Therefore, while security is imperative, undermining citizen’s liberties threatens the structure of the democracy by creating chaos and disloyal citizens. In a society where freedom of speech, assembly, and press is highly valued, passing a law prohibiting “willfully cause or attempt to cause insubordin... ... middle of paper ... ...it was founded. This means that the country must not forget to give its citizens freedom of speech, press, and assembly. By doing so, they will create a secure environment within the state and have loyal citizens that are willing to fight for the security of the country as a whole, regardless if it is right or wrong. When a democracy finds itself in a problematic decision, it should choose to put liberty above the security of the people.
It is absolutely necessary that people understand the nature of a monstrous government. It does have a tendency to become too monstrous by becoming overly aggressive in the process of preserving power. However, the order it provides is essential to the development of a sound community. It also provides the opportunity for citizens to take the world into their own hands. The more people volunteer in their community and support human rights groups such as Amnesty International, the less harm our benefits of monstrous government causes for others.
Both sides make valid arguments to bring the citizens more involved in what is going on in their country. Yet the biggest concern for both is factions, in what system can it survive with factions in place. As long as there is liberty there will always be factions. The Democratic side is to small of a scale to limit the factions, eventually there will be an overwhelming number of them. The Republican version however will limit the factions to where they would not affect the system in the long run.
They were dangerous because they were often violent and disruptive often being called the “weakness of popular government”. At worst, they lead to civil war and at the least the inhibited the execution of public policy. While he acknowledge that the easiest way to remove a faction was to destroy their liberties, he knew that this would mean to declare a war on human nature. He also understood that removing their liberty would mean removing the liberty of others, which he did not want. Instead, he suggested controlling the effects of majority faction... ... middle of paper ... ... have seen human nature grow and change.
The rights and responsibilities are important for the preservation of our democratic government because we as citizens of the US need these rights and responsibilities to lend us with direction. Without these there would be a lack of control and stability in our government. Lending us in a world wind of trouble and chaos. Disaster and devastation to the people would cause distrust in the government and lend to its downfall. Freedom to express yourself, Freedom to pursue "life,liberty,and the pursuit of happiness.
Machiavelli thoroughly states that anything and everything must be done to keep the peace of the masses, even if acts of immorality are used. However, instead of advocating immorality, Machiavelli is saying that to serve the people and the state well, a ruler must not restrict himself to conventional standards of morality. His use of immoral tactics in leadership would appear to be unpopular; however the acts of immorality have limitations and are done solely to avoid displeasing the masses or creating disorder. Therefore it is acceptable to practice immorality if it is done only to a small number of constituents, if it is not repeated, and if it is performed to please and benefit the public. It is these limitations that prove Machiavelli is arguing that the use of immoral tactics, to rule the people and in turn be ruled by the people, is needed.
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” Revolutionary Thomas Paine describes the government, which may seem evil at times, as a necessity for becoming a functioning society. A lot of responsibility is entrusted onto today’s government to create a safe, law based environment in which everyone can live and prosper. Although without the structure of a government to create laws and have the authority to enforce them, society itself would become chaotic. If a strong government ever became corrupt, it would have the ability to keep control on society by creating laws that limit people’s free-will. This creates a dystopian society for every person living under that government.
In exchange for better protection of the citizens, the citizens must be willing to also give up or abridge certain rights, the problem being the United States founded on freedom. Another issue is h... ... middle of paper ... ...made to others that oppose the United States. It is certain that changes need to be made in the areas of domestic policy, foreign policy, and the military. However, the answer to terrorism is not an easy one. The United States has already created a catch 22 situation with the middle east by its obsessive intrusion into the affairs of the middle east which is the main reason that terrorism has rose to what it has today.
Such resistance is usually for the greater good of society as it represents the discontent of a general population. Civilians must profess discontent since it is necessary to understand current and ongoing issues that harm society as a whole. Justification of disobedience comes when the state does not have the moral, attentive, and supportive capacity to rule well among its citizens, which can lead to excessive coercion, ignorance, and support for small ruling elites. People have every right to defend themselves, even if sacrifice and consequences are at hand. This paper will argue the justification of civil disobedience so long as it remains non-violent and is used to defy the powers of the state and government when the rule of law is in need change for the greater good.
Laws may be created on the spot to serve a personal purpose to someone of power and people may be wrongfully punished. All of these things are warning signs that democracy is at risk During the civil war, the government did many questionable things including President Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. Habeas corpus, which in Latin means, "Produce the body", states the holders of a prisoner must release the person to the court to face the charges brought against the person. This writ means that a party cannot hold a person prisoner indefinitely; they cannot make a person simply disappear. Lincoln suspended the writ during the war to control the rebel threat.