Instead we have what is called a representative democracy or the real type of democracy. In this type of democracy, we the people get to choose someone to represent our values an opinions and that person reports this to the government. We have this type of democracy because perfect democracy does not exist. It would be extremely hard to accomplish or even come close to it. The reality is that the United States is one of the closest best forms of democracy, yet it’s far from perfect.
Definition of democracy Before discussing the relationship between Confucianism and democracy, it is important to clarify what definition of democracy will be adopted as it sets the agenda and the framework of the analysis. As argued by many scholars, democracy is an essentially contested that there is no unitary definition can fit universally without regard to context (Whitehead, 1997). Basically, it can be classified into a procedural and substantive concept. Procedural democracy sets a lower threshold for democracy. According to Huntington (1991), the essences of democracy lay in ‘open, free and fair’ elections, regardless the qualities of government produced by them.
One example of government is a regime ruled by democratic ideas. A government under this type of rule has specific qualities that distinguish it as a democracy. For instance, many people can have an impact to a democracy; they can possess some power. "It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few" (Benjamin Jowett). However, when one citizen among the people stands out, it can be a positive aspect towards public service.
So for the purpose of this essay, the arguments put forward will elucidate using the strictest understanding of what the democratic systems of Parliamentarism and Presidentialism pertain to. As outlined, the main focus of this paper will endeavour to show the advantages of Parliamentarism pitched against Presidentialism. In orde... ... middle of paper ... ...uaranteed to create democratic stability, or even make better and more insightful decisions than their Presidential counterparts, but he does state the “vast majority of stable democracies in the world today are Parliamentary regimes” (Linz 1989, p.52). Using this hypostasis, I have constructed the essay in a way that hopefully shows the advantages of the imperfect systems’ of Parliamentarism over Presidentialism. Admittedly, mainly because of word count restrictions, the paper is not a comprehensive examination of the different democratic environments, and is very much open to debate, but by taking this approach of loosely contrasting Parliamentarism and Presidentialism, I have attempted to show the flexibility and inherent benefits of Parliamentarism.
China The history of China is embeded with revolution and tension dating back to the feudal periods and the " first unified Chinese empire under Qi Shi Huang Di in 221 B.C. " The Confucianism ideology entrenched in the minds of the Chinese people with its conservative base and the need to achieve harmony in society has yet to be reached and most likely, never will. The proletariat is at the heart of the Marxist-Maoist approach to politics and the basic way of life for the Chinese masses considering that "...roughly 85% of the population is based in peasantry..." While Marxism, as implemented by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and Nationalism have historically hindered the people of China; a growing need to conform to capitilism is plainly obvious if there will ever be success in the global market. The Marxist theory is based on a classless society where the proletariat or working class is given the opportunity to exist on an equal social level with the remainder of the people while given a form of leadership of its own for the first time. The dictatorship of the proletariat in communist China called the " peoples democratic dictatorship " is considered by the Chinese Communist Party to be truly democratic, since it is the dictatorship of the vast majority, the ‘ people' over a tiny minority of reactionaries.
After having analyzed the term democracy extensively by looking at different contexts and the perspectives of philosophers, there is a lot I could add to the initial definition and discussion I had about democracy. First of all, I started my initial argument saying that democracy is a type of government where every person forming part of it has a say in the management of policies and regulations by the majority of vote. On a more figurative way, I stated that democracy is a way in which a country or government is managed and it can be viewed as freedom and equality. I also argued that this form of government is valuable because it is more likely for a state to be sovereign and prosperous if the citizens that form part of it have had a say in the management of their own welfare. After re-accessing what I had argued, I am still convinced with
Our government benefits us, the citizens, through the form of government known as democracy. It protects our rights, aids our citizens, and protects our rights that our country holds for us the, the people. The nation, led by democracy, can have great systems of checks and balances that make a federal government and a state government work so well, which is why more countries should try to embrace a democratic view of government.
Once it has been established that there is a desire for a society to exist, debate over what type of government (if any) may commence. The core concept of democracy is actually ‘equity’, rather than ‘equality’. Equity is a term which stresses the fact that while it is true everyone has equal opportunities, the conditions in which those opportunities are pursued are different for each and every individual. Equality is a term implying that everyone has the exact same opportunities, pre-existing determinants... ... middle of paper ... ...ate the functioning of nature. However, the advantage of a democratic society is that it provides all people with the opportunity to become stronger, and become better educated even though it is not immediately pertinent to a modern day society.
There is no consensus on whether parliamentary systems are ultimately better than presidential systems. But many political scholars have supported the case of parliamentary systems. The efficiency and smooth process of policy-making exhibited in parliaments, as well as the presence of an intrinsic, accountable relationship between the executive and legislative branches give parliamentary systems the edge in effectiveness. Furthermore, the wider division of powers, concept of Responsible Government in Britain and Canada, and the flawed Electoral College in the U.S. also give the edge of democracy to parliamentary systems.
The competitive air is still present but is stunted from the full potential of political expression that it could be if there were more than two parties in the running. An ideal democracy is far from being realized but it is definitely something we can all strive for, a fair and equal opportunity government. Free and fair elections allowing for public expression, government power and support of the people for their decisions to be carried out, the participation of the masses to shape the government they are under, and finally a multiple party system that expresses the numerous and ever changing views of the people. All of these attributes combine to create and model democracy that we can all look to be a part of.