English social studies

The first election debate

2010-04-15T07:31:00.000-07:00

Today, the first election debate will be broadcast by ITV, from the north-west of England. The moderator will be ITV newsreader Alastair Stewart and the selected topic will be domestic policies.

Watch the debate online at itv.com, or at the ITV1 YouTube channel. It all starts at 08:30 pm.

For more information check out this page.

Voting on Health Care

2010-03-21T10:20:00.000-07:00

The House is voting on the much anticipated health care reform bill. Watch it now!:

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?on.cnn=2&stream=stream2

TV Debates

2010-03-10T06:41:00.001-08:00

In Great Britain, almost every household owns a TV. The TV is therefore a suitable medium to broadcast the debates in the upcoming election. However, a prime minister In Great Britain have never been in a live TV debate, and debated against the two main opposition parties. There is therefore a moment in political history when the prime minister and leader of the Labor party Gordon Brown, have agreed to take part in a TV Debate against the leader of the Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg, and the leader of the Conservative Party David Cameron.

During this historical event the politicians get an opportunity to express their view on politics in front of millions of viewers. The party leaders are also taking a huge risk when they participate in the debate. They may increase their support after the debate, but they may also lose votes if they deliver bad figure during the debate. It is therefore substantial for the political parties, that their leader delivers a good performance during the debates.

In order to make the debate as fair as possible the political parties have together with the TV companies BBC, ITV and Sky news (who will podcast the debates) agreed on 76 strict rules for the debate. The audience will not be allowed to respond to leaders' answers and applause will be restricted to the beginning and end of the debates. Every debate will be 90 minutes long. The debates will start to debate a selected topic, and then the studio audiences will be able to ask direct questions on any subject, with viewers doing the same via e-mail.

The first debate will be broadcast by ITV from the north-west of England. The moderator will be ITV newsreader Alastair Stewart and the selected topic will be domestic policies. The second debate will focus on global issues. The moderator will be Sky's political editor Adam Boulton and the debate will take place in south-west England. The third debate will be hosted by David Dimbleby and the BBC in the Midlands. The theme will be economy.

In contrast to Great Britain, there have been arranged TV debates between presidential candidates in the United States for decades. That also includes debates between the sitting president and new candidates. The first general presidential debate was arranged as early as in 1960. Since then there have been many arranged many more, and some of them have been described as crucial for the outcome of the presidential election. In 1980, the sitting president Jimmy Carter had a narrow lead over Ronald Reagan in a race considered "too close to call." However, Reagan, with years of experience in front of a camera as an actor, came across better than Carter and was judged by voters to have won the debate by a wide margin. Because this particular event, the election went from being a close race, to become a landslide victory for Regan. You can see the full video from the debate here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8YxFc_1b_0)Do you find Regan upbeat and positive? Does Carter seem comfortable, how often does he smile?

Remember, because of one debate, the politics in the worlds most powerful country was pushed in an entirely different direction. If the candidate’s wants to have only one good day at work, then they should have it one the day of the TV debate.

P.S, Jimmy carter was a very experienced politician. From 1966 to 1970 when he promoted his candidature for the governor position in Georgia he held over 1 800 speeches (!) And when he debated against Regan in 1980, he had been president for tree years. Had carter only a bad day when he debated against Regan, ore was he a bad speaker? Take a look at his “Crisis of Confidence" Speech and decide for your self.

UK Politics- Question time in the parliament Wednesday 24 February

2010-03-10T05:50:00.000-08:00

Mathias åker Solstad and I worked together at school today. He wrote this article about Question time in the parliament on Wednesday the 24 of February. I did the next article, which you can read over. Click here too watch the Question time and click here if you want to read more about what Question time is. To see the debate between Gordon Brown and David Cameron wind on to 28 minutes.

Question time is a happening at the parliament where the members of the parliament ask questions of Ministers of Government. This also includes the Prime Minister, and the little tweak is that the Ministers are obligated to answer. The actual time differs from day to day, but it is always for an hour. The Prime Minister answers questions in the Commons every Wednesday.

Gordon Brown appeared as a very eccentric man, as he frequently gesticulates to add to his arguments. He did it in a very controlled way however, and he did show a great sense of humor. That really added to his argumentation, and I also have to say that I was really surprised by how informal they are inside the Commons. It also seemed like he was on the defensive end rather than attacking people, and he backed up his arguments by telling the MPs statistics.

All the questions did get answered, but I don't think they were all answered properly. A thing we often saw was that the MPs and Ministers just tried to push the question in another direction, or just to try to change the topic.

David Cameron seemed rather un-prepared, as he frequently focused on personal attacks rather than making a statement based on the politics of his party. To me it feels dumb to try to trample on the Prime Minister when the next election is "right around the corner."

The debate in itself was rather heated, but it really depended on the topics under discussion. The reason for that is that there are bigger differences between the parties on different topics, which means that there will be more heated debates when discussing for example the wages of the Scottish MPs. Also, I would like to add that The Speaker did a great job at interrupting the MPs when things got out of control,

I think the election will end in favor of the Conservatives, as both Tony Blair and Gordon Brown has been failures, so I think that the British people wants to see a change in government.

Another tragedy in Afghanistan

2010-01-26T01:37:00.001-08:00

Unfortunately, my Senior Project topic has become more relevant because of the recent death of a young boy from Norway.

The Norwegian soldier Claes Joachim Olsson (22) was the driver on board in a CV9030. A CV9030 is a light tank, which is faster than a normal tank, but with less armor. Olsson was killed yesterday when his tank ran over a road bomb. Luckily, the two other soldiers who also were in the same tank survived with only light injuries. Earlier, there has been a debate about whether Norway should or shouldn’t use armored tanks in these areas. Probably, the two other soldiers would not have survived if the vehicle wasn’t a tank.

Olsson is the fifth Norwegian soldier who has died during service in Afghanistan. He was popular among his fellow soldiers. Olsson was devoted to his duty and a good human being and soldier. Read more about the sad story here .

Nutcases and psychopaths, ore real Americans?

2010-01-25T17:55:00.001-08:00

In 2008 during the presidential election journalist and documentary filmmaker Alexandra Pelosi made a HBO documentary called Right America: Felling wronged -- Some Voices From the Campaign Trail. In the documentary Pelosi follows the John McCain campaign and interviews mostly conservatives who didn’t wanted to have Barack Obama as there president. Many of the statements in the documentary are hateful and racist. The documentary shows how ignorance and religion can encourage these hateful and racist statements.

For instance There is a young guy who carries a T-shirt where he have written “No to Socilism," When Pelosi tells him he's misspelled socialism and asks him to define it, the boy says "basically, it's like the views of Hitler. It's between like communism and -- I don't know what the other word is."

There is one clip from a church where the priest takes a political stand, and encourages the congregation to vote for the Republican Party.

If you are interest in religions role in American check out this the documentary also made by HBO and Pelosi.

After watching both documentaries I think that Pelosi has a very peculiar way to make documentaries. She almost only films short interviews with people, where they come with some short statements. Pelosi does not take us viewers too these peoples’ homes, or show us why these people think what they think. I find Pelosi’s documentaries quite superficial and I wish that she had gone more “in depth” during her work with the documentary.

However Pelosi raises many interesting issues, and she manages too show us the fact that America is a diverse country with many different citizens. And let us not forget, there are over 50 million people in America who don’t want Obama as their president. Some of them are right-wing extremists, who have meanings that are hateful and racist. An issue that I find quite scary is those right-wing extremists get more and more support here in Europe. There have never been as many right-wing extremist in the European Parliament as now. And the same politicians get more and more support in countries all over Europe.

By the way, Alexandra Pelosi is Nancy Pelosi’s daughter. Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives.

Senior project - Afghanistan

2010-01-25T08:56:00.001-08:00

This semester the whole class will write a senior project. All students are free to choose any topic from English Social studies. I have always had an interest for security and development policy.

My topic is therefore as following:

Analyse one regional ore international conflict, where one ore more English speaking country are involved.

The conflict I have chosen to analyse is a both a regional and an international conflict. The conflict is located in Afghanistan, but over 40 different countries participate in a global initiative to create stability and security in the region. This is done through the International Security Force (ISAF). ISAF was created after a request from the Security Council. ISAF is now lead by NATO, but FN is still strongly involved in the region, to improve the conditions for the Afghanistan population and create development in the country.

Over the last years FN and ISAF have been strongly criticized for their work in Afghanistan. Here in Norway one of the governing parties, SV, even wants to withdraw the Norwegian troops from the region.

My allegation to my senior project is as following:

After FN and ISAF’s work in Afghanistan, the living conditions for the Afghan people are now worse.

I will probably make my allegation more specific during my work. A part of the task during the senior project is also to evaluate the working process. I will therefore create more post later on in the working process, so stay tuned!

Elections in Britain - is it fair?

2009-12-01T10:49:00.001-08:00

Elections in Britain - is it fair?
After the 2005 election this was the result:
Party
UK share of vote
Share of seats in the House of Commons
Labour
35.3%
55%
Conservative
32.3%
30.7%
Liberal Democrats
22.1%
9.6%
T
The Labour party only got 35,3% of the total votes in the UK. This means that 64,7% of the voters didn’t vote for the Labour party and still they got majority rule in the House of Commons. This is possible in Great Britain because the voters elect one representative from their constituencies. The representative represent his ore here constituencies in The house of commons. The house of commons is almost like the Norwegian Stortinge. They are both their countries budgetary and legislative assembly.

The elected representatives are called Members of Parliament (MPs). When the constituencies elect there Mp the winner takes it all. The votes which the losing parties may get are turn down. That’s why it is possible for parties in Great Britain to get many votes and still get little influence in The House of Commons. Because of the huge difference between the parties’ votes in the national scale and their influence in the House of Commons some people think that Great Britain is undemocratic.

A way to make Great Britain more democratic can be to induce direct democracy. Another solution can be to exchange the voting system with constituencies to one national voting system. However, then it is more likely that the power would be divided onto more parties and it is also likely that parties would be forced to form a coalition government. It is harder for a coalition government to form a clear policy.

The American goverment - A lecture by Lee Ann Potter

2009-12-01T10:20:00.001-08:00

Today Lee Ann Potter visited our class and had a lecture about how the government in America is build up. Lee Ann potter is a director of education and volunteer programs at the U.S. National Archives in Washington, DC. Thanks to the Fulbright Commission Potter is working in Norway this year as a Roving Scholar of American Studies. Click here to see here blog. This is my summary of Potters lecture:

The American form of government was written down in a Constitution which was adopted in 1787. The American Constitution is the oldest Constitution still in use and it has only been emended 17 times. The Constitution establishes some main points. They are as follow. The united states of America have a representative democracy to make sure that the powers are in the hands of the people. Every states have only given certain specific powers to a central government. This is known as Federal System ore Federalism. The power in the central government ore the federal government have been divided in three. All the branches keeps track of the other two so none of them grow to powerful ore abuse there power. This system is known as the Seperation of powers. The term Separation of powers is known as Maktfordelingsprinsippet in Norway and was inspired by the French philosopher Charles-Louis Montesquieu (1680 - 1755). Montesquieu’s theory about the Separation of powers was not only a inspiration in the making of the American Constitution , but also in the making of the Norwegian Constitution in 1814. Today, all the modern democratic societies have divided there power in different branches. In America the congress is the legislative power, the president is the executive power and the Supreme Court is judicial power.

2009-10-20T02:05:00.001-07:00

The 2009 Nobel peace prize goes to President Barack Obama. "For his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples". Together with the prize president Barack Obama will also be given 10 million Swedish Kronor. The Nobel Peace committee decision to give the 2009 Nobel Peace prize to Obama have been loudly criticizes. One of the main arguments given by those who criticize, are Obama's lack of concrete results in the causes he has focused on. I believe that President Obama should give the Nobel peace prize award money to an international charity organization. The organization should work with a subject were it is easy for people to see concrete results. When President Barack Obama is visiting Norway to collect the Nobel Peace prize he should also visit Sandvika High School. By visiting one of Norway's most modern High schools the president would show his support to the children who once will inherit the earth after his generation.

Does it matter

2009-09-01T04:43:00.000-07:00

Maria, Ingrid and I have read the poem «Does it matter» by Siegfried Sassoon and analyzed it:

Does it matter'
by Siegfried Sassoon
DOES it matter?--losing your legs?...
For people will always be kind,
And you need not show that you mind
When the others come in after hunting
To gobble their muffins and eggs.

Does it matter?--losing your sight?...
There's such splendid work for the blind;
And people will always be kind,
As you sit on the terrace remembering
And turning your face to the light.

Do they matter?--those dreams from the pit?...
You can drink and forget and be glad,
And people won't say that you're mad;
For they'll know you've fought for your country
And no one will worry a bit.

The poem touches three effects the war has had on the soldier; social problems, physical damage and psychical damage. "Does it matter? - loosing your legs?" That is in the first verse and it is about physical damage. The second verse covers psychological damage because he looses his sight and he can't see anything, but still he turns his face to the light and trying to be positive. The last verse is about the social problems that fighting a war can give you. You can be mad after experiencing all those horrible things you can experience in a war, but people won't mind, because you have fought a war and it is OK to be mad.

We think the soldier is a working-class man. The rest of the community doesn’t see what he has sacrificed because he did it for the country, so his damages is not that bad. It seems like it is the government saying “Does it matter?” and they don’t really see the individual but try to glorify his actions.

The poem has a newfound popularity and it might be because today we focus more on individual rights, we think it is important to see the individual as a person and not for what they sacrifice in a war. In this poem they put the country above the person which was normal to do in that time period(around 1916). We can also see this trend in the rest of the modern society with less person joining for instance political organizations today than 100 years ago. (source - "Å gjøre en forskjell" Jonas Gahr Støre)

When we started working with the poem analyze the studends in the class could choose between “Does it Matter?” and a poem called "The Soldier" by Rupert Brooke. All the studens chose "Does it Matter"

We believe that "Does it Matter" was the poem that appealed to the most of the students because we found it more direct and easier to understand than "The soldier" We believe that it's because "The soldier" is a very romantic poem and do not describe the reality of the war.

Student From Pocket Valley!

2009-09-01T03:26:00.000-07:00

Hello! I am a 18 year old student from Pocket Valley in Norway. This year I am on my last year at Sandvika high school. One of my assignments this year is to create and update a blog.

My first contribution to the blogg will be a short summary of my hometown.
As I mentioned earlier my home town is called Pocket Valley. The area looks like a small valley and perhaps a deserted place, but there are over 10 000 people living there. Pocket Valley is also close to Sandvika Storsenter, which is the biggest shopping mall in Scandinavia.
Pocket Valley has one alpine slope called Krydsby. Duri ng my childhood I spent much of my time in Krydsby as an active skier in Lommedalen IL. Below you can see a picture from Krydsby.

I am not an active skier anymore, but I have taken A, B and C courses in alpine training. The other picture is from the C course which I took in Stryn this summer.

I have trained two slalom groups for almost three years. This weekend I am taking the alpine group to a glacier called Juvass to practice. This is a picture from Juvass:

I am looking forward to ski again!

Party	UK share of vote	Share of seats in the House of Commons
Labour	35.3%	55%
Conservative	32.3%	30.7%
Liberal Democrats	22.1%	9.6%