is hard for anyone to agree, it is almost shocking that the American government has lasted as long is it has. However, it still stands a individualized but unified country. For a country built on principles purposefully excluding people if you were not white or male, you can expect there to be some major flaws with how our country runs its machine.  Our government and land have yet to collapse (though maybe teetering), but the people in our country have become very strongly separated.This gridlock of views can create a temporary peril in the nation as one side can never seem to compromise with the other. This causes the population to be entrenched in what they believe and only that. Compromise is lost, compassion is hard to find, and our country stands on a teeter-totter of collapse. One could say, yes, American democracy is doomed. However, Americans (on some level) are living here right now because they feel stable here. If the quality of their lives are still on the positive side of the scale. American democracy would truly start to fail if the people and the majority of the people rose up and revolted; if they caused complete havoc forcing it to collapse and turn to turmoil.

The process by which we define “science” can be loosely twisted and given certain connotations depending on the person deciding its meaning. In “The Dying Russians,” by Masha Geesen, Political Science is abled to be described from a point of science. Often people doubt the accuracy and legitimacy of political science being an actual science, but Masha’s examples of studies and researchers lean otherwise.
One study done by Nicholas Eberstadt was a full emersion into the findings, causes, and effects he was looking for. His intense and extensive study looking at very minuscule details shows the effectiveness of looking at political science as a science. Despite certain trail errors, it was still a very successful study. In experiments involved in the hard sciences, there are still margins of error and theories just as there are in the study of political science, proving that these studies are reliable and true. While the question of reason for why the deaths of so many Russians is still up in the air, the question of whether or not a study of political science can be defined as a “science” is answered.

In George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant,” there is a dynamic of power that is seemed to be maintained from the account of fear. The British Empire, which Orwell works for, has an authoritative power over the the Burmese. However, there rule and what they do is largely based off the people of which they govern. For example, In “Shooting an Elephant,” Orwell is largely concerned of doing what the Burmese want him to do. He does not want to shoot the elephant that seems and appears to be tame, but he knows that if he doesn’t he will seem like a coward to the people he is supposed to be in control of. And how easy is it to overthrow a coward? This anxiety hovering over him even follows him after the shooting of the elephant when he says, “I often wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool.” This fear of being seen as less allows the Burmese to have a form of power over the people that are supposed to be in total control.  If the “balance” of power is thrown off then the scales are flipped and the Burmese and the British have a situation where revolt or rebellion could occur.