The political system I would use for Viva la Vida Islands, is the Representative Democracy. I think it’s better to have citizens vote on representatives to represent them, rather than gathering everybody to vote on one law. It would be extremely difficult to gather people to have them vote. It’s easier to have citizens vote for a leader that has a voice for them and that they trust. Using this system would be easier and fairer making everyone have a voice in one way or another.
It’s certainly better than a communism or a dictatorship. I chose this route since, I disagree with communism. I don’t believe that everybody should have the same pay as each other. It’s certainly unfair for a McDonalds worker to earn the same pay as a builder. I believe the harder you work, the more pay you should earn! I also, don’t think it’s right how the government chooses your job and makes your life decisions. The government shouldn’t be that nosey and plan your life out. I also, don’t think a dictatorship is right. It’s not an ideally fair system and it’s ruled over by one person! Citizens don’t have a voice and I don’t think it’s fair. Dictatorships always fail anyways since someone always out rules them!
…show more content…
I feel it’s better to have the government involved a little bit, but not a whole lot. I think it’s better to have supply and demand rather than the government controlling all the prices on items. It also, supports the idea of the harder you work, the more money you earn. Also, there are hardly any regulations, regulations would include taxes and the amount of money the workers are making for doing their job. It also means more competition for
More than two-hundred years ago, thirteen young nations defeated a tyrant thousands of miles away. The prize for such a victory was self-government. For the first time in human history, a nation had handed over supreme executive power to the masses. Exercising this power has become a hallmark of being an American. Even today it is thought of as one of the most patriotic acts one can undertake. The thought of a nation run by popular vote is a comfortable enough idea, but in the case of the United States, a self-governed population threatens to destroy itself and possibly the world through wasteful spending, unregulated pursuit of profits, and a blotted military budget.
About a year ago i was going into town on a sunday afternoon. I went to walmart to do some shopping. When i walked in and seen this guy asking for some change. I had asked him what it was for, and he said food. Then he had mentioned he was a veteran. He was a pretty old guy too i felt super bad, we should not treat are veterans like that so here's what i think we should do.
When the Framers of the Constitution met in Philadelphia, they came together with one common purpose in mind. They needed to form a fair and solid system of government that would stand the test of time; one that was both fair for the people and would not involve a monarchy. Each of these men had their own ideas on what would constitute this system, however, so many compromises had to be made. Together, the men gathered in Philadelphia created a federal system of government and drafted a constitution outlining this government. They took care in developing three branches of federal government with a system of checks and balances so that no one branch would gain too much power, thus avoiding any
Industrial Countries all over the world have seen a steady decline in voter participation; Great Britain is a great example of this. The country has witness turnout in elections falling slowly as time pass. However, the election of 2001 dropped the country from their average of 76% voter turnout to just a 59.4% turnout. Comparatively, Australia, a former colony of Britain, has enjoyed high and steady voter participation since 1924 because of the implementation of compulsory voting. This system has proven to be not only effective in bring voters to the polls, but also effective in improving Australia’s democracy. By evaluating these two countries with similar political structure; one can see the difference in compulsory voting turnouts
Members of Congress are voted to office by their electorate as their representatives at the congress level of democracy. In their capacity, they may decide to exercise their powers by the will of the people or according to their personal judgment. When the members of Congress opt to be the people’s delegate, their actions in the House and other congressional engagements are a reflection of the will of their district. As such, the delegate representative does not have or exercise the autonomy to represent and decide for their district. Instead, a strenuous consultation process is required to keep the people in control of all relevant decisions.
Upon the opening words of the Constitution, "We the People do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America," one must ask, who are these people? While the American Constitution provided its citizens with individual rights, many members were excluded. Elite framers manipulated the idea of a constitution in order to protect their economic interests and the interests of their fellow white land and slave owning men' by restricting the voices of women, slaves, indentured servants and others. Therefore, the Constitution cannot truly be considered a "democratic document." However, because it is a live document, malleable and controllably changeable according to the interest of congress, it has enabled us to make
Democracy, as most people think of it today, did not exist during the first few decades of U.S. history.
voted against a policy which is found to be the best for the general, must have
Since the middle ages, corporatism has taken a leading role in countries by involving different organizations into a group of people to develop cooperative associations on the basis of shared interests. In Europe, corporatism was the main objective of people in a country. For example, Lewis Mumford note that the basic society "was based on classes and ranks" and there was no guaranteeing demand through security and no power that did not recognize the legal obligations of a corporate profile (Mumford). Once democracy began to spread and become definite in the United States, the Americans began to experiment with new ideas and values. In America, corporatism began to evolve into a new system where the knowing of freedom and justice was
Thomas Jefferson once wrote in the Declaration of Independence, “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they 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.” Today, this quote stands tall in defining and describing the type of government the United States has created for the people. A democracy is a supreme power
Democracy is a unique type of government, and the purpose of this essay is to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses that a democratic government provides. I will detail that many components of this type of society are both strengths and weakness as each component has beneficial aspects as well as unavoidable pitfalls.
Voting has not always been as easy as it is today. It is interesting to examine how far America has progressed in its process of allowing different types of people to be able to vote. Voting was once aimed at a particular group of people, which were white males that owned their own property. Today, most people over the age of eighteen can vote, except for the mentally incompetent or people who have been convicted of major felonies in some states. The decline of voter participation has always been a debate in the public arena. According to McDonald and Popkin, it is “the most important, most familiar, most analyzed, and most conjectured trend in recent American political history (2001, 963)” The question is, how important is voter
The American democracy is one of the most peaceful kinds of government in the world although it is a long way from utopia. The democracy in which we live has many strengths and weaknesses. Neither strengths or weaknesses out weigh one another, but it is necessary to have both due to the varying definitions. A democracy is a government that is run by the people. The politicians that we elect to run our government are human and they are susceptible to mistakes based on their own strengths and weaknesses. The strengths and weaknesses they possess are reflected into our government but at least “we the people” elect them and they are not chosen for us.
I think that this is a very good hypothesis put in front of us by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. They do a superb job of explaining the problem with the existing government. They also give a vehicle for change in the next chapter. So its seems that I should be ready for a communist revolution. The problem with this is that it is just a good hypothesis. As with all hypothesis’s they must be tested and the communist hypothesis has failed most of its tests. I must hand it to Mr. Marx, since I was born and raised in a very anti-communist country and after reading two chapters in his book I was almost ready to join him. He is a
The election process in the United States is a valuable process to the election of the proper officials to satisfy the people. The people run the country which is why we live in freedom because we control what happens with major decisions by choosing whom we want to decide these decisions. The whole country goes to vote on a certain day and by the end of that day we will vote to select who will run the country, state, county, or city political positions. The most complex decision and one with the biggest impact are selecting who the President of the United States shall be. We examine what their views are and who would do a better job. Then vote in our respected states with a certain number of electoral votes