Philosophy, politics and academics

This assignment will test your understanding of six of the scholarly articles attached.

The examination will consist of three essay questions, all of which you must answer. The answers will be of equal value. Each question will feature a quote from a newspaper article and will call upon you to discuss the topic of each article with reference to scholarly articles attached.

Please answer the following questions. All questions are of equal value.

1. American Anti-trust Law
Rana Faroohar writes of Lina Khan that “It’s hard to believe that this unassuming 30-year-old scholar, working in the long-neglected field of antitrust law, is currently public enemy number one for the world’s tech titans (or perhaps number two, just behind EU competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who has taken some of Khan’s ideas on board).”

How does Lina Khan’s interpretation of American anti-trust law compare with that of Howard Shelanski, and how do they jointly pose a challenge to the way the government of the United States regulates how corporations do business?
(To answer this question read the articles attached: 1 Howard Shelanski -Antitrust and Deregulation and 1 Lina M Khan – Amazons_antitrust_paradox)

2. European Immigration Policy

Victor Mallet writes that “French president Emmanuel Macron’s government has pledged to “take back control” of immigration policy, cracking down on illegal migrants and preparing quotas for foreign workers in an initiative designed to win voters from far-right leader Marine Le Pen.”

What factors at play in Brexit and the “policy schizophrenia” in the EU migration crisis, as interpreted by Kelly Greenhill and Thomas Sampson, are likely to influence what Macron does?
(To answer this question read the articles attached: 2 Kelly M. Greenhill – Open Arms Behind Barred Doors Fear, Hypocrisy and Policy Schizophrenia in the European Migration Crisis and 2 Thomas Sampson – Brexit The Economics of International Disintegration )

3. Canadian Carbon Taxing
Martin Sandbu writes that “For a greener economy, there is no way round making carbon-intensive products and activities much more expensive, through an outright carbon tax or policies that mimic its effects. According to William Nordhaus, the 2018 economics Nobel laureate, the global price of emitting carbon is less than one-tenth of what is needed. Even in Europe the level is far too low. […] The carbon tax and dividend model, where levies to discourage pollution are returned in lump sums to the population rather than funding government budgets, is gaining support across Europe.”

What have Brian Murray and Kathryn Harrison learned from British Columbia’s experience with carbon-taxing that would be pertinent to any government considering it?

(To answer this question read the articles attached: 3 Kathryn Harrison- The Political Economy of British Columbia’s Carbon Tax and 3 Brian C murray – British Columbia’s Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax- A Review of the Latest “Grand Experiment” in Environmental Policy)

Articles and newspaper articles attached.