It is not like a normal community were you socialize with who you please, and participate in functions unique to you. It is also preached that there is stability in society, but with every positive comes a negative. To keep stability in society people are given soma. They have also been robbed of many freedoms that could infringe on societal stability. Citizens are unable to read books about love and revolutions, and they can not be in long term relationships, or become mothers and fathers.
When talking about empires, a negative connotation of being oppressed is usually present. Living in the modern age, we tend to consider democracy as the “rightest form of government”. However, democracy is not simply “freedom for all” or “the will of the people” for ancient empires. It was a complex, delicate system that sometime people overlook its inherent fragility. Many democratic states, such as ancient Athens, the Roman Republic, failed to keep the promise of freedom for all and ended up in failure.
Andrew Romano’s article “How dumb are we?” contradicts the idea that citizens at least know the basics about their country’s political system and state affairs. He describes how surveys reveal that many Americans lack a common understanding and knowledge of their domestic politics as well as foreign politics. Some of his main arguments explain why the Americans are less aware of their country’s politics than the Europeans are, e.g. the complexity of the American political system, the decentralized educational system and most importantly that Americans are ignorant, not stupid. Romano also empathizes that the Americans’ lack of knowledge poses a threat to the American society.
As history has shown, sometimes all it takes is one person to turn a country on its head. Sometimes it’s for the better, sometimes it bares the worst. Under the all controlling hand of the government there are always a few people that do their best to slip through the fingertips. In George Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984, that someone is Winston Smith and he is barely safe in his own mind. A government that values the people’s ignorance to their situation has little good to say about someone that feels differently than the majority.
What is different in our society to that proposed by Weber is the rigidity and the impersonal nature of the bureaucracy. As a result the functionality and efficiency that comes about as a result is lacking. With every general election there is the hope and promise of jobs and security if you the individual vote for a particular democratic party. Having a position or rising to the top is no longer about how hard an individual would have worked in the field , but it’s all about who you know in that particular position. Even, the education system is affected by bias and personal selection with individuals being awarded scholarship based on who they know at the office at not at all on the merit of their education.
In recent political elections, I know numerous people who decided to let this one pass, because they did not feel strong support for either candidate. I think the decline in youth and middle America's votes is almost necessary to see, because then we can make better decisions on the candidates we place before them. Forcing bystanders to vote is not a solid concept, and almost challenges what America stands for by taking away your
Politics and Leadership have a lot of effect on us as a country. We all have different opinions. Some people feel like their vote doesn’t matter, others show up to the polls to demonstrate their ideals, their are those who believe that one person can’t control the outcomes of ordinary life, and some may think new leaders bring new opportunities or challenges for an average person. In all reality anything can cause a change rather you vote or not , not voting can cause things that is unwanted to happen. The best solution is to =show up to the polls in every election to demonstrate their ideals.
The current decline in mediating institutions is unsustainable because it creates a dangerous positive feedback loop of greater federal government power and individualism and weakens the very institutions that are necessary for creating a free society. Without middle institutions, people are left “without even local, interpersonal instructions to fall back on, since these have now been enervated for a century” (100). People now instead turn to government solutions instead of intuitions such as family, work, faith, and community. Increasingly, society can be viewed as “consisting only of individuals and a state” (100). This is especially difficult for low-income Americans as they are “more isolated- economically, culturally, and socially- than they used to be in America” (126).
The administrative way to deal with Public Administration looks upon the matter of government as that of a major organization . It has a tendency to limit the qualifications amongst open and private organization. This view is particularly prominent among the chosen political pioneers who have a tendency to loathe the part of political impact practiced by government workers. Amid decision battle the hopeful's 'administrative capacities' are often accentuated. Truly this approach was built up as a solution for the political support arrangements of the common servants.The real grumbling of that time was that political arrangements result in wastefulness and prompts defilement.