Examine and Assess How Political Order Is Made and Repaired

What makes a political authority legitimate? A legitimate political authority, in this essay, will be taken to mean that there is a justification for an individual or a body to have power over other people in determining such things as laws and protection of freedom. To consider this question, three theories shall be looked at – Hobbes’, Rousseau and finally Locke and determine which gives the most persuasive account of legitimate political authority. To begin with, their hypothetical starting point, the state of nature, shall be discussed to establish the foundations of their political authority. Secondly, the reasons that shall lead man to get out of the state of nature will be examined in order to see if these logically follow on from

When looking into the ideas of political theorists it is important to the use of political concepts that may play an important role in what the theorists are suggesting and also how they may affect the relationship between to state and the individuals living within a state. The concepts that will be looked at within this essay are: power, authority and also accountability.

Over the length of this course, we have discussed several aspects of politics. We have studied citizenship and obligations to society as a citizen, justice and what it means to us as individuals, and how to go about enacting change within a community and around the world. Some of the most important topics from this class included the characteristics, duties, and obligations of rulers of government. In addition to the concept of rulers, we also studied the notion of authority and the moral and metaphysical implications of authority to individuals ' autonomy. Within each concept of study, we read works from many authors with conflicting ontologies, constructed from their differing views on human nature.

Anscombe presents her argument by first defining what marks the authority of the state. Once the authority of the state can be identified it can later be determined whether or not it is justified. This justification comes from the performance of a necessary task for the general human need. These necessary tasks cannot be performed unless there is extensive obedience. The state has a right to be obeyed when its authority is based on its performance of the necessary task. This exercise of authority from the state is justified.

In our system of government we are privileged with the option to take part in the political process that runs the country. It is our right to vote that lets the people influence change in policy and set the guidelines that politicians must follow to be elected representatives. This precious ability, which is most coveted in most non-democratic countries, is taken for granted in our own.

The United States is notorious on the international scale for having one of the worst voter turnouts in the world. By pushing us to be obligated to take part in the happenings of our nation, this clause has advocated for the most fundamental piece of democracy: voting. Voting is what puts the power in the people’s hands and builds the nation’s ideal of popular sovereignty. Although it is true that we are not a direct democracy and that we do not vote ourselves on the creation of laws, we are absolutely in control of who does and does not make our laws. We are a representative democracy, and it is our duty to make sure we elect officials who share our values and act according to our will. We must never forget that our government and its officials work for us and never the other way around. To decide who we want working for us, we have elections. It is perhaps our most important role as citizens to actively investigate who we put into office. It is imperative that we find our best men and women to run our nation. This clause tells us to not only take an active part in our government but insinuates that we vote and do so

right to represent or rule some areas of society’s lives. Social scientists are able to see the

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

Legitimacy, the first step of many steps to retaining authority.” As understood by most social scientists, political

In addition to this, the manner in which a state exercises power is generally similar to and a result of the state’s current form of government and its political precedent. In order to discuss the relationship between legitimacy and government, it is first important to consider why governments are formed. John Locke, an English Enlightenment philosopher, wrote his Second Treatise on Government on this topic. Locke’s ideas have been highly influential historically, with a strong influence on the American government, which is visible in the American Constitution, as well as in the French revolution.

The United States of America is one of the oldest contemporary democracies, is currently the second largest democracy, and is ranked the 16th best democracy in the world (Campbell et. Al, 2014). Yet there is a legitimate question over whether or not the United States can still truly be considered a democracy, with some studies even suggesting it has begun to resemble an oligarchy (Chumley, 2014). In this essay, I will use Dahl’s criteria of voting equality and effective participation to determine whether or not the United States are truly a democracy.

What happens when the institutions created to maintain order within a state cannot maintain order within themselves? This is a question that has been debated time and time again, and is now more relevant than ever. Nations that had previously been seen as having stable and prosperous institutions, such as Britain and America, now see those institutions slowly losing their structures. Britain’s recent departure from the European Union, as well as the slow decline of America’s faith in its damaged and barely functioning presidential system, has greatly changed the way that the people view their institutions.

The legitimacy of a political order, argues Post (1995), is due to the citizens’ belief

The exercise of authority and power are facts as old as time, throughout the ages men have tried to explain and understand how and why political authority is organised. Sovereignty is a concept used to explain political power, to

one essential conviction, expressed in the word democracy itself: that power should be in the hands of the people. Although democracy today has been slightly inefficient in this idea, with the wealthy, elite class challenging this right, “it nevertheless claims for itself a fundamental validity that no other kind of society shares….” To completely understand the structure of democracy, one must return to the roots of the practice itself, and examine the origins in ancient Greece, the expansion in the Roman Empire, and how these practices combined make what we recognize as today’s democratic government.