Living in a Republic
We live in a republic governed not just by majority rule but also by law. We use law in our country to limit the power of majority rule. The basic reason that we do this is because society can be flawed. This "flaw" can come from a variety of areas, but the one that I would like to focus on is sexism. In criminal law the courts are blind to the ideas that people are different. Every person is given the same privileges and limitations as the next person regardless of sex or race. We do not live in a system were there is a set of rules for men and a different set of rules for women. The application of these laws can be flawed however, because the means in which law is applied is done through human eyes. In theory law should protect every person in the same way, but the application of our laws falls short of this ideal.
We live in a system where the law treats every person in the same way. The major argument against this is that race and sex do come into law because we use people to implement the law. This idea that the problem with law is that the people implementing it are sexist should not lead to the idea that law is sexist. Instead we should face the real problem that people are sexist. The law does not say to a police officer to treat one group of people different, but rather the law states that all people should be treated the same. Does that mean that if a police officer treats people different that there is a fundamental flaw in law or does that mean that there is a problem with this officer?
The same situation can be brought out in the courts. Jury members not only decide a case on the facts of the case, but also from their own opinions. If there is a sexist jury member that jury member's opinion will affect the outcome of the case. Once again this should not lead us to believe that the law is flawed; instead that that jury member is. Our court system tries to make sure that any person that sits in the jury box can be impartial and fair.
"With the Gracchi, all the consequences of empire - social, economic and political - broke loose in the Roman state, inaugurating a century of revolution." (The Roman Revolution, Ronald Syme, p16).
Historically, females have been discriminated against in the United States based solely on their gender. Gender or sex discrimination may be described as the unfair treatment of a person in their employment because of that person's sex. It is illegal to discriminate based on sex and it may result in negative effects on employment include pay, position and title, advancements and training opportunities or whether or not an individual is hired or fired from a job.
The essay under critical analysis is entitled, “Philadelphia’s Radical Caucus That Propelled Pennsylvania to Independence and Democracy,” written by Gary B. Nash. This analytical essay consumes the fourth chapter of the book Revolutionary Founders: Rebels, Radicals, and Reformers in the Making of the Nation, edited by Alfred F. Young, Gary B. Nash, and Ray Raphael. His essay, along with the twenty-one other accounts in the book depicting lesser-known individuals, whose contributions in securing independence from Great Britain and creating a new government in America rival that of the nation’s more notorious and beloved founders, such as Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. Dr. Nash focuses his efforts on Philadelphia’s Radical Caucus of the 1770’s and 80’s and the lasting influences of the 1776 constitution it created within American politics as well as several nations around the world. Within his analysis and interpretation of Pennsylvanian politics during the American Revolution, Dr. Nash utilizes a pro-whiggish, radically sympathetic stance to assert the Radical Caucus’ remarkable ability to gain support from and bestow power upon the common working man, take political power from conservatives within Pennsylvania’s public offices, and revolutionize democratic thought through their landmark reformations of the state’s constitution. Respecting the fact that Dr. Nash’s position on this subject required extensive research through first hand accounts, pamphlets, newspapers and the analysis of countless preserved records, indicates that the account he has given is very credible. Complying with his presentation of facts and the significance of the topic within early American history has prevented a well-rounded counter-argument ...
My fellow countrymen, I stand before you today in order to defend the necessity of small republics for democracy and liberty. Let us begin with Montesquieu’s simple thesis: Large republics are incapable of self-government because of the massive and inevitable diversity of their populations and of the interests of that population (153). This leads to a corruption of the principles of democracy and ends liberty. Using Montesquieu’s elegantly argued The Spirit of Laws as a framework to discuss and reflect upon the principles of a democratic republic and the necessity of a small republic, I hope to articulate herein the reasons you should come to see this most brilliant insight, honorable gentlemen.
Imagine Kirsty and Marc, a young couple who resort to robbing a house in a desperate attempt to make money. They are caught, charged with the same crime and given the same sentence, except for one thing: the male dominant world we live in does not stop at the courtroom door. Marc is sent to a medium security prison one hour from his family with every opportunity to earn his way into a minimum-security facility. He spends his days learning to cook in the kitchenette and has access to basic necessities like aftershave or hairspray. Meanwhile, Kirsty walks into her frigid six-by-ten foot cell with bars for a door, a toilet in plain view and not a trace of sunlight. She is twelve hours from home with no hope of changing location since there is nowhere else to go. The stories of rapes, beatings and riots told by her new neighbours are endless. Kirsty realizes that the only way for her to survive this place is to oppose nature and forget what it is to feel. This is discrimination against women as they are penalized more severely than men for committing less crime. How can women strive for equality when they cannot attain justice in the justice system itself? The controversy over the gender bias goes beyond the "too-few-to-count" syndrome as Sally Armstrong calls it, it is a question of women's constitutional right to be treated equally.
In the United States, true equality has never existed. From the Declaration of Independence to modern times, the U.S. legal system has failed in any attempt at equality. The ideology of "all [men] are equal but some [men] are more equal than others" has been present throughout the history of the U.S. (Orwell). Inequality has always existed in the United States legal system and continues to exist today; however, the inequality presently in the system is not as blatant as what it once was, but the system has come to depend on inequality. Since the very beginning of a legal system in the United States, there has been inequality.
within it. " ' I agree with Ralph. We've got to have rules and obey
There are several theories as to why gender disparity occurs. One perspective aimed at explaining sex-based disparities is what is known as the chivalry/paternalism thesis. This is the idea that because the justice system is male dominated, judges tend to associate female offenders with the women in their lives. For example, when a judge sees a female offender, the paternalism theory suggests that it causes them to think of their daughter, sister, wife, etc. and therefore be more lenient in
“The Republic One and Indivisible of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, or Death.” This statement is best known as the slogan of the French Revolution and is mentioned as a popular quote in A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens. The French revolution, (as told by Wikipedia) was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France from 1789 to 1799 that had a fundamental impact on French history and on modern history worldwide. This war, that lasted 10 years, is the main focus of A Tale of Two Cities. The Slogan of The French Revolution, that was frequently mentioned in the book, is completely filled with Irony.
In the late eighteenth century, America emerged as a new and independent nation with a new form of government that differed from any other around the world. Our framers, Madison, Jefferson, Adams, and more, created our Constitution and Bill of Rights that would prevent America from becoming a monarchy like Britain. In our Constitution there are seven basic principles that ensured that power would not go to one person or group, creating a Democratic Republic. This new notion began a period of growth and development. America began to develop a distinct and unique culture that was influenced by the Revolution. Common people began to have new ideas, traditions, principles, and opinions. Up until this point there were no famous painters, architects, or writers from America, but in 1785 paintings of historical scenes based on the American Revolution were published. The genre of literature grew to include political standpoints and more. America’s population diversified, including different religions and ethnicities, coming to experience the new country
Eliminating gender bias in the court system is something that needs to be taken care of quickly. With gender bias being an issue in the court system, equality and fairness is being questioned. People are not being treated the same way because of the attitudes the judges put on and give to the defendants and lawyers. Judges should not be able to pass with these approaches
... (2007) This case clearly demonstrated that there is no equality in the sentencing of female offenders and that women are being sentence more harshly than males.
Sexism has been extremely prevalent in the world since the start of agricultural societies. As groups of people moved from their hunting gathering practices and into agricultural women weren’t needed to keep the group alive. Their role in society was demoted to that of bearing children and therefore they were considered only fit for housework and weren’t included in hard labor. This was the beginning of deep seated sexism that carries on into the modern day. We have seen many examples of this throughout history from high levels of abuse in Ancient Rome, European witch hunts viciously attacking women and leading to around 51,000 deaths, extreme amounts of sexism surrounding the modern military, and even carrying into today. We see recurring patterns of unfair accusations directed toward women, physical abuse, and even murder. There are many ways in which we have improved the treatment of women throughout history, but there are also many ways in which we can still improve.
Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, “This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice” (“Quotes about Justice, Laws, and Crimes”). Most minority groups know that the court is not just, but what about the majority of the population; men? Men often have a disadvantage in the courtroom because people have natural biases, history has given certain groups an advantage over time, and gender discrimination is a popular issue in the media.
The idea of an ideal democracy is not a particularly obtainable idea, considering the different in culture and history of countries this could be a dramatic change to previous authoritarian regimes. Although we can work towards this idea of an ideal democracy reaching this goal will be a much harder task. The attributes that contribute to having an ideal democracy are free and fair elections, their capability to implement policies, political participation of the masses and universal adult suffrage, and a multiple party political system.