There is a price to strength, but a greater price to weakness, because weakness tempts aggression

Supporting Evidence

Logical Arguments:

1. Strength deters aggression: Strong entities, be it individuals, organizations, or nations, often deter potential aggressors by showcasing their capacity to retaliate or protect themselves. On a global scale, this is evident in the concept of deterrence theory in international relations.

2. Weakness invites exploitation: Entities perceived as weak can become targets for more aggressive entities that seek to exploit their vulnerabilities. This can manifest in various ways, from cyberattacks on vulnerable systems to geopolitical moves against weaker states.

Supporting Evidence (Data, Studies):

1. Studies in geopolitics and international relations support the idea that strong nations tend to face fewer overt threats than weaker ones. For instance, research by Jervis (1978) on the "Deterrence Theory of War" underlines this.

Supporting Books:

1. "The Logic of Violence in International Relations" by Robert Jervis

Supporting Videos:

1. A range of YouTube videos and lectures on geopolitics and international relations theory, such as those available from the channel 'Caspiancey.'

Supporting Organizations and their Websites:

1. Council on Foreign Relations
2. International Studies Association

Supporting Podcasts:

1. "The World Next Week" by CFR

Unbiased Experts:

1. Scholars in the field of international relations, such as John Mearsheimer and Robert Jervis

Opposing Evidence

Logical Arguments:

1. Strength can provoke escalation: Displaying overt strength can sometimes provoke a response from potential aggressors, leading to an escalation of conflict.

2. Diplomacy over force: Advocates for diplomacy and negotiation argue that it's more effective to resolve conflicts and deter aggression.

Supporting Evidence (Data, Studies):

1. Research has shown that diplomatic measures can successfully resolve conflicts and deter aggression. One example is a study by Fortna (2003) titled "Scraps of Paper? Agreements and the Durability of Peace."

Supporting Books:

1. "Diplomacy" by Henry Kissinger

Supporting Videos:

1. Numerous TED talks and other online videos advocate for diplomacy and soft power, like Joseph Nye's lectures on Soft Power.

Supporting Organizations and their Websites:

1. The Diplomatic Courier
2. American Diplomacy

Supporting Podcasts:

1. "Global Dispatches – World News That Matters" by Mark Leon Goldberg

Unbiased Experts:

1. Experts who advocate for diplomacy and soft power, such as Joseph Nye.

Further Exploration:

For a more comprehensive pro/con analysis and collective intelligence, visit Group Intel and Idea Stock Exchange.

The Pitfalls of Feel-Good Voting in Contemporary Politics

Supporting Evidence

Logical Arguments:

1. Long-term implications: Voting based solely on immediate emotional satisfaction can neglect long-term policy implications that affect daily life.
2. Substance over style: Voting should prioritize the candidate's policy positions and qualifications over charisma or image.

Supporting Evidence (Data, Studies):

1. Studies have shown that voters often prioritize short-term feelings over long-term policy outcomes. This includes the 'halo effect', where voters disproportionately favor charismatic candidates (Kinder, 1986).

Supporting Books:

1. "Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government" by Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels

Supporting Videos:

1. TED Talks like "The Irrationality of Politics" by Michael Huemer discuss the importance of rational decision-making in democracy.

Supporting Organizations and their Websites:

1. The Voter Participation Center

Supporting Podcasts:

1. "The Weeds" by Vox discusses in-depth policy issues that can influence voter decisions.

Unbiased Experts:

1. Political scientists such as Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels

Opposing Evidence

Logical Arguments:

1. Emotional intelligence: Voting based on empathy and human connection can lead to more compassionate policies.
2. Importance of motivation: Inspiring candidates can increase voter turnout and democratic participation.

Supporting Evidence (Data, Studies):

1. Research shows that charismatic leaders can motivate increased civic participation (Campbell et al., 1960).

Supporting Books:

1. "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion" by Jonathan Haidt

Supporting Videos:

1. YouTube video "Why Do We Vote On Feelings?" by CGP Grey explores the importance of emotional appeal in elections.

Supporting Organizations and their Websites:

1. The Center for Emotional Intelligence

Supporting Podcasts:

1. "Hidden Brain" by NPR often discusses the emotional aspects of decision-making, including voting.

Unbiased Experts:

1. Psychologists like Jonathan Haidt

Further Exploration:

For a more comprehensive pro/con analysis and collective intelligence, visit Group Intel and Idea Stock Exchange.

Search Description:
"Examining the implications of feel-good voting in contemporary politics with evidence from various sources and perspectives."