Democracy

The purpose of creating a democratic government is to allow its citizens a say in how the government operates. It's essential that the citizens of a democratic government vote, hold public office and interact with foreign governments. The term "democracy" does not apply in today's world. The world is a complicated place and citizens vote for people who will help the nation grow and prosper. By voting, people select candidates for public office who are charged with making fair & just laws. People do not vote to establish laws per se. They vote for people whose job it is to make the laws & regulations. In a free nation, the citizens can vote poor office holders out and replace them with more competent ones.

That depends on exactly how you define the word. They certainly intended to create a government in which the people were the ultimate authority and which was answerable to their will. However, that was not what they would have meant by the word democracy. To them democracy meant a government on the model of ancient Athens where the populace as a whole, all the free men of the nation, met on a regular basis to debate policy and act as the legislature and supreme court. Obviously such a government is simply impractical for any state larger than a small city. Thus the founders created a representative republic. That is a government where the people elect representatives to conduct the legislative and other business of government and must stand for re-election on a regular basis so that the people can pass judgment on their actions and retain control of them. Over time, as the franchise has expanded and elections have become more direct, the meaning of the word democracy has changed to be essentially synonymous with republic. Thus, if you mean democracy in the sense it was understood in the 18th century the answer is no, but if you mean democracy in the sense we use it today, the answer is reasonably yes.Michael Montagne

They have very little in common. They are both ruled by people.

Democracy is good for resolving disagreements between powerful groups in society, without resorting to physical fighting and civil war.

But democracy doesn't necessarily lead to social justice. Because it's the majority who makes the laws and the rules, regardless of whether weak minorities like these laws and rules or not. In a divided democratic society, quite often there is nothing weak minorities can do to protect their rights.

A good historical example of that is USA. USA has been a democracy right from the day of its independence. And in that democracy first slavery for the blacks existed, and then racial segregation and discrimination for millions of blacks.

Things are better in USA now. But democracy is no guarantee that things will stay as good as they are now.

You only need to remember that Hitler and the Nazis gained popularity and power in a reasonably democratic country of their time. And then they used their power to declare martial law for everyone.

Democracy is good for resolving disagreements between powerful groups in society, without resorting to physical fighting and civil war.

But democracy doesn't necessarily lead to social justice. Because it's the majority who makes the laws and the rules, regardless of whether weak minorities like these laws and rules or not. In a divided democratic society, quite often there is nothing weak minorities can do to protect their rights.

A good historical example of that is USA. USA has been a democracy right from the day of its independence. And in that democracy first slavery for the blacks existed, and then racial segregation and discrimination for millions of blacks.

Things are better in USA now. But democracy is no guarantee that things will stay as good as they are now.

You only need to remember that Hitler and the Nazis gained popularity and power in a reasonably democratic country of their time. And then they used their power to declare martial law for everyone.

The US is a Constitution Based Federal Republic, with a long and strong

Democratic Tradition. With all of its errors, it seems to work. It works only as far as a man will go. If the senate has a motive against the wishes of the public we can't do a thing about it.

It is likely that History does not record the origin of Democracy. The Greeks and Romans were known to have elections yet the eligible voters of these societies were only a small percentage of the people.

Machiavelli in "Discourses on Livy" suggest that democracies have existed for as long as history was recorded.

John Lock in his "Second Trieste on Government" suggest that democracy may be the oldest form of government outside of a Patriarchy.

No. For example China has become a much more capitalist oriented economy, however their government is communist.
Capitalism is an economic system in which the economy is controlled largely by private and corporate consumers and produces of goods and services.
Democracy is a political system in which the people have direct control over the government.

Representative democracy, since a large civilazation would make it impossible to control a direct democracy. Choosing representatives and trusting that they will make the correct decision is much easier than trying to listen to everyone's oppinion. Especially when there are 900 million + people.

Athens greese

do sex and send photos

Both Jeffersonian and Jacksonian were fighting for the interests of farmers against the commercial and mercantile interests of the country.

The real difference is application. Jefferson was portrayed as a man of the people, but he remained a wealthy planter who tended to associate only with other elites. His mannerisms were much more upper-class. Further, while Jefferson talked about limited government, his actual practices as President differed. He maintained the Bank of the US, authorized the Louisiana Purchase and pushed for stronger party cohesion, all things many Democrats opposed in the ideal.

Jackson was also a wealthy farmer, but he had come from a poorer region and did not have particularly wealthy parents. He was much more comfortable intermingling with people of lower social and economic classes. He was also much more focused on attacking the mercantile classes, particularly his refusal to renew the charter for the Bank of the US.

No. Canada was created in 1869. The world's longest lasting democracy is The United States of America created on July 4, 1776. However, the citizens of the micro state of San Morino in Italy might dispute that.

Argentina

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Benin

Brazil

Bulgaria

Canada

Cape Verde

Chile

Croatia

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Denmark

Dominican Republic

El Salvador

Estonia

Finland

France

Georgia

Germany

Ghana

Greece

Guatemala

Honduras

Hungary

Iceland

India

Indonesia

Ireland

Israel

Italy

Japan

Jamaica

Kiribati

Latvia

Lesotha

Lithuania

Malaysia

Mali

Malta

Mexico

Micronesia

Mongolia, Namibia

The Netherlands

New Zealand

Nicaragua

Norway

Palau

Peru

Philippines

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Singapore

Slovakia

Slovenia

South Africa

South Korea

Spain

Suriname

Sweden

Thailand

Taiwan

Tonga

Trinidad and Tobago

Tuvalu

Ukraine

United Kingdom

United States of America

Uruguay

Soviet Russia

By allowing protesters to share information and build support for political movements.

Ancient Greece was the first to practice democracy. Democracy is a form of government in which the supreme power is held completely by the people under a free electoral system. It is derived from the Greek δημοκρατία ([dimokratia] (help·info)), "popular government" which was coined from δήμος (dēmos), "people" and κράτος (kratos), "rule, strength" in the middle of the 5th-4th century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens following a popular uprising in 508 BC. In this form, there were no defined human rights or legal restraints upon the actions of assembly, making it the first instance of "illiberal democracy." All of the people in the Ancient Greek society were expected to serve their country in the Assembly at least once during their lifetime.

negative-delay in decision making,less economic development comparing to dictatorship.

positive- equitable sharing of economic resources,decisions are acceptable to all strata of society ,guards fundamental right,moreover people are supreme

answered by hafsal.m.h@gmail.com

A challenge that almost every employer has is to keep its employees motivated. Employers do this by paying a good wage and providing a pleasant work environment. They do it in other ways, too.

A very important motivator is the employee's hope that he or she will receive raises and promotions. If the employer doesn't treat its employees equally, then the employees can't really be sure that trying hard will get them a raise or promotion. So then they won't try hard. Then the business doesn't do well, and nobody's happy.

In the United States, there are laws that require employers to treat their employees equally. If the employers don't do so, they may be fined, and this could get very expensive.

The five concepts of democracy are outlined below.

1. Worth of the Individual: Democracy serves many of the different and distinct individuals that reside in the governed land.
2. Equality of All Persons: In democracy all are equal meaning that it does not matter what race, gender, color, religion, etc., an individual is. Each individual is entitled to equal opportunity and equality before law.
3. Majority Rule, Minority Rights: In democracy the will of the people is determined by popular vote meaning majority rules, but it does not mean the majority is correct. Sometimes the minority is correct thus allowing for democracy is a trial and error process.
4. Necessity of Compromise: A process in which democracy achieves majority or public agreement rather than completely terminating an idea or thought.
5. Individual Freedom: All individual are given individual freedom as long as it does not interfere or harm the others, majority will.

Because the constitution of 1993 dictates such a system, whereby the head of the government is the PM & the head of state is the president. The president appoints the PM rather than a legislative election of the majority party being held. The president's nominee must be approved by the Duma, which in actuality is simply a rubber stamp for Medvedev & Putin. Putin has been elected President again and he will appoint Medvedev as his PM and the appointment will receive the approval of the Duma. There are some divisions of formal power between the two positions in the Constitution, however, as Putin has centralized power in the office and among his supporters over the past decade, the power, in reality, seems to reside with Putin who has been making more political decisions and influencing policy as the PM more than any other PM in the past, whereby overlooking the few divisions of power that do exist between these positions.

cause you are stupid

The representative democracy of the United States.

That is the question, isn't it? Certainly, you cannot simply and quickly force a nation to embrace democracy, any more than you can force it to do anything. The assumption often is that if the majority of people in a nation are oppressed and even badly abused, and if they want a change that they cannot seem to bring about, then democracy is a system that they should be free to try. But that has to be tempered by the reality that nations are sovereign states and can follow, within reason, the systems that history, traditions and the popular sentiment deem correct. The idea of 'forcing' democracy is contradictory. The other thing that has to be tempered by reality is the assumed legitimacy of oppressive and absolute theocracies that engage in atrocities against humanity in the name of a deity. Such theocracies concentrate all power and authority in the hands of a very few men who usually operate beyond the scope of any civil law, and certainly beyond the authority or control of the people governed. This is abhorrent to the minds of most who understand democracy, but even these systems can be part of the operations of some sovereign states.

Theoretically Ancient Greece was democratic.But thten that all depends on your view of Democracy.... Who decides who gets to vote ? And then what do you do with the decisions that the voters make ? The plan is that if the vote is 51% against 49% then we all do what the 51% decide..... it simply ain't so ! It does not work like that because the 49% will whinge that something somewhere is not right ! Democracy is an idealistic concept: It simply does not exist !