Advantages Of Authoritarian Government

1. What is essential to the “preservation of liberty?” How should this “be so constituted?” The powers of government must be separated in order to preserve liberty To do this, the members of one branch should have little to no power over the selection of members of another branch This separation of powers ensures that no one branch gains control of the other two branches The people should have control and elect who fills most offices 2. Explain the following: “A dependence upon the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” Man has the tendency to put his ambitions first and be greedy The government is made up of man; therefore there must be Constitutional safeguards restricting the actions of powerful government

“That government is best which governs least”(Thoreu). Times of struggle, times of big government, and times of disagreement often lead to religious, political, and social revolutions. Thus, bringing debate, conflict, and ultimately resolutions. Civil Disobedience can often be portrayed as criminalistic or sometimes judgement falls upon those who participate. Henry Thoreau stated “I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government.” This means that the power should be to the people and government should represent the people.

This is why Economic Freedom is a major undemocratic feature of Colonial America. Equality is an undemocratic feature of Colonial America that is debated if it is good or not. Equality means that all people have the same equal rights. I think equality is a good feature because it stops people from have too little or too much power. Equality is also big because the people that have little power now have the same power as the people with lots of power.

The people should come first and their concerns and thoughts on a project should account for the planning, especially when the project involves developing a region. In order for an international financial institution like the World Bank to really do what is right for a region, the whole infrastructure would have to be re organized. For example, since the United States contributes the most money, they have the most say and the most amount of representatives. Each region that invests into the World Bank only has as much say as their pockets will allow. This is completely unfair in my opinion and really enforces the capitalistic views that many nations are run by.

Also, I think that we should get rid of the popular vote. There are so many reasons why we need an Electoral College. The Electoral College keeps the coastal elites from basically choosing whoever they want for president. Many people often get mistaken and believe that the Founders wanted a popular vote and power to the people, however, nowhere in the constitution does it say anything about that. If there wasn’t an Electoral College then the smaller states would be at a complete disadvantage.

As long as we are consenting to this ideology, the worship of the dollar, we cannot complain about the distribution of power or the actions of the powerful without being hypocritical. The dominant class may or may not have a malicious intent behind their actions, but it does not matter because that the source of their power is through us consenting to an ideology which benefits them and screws everyone else. We must first change the ideals of society before attacking the distribution of

Their work is significant because their service characteristic approach can be used as a framework to explain the basic political dynamics of particular services. However, I find it mundane that it leaves out a huge issue that shadows political dynamics of providing or improving services in developing countries, which is corruption. Bratley and Harris, very naively, argue that politicians only look for electoral/clientelistic returns and political attribution. While this might be true in a few developing countries, it is not true for most developing countries. In developing countries most politicians look for personal economical benefit whenever thinking about what service to improve or provide.

Marx and Arendt are two brilliant political theorists who pose different concerns, beliefs and ideals when it comes to the relationship between economics and freedom. Marx defines freedom as creative self- actualization which contrasts Arendt’s definition of freedom as worldly and eruptive action. Marx’s definition is more focused on the individual, which in turn will better society while Arendt is more focused on action as community. Marx believes in a society free from economic oppression by the elite while Arendt believes in one where poverty and politics do not meet. Economics and freedom, according to Marx, are intertwined in such a way that they cannot be separated.

However, the truth is, that by building this wall we will only make America isolated from the Dreamers; people who come to this country for a more desirable life and education. Likewise, it is proven that if the wall is built, it will eventually affect America’s economy due to how expensive this procedure is going to be. This topic will sooner or later create a lot of chaos in the United States considering that there is no possible way Mexico

For instance, Binay wants to be the DILG cabinet secretary in order for his name to be known all over the Philippines in preparation in the incoming 2016 election. However, the purpose of Binay to run in position is to steal the money of the country, and we all know that stealing money from the Filipino people will lead to various problems such as poverty and hunger which may result to death. Based on Aristole’s, this is against the telos. Binay is not exercising virtue. If only the pursuit of happiness is introduced to Binay, there is a great possibilty that he will