Critically Evaluate The Link Between Good Governance And Peace

The responsibilities of government are to protect its citizens by such means as our armed services or military weapons. Government is to ensure there is a way of fairly maintaining order as an example our police, National Guard, and to ensure every citizen has equal access to items, products, goods such as schools, and highways. However, government or politics often has a negative connotation too many as it is viewed as a way for lobbyists and those with money to make policies that are important or in some way helpful to them. Many view politics as dishonest and that politics is a manner in which someone or group benefits for their own advantage and not for society as a

A successful economy is perhaps the most key ingredient leading to a successful nation. An economy is a delicate balance of many different conflicting and coexisting elements. Naturally, an economy’s success can often be measured by the amount of wealth it contains, not to mention the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of its distribution of the wealth. Effective distribution of wealth is no easy feat. Wealthy and poor people will always need to coexist- this is an inescapable truth. The government’s job in many cases becomes that of a referee. Naturally, perfect peace and harmony between two totally different classes would be a utopia, and probably will never be completely achieved. A government must, therefore,

Throughout the time of recorded history, humans have had the natural desire for protection and order. That desire is where government comes in. There have been many forms of government throughout history, according to Aristotle, there have only been two types, oligarchies and democracies. Aristotle goes on to say that there are variations of these governments; for example, an aristocracy is considered to be an oligarchy where the wealthy land owners make the decisions in government. Later in that same paragraph, he states that a republic is a form of democracy; these are not the only variations of democracies and oligarchies as there are many variations of these two types of government along the spectrum (Aristotle 3). Societies all through history have one thing in common, they all had some form of government; This raises the question though, what is the difference between a good and bad government?

The duty of government is described in John Adams as to, “inculcate the principles of humanity, charity, industry, frugality, honesty, sincerity.” (224) In summation, the government’s ideals ought to be to instill virtue to its citizens with persistent instruction. However, Politics takes command of government when men disagree on when, how, and to what extent those virtues ought to be instilled. Politics controls people, which brings a motivation for corruption; and at the same time, people control politics, allowing that corruption to become manifest. However, politics cannot be corrupt on it’s own, rather through its composition of men and their thoughts contributes to its corruption. Politics will only be corrupt if those composing it

The civil war ended and it was soon the beginning of many hardships. “The Problems of Peacemaking” discusses all of the problems with the Northerners and Southerners becoming peaceful after the war. President Abraham Lincoln did many things to try to get peace after the war. When he realized it wasn’t going to be easy, he decided that a “Reconstruction Plan” could maybe help them get peace. After the civil war the South didn’t have many things left because everything they had was destroyed almost completely. People living in the south wanted to regain it back but they soon realized it wasn’t that easy to do. The white southerners lost some land and their slaves but that was nothing compared to the black southerners. Black southerners lost everything when they left to get freedom, besides a little bit of clothing and a few possessions they took with them. Blacks and whites had completely different meanings of freedom. The whites wanted to control what they did without the government’s input, and the blacks wanted to get freedom from the whites. The whites wanted white supremacy which is, they wanted to be more superior. The blacks just wanted to be control and own things such as land. General William Sherman’s “Special Field Order No. 15” helped give 400,000 acres of land to 40,000 freed slaves. Other methods were produced to help slaves get land, one of the most famous was the Freedmen’s Bureau. The Freedmen’s Bureau gave slaves food, health care, clothing, and education. The whites of course, disagreed with the Bureau and would have disputes about it. The disputes were all settled by the Freedmen’s Bureau. General Howard created the “Circular 13” which helped lease 40 acre plots to slaves and hoped to later sell it to them. He also made the Southern Homestead Act that made 46 million acres for sell to slaves in many states. It was later repealed because people thought slaves were taking advantage of it. Republicans had say in what happened during the reconstruction. The conservatives and radicals disagreed on their views. The radicals were more harsh. All the conservatives said was that the south should just take what was happening and do nothing about it. The radicals wanted to take away some rights from a

Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master.” -George Washington

For all of history there has existed the struggle between the strong and the weak. The establishment of government gives the power to a particular group to decide the amount of freedom the majority is allowed, however, though not ideal it provides necessary order. The benefits of security that limitations on freedom provides must be balanced with the individual's pursuit of happiness for citizens to be content. To prevent the governed majority from destabilizing the rulers and seeking power, the government will oppress political and personal freedom of thought. In result, the majority will live under the illusion of contentment and not wish to rebell; those enlightened to the idea that the government should be ruled by the governed, would associate happiness only with ignorance and consequently seek freedom.

are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights: that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence ,indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and, accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

There are many forms of government around the world. The United States is a democratic republic. North Korea is governed under an authoritarian dictatorship. Some countries are monarchies governed by hereditary rulers. But whether these are good forms of government depends on whether they achieve the purposes of government. For example, the Apostle Paul said that the purpose of government was to punish evildoers, or said another way, to secure the peace. (Romans 13:40) Another example is the US Constitution that says government has six purposes: to secure unity, justice, domestic tranquility, defense, general welfare and liberty. (Preamble to the US Constitution) To achieve any of these goals, the best government would be able to identify

If you don’t like an atrocious government, you should be able to overthrow it. A sound government should protect their people, and care about the less fortunate. Good governments should keep things organized without being cruel. A famous philosopher, John Locke agreed with this statement.

The introductory chapter situates the book within the current literature, provides a cursory overview of its intent, and outlines what it uniquely has to offer regarding critically informed understandings of governance and democracy. They provide an introduction to a relational understanding of existence and cautionary notes on the intent of establishing ideal-types that are necessary to critique governance; despite known philosophical weaknesses, Stout and Love present this material throughout in an accessible manner, even for the uninitiated student in public administration. Their intent in the following chapters is three-fold. First, they situate the motivation for changing governance practices by asking the simple question, why now: “contemporary governance theory is revisiting three fundamental questions – that of sovereignty, the role of government, and the methods of democratic participation” (p. 17). Moreover, shifts in power have produced social, economic, and environmental crises, and as a result, people are insisting upon practices of direct and participatory democracy (emphasis added). Next, they ground governance in ontology XXXX. Finally, in chapter 4, Stout and Love discuss the usefulness of a dialectical analysis an analytic frame to not only compare and contrast concepts but also construct ideal-types to explore anticipated implications. consisting

The amount of power that a government should have within a country has been argued throughout history. A mutualistic relationship between a government and its people is clear in almost every society in the world, yet, the dominance one entity has over the other varies from case to case. The United States’ foundation is based upon the fact that the Government works for the people in which actual citizens take part in maintaining a fair, unified authority, but this modern democracy has many pros and cons and is still not agreeably the best form of government. People’s opinions differ on how much say any given person should have on the decisions his or her county makes and the relationship a government should have with its people is very

The question of the morality of government has been one ever since the first prehistoric humans came together to form bands of nomads. This question was especially something the ancient Greek philosophers argued over as they were ruled by a patriarchal democracy. Plato and later Aristotle grappled with this question over who should rule and what various forms or kinds of rule would look like. Aristotle mentions a few various true forms of government such as a kingship, aristocracy, and polity as well as their perverted forms such a tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. The perverted forms are the same as the true ones only the true forms rule for the common interest and the perverted forms rule only to benefit the ruler(s). This represents

The just exercise of political power is conceived of as resting upon constitutional principles. Constitutional principles are a position from which we operate justly. However, what constitutes as just? Throughout history political power derived from many historical foundations that were deemed just based on the society that upheld those principles. This notion is evident throughout the development of constitutional doctrines in Greek democracy, Aristotle’s political theory, Roman Republicanism, and English Constitutionalism.

In each form of government, the role of the citizen and the organization of the infrastructure varied (Somerville and Santoni 70). Depending on the type of government, there can be good citizens who are bad people (or vice versa) (Somerville and Santoni 69), but in the best form of government, which he calls the polity, the good man is also the good citizen (Somerville and Santoni 75). The “least desirable forms of government,” Aristotle suggests, were corrupted versions of the best governments because they act in their own interest as opposed to the interests of the many (Sterling).