Liberals are probably the strongest advocates of democracy. Democracy solves a problem described by an old adage: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." When power or wealth concentrates too heavily in too few hands in society, democracy is useful for dispersing much of that power back to the people. In other words, when enough voters become discontented with the status quo, they vote to change it. Of course, those already in power bitterly resent this; that is why there is such a strong anti-democratic streak in wealthy conservatives and business owners.
Critics say that pressure groups benefit the well organised but they disadvantage the weakly organised, subsequently working against the public interest. This is because the pressure groups run on donations for their funding. As a result, a pressure group with as little as two or three wealthy advocates may end up becoming influential and having its cause heard by the government. However, its members may not represent as much of the population as is suggested by the pressure group’s standing, thus creating inequality. This is amplified by the fact that the larger pressure groups can leave many smaller ones in their shadow.
This contradicts a democratic society and is seen as a dictatorship because elections are the cornerstone of a democracy. So if two out of three powers that are running the UK are not elected, this itself questions whether or not we are living in a democracy. Furthermore, having a monarchy is very important yet traditional but not in the same aspects of Parliament, as they have more authority over
By having America pay the debt off as a whole, Hamilton thought that it would bring the people and the government together. But Hamilton wanted to use ways that were so impartial to society. Many people were inclined to adore Jefferson because of Hamilton’s malicious deed. Besides this fact, the people were truly being neglected by the power of the government. The government, just like the wealthy and rich, was so power hungry that they disregarded the people’s kind acts and defaced them as if they were animals.
"William Safire, in his Safire's Political Dictionary, defines "machine politics" as "the election of officials and the passage of legislation through the power of an organization created for political action." Hierarchy and discipline are hallmarks of political machines. "It generally means strict organization", (Safire ,1). The machine here is of course a political machine which by definition in US politics is a party organization headed by a single boss or small autocratic group, that commands enough votes to maintain political and administrative control of a city, county or state. In his Political Dictionary William Safire defines “Machine Politics” as the election of officials and the passage of legislation through the power of an organization created for political action.
This law shows the flaw of Athens and its democracy based government because it infringed on the freedom of speech that most democracies have. The Assembly was made up of all men that were eligible to serve on the council. The Life in Athens may have been sophisticated and nimble. This made Athens a target to other countries since they thought that Athens was a week country. If Athens had more of a military based government then they wouldn’t have been attacked as many of times and maybe never lost their power in Ancient
At a glance it is obvious that a major part of UK democracy is parliamentary democracy as this is our chosen form of government, having the houses of parliament which consist of the house of commons and the house of lords. In the UK we have the government which is drawn from parliament as well as the monarchy who are now concerned primarily with ceremonial roles within governing the country. However it is key to note that although the monarchy does have a part in the governing of the UK it is not elected and so this damages the argument of the UK being fully democratic. However the majority of parliament is elected at least. In the UK parliament all members of the house of commons are elected in free and fair elections by their local
However, Aristotle actually illustrates how the separation of powers actually contributes to those in the powerful standpoint remain at a powerful standpoint. They created this structure of separation of powers to make the citizens believe that they could not abuse their power while in fact they are all linked together in their higher power and all friends. Therefore, they are still in some way or form abusing their power. Aristotle believes the only to avoid this abuse of power would be to divide the office not only from one another but in different parts of society so that not only the rich can be a part of it but the lower class
He believed his plans to benefit the poor were more important than restrictions imposed by federal and state legislatures. “He was a crook — but he had no money; a corrupt politician — but the cost of government is third-lowest in the country; a demagogue — but he kept his campaign promises; a hillbilly — but he had no racial prejudices; an ignoramus — but he ran a business administration; a dictator — but he broadened the suffrage; an opportunist — but he had ideals." Drew Pearson uttered this spot on analogy of Huey Long; he depicted Long as an uncouth man who helped raise a state from the depths of hell. Even though his tactics could be characterized as maverick, he effectively allowed for the state of Louisiana to flourish. One reason why people could have believed that he had succumbed to fascist customs is because his ego grew exponentially in office.
Liberal Italy faced many problems in this period if it was from corruption in the government or catholic hostility. This showed that the government ( king ) was weak as political and religious opponents were ankle to challenge. The king had most of the power and was able to pass whatever law he wanted no matter how ridicules it was, Italy AT this time was meant to be liberated but with a king being able to do what he wanted it sounds very much like a dictatorship. The government also had substantial amounts of power but the problem was that they were elected by the king. This mean that the government mainly consisted of people with similar ideology as the king.