This is amplified by the fact that the larger pressure groups can leave many smaller ones in their shadow. For example, the British Stammering Association is a small pressure group with a good cause but one that many people will not have heard of due to its lack of funds and support. Many say that pressure groups holding the government to account and challenging authority is a sign of a healthy democracy. After all, a democracy is a system of government where decisions are arrived at by majoritarian principles. If a certain group of people do not feel that they are being represented then a democracy has to be able to recognise them for anything to change.
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
Most people have a basic understanding of obedience; however, many may fail to see the application and the impact of it in their own lives and in our society. Submission into conformity discourages the type of independence that is valued in our supposedly free-thinking world. Censorship is one of the major themes in Fahrenheit 451, and its impact is illustrated through submission in appearance, behavior and thought. This invites us to draw clear relationships between Ray Bradbury‘s novel and our current society. The association between appearance and social acceptance is already apparent in our lives.
A man has an obligation to act according to the commands of his conscience, even if it goes against majority opinion, the reigning leadership, or the laws of society. In cases where the government supports unjust laws Thoreau's idea of service to one's country ironically takes the form of resistance against it. Resistance is the highest form of patriotism because it demonstrates a desire not to overthrow government but to build a better one in the long term. Thoreau just wants to eliminate the ideas that make it a bad government not the entire government itself. Thoreau then talks about the issue of change through democratic ways.
However the other two will check the one wanting to exceed thus, balancing out the power and securing citizens from a dictatorship type of government. Another reason would simply be when he states, “If men were angles, no government would be necessary.” In other words since we are not angles but are men if we had power in our hands we would abuse it. Then he continues that even though the powers are shared and are equal the government should still be able to control not only the people but, themselves. This will only help protect the people’s individual rights including the minority. In the end he says that in order to have a balanced government the majority must agree on justice.
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
They were not inventing anything new but reclaiming something ancient. This is why governments tend to fall apart, because people often want to come together freely and be themselves, rather then fit a mold that is presented for them. Hobbes foretold that it was a human condition that war fought by each against each, making it hard for anything good to come out of it, or learn
If justice is conceived of as being about what individuals would choose were they unaware of who they are (Singer) then people would surely chose an impartial universalist approach to redistributive justice as advocated by Singer if they did not know whether they were a citizen of the USA or Europe. Singer believes that governments give priority to their citizens over the far more urgent and desperate needs of those further away. I believe Singer is right about this because, in most cases the governments don’t give much thought about helping kids with disabilities as much as they do to war or raising tuitions rates like the U.K just
Although there was changed tactics and a greater push from suffrage organisations to achieve the vote, it in some cases in fact alienated politicians and the public. As source 13 states “we have been told that we cannot have the same political rights which men have won unless we convert the whole country to our side”. This source being written by Emmeline Pankhurst means it very useful as it shows how people directly involved felt about what the suffrage movement had achieved, and from the implications of this source that was very little. If the leader of the WSPU claims herself that the movement is not making ‘substantial progress’ then it is very difficult to argue against this. They were beginning to make headway however this was still a long way to go before the movement had made substantial enough progress to gain the
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