Because there is really no Canadian identity to begin with, it makes it all the easier for them to carry on as they wish. This explains why people who are Canadian citizens tend to identify more with community or region than with Canada. Canadians all have different values and traditions, like any country, but in Canada there is a great diversity of values and traditions. This makes it harder for people to identify with each other. Alexander and Pearl e... ... middle of paper ... ...e West feel alienated by the East and think that they are not cared about, that they do not have an equal opportunity with those in the East.
Since the effective inclusion of citizens opinions “requires that public administrators and policy makers be committed to genuinely considering [this] input in policy analysis and decision-making” (347). Without a commitment to the collective voice, citizens may not be any better off. This calls into question whether a decrease in voter turn out is associated with the lack of influence citizens feel they really have in policy-making and the larger Canadian picture. In Canada, the participatory role of citizens in policy-making is made possible through consultative methods that seem to have far more negatives than positives. Woodford and Preston note that according to various Canadian scholars, consultative means include: “one way communication, infrequent feedback, limited involvement, poor representativeness,... ... middle of paper ... ...tion remained a top-down process (354), with the government at the helm.
There are Canadian citizens who thought that the Canadian government we have is perfect, citizens who believed that every aspect of the government was truly democratic, and citizens who believe that government could do no wrong. Truly this group of believers has been living a lie. In our Canadian system of government, large aspects within are far from democratic and need to be changed. Liberal-minded people will cry out for a change in order for government to serve the people better, and on the other hand the more conservative thinkers will argue that no change is needed because our government is efficient and considerate. However, our voting system, our Senate, and the power vested to the Prime Minister are far from democratic, do not meet the actual needs of the people and definitely need to be addressed.
That being said, Mulroney thought he was still keeping with Trudeau’s vision of a “just society” by giving the provinces more say in what happens to them. Mulroney examined what Trudeau had previously expressed as possible agreements between the provincial and federal governments and found Trudeau was sabotaging Mulroney’s plans only because Trudeau could not stand to watch another Prime Minister succeed at what he had failed to do. Whether this is true or not, it is obvious the battle for the Meech Lake Accord was won by Trudeau in the end.
These two articles will help me support my position on the issue. Olthius and Townshend are in favour of native sovereignty within Canada based on historical and moral grounds. These authors believe there is a difference in perceptions between native and non-native Canadians regarding the jurisdiction over Canadian territory. In their essay, they write that Aboriginal people believe the Canadian state is oppressive and usurps the powers of Aboriginal people, while most non-aboriginals would be unlikely to question the status of the Canadian state. The essay contends that before European settlement, First Nations people had stability in their economic and political structures.
This sh... ... middle of paper ... ...f them, Canadians want to push forward and see change and new things and not to hold onto the colonial past. The abolishment of the Monarchy in Canada would let the younger population of people become more global and distinct in their role as Canadians to the world The debate of whether or not to abolish the British Monarchy in Canada has been floating around Canada for years. Many are saying it should be abolished and the reasons why have been stated in this essay. Canada has become a country striving for change and embracing new things. The British Monarchy in Canada is old with simple traditions, it lacks legitimacy to most Canadians because younger people don’t support it and for that it should be abolished.
1. In your opinion, which ancient political practice, protective or developmental republicanism, has had the greatest impact on our liberal democratic practice? In my opinion it is clear to see that our liberal democratic practice has something from both protective and developmental republicanism. If I had to choose one of the two I would consider protective republicanism; a political practice where if the people do not participate in political they are ruled by others. It is clear to see that in many recent elections many of the citizens in Canada are not participating in elections; which also means they are not participating in politics, and by doing this they allowed themselves to be dominated by others.
If done correctly, it is a means to funnel local and regional views into central government (Nurse 01/13/2014). Some scholars pinpoint democracy as the highest socially accountable form of government, where “citizens participate in the process of creating legislation and policy, and freely agree to conform to them and share moral consequences” (Shoughi 3), and yet it can be argued that a wide percentage of citizens are unengaged and consequently negatively impact this “pe... ... middle of paper ... ...Canadians should have, as outlined in the charter of rights, these principles are still often challenged in practice. While a sense of public dislike for democracy is common in the media, its goals through public policy do not often reflect personal or group desires outside of those who implemented them. Canada is a democracy and yet, it can be argued that it is compromised in practice. This essay has illustrated a select number of parameters and problematic elements of democracy in an effort to address the reality that large portions of the country’s citizens frequently challenge their democracy.
Introduction A democratic government has long been favoured as the most fair and representative government for a country to have. This essay will explore the advantages and disadvantages of both minority and majority government (for example efficiency, compromise, and power) and argue that in fact neither offers a fair representation of Canadian’s due to lack of both transparency and accountability. Parliamentary Government In Canada there are three branches of government: the executive branch which enforces Canadian laws and carries out government business; the legislative branch which debates and passes laws; and the judicial branch which interprets the laws and dictates how punishment should be carried out. In parliamentary government the executive branch is drawn from the legislative branch and is responsible to it. The responsibility lies in the fact that the government must have the confidence (or majority support) of the House of Commons in order to remain in power and this confidence is assured through party discipline; in other words, the party expects their Members of Parliament (MP’s) to vote the way the party votes.
For as perfect as realpolitik is the reoccurring problem of it is the fact you cannot separate humans from morality. Inevitably making political realism impossible as a form of diplomacy that could be widely accepted. To support the United States in an occupation against Canada because it would widely help American economics, offer resources, etc. would evidently be the right thing to do according to realpolitik. Yet, moralistic Americans view Canadians as their allies and neighbors.