Unit 4 Overview: Political Patterns and Processes

The following summary is from AMSCO AP Human Geography :

Today’s political map consists mostly of independent states in which all territory is connected, and most people share a language and other cultural traits. This was not true of the past. Many states were sprawling, diverse empires, such as the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East or the British Empire that included people of many cultures. At the same time, many cultural groups were divided into several political groups, such as the hundreds of small German states in central Europe or the various groups of nomads in central Asia. 

A government demonstrates its power over a geographic area by enforcing laws that govern individual behavior and affect how resources are used. Boundaries separate territories at various scales, from those that divide the world into countries to those that determine where students attend school.

Political power can be divided in several ways. In a country, it can be centralized in one national government or divided between the national government and several local governments. In the United States, local power can be centralized under regional or county governments, or it can be divided into a patchwork of cities, school districts, and other types of districts.

Independent states face challenges from globalization. Transnational corporations, international organizations, and global environmental problems all make the boundaries around a state less important than they once were. Another challenge to independent states comes from within. Regions with distinctive cultural groups, such as Catalonia in Spain and Quebec in Canada, have successfully argued for more autonomy.

Unit 4 Essential Questions

What historical, economic, and social factors have influenced modern political maps at various scales?

Historical events: Wars, conquests, and other historical events have often led to the creation or modification of political boundaries. For example, the breakup of the Soviet Union and the formation of new independent states in Eastern Europe after the Cold War were significant events that led to changes in political maps at the global scale.

Economic factors: Political maps are also often influenced by economic considerations. For example, the creation of free trade zones or the development of natural resources in a particular region might lead to changes in political boundaries or the formation of new states.

Social factors: Political maps can also be influenced by social movements and changes in public opinion. For example, the movement for independence in a particular region or the demand for greater autonomy or self-determination might lead to changes in political boundaries.

How do boundaries reflect ideas of territoriality and political power on various scales?

Here are some ways in which boundaries reflect ideas of territoriality and political power on various scales:

• Boundaries between nations reflect the political power and territorial control of those nations, as well as their relationships with other nations. These boundaries can be used to mark the limits of a nation's territory and to establish control over that territory by the government of that nation.
• Boundaries within a nation, such as state or provincial boundaries, can also reflect political power and territorial control. These boundaries can be used to divide a nation into smaller regions or territories, each with its own government or administration.
• Boundaries between cities, neighborhoods, or even individual properties can reflect ideas of territoriality and the desire to control a particular space. These boundaries can be used to mark the limits of a particular area and to establish control over that area by a particular group or organization.
• Boundaries can also be used to demarcate areas with different legal or regulatory frameworks, such as customs zones or military bases. These boundaries can be used to establish the jurisdiction of different legal or regulatory systems and to control access to certain areas.

How has globalization changed the way people live?

Some of the key ways in which globalization has changed the way people live include:

• Increased international trade and exchange: Globalization has facilitated greater international trade and exchange of goods, services, and ideas. This has led to a wider availability of goods and has made it easier for people to access products and services from around the world.
• Increased mobility: Globalization has made it easier for people to travel and live in different countries. This has led to increased cross-cultural exchange and has facilitated the movement of people, ideas, and goods around the globe.
• Changes in the nature of work: Globalization has led to the outsourcing of many jobs to countries with lower labor costs, as well as the automation of many tasks. This has led to changes in the nature of work and has had significant impacts on employment patterns and income levels in different parts of the world.
• Changes in cultural norms and values: Globalization has facilitated the spread of cultural norms and values around the world, and has led to increased cultural exchange and blending. This has resulted in changes in traditional cultural practices and the adoption of new cultural practices in many parts of the world.
• Changes in the natural environment: Globalization has also had significant impacts on the natural environment, as increased trade and travel has led to greater resource consumption and environmental degradation in some parts of the world.

Models to Know from Unit 4

STUDY TIP: The models will appear all over the AP Human Geography exam, in both multiple choice and FRQs. You should be able to identify each one from a description or image, apply them to examples, and use them in your writing. All of the AP Human Geography models are explained here.

Organic Theory

The organic theory is a philosophical and scientific concept that suggests that social and political systems are analogous to living organisms and that they follow similar patterns of growth, development, and decline. According to the organic theory, social and political systems are made up of interdependent parts that work together to sustain the overall system, much like the organs and systems of a living organism.

The organic theory has been influential in the fields of sociology and political science and has been used to explain the development and evolution of societies and political systems. It has also been used to understand the roles and functions of different social and political institutions and the ways in which they interact and influence each other.

The organic theory has been criticized for its deterministic and teleological view of social and political change and for its assumption that societies and political systems are unified and cohesive entities. However, it has also been credited with highlighting the complex interdependencies and relationships within social and political systems and the importance of understanding these relationships in order to understand and change them.

Mackinder’s Heartland Theory

Mackinder's Heartland Theory is a geopolitical theory that was developed by the British geographer and political scientist Halford Mackinder in the early 20th century. The theory suggests that the control of the "heartland," a region comprising the vast interior of Eurasia, is key to world domination. According to Mackinder, the heartland is a natural fortress that is difficult to invade due to its size and location, and whoever controls it will have a significant advantage in any global conflict.

Mackinder's Heartland Theory was developed in the context of the emerging global tensions of the early 20th century and was intended to explain the strategic importance of the heartland region in global politics. The theory has been influential in the study of international relations and has been used to understand the strategic importance of the heartland region in global politics.

The Heartland Theory has been criticized for its deterministic and militaristic view of global politics and for its assumption that control of territory is the key factor in global power relations. However, it has also been credited with highlighting the importance of geography and the role of geography in shaping international relations.

Domino Theory

The domino theory was a Cold War-era policy that argued that if one country in a region fell to communism, it would lead to a domino effect and the spread of communism to other countries in the region. The theory was often used to justify the involvement of the United States and its allies in conflicts in regions such as Southeast Asia and Latin America, as a way to prevent the spread of communism.

The domino theory was based on the idea that communism was a monolithic and expansionist ideology that sought to spread to other countries through subversion and force. It was used as a justification for a number of American foreign policy decisions, including the Vietnam War, in which the United States intervened in an effort to prevent the spread of communism in Southeast Asia.

The domino theory has been criticized for its oversimplification of complex political and social issues and for its assumption that all countries in a region were equally vulnerable to communist influence. It has also been criticized for its role in the justification of American involvement in conflicts in countries around the world.

Spykman’s Rimland Theory

Spykman's Rimland Theory is a geopolitical theory that was developed by the American geographer and political scientist Nicholas Spykman in the mid-20th century. The theory suggests that the control of the "rimland," a region comprising the coastal areas of Eurasia, is key to world domination. According to Spykman, the rimland is a region of strategic importance due to its economic and political power, and whoever controls it will have a significant advantage in any global conflict.

Spykman's Rimland Theory was developed as a response to Mackinder's Heartland Theory, which argued that the control of the vast interior of Eurasia was key to world domination. Spykman argued that the rimland, rather than the heartland, was the key to global power, as it was the hub of international trade and communication and the center of economic and political power.

The Rimland Theory has been influential in the study of international relations and has been used to understand the strategic importance of the rimland region in global politics. It has also been criticized for its deterministic and militaristic view of global politics and for its assumption that control of territory is the key factor in global power relations.

Core-Periphery Model

The core-periphery model is a spatial model that describes the relationship between the "core" and "periphery" regions of a society or economy. In this model, the core regions are characterized by high levels of economic development, political power, and cultural influence, while the periphery regions are characterized by lower levels of development and less influence.

According to the core-periphery model, the core regions are the centers of economic and political power and play a dominant role in shaping the development of the periphery regions. The periphery regions, on the other hand, are often dependent on the core regions for economic and political support and are often subject to exploitation and marginalization.

The core-periphery model is often used to understand the distribution of economic and political power within a society or economy and the ways in which this distribution shapes the development and relationships of different regions. It has been applied to a wide range of contexts, including global politics, regional development, and urban planning.

Past FRQs from Unit 4

STUDY TIP: Content from this unit has appeared on the FRQs nine times since 2001. Take a look at these questions before you review the key concepts & vocabulary below to get a sense of how you will be assessed. Then, come back to these later and practice writing as many as you can!

1. 2017 – Question 3: Federal and Unitary governments
2. 2016 – Question 2: Politics of language – Bilingualism in Canada
3. 2015 – Question 1: Gerrymandering and reapportionment
4. ​2014 – Question 2: Consequences of superimposed borders in Africa
5. 2012 – Question 1: Border Walls and Barriers
6. 2010 – Question 2: National Identity
7. 2006 – Question 3: Centripetal and Centrifugal Forces
8. 2005 – Question 1: Supranationalism and Devolution
9. 2002 – Question 1: Nations, States, and Nation-States