Although there are advantages and disadvantages to both a representative government and

Parliament is very effective when dealing with the public and their interests and needs like when they redress public grievances to make sure they are listened too. However, parliament isn’t so effective on the representative side of things. This is because the electoral system that we use isn’t very fair and excludes smaller parties of a chance of being voted into parliament. This therefore means a large number of public votes have been

One final argument for direct democracy in the UK is that it increases the people’s political participation and engagement in current issues. When people are given the opportunity to have their say, they are more likely to get involved in the process, thus increasing the accuracy of the judgement. A successful and fully functional democracy relies on the involvement of the general public and the people it will be directly

Another common criticism of the UK system is that, although most politicians are elected, many powerful people hold their positions without having to face the voters. Over the years criticism has focused on the House of Lords, the civil service and judges. While the people serving these positions may indeed be experts in their field, the citizens of the UK have absolutely no say in who is elected into these positions. This shows a problem in the United Kingdom’s democratic system and one that does not follow a representative democracy.

Citizens of a free society can expect to be duly represented in governmental decisions. A free society enables individuals to have a voice in the activities of their country. This voice is presented through officials who are elected by the people. The politicians that are elected by the citizens of a free society represent the voices of

A direct democracy can only work in a small group, so as a form of government

Voting in many countries is held in different ways. In The United States of America, voting is voluntary while the Australian citizen has to vote, it is compulsory. When an Australian citizen does not vote they receive a fine. Compulsory voting has now become a large political issue for many countries. Great Britain has seen a dramatic decline in the number of people voting in the last 15 years (Singh, 2014) and compulsory voting has become a large political and social debate. However, as with any political change, there are strengths and weaknesses. The Australian system is an excellent one to analyse as the question has to be asked when introducing compulsory voting what are the long term democratic, economic and social issues? Four key points can be outlined to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the Australian compulsory voting system. The first, compulsory voting provides a clear and accurate representation of an entire electorate. Additionally, this system may influence an increase in support for the leftist policy in a current democratic institution. Another key issue to consider is, does an active and informed citizen have a moral duty and obligation to vote to protect and further society? Key constitutional changes brought about by referendums can prove that compulsory voting is essential and needed in society for every vote to count. Lastly, compulsory voting when being a secret ballot can turn into a more compulsory “turn up” for many citizens as they can

This Federalist arguments on the limitations of mass participation also has its merits in a modern context, where voters are often indifferent, uninformed, and easily manipulated in an increasingly technological world. What Fishkin defines as “rational ignorance,” in which citizens are not motivated to go out of their way to learn and form rational opinions on policies, supports Madison’s fears. One aspect of rational ignorance illustrates the tendency of voters to vote only on policy issues relevant to them. For instance, farmers under a mass participatory system may vote only on issues related to agriculture, while remaining ignorant on other issues

However this does not necessarily mean that the representatives are carrying out this function. Professor Martin Gilens of Princeton University looked at more than 20 years’ worth of data to answer a simple question, does the government represent the people? The study took data from nearly 2000 public opinion surveys and compared it to the policies that ended up becoming law. In other words it compared what the public wanted to what the government actually did. What they found was that the opinions of 90% of Americans have essentially no impact at all. With only two independents elected in the Senate and none in the House, it is apparent that the Congress is not

Government is an administration defined by the Constitution, but is also a constantly adjusting foundation by the efforts of its citizens. By Litherland (2014), government is defined as policies set in order to lead a body of people (p. 395). Over the span of time, the idea of government has been stretched, changed, and applied to various communities throughout both the nation and the world. Whether it was back in the eighteenth century, current, or in the very near future—government has existed and will continue to exist for its people and the nation it has built its foundation upon. With the use of multiple authors, those of: “Difference between Direct and Representative Democracy” (n.d.), “Federalism - Dividing Power between States and the

Democracy: a government by the people, in which citizens rule either directly or through elected representatives - the latter description more relevant to today’s societies. Quite evidently, democracy is not perfect; like any other political system, it is subject to a plethora of flaws. For instance, it is no secret that voters tend to make illogical decisions – not out of sheer malice, but as a result of being wrongly informed. Politicians also make erroneous choices, whether they do so because they are dishonest or simply out of touch with the true will of their constituents. Further, anyone who has studied the government of a parliamentary democracy knows gerrymandering can have a powerful say in determining elections. Despite these and

A weakness of democracy is the “Tyranny of the Majority”. This is an inevitable pitfall, because in a democracy, the power is vested foremost in the people the constituting the society itself. Alexis de Tocqueville wrote on this concept:

Freedom of speech is comprehended to be an essential in a democracy. The norms on constraining freedom of expression imply that open level headed discussion may not be totally smothered even in times of crisis. A standout among the most prominent defenders of the connection between the right to speak freely and majority rule government is Alexander Meiklejohn. He contends that the idea of vote based system is that of self-government by the individuals. For such a framework to work an educated electorate is essential. In order to be knowledgeable, there must be no requirements on the free stream of data and thoughts. As indicated by Meiklejohn, a democratic government won't be consistent with its key perfect if people with great influence have

Take it all the way back to when the constitution was being written. The founding fathers had a big choice to make; did they establish a direct democracy or a representative democracy? They had to weigh the pros and cons of each and they ended up deciding on a representative democracy. In this paper I will tell you why they made things the way they did and certain compromises they made along the way.

Throughout history different types of instrumental regimes have been in tact so civilizations remained structured and cohesive. As humanity advanced, governments obligingly followed. Although there have been hiccups from the ancient times to modern day, one type of government, democracy, has proven to be the most effective and adaptive. As quoted by Winston Churchill, democracy is the best form of government that has existed. This is true because the heart of democracy is reliant, dependent, and thrives on the populaces desires; which gives them the ability for maintaining the right to choose, over time it adjusts and fixes itself to engulf the prominent troubling issues, and people have the right of electing the person they

Churchill’s claim that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” is deliberately provocative and intended to challenge the reader’s simplistic ideal that democracy is without faults. There are an estimated 114 democracies in the world today (Wong, Oct 3rd lecture). A figure that has increased rapidly in the last century not necessarily because democracy is the best form of government, but primarily for reason that in practice, under stable social, economic and political conditions, it has the least limitations in comparison to other forms of government. Be it the transparency of a democratic government or the prevalence of majority rule, all subdivisions of democracy benefit and hinder its