It seems that while this overlap is present in war powers the distinction can be made between the powers of war and peace. As shown by Federalist 69 the legislature has the powers to declare war while the executive has the prerogative to maintain peace. As such the legislature acts slowly and deliberatively which is best for a larger body. In stark contrast, the executive acts quickly and decisively allowing it to respond to changing climates and necessitating a single authority or President. It seems in the case of the “Proclamation of Neutrality” that the executive is acting exactly as intended by preserving peace and acting
A constitution is a set of fundamental and entrenched rules governing the conduct of an organisation or nation, setting up its idea, character and structure. It is typically a short document general in nature embodying the aspirations of values of its scholars and subjects. (Business Dictionary, 2015). A constitution is a definitive power any action, which contradicts the rules of the constitution, will be both unconstitutional and unlawful. It helps to recognise the rights and freedoms of citizens through a bill of rights, which works both to protect citizens and to confine the power of the state.
This fact undoubtedly is a result of the uncertainty which still remains between states regardless of the numerous progressive moves in a liberal direction for the international community such as the establishment of the United Nations (UN) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). In spite of this liberal progression the traditional realist approach still and perhaps will for the foreseeable future remain at the crux of military security regardless of whatever shortcomings. An easy explanation for this is that the very concept of military security is based on realist thought, realist vision, the very instinct to defend, protect and attack if necessary are the fundamentals of military security but also of realism. The world continues to be a dangerous and ruthless place as any traditional realist would agree. The inherent dark side of humanity remains giving optimum reason as to why the strengths of the traditional realist approach to military security outweigh the weaknesses.
They desire to preserve or strengthen its unity, identity and autonomy.” Breuilly (1995) states that there are three beliefs that drive nationalist: the nation exists, the interests of the nation may be primary and the nation must be as independent as possible. Economic autarky is an important too for majority nationalists to pursue a high level of independence. Autarky protects majority nationalists’ economy from foreign business cycles, currency fluctuations and decision factors of foreign states and corporations. It holds foreign economies back to put any exercise of potential control by exploiting asymmetrical economic interdependence over the nation. This indeed entails a matter of priority.
SECOND AMENDMENT "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The Second Amendment in its literal reading exemplifies the trust and resolve that the fathers of the American Constitutionalism have bequeath upon the American people. A truly acknowledges and bolsters distinction and independence of which vest in component federal states and its citizenry. One can but help draw parallels to the wisdom of words Albert Einstein afore-quoted that: “The strength of the Constitution lies entirely in the determination of each citizen to defend it. Only if every single citizen feels duty bound to do his share in this defence are the constitutional rights secure.” Drafted at the
In order to understand the true impact of the decisions that Creon and Antigone made, it is also important to understand Weber’s perspective. In “Politics as a Vocation”, Weber emphasizes the authority and legitimacy from which political leaders derive power. Particularly, in the case of politics, legitimacy is seen as crucial; he defines a state as “the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory” (Weber 4). Without this legitimation, a monopoly of force is not enough to constitute a political entity. Taking it one step further, Weber also discusses the three legitimations of dominion over the state: traditional domination, charismatic domination, and legal domination.
The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branch were created and they all have equal powers. Federalist No. 51 states, “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others … But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others.” The Anti-Federalists believed the executive branch had too much power and that it became a monarch government. Richard Henry Lee's Objections to the Constitution states, “In the new Constitution, the President and Senate have all the executive, and two thirds of the legislative power. In some weighty instances, (as making all kinds of treaties, which are to be the laws of the land,) they have the whole legislative and executive powers.
However, things do not appear to be so straightforward, there definitely is more than meets the eye. After all, Singapore was named as an example to an “illiberal democracy” in a regularly cited article in the journal Foreign Affairs. So do the citizens in Singapore really have true democracy? In this essay, I will develop on why Singapore is an illiberal democracy and then discuss on whether a liberal democracy is the way forward for Singapore. Firstly, a liberal democracy is one that embraces liberalism through the fairness of elections between different political parties and also the protection of human rights and liberties for everyone.
Not only do the principles of Idealism assert that the state and people should be considered actors, in fact, both they must be viewed as actors. Actors have interests; while realists such as Machiavelli insist the state is the only unit of analysis necessary in international politics, idealists argue that just as states have interests, people in government have interests as well. Therefore, Realism and Idealism begin their assessment of actors from two different perspectives, however, both schools of thought go on to identify many characteristics of actors which are largely similar. For both realists and idealists, actors are autonomous; they exist independently and retain sovereign rights over material and non-material resources. In both Realism and Idealism actors are said to possess prioritized interests and preferences.
Deleuze (1992) has described this shift as a transition from disciplinary societies to ‘societies of control’. Irrespective of the specific form of government that has emerged observers of neoliberalism and theorists of governmentality have however tended to overlook a critical feature of contemporary state practice. This characteristic is the retention by the state of a very strong, indeed dominant, capacity to determine not only the mode of government that is to be deployed but the discursive basis for that deployment. Indeed the state remains the primary site for the articulation of governmental discourse, irrespective of its other activities. The production, articulation and implementation of housing policy, for example, continues to be the domain of the state, irrespective of whether the policy specifies a social or a market mode of action.
Checks and Balances are intertwined throughout the government precisely for disruptions like this. It acts as a regulator between any origins of supremacy to guarantee no one overrides an opposing authoritative group. Due to these factors, Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers deserve a lengthy reign, for it bears morality and emphasizes reason behind the U.S. Constitution. Separation of Powers is imperative to the functionality of society, the government, and the Constitution because it’s teeming with crucial principles and liberates the nation of tyrants. Absence of this system of government makes documents, such as the Bill of Rights, ineffectual without Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances to fortify its claims.
Such a relationship has been broadly defined by this Court as one in which there has been a special confidence reposed in one who in equity and good conscience is bound to act in good faith and with due regard to the interests of the one reposing confidence and it extends to any possible case in which a fiduciary relationship exists in fact, and in which there is confidence reposed on one side, and resulting domination and influence on the other. However, the broad parameters accorded the term have been specifically limited in the context of employment situations. Under the general rule, the relation of employer and employee is not one of those regarded as
The supremacy clause says that, “the Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land” (US Const. art VI); This basically says that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. If a state law conflicts with federal law or is even unconstitutional then it cannot be enforced. The federal laws will always triumph the state
Protective tariff, federal internal improvements, 2nd national bank, opposes Indian removal, specie circular, and nullification. 80. The Jeffersonian support a federal government with greatly powers, they are followers of a strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. Jeffersonian also called for state and local governments to safeguard the rights and property of citizens. The protection and expansion of human liberty was one of the chief goals of the Jeffersonian.
Civil Rights can be most aptly defined as specific privileges possessed by an individual through citizenship that the government is obligated to protect, including the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses under the 14th Amendment. Furthermore, Civil Rights constitute an individual’s entitlement to equal treatment under the law and freedom from unjust discrimination. The Supreme Court, as the nation’s highest judicial power, should play a substantial role in protecting and expanding (when necessary) the Civil Rights of citizens in various societal institutions including education, housing, employment, voting, marriage, and public amenities. Although many would argue that the Supreme Court lacks the power and influence to enforce its landmark Civil Rights rulings (e.g., Brown v. Board of Education I & II), it none-the-less performs