Democracy Is The Worst Form Of Government Politics Essay

Democracy Is The Worst Form Of Government Politics Essay Democracy is a strong and emotive concept. It has sparked debate and discussion since its first inception in ancient Greece, right through to its modern conception of western liberal democracy. Today, it has become the predominant form of government around the world, and, indeed, countries go to war to defend the values and principles that it enshrines. Huntington defined democracy as involving two dimensions: contestation and participation, and that it implies the existence of those civil and political freedoms to speak, publish, assemble and organise that are necessary for political debate (1991, p. 7). There are, of course, problems peculiar to democracy; however, do these problems warrant the description of democracy as being the least worst option? Perhaps one of the most prevalent criticisms of democracy is that it can lead to ineffectual government. When Aristotle first established typologies and started to categorise political systems, he considered democracy to be a perverted form of rule by many. This idea of the masses being unfit to govern is still evident in Britain up until 1862, and perhaps even 1928 when universal suffrage was introduced. There are still free market economists up to this day, such as Milton Friedman, who believe that democracy produces inefficient economic systems. They argue that in order to create effective economies, governments need to make what are generally considered to be deeply unpopular decisions such as mass privatization, de-regulation and removing workers rights; particularly relevant at this time of economic austerity. This is an example of the governing paradox (Flinders, 2010, p. 311). In part this is due to what they see as an inherent contradiction between Capitalism and Democracy that as economic agents, people are expected to act in their own self-interest, whereas, when it comes to casting their ballot, they are expected to act in the interest of the society as a whole. However, democratic countries tend to be more prosperous (Dahl, 1998, p. 58). India, for example, the worlds largest democracy, grew by 5.5% in the first quarter of 2012. In more general terms, the West predominantly America and Europe consist of the most developed economies in the world, the overwhelming majority of which are democracies. Increasingly, there have been those who have argued that democratic national governments have become ineffective in the face of globalisation. Democracy has spread around the world, in a development that Fukuyama referred to as the end of history, but now, as Gilbert (2009) argues; this is being undermined by the process of globalisation. Indeed, there is now a structural crisis in Democracy (Ghali, 2009), where the need for governance is stretching beyond states. Indeed, national legislatures are increasingly impotent (Gilbert, 2009). Thus we see ineffective global governance, and there are concerns over how democratic any solution can be. Is it feasible to consider democratically elected global institutions? Or should we consign ourselves to the economic oversight of appointed economists at the World Bank and the IMF? The solution lies not with Gilberts radical devolutionary ideas, but rather with the case put forward by Ghali for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (2009). We cannot answer the problem that globalisation poses by shrinking away from it, we must embrace it and accept that global democratic oversight is becoming increasingly necessary. The globalisation of democracy, on the other hand, has brought benefits. Namely, that it has brought peace (Dahl, 1998). Since the Second World War, there have been few wars between democratic countries. This is because democracies are built on the basis of rational debate and discussion that tends to limit aggression. Although, there is an argument to be made that this era of peace between democracies owes itself more to free trade, and market economies rather than democracy itself. Nevertheless, there is a correlation between democracies and peace. However, we should not defend democracy on the benefits that it happens to bring about. A defence of democracy must come from first principles, that it is intrinsically good. Democracy is fundamentally a pluralist system of power distribution, in that it diffuses power among many different competing groups albeit perhaps not equally. Thus, democracy achieves a greater level of political equality amongst citizens than any alternative (Dahl, 1998) reflecting the fundamental belief that all humans are born equal, and that consent for governance must be derived from the governed. Moreover, this allows individuals to protect their own interests. Human nature dictates that we all desire some control over our needs and wants, and J.S. Mill stated that this, the ability to protect ones own interests, protects us from evil at the hands of others. This competition between different groups within society is what protects democracies from authoritarianism. In short: difference is good (Flinders, 2010). Debate and discussion, the exercise of the right to freedom of speech, are the pillars upon which democracy is built. Furthermore, democracy is inherently a system of rights (Dahl, 1998, p. 48). Democracies, by definition, grant basic political and civil rights to its citizens, so that they may participate fully in the democratic process. In order for citizens to participate, to hear the voice of the people, it must therefore be necessary to grant them the right to freedom of assembly that would not be granted within an authoritarian or totalitarian regime. Enshrined in democracy is the belief in equality, and thus, establishing and enforcing rights gives that greater degree of equality than any non-democratic alternative. Moreover, granting these rights protects minority groups from persecution and allows them to protect their interests, as written previously. The society we live in has evolved so much over the generations. Society is no longer as homogenous it once was, it is increasingly made up of heterogeneous (Flinders, 2010) groups all of which represent different and varied interests, all of which must be to a greater, or lesser extent, r espected. Otherwise, we commit ourselves to rule by an elite, a select few who determine their interests are above those of all others. And therein lies democracys intrinsic goodness. It enshrines several principles: political equality, that all citizens should have an equal say in who governs them; guaranteed and enforced political and civil rights that allow citizens to be a part of the democratic process and to protect the rights of minorities. These rights and freedoms therefore allow citizens to preserve their own interests, and to protect themselves from persecution. Of course, democracy has its problems. There will always be problems, but the idea that power should be spread, albeit unevenly, amongst citizens and not concentrated in an elite is perhaps one of the most noble. Maybe this is why Winston Churchill, an aristocrat, treated democracy with such revulsion.

A College Degree: What’s the Point?

Nowadays there are many millionaires and even billionaires, who don’t have a college degree. Some of them quit collage while others didn’t even step foot into collage. The entertainment industry is filled with high school dropouts and people who never stepped inside college, yet these people are often millionaires, earning millions of dollars. This leaves one wondering whether a college degree is really necessary or can one do without one.In this era that is riddled with economic recession and unemployment, the world is no longer as friendly to college graduates as it used to be in past decades. More and more fresh graduates are finding themselves unemployed or in jobs without security as the world becomes more and more competitive.John Goes argues that modern education has two purposes; to show that one was smart enough to get into college, and to show a prospective employer that one may be smart enough to learn their job-specific skills. He argues that college degrees have become the modern day IQ tests to determine employability following the ban of IQ testing of job-applicants by the governments (Goes, par4).John Goes further argues that nowadays people have been conditioned to think that anybody can get a college degree. A few decades ago it was accepted that half the people were below average. Only half the people got high school diplomas and only 1 in 20 students managed to obtain a Bachelors degree.Today the statistics indicate that there is an 80% to 90% high school diploma attainment rate (Goes, par5). What is worse is that the cost of acquiring a college degree is now very high. So high that, one Trina Thompson filled a law suite against her alma mater Monroe College for the refund of the $70,000 tuition due to the fact that no one wants to employ someone with a worthless degree. She accused the college for false advertising (Goes, par6).But, to say that college degrees are now worthless is to be shortsighted. The benefits of acquiring a college degree may not be evident in the short-term but are always plenty in the long run. The fact that more people are getting degrees nowadays does not mean that college degrees have lost their value rather it shows that college degrees have become more valuable. Acquiring a college degree definitely puts one ahead in the job market.The recession that hit the world last year resulted in the loss of many jobs. What is to note however is that the majority of the jobs lost were jobs in the manufacturing industry. These jobs were mainly blue collar jobs that were mostly taken by high school graduates and dropouts. Once the recession hit, many companies closed shop, others relocated their operations to more labor economic countries.It was reported that the US economy had shed 131,000 jobs by 6th August this year and that unemployment rates remained stuck at 9.5% (Aljazeera, par1). The private sector only managed to create 71, 000 jobs. Experts say that this rate is too slow for the country to recover its pre-recession employment rate.Blue collar jobs are routine jobs which are more manual and do not require a lot of mental output. Being manual, these jobs can be easily done by other people given the right instructions or by machines which have been programmed to do these tasks. Therefore people who work in blue collar jobs are easily dispensable.However, jobs that are more technical and requiring of high skills are often the kinds that require degrees. Even in the recession many college graduates did not lose their jobs. Even when they lost their jobs it was possible for them to search for telecommute jobs which more and more companies began to offer as alternative employment to laid off employees. High skill jobs like financial jobs and medical jobs continue to pay off in spite of the recession.What’s more college degrees attract higher pay. The acquisition of a college degree in a particular field usually makes the person specialized. Specialization l eads to mastering of ones work and creating high skills which make the person a professional in his field of specialization. College graduates earn an average of $20, 000, far much more than non-college graduates (Milliken, par2). Experts argue that college graduates have significantly lower unemployment rates, rely less on public assistance and enjoy better health making them an asset to any employer and country.Because the current world is still as keen on academic certificates as it was three decades ago, perhaps even more so as competition for jobs continues to go up. It is no wonder then that professionals continue to go back to college to acquire higher degrees in order to improve their skills and therefore their chances of promotion and better pay. In fact when an employee seeks to get a promotion the best tactic would be to get a college degree, because coupled with the person’s work experience a college degree is like having gold in ones possession.Another reason for one to get a college degree would be for the purpose of self fulfillment. All of us are born with the need to excel, for some of us this need is so great that it cannot be ignored. This need is ever present within us so that if we settle for anything less that we ha envisioned for ourselves than we end up miserable.The acquisition of a college degree is one a venue of fulfilling our need to excel. Going to college has become second-nature majority of college educated parents and their children. Jay Mathews defines it as instinctual as tacking an August vacation (Mathews, par4). With so many people dropping out of high school or even never proceeding to college getting a college degree remains an achievement worth acknowledging.So many people are stuck in a job that they may not like, or a job that may not pay them nearly enough to survive and meet their basic needs and the basic needs of their families. Often the acquisition of a college degree is usually the means of achieving the ir desire for a better paying job and a more fulfilling one. A college degree is therefore a means of self fulfillment and acquiring the social and financial status that one dreams of.Some millionaire and billionaires may not have a college degree, but college degrees remain important and valuable. Bill Gates had to go to college in order for him to get the inspiration to start Microsoft. Even though he did not graduate he got knowledge that helped him build his dream. College is a mine of ideas and knowledge, and no one should miss out on an opportunity to acquire either or both of these.ReferencesGoes, John. What Is the Point of a College Education. 24 August 2009. 7 August 2010http://media.www.chicagoflame.com/media/storage/paper519/news/2009/08/24/Opinions/Whats.The.Point.Of.A.College.Education-3755931.shtmlAljazeera. US Employers Shed 131,000 Jobs. 6 August 2010. 7 August 2010. http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2010/08/20108616525186107.htmlMilliken, James. Growing Imp ortance of a College Education. 6 August 2010. 7 August 2010.http://fremonttribune.com/news/opinion/columnists/article_ab479f02-a161-11df-9183-001cc4c03286.htmlMathews, Jay. Patrick Welsh Is Wrong About Too Many Going to College. 29 July 2010. 7 August 2010. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2010/07/patrick_welsh_is_wrong_about_t.html   

Leap, Bryan Doyle Essay

Before the Leap In 2002, Brian Doyle, an editor for the Portland Magazine, wrote the critically acclaimed poem, â€Å"Leap†, in remembrance of the victims September 11th, 2001. Brian has also authored ten major books including The Grail, The Wet Engine, and the novel, Mink River. Doyle has written numerous essays and poems since 1999 including Credo, Saints Passionate & Peculiar, and Two Voices. Additionally, Doyle’s books have been finalists four times for the coveted Oregon Book Award and his essays have been featured in publications like The American Scholar, Harpers, and The Atlantic Monthly. Upon reading the title of the poem, â€Å"Leap†, by hailed author, Brian Doyle, and considering the title of the section in the text book, â€Å"Faith and Doubt†, I was thinking the poem would, more or less, concern taking the proverbial â€Å"leap of faith†. I was wrong. The poem revolves around the actual physical action of one leaping out into the air, more specifically, those â€Å"jumpers† who consciously made the incredible decision to leap from the blazing conditions in the Twin Towers to their deaths on September 11th, 2001. Doyle used a fair amount of imagery to add an incredible level of depth and to provide readers with a terrifying mental picture of that horrific day in America. Consider one of the opening lines describing the sight, â€Å"Many People Jumped. Perhaps hundreds. No one knows. They struck the pavement with such force that there was a pink mist in the air. † (1168). Doyle effectively implemented figurative language throughout the poem to provide the full effect of being a shell-shocked, stunned bystander at the sight of 9/11. Additionally, Doyle told of â€Å"A kindergarten boy who saw people falling in flames told his teacher that the birds were on fire. † (1168). This use of imagery made me feel as though I was there. I believe the author used the â€Å"couple† in the poem to symbolize the strength of human resolve. As readers, we are unclear as to who they were, where they came from, or whether they even knew each other before they grasped each other’s hands as they leaped to their deaths far below, to escape the intense heat, toxic gases, and engulfing flames. Doyle also made reference to different onlookers witnessing the â€Å"couple† as they leaped together, hand in hand. This was symbolic of the intense, far reaching, familiar pain shared by so many around the world as they watched the towers fall to rubble. Doyle also mentioned the couple’s hands quite a few times throughout the poem. I believe he intended the couple’s hands to be symbolic of the strength of the human bond, as well as, the courage that we gain, as humans, through our bonds. But he reached for her hand and she reached for his hand and they leaped out the window holding hands. † (1169). The author successfully makes use of the first person point of view to place himself right there, as a witness of the tragic event, along with the others mentioned in the poem. Again, while he is in the first person, Doyle focuses on the clinched hands. He recalls, â€Å"but I kept coming back to his hand and her hand nestled in each other with such extraordin ary ordinary succinct ancient naked stunning perfect simple ferocious love. † (1169). However, he too is unsure who the couple really is but he is intrigued by their hands, their bond, their strength, their agreement, and their courage to do, together, what has to be done. He mentions that, â€Å"Their hands reaching and joining are the most powerful prayer I can imagine. † (1169). At the end of the poem, Doyle writes, â€Å"Jennifer Brickhouse saw them holding hands, and Stuart DeHann saw them holding hands, and I hold onto that. † (1169). The author feels a sense of peace in knowing that the couple was witnessed by others. Their moment in time, their raw emotion, their true human characteristics took over and they leaped, together. Doyle makes use of a powerful simile towards the end of the poem that compares humankind finding and accessing their inner greatness to, â€Å"seeds that open only under great fires†. (1169). He continues to describe our lives as they almost instantly decay into an unknown state, our most powerful, instinctive human traits surface and are focused with an extreme intensity, enabling us to overcome our fears and do what is required. Doyle writes, â€Å"to believe that some unimaginable essence of who we are persists past the dissolution of what we were, to believe against such evil hourly evidence that love is why we are here. † (1169). As a reader, my emotion compels me to believe the couple, possibly nothing more than strangers, at the brink of their inevitable dissolution, experienced the miracle of love, compassion, and bravery that are all intertwined throughout the complexity of our human nature. I think that the author used the simile, â€Å"like seeds that open only under great fires†, to describe the epic effect that our human spirit is able achieve in even the worst possible scenarios. After reading the through the entire poem more than a few times, I realize that the title, â€Å"Leap†, truly is about realizing the power of the bonds we share as human beings. Even as our lives, in a complete state of disarray and chaos, are forced to come to an end, we are able to harness the miraculous strength of our bonds, and focus it in a way that allows us to achieve a sense of peace during our final moments. I believe the author intended for his readers to hope that the couple, in their final moments before they leaped into the â€Å"smoking canyon†, were able to experience this miracle and find that peace before they took the leap, together, into the unknown.

A Comparison Of Hamilton And Alexander Hamilton - 1149 Words

In early 1790, Alexander Hamilton presented an idea that initially established the National Bank. While Hamilton’s plan was the best solution to the financial difficulties the United States faced, it received a large amount of criticism. Thomas Jefferson vehemently objected to Hamilton’s proposal mainly regarding the constitutionality of the National Bank. In this paper, I argue that Alexander Hamilton’s proposal for the National Bank was better than Thomas Jefferson’s because it created a path to a self-sufficient economy, potential for a thriving economy, and expanded the interpretation of the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton was asked to formulate an idea so that America could depend less of foreign nations to import valuable goods,†¦show more content†¦The other issue to consider is it would leave the United States vulnerable to depend on other nations for supplies, specifically military equipment. Even other simple goods such as foods, spices , and clothing that could potentially all be at risk. Jefferson stated, â€Å"Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools of the designs of ambition,† (Kramnick Lowi, 347). Even though he is making the argument that being reliant on anyone or anything other than oneself is frowned upon, the United States would be dependent upon foreign nations. If his statement was true, America would never be able to develop into a prosperous nation. The idea of an agrarian republic may sound like an ideal society but it would make America weak in comparison to Great Britain. Farmers are a key part to a successful economy, but there also needs to be accountants, businessmen, blacksmiths, and more which Alexander Hamilton suggested. If the United States followed along with Thomas Jefferson’s plan, it would have been disastrous for the economy and future of the country. One of Hamilton’s concerns for the United States was to preserve its public credit. In the â€Å"First Report of Public Credit† Hamilton wrote, â€Å"†¦to be able to borrow upon good terms, it is essential that the credit of a nation be well established,† (Kramnick Lowi, 298). He knew that in order for America to become a thriving nation, the country would need aShow MoreRelatedA Comparison Of Alexander Hamilton And Aaron Burr1156 Words   |  5 Pagesintellect and creativity into a creation. To demonstrate, Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr were praised for their talent and success. On the other hand, there was a distinct difference between the two men as one was merely talented in his craft and the other was a genius. Aaron Burr was a celebrated lawyer and a favored politician but did not create anything groundbreaking in his time (Chernow 677). On the other hand, Alexander Hamilton was not only a talented layer and policy maker; in fact, theRead MoreComparison Of Alexander Hamilton And Thomas Jefferson1213 Words   |  5 PagesAlexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were key Founding Fathers of America who contributed to its freedom and independence. Both men were influential leaders of their time whose visions for the future of the country were clearly contrasting. Hamilton believed for a strong federal government and an economy based on banking. While Jefferson desired for a nation to be controlled by the states and its people. Their competing visions for the United States are still in debate until this day. AlthoughRead MoreWilliam Shakespeare s Macbeth 1457 Words   |  6 Pageseyes to Alexander Hamilton’s true character traits and it may also open my eyes to why Macbeth was motivated to do such heinous acts. Both Alexander Hamilton and Macbeth come from generally disturbing backgrounds. Hamilton has a considerably less than admirable one, but Macbeth had issues of his own. Hamilton was born in the Caribbean isles with a confusing lineage of who his true birth father was. As a bastard and someone who lost their mother at a very young age, it was up to Hamilton to makeRead MoreAlexander Hamilton And John Marshall1367 Words   |  6 PagesAs a newborn nation, America had many tasks ahead of it, such as structuring a well functioning government, economy, and court system. Two men who had an extreme influence over these things were Alexander Hamilton and John Marshall. Both had brilliant ideas to bring forth and would eventually shape the nation to be a land of economic prosperity and fairness. Hamilton’s financial plan began the emergence of an economically superior country and ended in the creation of political parties that wouldRead MoreAnalysis Of The Musical Hamilton : An America n Story1471 Words   |  6 PagesYour Obedient Servant is one of the last songs in the musical Hamilton: An American Story. This song is based off a set of interactions between the title character, Alexander Hamilton, and his antagonist, Aaron Burr. It follows the Song, Election of 1800, in which Hamilton openly supports Thomas Jefferson to become president instead of Burr after the electoral tie between the two candidates. The tension that has been growing throughout the entire musical has climaxed at that point and then the infamousRead MoreAnalysis Of Aaron Burr s The Duel With Alexander Hamilton 1697 Words   |  7 PagesDuel† with Alexander Hamilton. Not only was dueling illegal in 1804 in New Jersey, which is where the duel occurred, but Aaron Burr was the current Vice President of the United States of America taking part in an event that led to the death of Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton himself was one of the most powerful figures in the Federalist Party and was so w ell known within the party that his advocates believed that he emulated the political energy of George Washington, so the death of Hamilton was a shockRead MoreThe Power of Judicial Review1125 Words   |  5 Pagesindividual states and gave it to the federal government. When the Constitution was ratified, both Brutus (believed to be Robert Yates), and Alexander Hamilton were in a debate over the potential power of the federal government, and more specifically, the power of the Supreme Court in Federalist 78 and Brutus’ eleventh and twelfth letters. Alexander Hamilton supported the proposed system and expressed his belief that the judiciary did not have too much power by any means. Brutus was more concernedRead MoreIn The United States, Voters Have The Choice Between Republican1494 Words   |  6 Pagesabout much debate over how the government should be ran, how big it should be, and how officials would be elected. Through this political turmoil, many agree that two men had strong voices in how the government should be shaped, Founding Fathers Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, and they, combined with the overall eventual setup of the government, are what led to the formation and sustaining of the two-party system that is present today. Studying the topic of the two-party system in America canRead MoreThe Articles Of Confederation And The United States1509 Words   |  7 PagesThe people were also being affected by the political and economic crisis; therefore this led them to be leery towards any type of change in government. The colonist’s fears were also justified due to the power of influential man, such as Madison, Hamilton, and Jefferson. These men had slightly different views than one another about how the government should be throughout the nation. Instead of seeing these men as those who had America’s best interest, they might of saw them as another king, whichRead MoreAnalysis Of The Musical Hamilton 1805 Words   |  8 PagesHamilton Essay The musical â€Å"Hamilton† is the most sought after musical in years. It is the first seen rap musical and it has received the most ‘Tony’ awards and nominations in Broadway history. Hamilton premiered off Broadway in 2015 and soon moved to Broadway to stun the world with it’s incredible everything, from plot to casting. For best albums, Hamilton was second ranked in Billboard magazine and has got endless supply of recognition for the ingenious play written by the phenomenal Lin Manual