The ideology of an idyllic society based on equality as well as democratic principles has long been synonymous with a righteous government. But the consequences of this aspiration for a utopian society has begun to show in countries where democracy as a political system has been implemented in the immediate wake of wars and instability. In the speech “Why Democracy Matters”, which was held in the historic Banqueting House, Whitehall, in London on the 22nd of June 2012, the British member of parliament Rory Stewart sounds a call to rebuild the frail democracy of today which is threatened by mistrust and corruption. This essay will analyse Stewart’s speech with a particular focus on how Stewart argues for his views and the intention of the speech
Scholars from all over the Western world have analyzed and discussed the impact of democracy has had for the citizens of the United States, for over 200 years. Each new period throughout American history, has brought a new concept of being an individual in a democratic society. One flaw scholars from the late nineteenth century saw with democracy was that the majority ruled and if an individual part of the minority their voices were not heard, even if the minority was just and the majority unjust. Thus the democracy most Americans are proud to have is primarily individualistic and can be deemed corrupt because of the focus of majority rule, which might not be the wisest decision. Alexis de Tocqueville was a French writer who wrote several essays on his visit to the United States.
INTRODUCTION Lipset’s theory about the correlation between economic development and democratization is probably one of the strongest find in the social sciences (Cheibub & Vreeland 2012). According to him, “the more well-to-do a nation, the greater the chances that it will sustain democracy” (Lipset 1959, p. 75). He formulated two explanations in the correlation of economy and democracy. The first is the endogenous explanation or simply the “modernization theory”. This theory examines how modernization processes, and economic growth in particular, relate to democratization and democratic consolidation (Johannessen 2009).
Progression has been a defining feature of humanity and it has continued to be a much discussed topic in academic, political and economic fields. Over the past seventy years the attention has turned to states that are regarded as third world, where the economic and standards of living is considered to be lower than developed nations such as Australia and Great Britain and how to encourage development within their systems (Evans & Thomas 2013). During the Cold War era from 1947 - 1989, two prominent ideologies were clashing in the form of two world powers, USA with liberalism and USSR with socialism; the campaign against socialism by the USA included pushing the liberalist theory of modernisation as the superior form of theory to stimulate development.
The paper compares and contrasts the differences involving critical thinking, reasoned dialogue, and dialectic reasoning. All the above mentioned processes aim at solving particular relevant issues in the society. When incorporated in the people’s activities and lifestyles, they are able to change one’s way of reasoning and their attitude toward particular issues in society. Despite their differences, critical thinking, reasoned dialogue, and dialectic reasoning are all important aspects in personal development. Critical thinking is the capability of an individual think to clearly and wisely.
Modern societies are conceived to be more secular vis a vis traditional society. There is constant climate of change and in which contracts are established which are deemed fit. These contracts are usually orientated towards economic and political benefits/interests of the commanding modern State. It is assumed modern societies are more tolerant than the earlier ones. Modernization theory by define has connotation that cannot be accepted in its
It is something only if it consists of all of us." The value of teamwork is essential in making a difference in our society, but the ideas that fuel the determination of the teamwork came from one individual. Changing society to be more suitable for everyone as a whole would not be evident if people did not stand up for their individual rights. It is essential for there to be individualism in our society because it ultimately ensures that there are people who are working for our society to be better. Individualism has been evident in our society for an extensive amount of time, and it has characterized our union as we know it today.
The 20th century is marked with a lot of transformation in the political, social and economic structure of the world that no one would have thought as 1800 drew to a close. The capacity for imagination was stretched so as to accommodate the ideas of a space flight, computers, nuclear energy and world wars. Aside from the immense advancement in science and technology, one of the defining ideas of the century, specifically in the political aspect, is the idea of democracy. It has become so widespread that during the 1970s and 1980s, more than 30 countries shifted from authoritarian to democratic political systems (The Economist 15). According to The Economist Intelligence Unit’s measure of democracy, [almost] one-half of the world’s population
In our modern day world, or more accurately, western culture, democracy is seen as the greatest type of regime. Democracy represents a plethora of attractive features that promotes individual freedoms and allows citizens to control the government that represents them domestically and on the world stage. Because of their belief that democracy is the best form of government, most western nations seek to use their foreign influence to promote democratic norms and institutions. The argument for the promotion of democracy comes from the Democratic Peace Theory, which states that democracies do not go to war against one another. However, some foreign policy analysts would disagree that the promotion of democracy brings international peace for multiple
This means that having access to fair opinions is not always possible. The group may bring many greater alternatives, that may higher quality than individual. Then it is likely that the group will reach a superior problem solution than the individual finally. Group members can identify more perfect and possible solutions and recommendations through discussion. Another advantage is they can share information in group of the group decision-making procedure.