Chapter 1 Review Questions

According to Marx and Engels, “The executive of the modern State is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.” Frédéric Bastiat said, “The state is that fiction by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else.” Louis XIV said, “L’État, c’est moi.” [I am the state.] According to Max Weber, “[The state is that institution which] successfully upholds a claim to the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force in the enforcement of its order . . . within a given territorial area.” Jill Vickers said, “All state-based political systems are patriarchal—that is, in no country in the world are women equal participants in the institutions of the state or equal beneficiaries in its distribution of power or in the norms and values sanctioned in law and enforced by those institutions.”

The rules and institutions that comprise the state, and that determine how governments are chosen, are accepted by most people as being reasonable. Therefore, the legitimacy of the state is based on the consent of the governed.

The old fault lines identified in the chapter include: French–English tensions, the desire to be different than the United States, and regional differences across the country. The new fault lines identified in the chapter include climate change, social justice, human rights, environmental protection and class conflict/inequality.

Socialists point out that those preoccupied with feeding and housing themselves lack the means to participate in political affairs to the same extent as the wealthier classes. They often lack the knowledge, the time, the confidence, and the other skills necessary to participate on an equal basis. Thus, they are effectively excluded from full participation.

A political system based on the formal political equality of all citizens, in which there is a realistic possibility that voters can replace the government, and in which certain basic rights and freedoms are protected.

Answers will vary based on the examples of democratic processes present around you. Examples may include voting in student body elections, choosing to eat at the restaurant favoured by the greatest number of people in your group of friends, or phoning to vote for a reality television competition, among others.

For the most part, the traditional religious sects of Canada, Catholicism and Protestantism, no longer hold significant meaning for Canadians. An illustration of this was the move of Quebec from religion-based school boards to language-based school boards. If religion has little meaning for most citizens it will not be a significant marker of the country’s identity.

Consider the various definitions of the nation outlined in the textbook. Brooks says that most agree that a nation is a community with characteristics that distinguish it from other nations. But what are those characteristics? Racial? Sociological? Religious? Shared history? Is shared citizenship enough, as Pierre Trudeau suggests? A related and equally difficult question is this: Is each nation entitled to self-determination or self-governance?

It has produced greater polarization between rich and poor within Canada and between rich and poor countries. Also, the ability of governments to protect the underclasses and to pursue policies that are unpopular with powerful corporate interests has been diminished.

Answers will vary based on the examples of political power or power dynamics present around you. Examples listed by Brooks include Facebook’s decision-making about when and under what conditions it will share user data, and peaceful demonstrations outside of parliament, among others.

Brooks gives two main reasons. First, the NDP has not experienced a surge of support. This may not hold, given the results of the 2011 federal election. Second, there is no evidence that recent social protests reflect an awakening sense of class consciousness on the part of the general population.

Firstly, a state requires territorial boundaries or borders, outside of which it has little to no power.  Secondly, a state must have institutions with public authority, including bureaucracy, legislature, judiciary, police, Armed Forces, and public corporations, although this list is not limited to these institutions.  Lastly, a state must have what Weber calls “monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force in the enforcement of its order,” in that the state must have power, though this power can be exercised for different purposes and interests.

The state refers to the overarching set of institutions, boundaries and power structures (see question 13), while the government is the ruling leadership of the time; in democracies, the government is chosen through elections and can be change frequently based on its legitimacy.

Answers will vary based on the impacts of globalization on your everyday life. Examples may include the ability to communicate with friends living elsewhere in the world on social networking sites, or increased ease of travel to different parts of the world, for example, more frequent and less expensive flights.

You can begin by reviewing what Brooks says on power, influence, coercion, and authority. Consider then the responses of governments, particularly the Canadian government, post 9/11 including the Anti-Terrorism Act, greater empowerment of CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service), a renewed desire to foster increased relationships with countries utilizing electronic monitoring through CSEC (Communications Security Establishment Canada) and the tightening of citizenship regulations. It would be useful to contrast the situation as it is now with the situation pre-9/11 as to the relationship between citizens’ rights as protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms juxtaposed with the new reality.

You can begin by identifying the four theories—pluralism, class analysis, feminism, and postmodernism. The essence of each is as follows: pluralism—politics is about group competition, the state is an umpire and ultimately chooses the policies of those groups that are the best organized, have superior resources, etc.; class analysis—society is divided into classes, those who own the means of production and those who work for them; the state is vulnerable to business pressures and, while it does respond to other interests, it always works to protect the interests of large enterprises; feminism—the state is a patriarchal institution and works to ensure male dominance; postmodernism—the state is an oppressive structure but its targets may vary; the state upholds certain values while repressing others. Of these, you can select the one that you think is the most convincing and explain why.

You can begin by defining the main ideas surrounding each type of democracy: direct democracy involves direct involvement of citizens, often through plebiscites or referenda; representative democracy delegates authority to elected officials that represent a constituency.  Direct democracy is present in Switzerland and some towns in New England, as well as in other non-political settings such as reality television competitions like American Idol and Eurovision, where citizens can vote directly for an outcome.  Most democracies are representative democracies; thus, this is the more common type of democracy.  Examples could include, but are not limited to, Canada and the United States.  Based on the ideas you have outlined, you can debate which form of democracy you think is more compelling and support with evidence.

Civil disobedience occurs when citizens refuse to obey the laws, policies, or orders of a government because they do not accept them as legitimate. Brooks lists examples such as anti-globalization protests in Seattle, Genoa, Toronto, and Hamburg over the last two decades, as well as the Idle No More movement, which protested federal-level Indigenous policy in Canada. You may wish to include other examples of civil disobedience described by Brooks or that you otherwise know about. Using evidence from these examples to support your position, debate whether such acts are justified in a democracy; when, how, and in what form.