Otis contrasts two types of power structure: Oligarchies and aristocracies, where only a select few posses a large amount of power, and democracies, where power is distributed amongst the people. Most successful countries and empires throughout history structure their government to one of the two extremes, leading to corruption, in the case of an oligarchy or aristocracy, or poor decision making, in the case of a complete democracy. From his analysis of these systems of government, Otis proposes “to have those several power properly combined,” calling for the integration of both political systems in American society instead of only following one to an extreme. (Otis 105) The idea of a balance between authoritarianism and republicanism is virtually unprecedented in history; the only civilization resembling Otis’ idea was ancient Rome, but it failed to accurately reflect his vision as there was an inability to maintain balance between the Senate and the Roman people.
A tyrant is a powerful meteor destroying everything in its path. In Philadelphia 1787 men were facing problems of their existing constitution and the problem they had was tyranny. So James Madison and his fellow delegates created a new constitution that guards against tyranny over cities. Tyranny is a group that has too much power over citizens. Tyranny is an organization that has too much power over people.
Tyranny (The accumulation of all power… in the same hands whether of one, few or many) is everywhere whether you are a kid or and adult it's affecting you. In the summer of 1781 55 delegates representing twelve of the thirteen states met in philadelphia to fix the national government. The problem was that the existing government, under the article of confederation just wasn’t doing the job. It was to weak so the made a challenge to make a new central government. The constitution guarded against tyranny in four ways.
Madison rhapsodizes at length about the dangers of factionalism under majority rule; he claims that “popular government [...] enables [the majority] to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest, both the public good and the rights of other citizens”, thus insinuating that popular rule in a system where “the causes of factionalism cannot be prevented” will ultimately devastate both the working class’s public good and the elite class’s private right (10). This fear mongering over majority rule acts as a ringing endorsement of the alternative: minority, or elite, political dominance. To ease the minds of his readers, Madison then declares that the working class of the new republic will be too spread out and otherwise divided to oppose the just government established by the upper class–or, in his words, lower classes will be “rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression” against the elite (10). In this way, Madison promotes upper class rule as a means to protect American liberty, believing that the people at large were unfit to establish this protection themselves–and that they had neither the intelligence nor the unity to carry out their corrupt schemes under properly conducted elite
Have you ever wondered why we aren’t ruled by single tyrant? A tyrant is one individual who holds all the power over a group of people. The question this essay will answer is how did the constitution protect against one person or group of people from having too much power. The constitution guards against tyranny through federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and big states vs. small states.
The stasis within the social classes after the revolution was beneficial to society. “One class did not overthrow another; the poor did not supplant the rich. But social relationships-- the way people were connected to one another-- were changed, and decisively so” (Wood 132). There was a solid relationship between higher and lower classes, and that helped maintain balance within communities, which made the new country a “giant, almost continent wide republic of nearly ten million egalitarian-minded bustling citizens who not only had thrust themselves into the vanguard of history but had fundamentally altered their society and their social relationships” (132-133).
The first tyrant was Peisistratus, a lawyer, who had two previous failed attempts to install himself before succeeding. He was supported by the well-being of the poor and the landowners as well as clients and maintained popularity through funding festivals and public programs, which ties into the answer for the previous question. His position was known as in equation with that of emperor; however, with the growth of democracy, the title of ‘tyrant’ became negative, and its popularity and usefulness decreased from there. As a tyrant was a person who seized power unlawfully or inherited it, became a popular occupation as the monarchy structure became unpopular and birth aristocratic regimes, which, themselves, became unpopular.
History has seen many strong leaders who have used their power for good but also abused their power for their personal harmful plans. Autocrats are rulers who influence everything in their region, they have been seen throughout the centuries. According to document 4, the characteristics of an autocrat state how they “control religious authorities, make laws, limit or control the power of nobles, and use armies to expand or consolidate borders under the ruler’s control.” This shows how they influence religion, and armies to extend the empire and change aspects of people's lives. Autocrats would have a desire for power which would have an impact on people's lives.
But a close analysis will tell us that it is not the political system or the society that is responsible for the evil, but some individuals within the society or in the political system that perpetrate evil. Therefore, it is the individual who needs to bring-forth the change in
And in response Simonides argues that there are some ways that the tyrant can redeem himself and get the love and attention that he craves and tries to advice him and show him these ways. In general, tyrants are sovereign rulers who rule over unwilling subjects by force. They have control over almost everything and everyone in the state, meaning there is no consideration for law. Tyrants always think of themselves
Abuse of Power From the beginning of time until now, civilization has always felt the need to be organized under a leader. The craving of power lives in most people. Sometimes men striving for power can work their way up to a dictatorship, absolute control, by using propaganda, fear, and many other methods. In the novel, Animal Farm by George Orwell, Napoleon portrays similar qualities in power as Hitler.
A tyrant, in Ancient Greece, was a man who forcefully took control of and governed over a city state illegally. It was impossible for a man to take that much power without the help and support of many followers and none of the tyrants was ever able to stay longer than the majority of the people
1 INTRODUCTION Power and authority are the most important aspects of politics as such way of thinking comes a long way from the earliest thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle to mention few. They are the fundamental features of state in politics, focusing on who should have the power and authority over the people and who should rule them. During the time prior and after the birth of states, political authority has always been a major concern with regards to who should rule and how and who shouldn’t. Therefore this issues need to be addressed in a way that will at the end benefit the society. Plato is the thinker or theorist who came with addressing who should rule in a political environment in what Plato outlined that only Philosophers should rule.
Social classes are a form of social stratification that refers to the existence of structured inequalities between individuals and groups in society. A social class is a group of people of comparable status, power and wealth which are usually classified as upper class, middle class, and lower class. For each class, there are some specific opportunities available that influence their social life. We can understand about the particularity of the chances through unequal distribution of these opportunities between individuals in social classes. In here belonging to a social class seems to be an obstacle for some individuals to obtain equal opportunity, unlike upper class people.
Class struggle is a conflict in a particular society or between a society which is caused by the lack of unity in one society and different perspective of a different group in a society. It is also called class conflict or class warfare. One social issue of a class struggle is the social inequality. According to study.com, Social inequality is an inequity of social class, award, opportunities, religion, position in the community, social status and at some other point respect in a group of society.
