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
If I had to choose a type of government, I would support the Federalists. The Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the Constitution. Basically, they argue that the constitution gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state governments, there was no bill of rights, the national government could maintain an army in peacetime, Congress, because of the `necessary and proper clause,' wielded too much power and the executive branch held too much power. The Antifederalists, were generally farmers, debtors, and other lower class people who were loyal to their state governments. Antifederalist leaders, including Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry, typically enjoyed more wealth and power than the people they led.I am sure these seemed like legitimate claims at the time, however, they are really fears unfounded by any proof.
Although the people had a right to be involved in the government, the author of Caesar No. 2 thought that it should be left up to people of greater intelligence to choose the government and its actions. The argument against this was that the people had the ability to choose the people that would have authority in the government. This idea helped place a foothold in the government for the people to always play a role. The last concern was that of the
He refers to the “majority” and its “absolute sovereignty as the essence of democratic government: in a democracy, nothing outside of the majority is capable of mounting resistance to it.” He goes on to explain that legislatures will always “respond most readily to the will of the majority.” That is important, as the legislative branch is elected directly by the people and “thus constituted, the legislatures have acquired almost all powers of government.” Perhaps Tocqueville’s most important revelation is that of “tyranny of the majority,” that is, the idea that the majority in a government can do whatever it pleases, is a real danger to the sustainability of American democracy. He likens the majority to that of an “all powerful individual with the capability to abuse his power to harm his opponent,” and goes on to say that the majority can do the same. He blames the protections of tyranny by the American government as the thing he detests about democracy in the United States, but is quick to fault the irresistible power available, not the weakness of government as perceived in Europe. Legislative instability and the fact that almost every American constitution has been amended in the last 30 years and that there is no state that hasn’t modified its legal principles are seen as weaknesses that could prevail into a tyranny of the majority. It’s safe to say that an
Representative democracy is basically when there is a competition between leaders to earn as much votes as possible. It's the most common form of government used today. The other interpretation or meaning is known as direct or participatory democracy. This kind of democracy is when a government has all or the majority of its citizens participating in some way, either making policy or holding office. Economist Joseph Schumpeter's definition of democracy is that in order to become a leader, you have to go into a competitive struggle with someone else and gain the citizens votes.
This mean that the government mainly consisted of people with similar ideology as the king. This lead to a very corrupt political
Agree of the agitation that could be permitted and where they should have an ending to it. “ The vast extent of the territory over which the inhabitants spread makes the collisions between the various parties less probable and less dangerous there than elsewhere” pg.75). Most candidates and people may think that time of the presidential elections as the moment of the national crisis. The parties have a great interest in winning the election but not so much to make their doctrines triumph by the president- elect help to illustrate by his election that the doctrines have gained a majority. Of course the president always defends his self.
The pathway essay The United States is built around freedom, equality and individual right. These basic rights include the right to vote, express religion, due process and many more. The United States is a democracy, meaning that all citizens have the right to participate in government actions. Although the United States is considered a democracy, it is not a pure democracy, but actually a republic. Within a republic there are still government positions, each possessing specific powers and even rank.
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.
But in a time where there is much more vocal opposition and cries of justice by the people of this country it is but ever so prudent to fathom that untimely the people fed up with this system will turn this country into one that directs itself under the direct democracy system. Now if I was more of a politically correct person this might actually work out. But a direct democracy system is more over like the one that operates as of right now in this economy. What can be more democratic than being able to elect your leaders through public note? That would be one side of the question.