What are the political and social class affiliations of the fans of English clubs?
Hi everyone :) I am doing a report on football clubs in Europe and their traditional political and social backgrounds. For example here is an example of how it is in my home country: Lazio: Politically Far Right, Middle Class Roma: Politically Right, Lower to Middle Class Inter: Politically Center Right, Upper Middle to Upper Class Juventus: Politically Moderate, Middle Class to Upper Middle Class Lecce: Politically Far Left, Lower to Middle Class Napoli: Politically Center Left, Lower to Middle Class Milan: Politically Center Left, Lower to Middle Class Can anyone make me a chart like what i have done above? Thanks, Mimma
Why do people blindly follow political parties?
I'm not picking on either of the major parties here, but It seems to me that more and more people are caught up into being either 100% republican and 100% Democrat. Why not vote for the person, regardless of party affiliation, who most closely speaks for your own personal interests? And if you do, why does everyone hate you and call you a flip flopper? In general are the people of America (the country I love and would die for) that stupid?
What are the religious and political views of the following children's entertainment stars?
Bella Thorne is a dedicated Christian and she supports Obama. Zendaya Coleman has no talks of her religious believes, but some say she could be Christian or Catholic. She also has no speak of her political views, but she has performed at the White House. Victoria Justice has no speak of her religion, but some say she could be Christian/Catholic, she also has no talk of politics, but is rumored to support Obama. Ariana Grande is a devoted Catholic and supports Obama, on her personal facebook she uploaded a status saying "if Mitt Romney becomes president, I'm moving to Canada". Bridgit Mendler doesn't speak of religion, but some say she's a Christian, she also doesn't speak of politics, but she does vote. Ross Lynch doesn't speak of religion, and he's not old enough to vote and doesn't talk about politics. One Direction: Louis Tomlinson as far as I know I don't think he has a religion, he doesn't thank God or any God in his 'thank yous' in the CD booklet, he's also in a relationship with bandmember Harry Styles (some don't believe this, but look up some proof I guarantee they're in a relationship) in which God doesn't support Gays, so why would he believe? He and Harry Styles also tweeted "My thoughts go out to those affected in Boston" not "Praying for those" As for political views, he doesn't talk about it. Zayn Malik is a devoted Muslim and he does not speak of political views. Liam Payne also doesn't thank a God in his 'thanks yous' in the CD booklet, so if he has a religion, I don't think so, he also doesn't talk about political views. Niall Horan went to a Catholic school, he is speculated to be Catholic but does not thank God in his 'thanks yous' in the CD Booklet, also no talk of political views. Harry Styles is the same as Louis Tomlinson, no political views either. Hope this helped! :)
These are brief, frequent, positive descriptions of a candidate.?
Backgrounds The media never gave the background & history of Obama - just the media's misrepresentation elected him.
Based, upon the brief descriptions provides in table 2.1, which subfield of physics are in vold,...?
Based, upon the brief descriptions provides in table 2.1, which subfield of physics are in vold, in explaining who an ice cube melts? Which subfields are invalid in explaining how an airplane flies? Explain?
Do people of higher intelligence find political affiliations quaint?
It’s hard to realistically paint any group of people with a broad brush without being wrong about somebody. But it seems to me that intelligent people see political affiliations from the standpoint of ensuring their personal interests are heard and acted upon. That is neither quaint nor odd. Even if people do not stand to benefit personally from their political affiliation, they often have principles or ideology that fit better with one political group than another. It is also sensible to realize that even when we affiliate with one particular group, there is no guarantee that this group will be able to accomplish what we want.
Why do people in the USA think they have to blindly follow a political party?
Why do people in the USA think they have to blindly follow a political party?Not many Americans of my acquaintance believe they “blindly follow a political party”.Party affiliation among U.S. voters: 1992-2016According to the Pew Research Center study linked above, regardless of their actual party registration, 48% of registered voters lean Democratic Party and 44% lean Republican Party.Registering By Party: Where the Democrats and Republicans Are AheadIn a different study (linked above) limited to actual party registration in the 31 states that register voters by party, the University of Virginia’s Political Studies Center reports that Democrats are 28%, Republicans 24% and the rest register alternative parties or unaffiliated.To return to the original question, while there are pockets of Americans that do “blindly follow a political party”, about half of Americans appear to demonstrate perhaps half of a wit in their voting process.
What kind of people (political affiliation, social status, gender, age) would follow Nietzsche today?
I can probably say who would not follow his philosophies. Due to his views on religion and morality he would not get understanding from Christians his view on these were that they are human creations loaded with the error of confusing cause and effect, he posited the statement "God is dead", developments in science and the increasing secularization of European society had effectively killed off the Abrahamic God. He has some interesting ideas.
What were Machiavelli's political views?
Since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than to be loved - Niccolo MachiavelliThere are many important aspects to Machiavelli's view as he is one of the most important political theorists of his and our time, especially in retrospect to the development of realistic political approach.The first thing one needs to know in order to understand Machiavelli's thought is that he lived in turbulent political times at the beginning of the Renaissance period.He believes that the well-being of the state is the responsibility of the ruler and should be achieved by any means possible, even by deceptions, treacheries, and intrigues. The ruler's personal morality is much less important than the good of the state for he will be judged by the results of his reign rather than the means he used. In short, a prudent ruler cannot and must not honor his words.He argues that an effective leader can harness the weaker traits of humanity in his people to great effect, in the same way that a sheepdog can manipulate a herd of sheep.By analyzing politics using military theory, he concludes that the essence of most political life is conspiracy.In his less popular work, Discourses on Livy, he strongly advocated republicanism rather than any form of monarchy or oligarchy. He modeled the Roman Republic as ideal with mixed constitution and participation by citizens who are protected by properly constituted citizens' army instead of a militia of hired mercenaries.As he puts in The Prince, "In the actions of all men, especially princes, where there is no recourse to justice, the end is all that counts. A prince should only be concerned with conquering or maintaining a state, for the means will always be judged to be honorable and praiseworthy by each and every person, because the masses always follow appearances and the outcomes of affairs, and the world is nothing than the masses." He strongly emphasizes that "A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise."While this answer does not at all sum the entire idea of Machiavelli's political views, I hope this is concise enough to give the big ideas of what he proposes as idea. I think it'd be best to study Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan and Carl von Clausewitz's On War in order to polish your understanding on this type of realism.