EMA Question
“Symbols are used to communicate and enable obedience to authority. Prohibiting the display of symbols offensive to the state is therefore the best way of enforcing its authority.”
Critically evaluate the accuracy of this statement by considering the example of the German Swastika and one contemporary example of another symbol from a country other than Germany.
Guidance
This EMA tests the following learning outcomes:
Knowledge and understanding
knowledge and understanding of the intersection between humanities, culture and law.
Skills
ability to conduct independent research and critically evaluate the findings.
ability to organise and assimilate legal and factual material and express a reasoned and critical view about that material.
ability to correctly reference and cite a variety of legal and other materials, including primary and secondary sources.
EMA Advice
This EMA tests your understanding of themes in Unit 8A in particular, but you may also choose to draw on material from elsewhere in Block 3A.
You are asked to ‘critically evaluate’ the accuracy of the statement. Critically means ‘in a way that makes judgements (backed by discussion of the evidence or reasoning involved) about the merit of theories or opinions, or the truth of facts’. ‘Evaluate’ means ‘make an appraisal of the worth or validity or effectiveness of something in light of its truth or usefulness’. You are therefore asked to come to a conclusion as to whether or not the statement is accurate (true) through considering two examples of the use of symbols.
One of those examples is the German Swastika, and you can draw upon material from unit 8A and sources found from your own independent legal research in your discussion. Your second example must be from a country other than Germany, and it should not be the Swastika. It should be a contemporary (recent or current) example. The second example you chose does not need to be a symbol which has already been prohibited by a state (or country), but should be an example where there has been debate and discussion around whether or not it should be prohibited. You are unlikely to achieve a pass mark for this EMA if you do not discuss a second contemporary example, as you will not have answered the question.
The choice of contemporary example to analyse is yours and the choice you make may lead you down different paths to answering the question. You may use examples from an authoritarian, totalitarian or fascist state, but of course you may select one from a democratic state. Whatever path you take, your response must be supported by independent research based on suitable, relevant and reliable sources and materials. In the context of the research and example you choose to focus on, the ideological policy debate and national laws that exist should be highlighted. This ideological debate is invariably contested, and this should be explicitly presented.
This EMA question, therefore, requires you to do four things:
Choose one contemporary example of a symbol where there has been discussion and debate over whether that symbol should be prohibited by the state, stating the choice you have made in your essay introduction.
Evaluate whether the German Swastika and your chosen contemporary symbol are used to communicate and enable obedience to authority (and whose authority).
Evaluate whether the prohibition of the German Swastika and your chosen contemporary symbol is the best way of enforcing the state’s authority.
Come to a clear conclusion as to whether you consider the statement is accurate.
You need to demonstrate a critical understanding of the materials you employ in your argument. Simply reciting knowledge will not suffice. This means that you should choose materials that most effectively support the structure of your argument and enable you to focus your answer on the EMA question posed.