Australia's System of Democracy

A major problem that many representative democracies had, and still have, is securing minorities rights within a system ruled by the majority of that country. This is when the term modern pluralism comes into light. Modern pluralism is the idea that having a large number of parties within a government will create more power in the system, which ensures that not a single group will contain total control.

Pluralism paints a really blushing picture of how intrigue gatherings work in American legislative issues. One approach that is to some extent propelled by the issue of vote based citizenship yet which endeavors to save a few components of uniformity against the elitist feedback is the vested party pluralist record of governmental issues. Initial articulation of the perspective is intense. In this origination of the popularity based procedure, every resident is an individual from a vested party with barely characterized intrigues that are firmly associated with their regular lives. On these subjects nationals should be great educated and inspired by having an impact. Or if nothing else, elites from each of the vested parties that are moderately

The Pluralist structure illustrates power as the aftermath of the collection of different interest groups haggling for the

The Australian Constitution is a rich amalgam of various classical political principles. The concepts of the Rule of Law and the doctrine of the Separation of Powers evident in Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws are both salient examples of political theses that are central to Australian Constitutional Law. The structure of the Constitution itself and decisions of the High Court of Australia unequivocally validate the entrenchment of the doctrine separation of powers in the Commonwealth Constitution . In particular, the High Court has applied this with relative rigour with respect to the separation of judicial power. The separation of the judicial power is fundamentally critical to upholding the rule of law. The High Court in Wilson v Minister for Aboriginal Affairs noted that “the separation of the judicial function…advances two constitutional objectives: the guarantee of liberty and, to that end, the independence of Chapter III judges” . Kitto J in R v Davidson also identified that the judiciary should be subject to no other authority but the law itself . This is a critical aspect ensuring the concept of legal equality is upheld. Therefore, its role clearly extends to providing checks and balances on the exercise of power by the legislative and executive arms of government . This ensures the liberty of the law and limits the abuse of the judicial system. Judicial Power is defined as “the power which every sovereign must of necessity have to decide between its subjects

The majoritarian model is currently being used in Canadas political economy, however, Canada’s would be better off with a shift to the consensus model as it included all minority groups and represented the true meaning of democracy. The consensus model represented the people in a society by including minority groups, using a federal or decentralized government and a multi-party system. The consensus model ensured the inclusion of groups in plural societies, where this was absent under a majoritarian ruling. A majoritarian model of government only made decisions in the hands of a select few, whereas, in a consensus model the power was divided in a federal or decentralized government. Finally, a consensus model allowed for multiple parties to run for election under the multiparty system and voting was done under proportional representation. However, in a majoritarian government, there are two parties running for office which operated under a disproportional election.

Pluralist theory views politics and decision making as a competitive phenomenon where different groups and individuals have different views and that there is no single elite group that exercises influence (Davis & Go, 2009). The theory holds that power is relatively broadly distributed among different interest groups. These groups hold different views of the same aspect and compete with each other for

The modern day government of the United States of America most closely resembles the pluralist view as no single body is able to gain control of the government as evidenced by many modern issues. The pluralistic view demonstrates that competition among all affected interests shapes public policy. A problem that can be associated with pluralism is that multiple prominent groups can constantly conflict with each other which weakens the power of the government to serve the masses as a whole. Looking at the current federal government there has been little done to pass anything on anti-outsourcing, child-care, or anything about building a wall (www.washingtonpost.com). This is mainly due to the fundamentals of how the government was created in

Pluralism is an existence of coexisting. It encompasses a diverse group of views rather that

The pluralists are several groups that seek to influence the government for the common good of society. Since the nation is full of people with various ethnic backgrounds, different religions, and cultures, it is imperative that the government attends to the needs of the interest groups. The end goal of Pluralism is to be able to bargain with government; it views politics

In context to Australia, this is formed through the House of Representatives and the Senate. These are more commonly identified as the lower house (House of Representatives) and the upper house (Senate). Contemporary bicameral systems such as that adopted by Australia date back to the beginnings of British constitutional government in the seventeenth century (EBO, 2015). Subsequently, Australia’s adaptation of bicameralism has become a highly distinctive feature of democracy. The concept behind bicameralism is that the formation of two chambers upholds the task of maintaining the separation of powers and responsible government, so that power is not concentrated in a single body as seen in Queensland’s unicameral system, which will be discussed further on (PEO, 2015).

Australian classical pluralist theory is a conventional corpus, and its core ideas offer one of the more relevant power analyses regarding polarized concerns for morality in the same-sex marriage debate. Political theorist, Galston, argues that there is a strong case for pluralism being the most adequate account of the moral universe mankind inhabits (1999). If this is the case, then the pendulum

The pluralist model indicates the power is distributed among many groups. These groups may include coalitions of like-minded people, unions, professional associations and business lobbyists. The percentages of average people that make up these groups are small, so in theory, the public acts as bystanders in the pluralist model of power. Power elitism is a theory that centers on the idea of how power is concentrated. There are two types of groups within the pluralist model: insider groups, which tend to be more powerful, and outsider groups.

Canada is one of the largest and most culturally diverse countries in the world. These characteristics make the democratic governing of the country a difficult task. A democratic model is needed that respects the fundamental rights and freedoms of various diverse cultures, and unites these cultures over a huge land mass as Canadians. To do this the Canadian government is one which is pluralist. Pluralism is the ideology that groups, (in Canada's case political parties), should rule in government. These parties help protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of everyone living in Canada, regardless of their ethnicity, or religious beliefs. The role political parties play in Canada is vital for

The scopes of elist and pluralist perspectives permit for a greater comprehension of Proposition 47 within the discourse of the American politics. Elitism is a belief that few people control politics in the United States (Schuber, Dye and Zeigler 2014). Likewise, elitism appears to be a hierarchical system, suggesting that the top dictates all the decision-makings. As Schuber, Dye and Zeigler (2014) suggest the central assumptions of elitism are that the society is segmented into the few who have the power and the few, who govern, are not typical of the masses that are governed. Similarly, elites share a consensus on the fundamental values of the system and preservation of the system (Schuber, Dye and Zeigler 2014). On the contrary, pluralism

The Division and Separation of power are essential to keep our societies rulers to have a restriction on their powers. The importance of each on the Australian domestic law especially in relation to the rule of law, and protecting individual rights, and the legal system.