Pressure groups are mostly seen to be a major part of how democracy functions in the UK, however whether they undermine democracy is a question that has always been raised. They are mostly seen as to help democracy rather than hinder it however, as they help to represent the opinions and needs of minorities, as well as give an extra platform for participation. One of the ways in which pressure groups can undermine democracy is that they concentrate power,meaning some groups are able to influence the government more than others. These types of groups are ones such as the BMA and BDA, wealthy insider groups which a close and established relationship with the government and have direct access to decision makers, allowing them to influence policies
Some say a dictatorship is better because the people don’t know what is and isn’t good for them. Others might claim that a democracy isn’t necessarily the better option because there could be a lot hidden between the lines that people vote for without a second through. Both can be abused, and both can be
With the rise in the professional politician many prefer to remain loyal in order to gain power and move up in the hierarchy as opposed to become a rebel who remains in the back benchers. This can be seen after the vote on tuition fees and the liberal democrats. Despite the fact that they had campaigned for this cause endlessly only 26 (including a few Conservatives) chose to vote against the bill. Whips play an important part in removing efficiency from Parliament. By having whips who ensure that MPs behave in accordance to the decisions of the executive both Parliaments ability to scrutinise and hold the executive to account is diminished, but also their role as representatives of their individual constituency is also compromised.
Another problem was that even though there are anti-discrimination policies, a slight differential treatment towards minorities is still present. Employers expect and demand more input from minority groups and that is why people are hesitant to leave their workplace to cast a vote (Rivers, 2012). An outside source looks at voting from a different perspective. An interestingly opposing statistic is that minority groups with higher education and social status take the time to participate, as voting is very important to them. They want to take part in the choice of their government because it took so long and so much effort for them to receive the equal rights and abilities to enjoy democracy (Speel, 2010).
So one interesting possibility for Electoral College reform is to educate the voters more clearly and involve them in the process earlier on. While the theory of this is good, it would be difficult to implement since much of the voting population currently feels disenfranchised. This proposal also does note address the problems of two-party
One example would be that it is used by politicians to inform people about social issues, as Best explains in chapter one. This is why they are so important. Due to the fact that if they are not used the right way they can really affect how things are believed to be and what people might do because of them. Threw out the book Best explains different things that cause deformations in statistics. They round up from the simple fact that people usually change the meaning of them due to the fact that they simply don’t understand it.
Their goal is not perfect equality, because people differ in ability, and some work harder than others. The goal is equality of opportunity-sometimes called social democracy. Ensuring Peaceful Change: Those who favor democracy believe that democratic procedures for bringing about change make violent revolutions unnecessary. They claim that democracy meets the just demands of the people more effectively than any other form of government. Supporters of
The political state of a nation which determines the liberality of the media also contributes Putting these reasons aside, the media also have times in which it does not act in public’s interest. This is due to factors such as the vested interests of various media owners as well as the lack of regulation of the media by authorities due to its self-regulating nature could result in the media to not act in the public interest. Therefore, even though in reality, the media do not always act in the interest of the public, the media do try to act in the public’s interest most of the time due to the high expectations from the public. Due to the public’s high expectations of the media, the media do act in the interest of the public all the time in terms of the accessibility to a variety of information. This is because the pervasive nature of the media thus leads to an immense power to deliver information that has the potential to influence people’s lives, which includes their thinking and beliefs.
Firstly, a codified constitution would clarify the nature of the political system to citizens of the state. Most British citizens do not understand the concept of the constitution, nor what the UK constitution entails. It is therefore an argument that having a codified constitution would raise public awareness and support for the government would grow. It would also enable the public and people in government to view the constitution whenever necessary for matters such as court cases, etc. This would encourage public involvement in politics and act as an improvement to our democratic society.
The oral questions are sometimes dominated by loyal backbench government supporters, and it is often suggested that the media provide a more effective form of scrutiny than does parliament. MPs have remarkably limited access to resources, partly because of the largely secretive nature of UK government. They can sometimes contribute to the pressure that might ultimately lead to the resignation of an incompetent