This can guard against tyranny because when one person gains too much power, then tyranny is almost guaranteed because there would not be an easy way to stop them from doing only what they desire. For example, if the president had all the power over everyone they would be able to do whatever they want and make laws that maybe no one agrees with. Next, if the power is divided and shared between people, then there will be a strong central government. John Madison presented this idea. When there is a strong central government then it means that the government would have a strong middle, which can guard against tyranny because it keeps the government successful and strong.
Many people believe that the election plays the most important role in democracy. Because a free and fair election holds the government responsible and forces it to behave on voter's interest. However, some scholars find evidence that election itself is not enough to hold politicians responsible if the institutions are not shaping incentives in a correct way. In other words, the role of the election on democracy, whether it helps to serve the interest of the public or specific groups, depends on other political institutions. I In an ideal democracy, voters will vote for the politicians and policies that can bring the most benefit to themselves, while the rules of the society cares about how to maximize the social welfare as a whole.
These can easily be seen in the U.S. legislature with the use of filibuster. When only a small portion of the population desires partisanship then legislators will have little reason besides personal belief to refuse to compromise, but if a large portion of representatives refuse to budge and are split, or polarized, on the topic then little can be done to progress or improve the discussion. These same unmoving individuals continue to be reelected, because they are satisfying their population’s desire for partisanship (Lee 170). Polarization by itself can also hinder the democratic process, because it can reduce the competitive nature of politics (Sørensen 430). It does so, because constituents would likely keep the “bad” politician in their party in power, instead of voting for the other party’s representative (Sørensen 432).
As previously talked about in The Federalist 10, the majority group most often threatens the rights of the minorities. Madison believes that there are only two ways to avoid the wrongs brought about by citizens. The first solution is to create a powerful government. This solution would be chancy because a government of this type may place power behind a certain group that is working against the common good. Ultimately if this occurred, the purpose for creating a powerful government would be overlooked.
In addition, the winner-take-all system, also known as “unit rule”, while not always necessarily representative of the popular vote, “the electoral college and unit rule provide decisive majorities that lend stability to our presidential election system” (Josephson, Ross 162). This stability compliments the argument that it simply isn’t worth the effort to make any changes to the Electoral College because of the work involved and how functional it is. The Electoral College may not be the most ideal system, but it performs the functions it was designed to do. As said by Alexander Bickel on the
One great way to deal with factions is by having a government that knows how to control and deal with their effects. Madison believes that a republic can do that job better than a democracy, because a democracy is a small society of people who can not admit there is a cure to factions. He believes that a large republic would work out well for the States, because a larger government causes less negative impacts on the people, even though all of the people won’t be known, the government won’t be too centralized and only focused on the
Some of the people felt, The Articles of Confederation, made the national government too weak because of democracy. The Articles of Confederation maintained the principle that the national government would not hold more power than the states, which they saw as sovereign. This did satisfy the fears and questions
It can be seen from different angles since many countries are determined to live in a free expression society but others want to enforce censorship in many situations. Countries that are against censorship is mainly because it can be very powerful in the sense that it can control what is shown on the news. It may present false statements and mislead the people in to believing things that are not true. If censored, everything would have to pass first through the government, and they may change some stories to please them. This can lead to only showing favoritism for certain brands or groups; companies may get to control the information that gets to the country.
Holding elections for government officials is a democratic feature of government, but the requirements were not equal. For the election to be completely democratic it has to be fair, all people must have a say in government. Despite their race, gender, or religion. Although colonial America’s government was democratic it had some undemocratic features like selective rights and unfair elections so the democracy was a work in progress at the time. With the distance from Britain helping with the planning of the government, over time the colonial version of democracy was improved.
The fact that one has the right to say and believe is the foundation for democracy to function. If no one dared to say their opinions, then it had become a dictatorship where only one opinion on how society and the country should work had been the “right”. If people dared to express their opinions, they will help improving the society one lives. Freedom of speech gives one the responsibility to consider what fits into different contexts, and it will make us better persons and people. Simply, people will feel safe in the society they live in.
The lawyers were a type of Aristocrat and he held them on a different scale. He was impressed with our system of Justice of the Peace. The local government acts as a school for democracy, and makes people join offices. Alexis believed that democracy trickles up rather than down. Freedom of Press is important to a democracy, but he thought if it becomes too powerful it can become a threat to democracy.
176). An effective party will be able to present and carry out programs that they propose. However, if the cynicism of the public and the ineffectiveness of the party system continues to escalate, the nation may eventually witness the disintegration of the two major political parties. The two-party system is an essential part of our national government because if “[reinforces] the constitutional framework within which the voter may without peril exercise his freedom of political choice” (pg. 178).
While we may be considered a democratic society, we do not involve enough of our citizens in the democratic process. Since most people do not vote we are not truly a democracy. If more eligible voters were to vote, it would greatly change how our political system currently works. A broader spectrum of voters would shape policies and decisions differently. The additional voters would aid in more accurately deciding upon what the entirety of society wishes.
Gerrymandering is one of those issues that is a problem and the legislature would need to fix this by changing electoral districts, it may have made sense at one time but not now. Some of the problems within the judicial branch are setting laws for lower courts, the problem with this as with the other branches are that no everyone will agree with decisions or bills or laws being brought to the table, they may seem unfair or
One of the main purposes of elections is to provide citizens with the opportunity to hold their representatives accountable. Those appoint are not obligated to do a good job because they are not faced with reelection. There is no guarantee that the one who is randomly selected for their district represents the ideas of the majority. The power of the general public would diminish because they would not be able to select the voice to represent them. Often we really do elect representatives because we believe they’re good at their jobs.