US immigration policies have negatively impacted Haitian migrants for decades, including, most recently, through policies like Title 42 and the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP)--also called the Remain in Mexico Program. My paper argues that laws like these and how they are enforced are problematic and unjust because they negatively impact immigrants of color, especially Black immigrants. They exemplify the extent to which racism continues to affect immigration policy. The paper also shows how Haitian refugees as a group are systematically discriminated against based on their intersecting identities of being both migrants and Black. The paper makes a contribution to the securitization theory of migration, which argues that governments increasingly frame migration as a security threat, in part to scapegoat migrants and to distract from other issues. Relying on in-depth interviews with five Haitian migrants, the paper also shows how immigrants are forced to embark on a dangerous journey through the Mexican border because existing policies have made it impossible for them to come via other ways.

The United States, like many countries in the West today, is experiencing a wave of populism. While the populist left in the United States has certainly attracted thousands through the candidacy of Bernie Sanders, the populist right, or more accurately the influence of the populist right, has grown amazingly to the point where two-thirds of self-identified Republicans want Donald Trump to retain political power. More astonishingly, forty four percent of self-identified Republicans want Trump (who will be around seventy-eight) to run for president in 2024. Right-wing populism has been dominating the American political discussion since at least 2016, though the precursors to this movement go back further. This paper will discuss the underlying causes of the recent surge in right wing populism and the intentional strategies that right wing political actors use to both gain and retain support for the populist right in the United States. The rise of right wing populism cannot be attributed to a single person, movement, or event but rather a series of (1) a number of underlying economic plights caused by policies which favor the desires of the billionaire class and corporations (to pursue maximum profit) over working class and middle class people, (2) the economic and political manipulation at the hands of bourgeois political actors (such as the Koch family), and (3) a series of intentional political strategies used by right wing political actors to inspire outrage, garner support, and manipulate the political narrative with a particular interest in undermining traditional sources of authority and promoting nativist rhetoric. Mainly, many people in the United States are unable to live basic lives because of a constraining economic system and legislation which favor imminent and permanent indebtment, disinvestment from public goods, tremendous income inequality through financialization and wage theft, and corporate interests. This inability to live comfortably has caused disillusionment with the government for most Americans and is particularly salient with white men who are feeling the heat of unfettered capitalism in ways that contradict their view of the American exceptionalist framework. This disillusionment coupled with the infiltration of right wing views in the political and cultural views by presenting new sources of legitimate discourse and authority is capitalized on by right wing political actors through scare tactics and nativist/white nationalist rhetoric in order to achieve the political, cultural, and economic power to drive their movement.

For this project, I have analyzed the passage of the Global Warming Protection Act and subsequent legislation related to its implementation. The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2008 was a groundbreaking piece of legislation at the time of its passage but has proven to be a poor mechanism for the implementation of renewable energy in the Commonwealth. Using the Punctuated Equilibrium Theoretical Framework, my research found that the policy monopoly of National Grid, Eversource and Exxon Mobil have constrained the renewable energy outcomes of the Global Warming Solutions Act. While the Global Warming Solutions Act was intended to develop and implement renewable energy projects across the Commonwealth like Cape Wind and the Northeast Energy Link, there have been no major renewable projects completed in Massachusetts. The policy monopoly has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars lobbying against any and all issues related to energy policy in Massachusetts. By analyzing these policies, this research has established how Massachusetts has failed to become a leader in renewable energy in the years since the Global Warming Solutions Act. In order to meet net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, Massachusetts must create stricter reporting requirements for the policy monopoly, focus on implementing large-scale renewable energy projects, and develop a Department of Renewable Energy with the sole purpose of ending the Commonwealth’s reliance on fossil fuels. This analysis was used to craft recommendations for future pieces of legislation that will help Massachusetts transition to complete reliance on renewable energy.

With this study, I aspire to further evaluate how alternatives to “standard English” within the majority of political process platforms, specifically taboo, explicit, profane, and obscene language, lead to fewer inhibitors when exercising political participation in the United States. This is seen through the suppression of such expressions of profane speech in contrast to the “standard English” used in political processes. An introspection into how freedom of speech is inhibited through real-world examples is illuminated. The ways in which the United States political processes are set up to suppress such alternative linguistic choices and the needs of the constituents to participate to a more free and equitable extent are also consequently shown. This research provides a more in-depth analysis into the ever-growing spectacle on US oppressive behaviors and tactics employed to discourage variants of language choices amongst constituents despite having the freedom to one’s own speech that are continuously being overextended to attempt to encompass both language choices and needs. This is done through analyzing the relationship between political/democratic participation and language choices and needs, specifically looking at profane language in comparison to the accepted and socially preferred “standard English”. The evidence given within this text alludes to the theoretical explanation as to how profane language choices in the US democratic and political spheres are beneficial to participation.

In a world where electoral reforms are frequently discussed, numerous countries have resorted to mandating citizen participation in elections. This electoral approach – commonly termed compulsory voting – has been adopted by democratic and authoritarian regimes alike. The majority of research on compulsory voting acknowledges that it successfully increases voter turnout. Other factors including the presence and severity of sanctions for abstention have been analyzed, but the existing literature fails to consider multiple components of compulsory voting. This research strives to bridge that gap through the use of preliminary data, a literature review of existing work, and case studies of Brazil and Belgium as it seeks to address the effectiveness of compulsory voting today. By considering various elements of past and present systems simultaneously, this research finds that compulsory voting is only as effective as a country’s political, social and economic configurations allow. If implemented correctly, compulsory voting is effective in increasing voter turnout and has the potential to create more representative election results.

In political philosophy, the concept of justice has been historically confined to the domestic state. In the last 50 years theorists have been forced to confront or defend the idea that their comprehensive doctrines say nothing about what the duties and entitlements are for people across state boundaries even though moral worth is not different based on where persons are born. It is within this context that John Rawls formulates a comprehensive theory of egalitarian justice for the domestic state that is explicitly not meant to apply to those outside the state. Opposing this view, cosmopolitans contend that it is morally incoherent to say that justice is bound by the state, even if state boundaries are relevant to the actual pursuit of justice for all persons. In exploring the reasons that Rawls creates tiered, unequal account of what persons deserve for justice, I defend the cosmopolitan foundation that justice applies to all equal persons regardless of the relationships of political association. A two step account of justice is morally incoherent because it relies on equal persons morally deserving certain protections in the domestic state and ignores that principle for persons elsewhere. Yet granting that Rawls claims to not rely on any moral law at all, I explore the implication of putting forward a theory of justice devoid of moral considerations. Political realism is a prevailing conception of the global order that would seem to necessitate amoral global justice and the metaphysical foundation that this doctrine is based on is highly unsettled and problematic.

Two significant social movements, Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party have entered onto the political scene within the last decade, both having significantly different impacts upon the political discourse and political establishment within the United States. The question remains, however, which elements of each movement is ascribed to its corresponding success or failure? Three social movement theories: Resource Mobilization Theory, Political Process Theory, and Collective Identity Theory, better help explain the results of these movements. While none of the individual theories fully explores all the necessary elements required to explain the results of these movements, and each aids the other in exploring both movements more fully, Resource Mobilization Theory best explains each movement’s progress, with a proper focus being placed upon the resources at the disposable of Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party. Each theory’s effectiveness in explaining both social movements will be measured, on a 3 scale basis, in regards to both group formation and political efficacy.

With the election of our current president Barack Obama, many believe that racism had finally ended and equality amongst all has finally been achieved, unfortunately this is not the case. Although a lot has changed for people of color, such as an increase in opportunities for success, there is still a major disconnect between the playing field of Caucasians and people of color. The United States is run by a series of institutions that monitor its population, but it is these exact institutions that continue to cultivate inequality. Ta-Nehisi Coates describes racism as “the need to ascribe bone- deep features to people and then humiliate, reduce and destroy them” (Coates 2015, 7). Our political institutions such as political parties, courts, and branches of government have helped to promote racism since the ending of slavery. Although racism is not as blatantly overt as it used to be, it still hinders people of color from having equal opportunities for success.