Although it initially seemed like a difficult task, the simulation was an interesting process that was quite simple and even fun. It seemed difficult at first because of the amount of information given. It was a bit overwhelming given statistics, background, and so forth. This led me to re-reading and re-analyzing everything twice to fully understand this member whose role I was taking. I found it also difficult to not base decisions off of my own opinions in the choices given to me. In other words, I couldn’t go off of my instinct like I usually would do in a situation. I had to overcome this barrier, and I did this by constantly reminding myself that I was someone else; especially after receiving a bad ranking for the first question! I was determined to get the next questions correct for the reason that I knew that it would help guide me in the other questions. I began to focus on being that other candidate, and not my own opinionated self. After I finally achieved this task, I had a better understanding of the political simulation as a whole, and the scenarios at hand made more sense. It was then that the questions became easier for me to answer and more exciting to do. All in all, the simulation was a fun and easy way of learning about a sector in a political process.

In Small Country, the civil liberties I would choose to keep would be: freedom of speech and press, right to assemble peaceably and petition the government for redress of grievances, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, right to a speedy and public trial by jury, and right to due process of law. Freedom of speech and press will be a good civil liberty to have because the conquerors will not have control over such an important value. Since Small Country was taken over, the writ of habeas corpus will be important for those held prisoner. The right to assemble peaceably and petition the government for redress of grievances is a good civil liberty to keep because the people have the freedom to peacefully petition for what the government has done. I feel like this will be important with the possible new form of government the aliens may have: possibly dictatorship, monarchy, oligarchy, authoritarianism, communism, etc. The freedom from unreasonable search and seizure will keep the government from invading and assuming they can search without a reason or warrant. Right to a speedy trial and public trial by jury and right to due process I feel are the most important because no matter what you cannot be convicted of any crime without going through a trial and going through the processes the Constitution grants: protection for the accused and protection from arbitrary government action.

I chose to give up freedom of religion because I feel that in a society that was taken over the other liberties would be more important. I do think that freedom of religion is important, but in this particular instance I would give up this freedom and just pretend to believe in the aliens' religion. I gave up the right to bear arms since if Small Country was taken over and weapons did not help us not to get conquered because they are stronger than us, then arms won't help us. Now giving up this liberty could affect the future in the case of a revolt. Since people would not be allowed to bear arms it would not end well. The right to be confronted by the witnesses, be informed of the nature of accusations and compel witnesses to testify was given up because the right to a speedy and public trial by jury was kept. If the trial is public enough and there was a witness, they would still most likely be called on to testify, even though they can refuse. It was hard to give up the right to reasonable bail, the assistance of an attorney and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment because these are very good liberties. They give people the right to an attorney even if they cannot afford one and the right to get out on bail, and protect them from the abuse of power in the justice system. Giving up these freedoms could also be a problem in the future. Especially if the aliens do use cruel and unusual punishments there will be no rights to protect the people.

In about twenty years I see Small Country facing many troubles. The aliens adopted a monarchy form of government, with a king. The people speak out against the government but are ignored because of the monarchy. The people wish that they could get out on bail, have the right to an attorney, and were free from cruel and unusual punishment but unfortunately the government abuses these powers especially with the poor and criminals. Since they do not have some rights they are also exposed to the cruel and unusual punishments of the aliens. Politics are controlled by one party since the aliens do not allow more than one. The people of Small Country unfortunately struggle to maintain what rights they have left in their new society.

Is most power in America used legitimately and only by those granted authority by the people? Maybe said in other ways, but this question is more often asked than not. Everyone wants to know who is in charge of whom, why they are in charge, how they got in charge, and so on. For the most part people would think that the ones who can be in charge of them are those who are CEO’s of a business, a boss at their job, or a leader of some sort. It all depends on who is designated as the leader of that particular situation. Not only the situation but who has the power also depends on the point-of-view of each person.

With so many different views on what is truly a legitimate use of power, is there a really a way to determine who has it and who thinks they have it. What makes someone different from anyone else that they have the power to tell others what to do? The fact that the people themselves have given someone else the authority gives that person the power legitimately. Someone can say they have the right but if the people say otherwise, the authority they think they have to power is illegitimate. The examples of who has the power overall would be characterized in the sense of authority. In one way or another right was given to them, so they have the use of power legitimately.

Who has the power and how was it given to them? An example of someone who has power would of course be the president. He has the right to the use power because we the people elected him into office and gave him the authority. In this situation the president could be considered as practicing macro-politics. Not everyone agrees with his decisions but he has the right to do what he does. Some more people with authority would be the cops. I paid more attention over my two days of journal entries at the fact that the cops on school campus use their power in any way they can. I have seen more tickets been given out just by the cop walking around the parking lot then a student getting pulled over for speeding. It is stated in the school handbook that we as student are supposed to have a parking decal and if we don’t we will get ticketed. That alone gives the cop the power to write a ticket if they see a car without a decal. Most students don’t take the campus cops seriously but they can’t forget that they still have the right and power to do what they do.

Others who may not always be considered as people who have the right to power would be parents and teachers. Teachers were given the authority when they got their teaching degree, and parents, I guess you can say that would be an unspoken authority. They are dealing with children and students on a daily basis, so the power that they have would be considered micro-politics. A parent has the power to tell his or her child what to do and how they would like it to be done. Not all parents take advantage of  this power and think that it would nicer to just get along with their children, but they still have the power. Teachers and administration have the power while students are at school. Certain rules and consequences are set forth in the school so that no disruptions are taking place and everyone is there doing what they need to do, getting an education. If a student doesn’t follow the directions at school the administration has the power to take the appropriate actions to teach the student a lesson.

The question still remains, is most power in America being used legitimately and by those with the authority? I believe so, power is being used by everyone in any way, whether it is as small as a parent grounding their child or as big as the president declaring war. The power is being used and in a legitimate way. Although the person with the power may differ, as long as the people have given the authority the, power is being used legitimately. Someone giving another the authority can range anywhere from a dean of a college giving the student’s their degrees to the owner of a corporation hiring someone as the manager of the business. This all just goes back to the point-of-view of any one person.

Power struggles occur in daily life in every culture: a battle in Congress over healthcare, a fight between a mother and her teenage son, and two cops vying for the same promotion. In politics, power is legitimately given by the people through voting. With the balance of power in the three branches of government, votes are needed to gain majority rule. Earlier in his life, a son would obediently listen to his mother; however, as he aged, he yearned for more freedom, responsibility and power. Nature has run its course as the son wins over his mother and is allowed to do as he pleases. A power struggle between two police officers wanting the same promotion can cause tension and competition between them. By nature, individuals strive for power to use to gain a higher status. Power is have the ability and aptitude to influence others in order to further a purpose. However, how this power is used is either legitimate or illegitimate.

To understand power in politics and power relations, we must know how it works. Democracy in America gives its citizens the power to influence, like interest groups, but protects its citizens from physical power. Power in politics does not lie in the hands of the leader. Instead, the power is shared and balanced. Without this type of structure, democracy would not exist, and without democracy, the control of the government would not grant authority to the people. The people are who control the government, because they are the majority and the foundation. In a visual mind, the shape of a pentagon can help explain the role of power in politics. A pentagon has five points and five sides. The very base (one side and two points) of the pentagon represents the people, for they are the foundation and influencers of politics in government. From the foundation, a government is able to form and build upon its foundation. The people (foundation) elect officials which represent the parallel walls of the pentagon. These officials use the authority granted to them by the people to secure the structure of the government, just like the walls secure the shape of the pentagon. The officials who represent these parallel walls, and the foundation of the people then work together to form a point, which is usually the leader or the president. With this shape, we can now understand how power relations work, as each point and each side or wall of the shape can depend upon each other. It’s funny how in America one of our government buildings is called ‘The Pentagon’.

In macro politics, power relations heavily depend on each other. Every day we rely on our elected officials to use their votes to voice our opinions, known as majority rule. However, sometimes an official may go against their beliefs and morals in order to win majority rule. Usually, an official will vote for or support an interest when it is in the best interest of the general public. Let’s look at the healthcare bill, for example. When campaigning for presidency, Barack Obama made it known that he wanted to see ‘change’ in America. Part of his vision of change was the reformation of healthcare. When he was elected president, his big idea was to pass his healthcare bill. Let’s look into this bill in the form of power. The power to pass this bill does not lie solely in one person, or Obama. In fact, the power to put Obama’s idea of change into action lies in the hands of many people. For his bill to even be considered, he must have supports such as his vice president, the speaker of the house, and of course the votes, which plays a heavy factor. This type of power and the relations of power in this case are legitimate. The people, who were given the original power to vote, voted in officials who voted in this healthcare bill. However, if within the bill were policies made to benefit only some and not everyone, then that would be illegitimate. Policies, bills, laws must be made to suit the best of the general public, and power should not cause illegitimate benefits.

In micro politics, power relations rely on the individuals who set the power. Let’s look at the power of a family. In the simplest form, a family is a government. Depending on what type of family it is, the mother and/or father, or guardians will set the power in the household. As noted earlier, power can often shift. There are a number of reasons why power may shift but one cause is through development and change. Let’s take into consideration a police officer giving a driver a ticket for speeding. The legitimate power lies in the police officer who has the authority to give a speeding driver a ticket. To be very clear, the speed limit was documented at sixty miles per hour, but the unaware driver was going seventy miles per hour. Speed limits are set for a reason and should be obeyed, as all road signs should be obeyed. The police officer has legitimate authority to ticket the speeding driver for not following the speed limit. Legitimate authority is what is accepted as just by the ruler and the ruled. The speeding driver understands the consequences but decides to shift the power. The speeding driver then bribes the police officer into believing that a tree was blocking the speed limit sign and convinces the officer to let them go with a warning. This type of situation is an example of illegitimate power, and as a result, the power has thus shifted.

To answer the question, is most power in America used legitimately and only by those granted authority by the people? -- I am going to have to agree but also disagree. Yes, we the people set the legitimacy of the power given to those granted authority, but often we see illegitimate power to gain benefits or shift the power. Elected officials and leaders are trusted by their voters to put the people’s voice into action, which, in fact, they do. However, there are individuals who think they can get past the system and can take advantage of any situation to gain power. However, with the research I have found, those granted authority are from the people. So really, it is the people who have the authority. People just like me are who really run this country and have the power, so why are illegitimate powers being used when we have to power to oversee it? As a voter and a participating citizen in politics, I feel that the research in this area shows that the people or the voters need to be more aware of legitimate and illegitimate powers.