...direct democracy in the UK (25 marks) Direct democracy is a form of government in which all laws are created by a general vote of society. Direct Democracy is supposedly meant to remove the division between the government and the people being governed. The UK currently has a representative democracy with aspects of direct democracy. Direct democracy is genuine democracy in action. With popular participation emerges the precise and true view of all the citizenry. The people determine their future and shape accurately their society. There is no vacuum or distinction between the government and the people. For example this clear link can be seen in the case of the Scottish referendum on independence in 2014. However, the above may be more a reflection of an ideal and an aspiration than a functional practical possibility. In a large scale society direct democracy is not achievable, with voting population of almost 45 million. This means there is too many varying opinions for the public to come up with clear concise decisions. Representative Democracy requires the voter to vote for some candidate or party with whom they are very unlikely to agree on everything - the 'take it or leave it' option. Direct Democracy allows voters to vote on the issues separately. The problems with representative democracy can be seen in the case of the Liberal democrats as once they got into office very few of their policies came to fruition. However in general when representative democracy is used...
Words: 781 - Pages: 4
... concept or model of democracy, but clearly a pluralism or plurality of different theories and models. The concept of "democracy" is contestable. It is understood by many people to mean a form of government in which a significant portion of the governed society has a franchise to elect members of the governing body. Other observers would argue that a "true" democracy is a system of government that embraces a universal adult franchise. While flaws exist in all democratic systems of government, most advocates accept Churchill's dictum that contemporary democracy as we know it is the least bad of all systems of government. What is democracy? The popular understanding of the term "democracy" is that there are three basic forms: direct, representative and constitutional. Direct democracy is a form of government in which the right to participate in making political decisions is exercised directly by all citizens, acting under procedures of majority rule. Representative democracy is a form of government in which the citizens exercise the same right of participation in making political decisions, not in person but through elected representatives. Constitutional democracy developed to counter this possibility and is a form of representative democracy in which the powers of the majority are enshrined in constitutional provisions designed to guarantee the individual and collective rights of all citizens. There is an abundant literature relating to democracy theory, with countless...
Words: 1360 - Pages: 6
...colonial era, the extent of establishing democracy was questionable. (I) This was because ‘attempts’ highlighted that actions to adopt democracy was met with both willingness and resistance throughout 1945-1997. But before one evaluates the extent of success of these attempts, it is crucial to note that democracy meant that the state was ruled by the people, and existed in either in the liberal form or the parliamentary form. Additionally, one needs to consider the features of Western-style democracy, politically and economically. A democratic political model would have the presence of multi-party, free and fair elections as well as the separation of powers amongst the leaders of the country. A democratic economic model would adopt capitalism that promotes free trade and economic stability. (C) With these in mind, the assumption put forth by the question holds as we recognise that there were attempts, to establish democracy. (A) However, there were varying degrees of success when carrying out said attempts if one closely looks into individual features of democracy that was present (or not present) in the countries. (C) Therefore if one looks into the amount of presence of a democratic feature in the countries, it was to large extent that the attempts were successful. However, when one looks at the countries holistically the attempts to establish democracy was successful to only to a small extent throughout 1945-1997. (T) If democracy equates to the presence of many political...
Words: 1564 - Pages: 7
...The United States has changed over time making the American citizens question what power of government they are being ruled under. The changes this country has gone through can show the development of the different government powers. The main three: Oligarchy, Democracy, and Plutocracy. The basic definition of an Oligarchy is when a small group, or a few people, has control over a country or organization. Specific groups in the US have had problems with the top 1% and the fairness between different groups. Democracy is when the power is vested within the people through elected representatives. The majority of Americans already believe that the United States is a democracy, but some believe that there is too much liberty within the people....
Words: 1405 - Pages: 6
...Democracy and Development in India: A Comparative Perspective By Pranab Bardhan University of California at Berkeley To most theorists of democracy in the West, India is an embarrassing anomaly and hence largely avoided. By most theoretical stipulations India should not have survived as a democracy: it’s too poor its citizens largely rural and uneducated its civic institutions rather weak. It is a paradox even for those who believe in a positive relationship between economic equality or social homogeneity and democracy. India’s wealth inequality (say, in land distribution, and even more in education or human capital) is one of the highest in the world. Indian society is also one of the most heterogeneous in the world (in terms of ethnicity, language, caste and religion), and social inequality, a legacy of the caste system, is considerable. Yet this country, with the world’s largest electorate (it is now larger than the electorate in North America, Western Europe, and Japan combined), keeps lumbering on decade after decade as a ramshackle, yet remarkably resilient, democratic polity. Of course, depending on the defining features of democracy the depth of Indian democracy may be rather limited. It is useful to keep a distinction between three general aspects of democracy: (a) some basic minimum civil and political rights enjoyed by citizens, (b) some procedures of accountability in day-to-day administration under some overarching constitutional rules of the game, (c) periodic...
Words: 3182 - Pages: 13
...Abstract In this paper, we will look into the relationship between democracy and economic development. The paper opens with a brief look into the importance of economic development, and then looks into democracy and its elements and how they factor into the growth of the economy, with some hypotheses from specialists of the field. Cases of economic growth in non-democratic countries are also delved into, namely the case of China. There the paper analyzes what results in economic growth in the absence of democracy. In the end we come to a conclusion on the matter, whether or not democracy is a necessity for economic growth. Economic development is one of the core priorities of any given state, regardless of regime or position in the international...
Words: 1624 - Pages: 7
...calamities, and common strife. Democracy allows individuals talk what they have in their minds and shape their kids' prospects. When many people from various locations in the world are ready to face risks, it proves that they endure an appeal. Democracy in the third world countries has experienced the same issues as those in the rich world. Democracy is a good thing for every country but it seems to be losing what it was initially supposed to do. Third world countries have focused on short term spending as opposed to long haul investment, which is opposed to what democracy supports. For example, Brazil permits its laborers to resign at the age of fifty-three, however, has done little to make a current air transport system. India pays a lot to customer gatherings, yet puts too little in investment (Hirst, 2000). Political frameworks have been caught by vested parties and undermined by those who are against democracy. Before the occurrence of financial crisis, there was a huge conviction that democracy was not just ethically better than authoritarian types of government, but on the other hand were better situated to manage monetary and money related turmoil. The latest monetary crisis, however, has raised doubt about this suspicion, particularly as some dictator states, for example, China have clearly weathered the storm as compared to its counter parts; Europe and the US. Most business analysts and political researchers still concur that liberal democracy is in reality a superior...
Words: 2041 - Pages: 9
...and Rwanda face similar issues with many cases of violence, torture, imprisonment and police brutality reported (BBC, 2010; Davenport & Stam, 2009). All these countries are always in the top list of ODA recipient countries, so is it the case that donors do not know about their political context or there other reasons? The other factor that makes me disagree with the opinion “development first, democracy later” is that development may not lead to positive but very negative consequences to recipient countries, such as social and political corruption. Government leaders may find all the way to protect their economic benefits and avoid democracy and democratisation as analysed Anna Lekvall in her book “Development first, Democracy later?” (Lekvall, 2013). In the UN’s Corruption Index, top ODA recipient countries whose regimes are non-democratic, such as China, Vietnam, Kenya and Nigeria are always among the worst (Fisman & Miguel, 2007; TransparencyInternational,...
Words: 890 - Pages: 4
...The Effect of Campaign Finnacne on Democracy Daniel Sykes Student ID 250719824 Every election cycle, huge sums of money are spent in the promotion for campaigns to elect or re-elect candidates for public office. These contributions play a vital role in the success of election campaigns. Sources of campaign donations range from big businesses and trade unions to PACs (political action committees) such as the NRA. These groups donate to candidates in the assumption and hopes that the candidate will pursue a discourse and perhaps implement legislation that benefits the donating group. When we refer to “campaign finance”, we are of course referring to funds that are used to promote and advertise, hire advisers, pay for travel expenses, administration fees and other costs associated with running a campaign. The Presidential Election of 2008 generated one billion US dollars in campaign contributions and finance1, with this figure on the rise, many have spoken out against the propensity of election victories to be seemingly “bought” by the party who generated the most funds2. In this essay I will be discussing whether or not big money in campaign finance is a threat to democracy. It is important to consider the history of campaign finance reform and how it evolved over time, for this gives us a better perspective when reviewing our modern situation to see if democracy has lost its way. Before the 19th century, the majority...
Words: 2551 - Pages: 11
...Democracy Democracy is a word frequently used in British Politics. We are constantly told that we live in a democracy in Britain and that our political system is "democratic" and that nations that do not match these standards are classed as "undemocratic". The concept of "democracy" is contestable. It is understood by many people to mean a form of government in which a significant portion of the governed society has a franchise to elect members of the governing body. Other observers would argue that a "true" democracy is a system of government that embraces a universal adult franchise. While flaws exist in all democratic systems of government, most advocates accept Churchill's dictum that contemporary democracy as we know it is the least bad of all systems of government. What is democracy? The popular understanding of the term "democracy" is that there are three basic forms: direct, representative and constitutional. Direct democracy is a form of government in which the right to participate in making political decisions is exercised directly by all citizens, acting under procedures of majority rule. In large states, direct or participative democracy is not possible. Representative democracy is a form of government in which the citizens exercise the same right of participation in making political decisions, not in person but through elected representatives. However, different representative political structures can produce substantially different outcomes. There is no simple...
Words: 2847 - Pages: 12
...How effectively do elections promote democracy? It can be argued that elections can or cannot promote democracy effectively, however elections do promote democracy because the influences it can have on key policies. Elections are a pivotal time for citizens as it allows their opinions to be heard and this may affect some political agendas in order to attract more votes. For example in 2010 large amounts of young people opted to vote for the liberal democrats as they offered to cut the price of tuition fees, sometimes a defeat in elections may lead to a party to alter their policies to still have their ideology as the foundation for their policies but make them more attractive to the citizens. One other way that elections effectively promote democracy is that it holds the government accountable for their performance over the term that they have been in power. This accountability also means that citizens can make proper decisions over what party can offer the best rules in the country for that period of time. For example on 21st January 2008 many families on low income were displeased this then forced the Labour MPs to rethink the policy of the 10p tax band. However in 2010 most people were displeased with the Labour party and it ended in them being overthrown and was replaced by the conservatives who won the most seats. However one way that elections may not promote democracy is that there are flaws in the FPTP voting system. This is because most MPs are elected on the less...
Words: 530 - Pages: 3
...1999) first branded democracies as ‘consensual’ or ‘majoritarian.’ The UK parliament is said to be majoritarian, with a strong governing party and Cabinet, a lesser presence of small parties, minimal decentralisation,...
Words: 1638 - Pages: 7
...Essay Topic Paper- Types of Democracy Direct Democracy and Representative Democracy both have their positives and negatives. But in the end I think that if they were intertwined, you could have the ultimate government. Representative Democracy has a way of making it easier for ideas of the people to be represented. Whereas Direct Democracy lets the people actually voice their own thoughts and help the average person be heard. Both of these forms of government are talked about in multiple chapters of Dunn’s book about Democracy. They both have their ups and downs but in the end the best form of government in my point of view would be a mixture between both types of Democracy. In Dunn’s book on Democracy, they talk about how having a Representative Democracy effects society and how it could be either beneficial or harmful. A Representative Democracy is a form of democracy in which the people allow others to represent them in the various forms of democratic process. An example of an early Representative Democracy is during the Old Regime of France. In the article “Democracy and the French Revolution” Fontana states how there was a group of representative’s set up to voice the peoples opinions and bring their voices to the leader (Fontana 117). The Assembly was a group of these representatives who were basically the spokesperson for the people, who voiced their complaints and requests to the Crown (Fontana 117). The people aren’t directly involved in any of the decision making...
Words: 1231 - Pages: 5
...managers in global settings need to be sensitive to these differences. Political differences are described along two dimensions: collectivist vs. individualist and democratic vs. totalitarian. Economic systems are explored in terms of market characteristics: market economies, command economies, and mixed economies. Legal systems are discussed in terms of the protections they offer for business: intellectual property, product safety, liability and contracts. The opening case explores the political and economic situation in Venezuela since Hugo Chavez was elected president in 1998. The closing case describes the challenges facing Indonesia, a vast country populated mainly by Muslims that stretches over 17,000 islands. Indonesia, after decades of corruption and a near dictatorship, now has a newly elected president. OUTLINE OF CHAPTER 2: NATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN POLITICAL ECONOMY Opening Case: Chavez’s Venezuela Introduction Political Systems Collectivism and Individualism Democracy and Totalitarianism Economic Systems Market Economy Command Economy Mixed Economy Legal...
Words: 6929 - Pages: 28
...magnitude that the corruption is affecting the fundamental establishments of democracy. As Ben Doherty, a reporter for Guardian Australia and twice a Walkley award winner for his foreign reporting, states, “[India] instead of being of the people, for the people, by the people, has become a government of the corrupt, for the corrupt, by the corrupt.” The sad truth is that India, although once prided as the world’s largest democracy, can no longer retain that title as it has transformed into an oligarchy where the power lies in the hands of the rich and the corrupt. While a democracy must be driven by the people, it is not necessarily a good form of government. The definition of a democracy, according to Sean Connolly in his book Democracy, is a “government where the people have the power and… [that] works to benefit these people” (3). Essentially, he is saying that the government in a democracy is “of the people” and “by the people” so that the people have the power, and “for the people” so that the government actually works for the people and not for its own selfish interests. In addition, Connolly supports the definition that Winston Churchill put forth calling democracy the “worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time” (Churchill qtd. in Connolly). This is vital as the presence of corruption does not automatically disqualify a country as a democracy. In fact, corruption can be prominent as Dr. Michael Kugelman, Senior Program...
Words: 2760 - Pages: 12
