More handpicked essays just for you.
Tracing the evolution of the social contract theory to its contemporary times
Tracing the evolution of the social contract theory to its contemporary times
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Catt explains the history of America’s democracy, political stand and goals through events and quotations of certain presidents. She states, “Abraham Lincoln welded those two axioms into a new one: ‘Ours is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.’” , she states another quote, “Fifty years more passed and the president of the United States, Woodrow Wilson, in a mighty crisis of the nation,
In fact he explains to the people that without the constitution in play the very freedom they are enjoying due to their previous hard fight will be lost. He says that the only way to keep the branches of government separated to prevent one that is too powerful is to have a binding document such as the constitution. As
embraces more than the fate of these United States. It presents to the whole family of man the question of whether a constitutional republic or democracy -- a government of the people, by the same people -- can or cannot maintain its territorial integrity against its own domestic foes. It presents the question whether the discontented individuals-- too few in numbers to control the administration, according to organic law, in anycase -- can always, upon the pretenses made in this case or on any other pretenses, or arbitrarily without any pretense, break up the government and thus practically put an end to free government upon the earth. It forces us to ask: “Is there, in all republics, this inherent and fatal weakness? Make a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to maintain its own
Thomas Jefferson and Niccolo Machiavelli both believe that the actions of the people shape the characteristics of the ruler and define the type of authority that will be held towards the people. Machiavelli, the first great political philosopher of the Renaissance, argues all men are untrustworthy due to their selfish, self-interested and impulsive ways of life in his writing, The Morals of the Prince, and therefore, to keep the people under control the ruler must be prepared to be cruel and instill fear among the people. Opposing Machiavelli is Jefferson. In The Declaration of Independence Jefferson believes people can be trusted since they have the ability to make their own decisions. Whereas Machiavelli supports tyranny, Jefferson believes
To prosper in a just and moral way, America must stand united. Thoreau demonstrates the accountability between the two parties: “The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted” (Thoreau, 1849/1998, p. 127). The people who compose a nation must not be complacent and inactive. Inactivity prevents progress.
A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it, does, of necessity, fly to anarchy or to despotism” (Basler,
Scholars from all over the Western world have analyzed and discussed the impact of democracy has had for the citizens of the United States, for over 200 years. Each new period throughout American history, has brought a new concept of being an individual in a democratic society. One flaw scholars from the late nineteenth century saw with democracy was that the majority ruled and if an individual part of the minority their voices were not heard, even if the minority was just and the majority unjust. Thus the democracy most Americans are proud to have is primarily individualistic and can be deemed corrupt because of the focus of majority rule, which might not be the wisest decision. Alexis de Tocqueville was a French writer who wrote several essays on his visit to the United States.
The founding fathers wrote these documents in a time period with entirely different influences regarding how a government should be structured, such as a focus on avoiding imperial influences and monarchies, and one that was structured during a constant fear of war (Berkin 41). Additionally, the meanings of these documents are continually purposely misconstrued, and so should be regarded with caution as to the ways in which the writings can be utilized for personal gain in times where the original intentions are somewhat moot. Overall, however, the government is still one that draws its authority from the consent of the governed, so those who are elected to represent the citizens of the United States should keep in mind the true desires of its
I was shocked when I read Democracy in America, written by Alexis De Tocqueville and published by Signet Classic. He predicted so many of the problems the American government has had, yet we could not see them ourselves. In some ways, I found his predictions to be uncanny. However, he lost some credibility with me when her said our “principle instrument was freedom.”(pg 20) While I agree with many of Tocqueville’s predictions about democracy, I disagree with his assessment of American’s using freedom as their guiding
De Tocqueville doesn 't view liberty as an attribute part of the democratic era. He believes that the only character that is associated with this era is equality. He explains in his theory that people of this era prize equality over liberty, although he doesn 't deny that democratic people value liberty, because everyone can take part in it and enjoy it effortlessly, as opposed to liberty where you have to "sacrifice" to achieve it (De Tocqueville, 1835). He holds that equality creates individualism, which means people separate themselves from one another, their ancestors and the future generations, that leads to tyranny and despotism. On the contrary, he claims that during the aristocratic ages, people were not selfish and careless about others ' needs because "aristocracy links everybody, from peasant to king" (De Tocqueville, 1835).
The aim of Tocqueville’s work The Old Regime and the French Revolution is not to draw on the history of the revolution. In the preliminary pages of his work, Tocqueville states, “it is not my purpose here to write a history of the French Revolution; that has been done already, and so alby that it would be folly on my part to think of covering the ground again. In this book I shall study, rather, the background and nature of the revolution” (Tocqueville, pg. vii). Tocqueville further asserts that a great deal of both speculation and theory will be central to his work.
In Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville provides an analysis and critique of American civic life. During his travels across the country, he discovered how different America was from Europe, particularly France. While the majority of Europe consisted of aristocratic countries with hundreds of years of history, America was a young democratic country. Most notably, he observed that America was growing in equality. The growing equality becomes a presupposition of individualism and isolation, but despite this inevitable growth of equality, individualism and isolation can be minimized.
Introduction: While freedom as a concept feels fairly intuitive, nuances in interpretation can change the basis of an argument. John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government and Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America do not define liberty in precisely the same way, which in turn guides two different visions in how a government should function. When examining a core concept in an argument, it is important to inquire to whether its treatment is adequate. Is either definition of liberty sufficient, and does either author’s envisioned government adequately address liberty in that system? This paper will argue that Locke’s definition of liberty remains in the literal sphere while Tocqueville’s is more conceptual, but neither Locke’s nor Tocqueville’s
De Tocqueville does see that “I know of no country, indeed, where the love of money has such a grip on men 's heart. [... ]The business in America is business.” (Spence, 1989:150) Literary, work is something attached as male habits or as a backbone to family. Meanwhile on the female side, habits to maintain something they care mostly found rather than they work at office to fulfill life as authority.
In the United States, people always talk about freedom and equality. Especially they want elections could be more democratic. In American Democracy in Peril, Hudson’s main argument regarding chapter five “Election Without the People’s Voice,” is if elections want to be democratic, they must meet three essential criteria, which are to provide equal representation of all citizens, to be mechanisms for deliberation about public policy issues, and to control what government does. Unfortunately, those points that Hudson mentions are what American elections do not have. American elections do not provide equal representation to everyone in the country.
