Humankind is divided into nations each possessing a distinctive character and separate identity. This is why a higher loyalty attaches to the nation. Hegel argued that the organic society is an expression of universal wills for example Volkism where people are bound by a sense of being one. Secondly Conservative nationalism is concerned with maintaining unity, authority and social stability and an example of this is Disraeli who appealed to the national instincts of the people by appealing to the idea of one nation to prevent social disorder. Patriotism and nationalism give a sense of identity and belonging and helps maintain authority and social order.
I believe as a democratic country it is important that the rights of minority groups are upheld. If the minority is suppressed it will eventually end up in an uprising, civil riots, or possibly a revolution. Therefore, although the rights of the majority are substantial the rights of the minority cannot be ignored. Equilibrium must be reached in which the rights and freedoms of both minorities and the majority are met. In order for a government to promote unity, all citizens must be content with the way the country is being handled.
As well, when he is talking about interest, he is referring to whatever may empower or benefit the ruling party, such as laws that can be passed. Thrasymachus also claims that it is in the interest of the ruled to be just, and as a society we must subordinate ourselves to the interests of someone in authority. From this, we can gather that while the ruled must be just and promote the interest of another, the ruler must
In classical conservatism, the upper class, or elitists, were in power, not the entire society. The elitists were expected to regulate the lower class, and were given the right to decide for everyone, whether or not the decisions were beneficial to all classes. This belief, exemplified in Edmund Burke’s quote, is a direct contrast to democratic liberalism. Democratic liberalism is an ideology where the government commends each and every citizen’s opinion on how a country should operate. This form of democracy ensures that each person of the country is conscious and acknowledges the government’s decisions, as well as being part of the decision-making.
Hence, most people believe that the two parties are similar enough that they are practically the same. Upon closer examination into the history of the Democratic and the Republican parties, we are able to determine that the political philosophies from which they originate have completely opposing ideologies. The ideologies of the Democratic Party derive from the ideology of the classical liberalism philosophy. The most prevailing idea of classical liberalism is that the government's role is to guard the individual's natural rights because individuals are the primary unit of society (Franks 27). According to John Locke, a philosopher who contributed to classical liberalism's vitality, the protection of individuals' "life, liberty, and property" is their natural rights (Jones 227).
On the other hand, the ‘general will’ supports the good of the whole; in turn, it can conflict with certain interests of the individual. This seems like a contradiction to me – in that, if the ‘will of all’ is subservient to the ‘general will’ how can the ‘general will’ allow for individual diversity and freedom. Furthermore, Rousseau’s distinction between the ‘will of all’ and the ‘general
Some people blame this loss of faith in democracy on Watergate and Vietnam; however the doubt in government began before these events. Other people believe that the quality of politicians has declined over the past 25 years, and others believe that the quality has increased and that a bad system is to blame for the doubt, as the fall in public trust began shortly after the increase in public contact with political institutions. Democracy, in America, is merely part of a political structure; within this structure are many institutions that precede democracy. Democratising these institutions creates indirect democracy, for example Americans choose who will legislate for them, not create the legislation themselves. In the 60’s and 70’s the American government was subject to assault.
The highest moral right is liberty and from it any other goods will follow. These secondary rights could include freedom to get married, or be a musician, but these are to be pursued privately. Negative liberty is “freedom from”, only when an individual is free to make his own decisions and actions without coercion is a person truly free (Machan 5). This “freedom from” emphasizes right before good. According to Hospers The essential ingredient in all freedom from coercion by other is one’s basic and inalienable right; it is fundamental to human survival and the development of the self (Machan 8).
When other countries look at us and see how we treat illegal immigrants they say and that's what people call the world super power. If we were the world super power we would help people who come from another part of the world and seek for help. If we was the world super power when they come we wouldn't look down on them put labels on them and say you don't belong here and you are not apart of us. If we were a world super power we would accept them, no matter what's there ethnicity or where they come from, we would take them in as our own without having to take them through every loop we find to be free. If we are a world super power and a country of freedom we need to start acting like it or give our title to someone who deserve it.
Therefore the law did not resolve conflicting interests but imposed the interests of one group over another. While this can still happen today it seems that the law does try hard to make sure everyone is satisfied and everyone’s interests are accounted for. Rudolf von Jhering said that the law is the main way of ordering society, his views was that the rights of the majority should take precedence over the individual. He said that society is made up of conflicting interests that cannot all be satisfied and that the role of the law was to balance them out so the individual conformed to the needs of society. Roscoe Pound said that interests are both individual and social and that conflicts are only resolved through considering them on the same level.