Claude: To introduce greater public

Answer choices

1. A

   Weakens2% picked this

   The public would become better informed about an issue in foreign policy if a referendum

   This talks about one of our objections. Maybe currently the public is ill-informed but if we gave them the power to vote on major foreign policy issues, it would motivate them to be better equipped to make an informed choice.

   2%
2. B

   No Impact2% picked this

   Not every issue would be subject to referendum, only the major

   If anything this might weaken a bit, because by saying, "Look, the general public wouldn't be voting on everything, just general outlines" we'd be lessening the potential worry about what the general public's voting could do to foreign policy. Since this makes it sound like the public would be voting on less than everything, it goes in the direction of "they are less likely to cause foreign policy disaster".

   2%
3. C

   Correct84% picked this

   Decision by referendum would make the overall course of policy unpredictable, and countries friendly to France could not make reasonable decisions based

   Why this is right

   This helps to substantiate the author's conclusion. It provides the "causal mechanism" or provides a missing explanatory link between letting the public vote on foreign policy via referendum and getting foreign-policy disaster. 1. We give the public the chance to vote on foreign policy. 2. They make erratic decisions 3. The overall course of foreign policy is unpredictable (one referendum makes France seem like a globalizing nation ready to intervene in foreign crises / the next referendum makes France seem like an isolationist country). 4. Other countries can't count on France to have a consistent style or mentality to their foreign policy decisions, so they stop wanting to partner with France on any international issue. Many students might be thinking, "does it really qualify as disaster when your allies can't make reasonable decisions based on a consistent French line"? No, but it doesn't have to qualify as disaster to be our best available answer. This isn't Sufficient Assumption, where we would actually need to guarantee foreign-policy disaster. This is Strengthen, where we just pick which ever answer helps us drift the most in the direction of believing the conclusion. And this answer does more than any other to corroborate the idea that letting foreign policy decisions be made by referenda would have bad repercussions for foreign-policy.

   Skill tested: Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   84%
4. D

   Weakens3% picked this

   Requiring a large minimum number of voters’ signatures on a petition for a referendum would ensure that many people would consider the

   Just like (A), this is a weakening idea that logically counters Lorraine's premise. She is worried about uninformed voters, and this answer talks about how in a world where we used referenda, we could ensure that many people would consider the issue and treat it as important.

   3%
5. E

   Strengthens Claude8% picked this

   Elections decided mainly on foreign-policy issues have perhaps constituted ratifications by the public of past decisions, but certainly not judgments about

   It's hard to say that this weakens Lorraine, but it definitely strengthens Claude. He has already mentioned that regular elections don't give the public accountability into foreign-policy, because the candidate you vote for has positions on multiple issues. If your candidate wins, can we blame you for the foreign policy decisions they make while in office? No, because 1) you can say that you voted for them based on their economic positions, not their foreign policy decisions 2) voting for someone based on foreign policy is really just endorsing decisions they've made in the past, not endorsing judgments they may make about future issues Anyway, since this answer would help Claude make the push for referenda on foreign-policy issues, it's definitely not strengthening Lorraine's argument.

   8%