South Korea:
In at least 300 words, you will analyze your country at the individual level of analysis. Drawing from the concepts and information from the lecture and readings (that means demonstrate that you know what these concepts and dimensions of analysis are and what they mean), pick one individual from your country to analyze. That individual can be either historical or from the present, an elite or non-elite. Make sure to state near the beginning of your entry why you think this person is politically important or at least interesting enough to analyze.
You will want to potentially look at:
-whether they should be considered political elites or non-elites (and why)
-what their values, beliefs, ideology, and/or religious views are or have been and why they matter (or if they matter)
-what their psychological makeup and personality characteristics and motivations are or have been and why they matter;
-if they engage in any of the decision-making processes we discussed and how;
-other pertinent aspects of their individual history that might be important in relation to major political events or trends.
You do not have to look at all of these things (though the more you do the better your analysis and grade will be), but a good entry will discuss several of them (making sure not to just list details, but to explain why these details matter politically, and in relation to our analytical concepts and categories). A great entry will go into further depth of analysis and detailed evidence regarding how that individual’s personal characteristics, beliefs, etc help us understand some political situation or consequences. Which elements you choose to emphasize will depend on the individual you choose. Don’t hobble yourself by picking someone about whom there is very little information.
Please use proper sources and cite them appropriately.