Imagined communities refers to the idea that people who consider themselves to be members of a certain group believe that a country is an imagined or socially built community. Languages or power were developed as a result of print capitalism that were distinct from the prior administrative vernaculars. While other languages lost their significance, the dialects that appeared to be closest to each of the print languages became dominant. According to Anderson (10), modernity gave rise to the imagined community, but nations came into existence as a result of secularization and print capitalism. Because members never actually meet, but always have an idea of their community, Anderson claims that a nation is an imagined political community. The nation is imagined as limited since every nation has a boundary regardless of its size and every activity must be convinced within the boundaries. It is also imagined as sovereign due to modernization that helped to get rid of monastic leadership. The nation also creates a sense of solidarity despite the sense of inequality and injustices that are experienced. The nation can be viewed as a cultural artefact while nationalism is a modern principle such that there is congruency between the national and political unit. Relying on printed materials especially the popularity of the newspapers, which reported the provincial and world news led discover of existence of other groups. When people read about events occurring locally and around the world, they developed some consciousness about the existence of other nations creating a sense of “our” and “their” nation. The print languages created national consciousness in ways such as creating united fields of exchange and communication, which enhanced understanding of one another in conversations via print media (Anderson 40). This way, people started becoming aware of existence of thousands of groups living on different parts of the world.
Oil and democracy
Countries that drill and export oil are known to experience problems in ensuring democracy due to the political problems that exist in such nations. For instance, countries such as Arabia that record high incomes from oil exports experience unstable governance (Timothy 400). Although there is little research on the relationship that exist between oil an democracy, it is right to argue that oil impedes democracy considering the challenges oil-producing nations such as Latin America, Southeast Asia, and Sub-Saharan-Africa. The link between oil revenue and democracy exist since leaders become quite authoritative, which can be explained by mechanisms such as rentier effect, repression effect, and modernization effect.
According to rentier effect, governments utilize the revenues derived from sale of oil to achieve less pressure that lead to greater accountability (Timothy 400). In this case, governments do not assume their responsibility since citizens do not push them in any way. For instance, the government may tax citizens less heavily since it gets enough revenues from selling oil the public does not see the need to demand accountability from the government, which impedes democracy. Again, the government earns oil revenues and use it to prevent formation of social groups that are independent for the state thus there is no one to man political rights. The repression effect suggests that governments in countries rich in resources such as oil spend a lot of money on internal security hence blocking the aspirations of the people towards achievement of democracy (Timothy 401). For instance, in the Middle East democracy cannot be achieved since the leaders prefer mukhabarat or national security of the state. The modernization effect argues that democracy can be influenced by social, political, and economic changes. As a result, the public is demobilized and cannot focus on issues touching on democracy.
The Trump’s budget proposal reflects the power of corporate America since it does not seem to confront problems, which individuals may not resolve effectively such as those related to social issues. His budget tries to tear apart the social safety while it distributes resources to the very rich class. Therefore, it benefits the corporate businesses while the low income earners continue struggling for survival. This means that Trump and the Republicans are interested in promoting the wealthy individuals while transferring resources away from the poor, children, the senior citizens, the nonwhites, women, immigrants, and the sick. Corporations and the wealthiest Americans that form about 0.1 percent of the entire population benefit more from the proposed budget.
According to (Woll 374) structural power points at the how business influences on the society and government by withdrawing investments reducing the levels of funding, employment, and production, which affect the growth of the economy. If Trump continues to protect wealthy businesses, America is likely to fall into a financial crisis since private businesspersons will control every sector. Politics is associated with affluent and influent groups with the first being very powerful and taking control of the nation (De Leon, Cedric, Desai and Tugal 4). Parties are likely to show social divisions in the electorate thus politics is just an extension of the careers for the politicians. Leaders focus on oligarchy, which tends to serve their desires as well as enhance power for the state. Any country that claims to practice healthy democracy will always try to nurture and protect the common people, public lands, spaces, resources, and roads among others. According to Orloff (303), state social welfare has great impact on the gender relationships, political conflicts, as well as participation. A budget that ignores the society and their needs only focuses on a few privileged individuals in the society. The budget reveals Trump’s plutocratic, fascist, and an authoritarian value since it gives corporations more power, fails to support public education, and funds the construction of the wall on the US-Mexico border. Repealing of the Affordable Healthcare Act and ending the estate tax is an action that will only benefit Trump, his family, political allies, and businesses and not the common Americans. According to Quadango (25), the US is the only industrialized western nation that does not offer universal healthcare coverage leaving it under the for-profit organizations and private insurance companies. Trump is worsening the matter since his budget ignores the availability of quality and affordable healthcare in America.
Trump seems to have great trust for the private sector while ignoring the low-income earners and their daily issues. The 2018 proposed budget may face disapproval by the democrats due to its focus on issues that benefit the wealthy class and slashing on areas that require adequate intervention. Although he promised to make America great again the budget tends to disapprove it since he seems to ignore areas that need great attention. I therefore agree with Courtney’s argument that Trump’s budget proposal reflects the power of corporate America. I believe America should take care of all citizens regardless of their social status, ethnicity, and income and ensure they all can have access to basic needs and services.
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Verso Books, 2006.
De Leon, Cedric, Manali Desai, and Cihan Tugal. Introduction Political Articulation. The Structured Creativity of Parties.3-35.
Orloff, Ann Shola. “Gender and the Social Rights of Citizenship: The Comparative Analysis of Gender Relations and Welfare States.” American sociological review (1993): 303-328.
Quadagno, Jill. “Why the United States has No National Health Insurance: Stakeholder Mobilization Against the Welfare State, 1945-1996.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior (2004): 25-44.
Timothy Mitchell. Carbon Democracy, Economy, and Society. 2009. 38:3, 399-432, DOI: 10.1080/03085140903020598
Woll, Cornelia. Politics in the Interest of Capital: A Not-So-Organized Combat. No. 15/2. MaxPo Discussion Paper, 2015.