The idea of a governing body drawing its power directly from its constituents has been undermined by the corrupt nature of modern politics where politicians act out of self-interest. While the Constitution and later amendments had every intention of securing basic liberties, certain limitations later undermined the original intentions of the founding fathers to give power back to the people by placing the larger majority of power in the hands of the state. Federal limitations to certain amendments, known as federal mandates, have taken power away from the masses. To secure democracy and avoid further abuses of power by the judicial courts, an amendment should be made to the Constitution prohibiting the federal government from putting down mandates that directly interfere with the power given to the states by law. Federal politicians use desultory commands as leverage to ensure that the states comply with their wishes.
Alexander introduced mass repression, which included executions and other forms of torture in order to regain political stability. Similarly, Nicholas introduced continued repression, but combined this with concessions in order to diminish opposition and increase popularity towards his regime. Stolypin's necktie echoes Alexander's ruthless suppression of opposition to suggest that both Tsars' were autocratic. Yet, a deeper analysis of both regimes can lead one to conclude that it was in fact Nicholas who was more autocratic. By transforming Russia into a modern democratic state, he also made his opposition more active and demanding, especially since they saw the power of the monarch decrease gradually in the western countries.
Henry Thoreau once stated that, “When a government is unjust, people should refuse to abide by the law and distance themselves from the administration in general”, which denotes that when a government is not being fair in rules that people could revolt (Straub 3). Begins the events which lead up to the Russian civil disobedience act in where Vladimir Putin was elected third-term once again, by cheating his way through and buying himself votes. People did not like this because it seemed to be an unfair move. The Russians had many conflicts with Putin when he governed Russia. Russians had reasons upon protesting against Putin because of the way he governed way very unfair.
Occasional demonstrations in support of democracy are small and largely ignored, except by law enforcement. Those who defended the White House thought they had diverted the course of history, that in standing up self-assured the people had shaken off their Soviet obsequious to the state and that the state would begin to serve the people. But today, elections are not free and fair, the courts are not independent from the government, political opposition is not tolerated and the reformers are widely blamed for what has gone wrong. Today, Russia functions on bribes, and Putin’s opponents call his United Russia party the party of crooks and thieves. People can say whatever they want to one another, unlike in Soviet times when they feared the secret police knocking in the middle of the night, but television is controlled and any opposition is publicly invisible.
Next, he believed the US political system naturally tended towards corruption and finally, he thought that politics and power inevitably tend to sap a person’s morals. Adams’ assumption that a respectable government is not possible in a democracy underlies the entire book and culminates with Mrs. Lee and Senator Ratcliffe’s conversation about government corruption. Mrs. Lee asks, “Is a respectable government impossible in a democracy?” Senator Ratcliffe replies, “That no representative government can long be much better or much worse than the society it represents. Purify society and you purify government. But try to purify the government artificially and you only aggravate failure” (Adams 42).
To advance his arguments, Pobedonostsev refers to countries that have incorporated the parliamentary system and how its members have failed to satisfy any of their promises. In theory, they care about public welfare, but in practice they formulate lies to get elected and gain personal wealth and fame. To Pobedonostsev, Parliament is a despotic entity that fools people into believing in a fantasy where “the representative as such, surrenders his personality, and serves as the embodiment of the will and opinions of his constituents” (RORS 5). Lenin, however, disagrees with Pobedonostsev’s criticisms of democratic representation. His revolutionary scheme, which involves the proletariat takeover of the bourgeoisie state, consists of a small private unit of party leaders executing the socialist policies that the larger public unit of workers’ demand.
As stronger nations exercise their control over weaker ones, the United States try to prove their authority, power and control over weaker nations seeing them as unable to handle their own issues thereby, imposing their ideology on them. And if any of these weaker nations try to resist, then the wrath of the United States will come upon them. In overthrow the author Stephen Kinzer tells how Americans used different means to overthrow foreign government. He explains that the campaign & ideology of anti- communism made Americans believe that it was their right and historical obligation to lead forces of good against those of iniquity. They also overthrew foreign government, when economic interest coincided with their ideological ones (kinzer.215).
The fact that Marc Antony carried out his plan states that he will deceive his asso... ... middle of paper ... ...s riled audience and the possession of information that sets them over the edge into being an unforgiving mob (III, 2, 107-259). Having a serious effect on an audience is important when trying to be understood fully, however revenge is a dangerous topic especially when being encouraged by a talented public speaker. Marc Antony is truly a deceitful person. This attribute is apparent in Antony's actions including how he handles his excessive greed, presumption in himself and his opinions and his perilous power of public speaking. Antony is not worthy of the presidency because he would be entrusted with too much power.
The power between majorities and the minorities caused each state to become jealous of one another 's rights and powers. So, The Founding Fathers became afraid that, “A Tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come to power.” Therefore, they came up with many different ideas for The Electoral College. The first idea, was to have congress choose the president. The idea was rejected though, because it was too indecisive and would leave too many hard feelings in congress. The second idea proposed the state legislature to choose the president, but was later rejected because they thought the president could persuade the state legislature and he/she would violate federal authority.
Even if an editor, for example, wants to oppose the party ideology or wants to choose the picture showing the Prime Minister slapping a citizen on the face, he or she would not be allowed to do so. Either he will lose his financial gain and become a target or he will bow the pressure and become a corrupted person.