0
Democracy
Democracy is a type of government characterized by a "rule of the people." In most democracies, citizens are equal and have the ability to vote for their political leaders.
1,484 Questions
Do you think Muhammad should have named a successor why or why not?
Answer 1
No,
The reasons are:
- All sayings and practices of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him); that is called Sunnah; are under guidance and commands of God. So, I don't agree with the question itself. Prophet Muhammad is not a normal leader or chairman to be criticized and judged by people on his sayings and doings.
- If prophet Muhammad named his successor, each successor will name the one following him. Islam would described as a system of dictatorship after that and would be accused of not adopting democracy. Refer to the questions below.
- Qur'an calls for democracy under the name of consultation "Shoura", so how do you expect prophet Muhammad will violate the Qur'an rules and commands. Qur'an says (English meaning translation):
"And those who have responded to their lord and established prayer and whose affair is [determined by] consultation among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend." (42:38)"
Answer 2
The question of "should" appears at first to throw an interesting wrench into the equation. If it is excised, (i.e. Do you think that Mohammed had named a successor?), this becomes a question strictly of Sunni vs. Shiite understandings of Imamat or Leadership. The Sunni opinion is well described in Answer 1, while the Shiite opinion would be that at Ghadir, Mohammed did name 'Ali as his successor because of Divine Revelation.
The changes that result from adding the "should" are slight. As Answer 1 notes, the Sunni position is that creating a direct line of succession from one leader to another would create at its best a benign dictatorship and at worst a tyrannical monarchy. Either way, there would be no democracy and the will of the people would be stifled by present authority. The Shiites do not disagree with this assertion and say that it would be quite correct and proper that there is no real democracy in Islamic leadership. However, since God has chosen these individuals and the succession is divinely made, these leaders would be perfect individuals. (The Fourteen Infallibles are the extension of this view.) Therefore, there should be no innate problem with their leadership since they are ruling as God would wish and anyone who opposes this mentality is themselves unrighteous, even if this group of unrighteous individuals is the majority. (The results of such belief are quite evident in the case of the Islamic Republic of Iran.)
System of democracy first introduced?
Democracy is a Greek term which means 'rule of people'. This system of government was first practiced by Greek city state of Athens. Athenians are believed to have established first democratic government in 508-507 BC.
Democracy Is a form of government In which the supreme power Is held completely by the people via free elections. In a pure democracy the majority always wins and can persecute the minority. In a democratic republic, like the US, there is a constitution and certain rights which can not be abridged even by a majority vote.
Democracy is a form of government in which people have a voice in the exercise of power , typically through elected representatives
What is the difference between a direct democracy and the electoral college system?
There are a number of differences, but if we assume that you are exclusively referring to the election for the US President, the difference comes down to how the votes are weighed. A direct election for US President would result in the election of that president regardless of where those votes came from. In the electoral college system, each state is considered to have its own vote for the US President. Once the US President has won a particular state, all of the state's electoral votes (based on the sum total of senators and representatives from that state) go to that Presidential candidate. It does not matter if the US President won that state by a few votes or a landslide, he gets the whole state. (Nebraska is the lone exception to this policy). The benefit of the electoral system is that it forces Presidents to take small states seriously, but the advantage of the direct election system is that every vote actually matters, not just those in swing states.
What is the difference between a true democracy and a parliamentary democracy?
It depends on how you define "true democracy", but most people use it as a euphemism for "direct democracy".
Direct Democracy makes every citizen responsible for every political decision. For example, in a direct democracy, every citizen would be voting on tax rates, immigration policy, etc. In a parliamentary democracy, districts of people vote for a person or party to represent them in a legislative forum. The party with the largest number of seats then forms a government, which directs the policy of the country.
Judaism is egalitarian and values all individuals, both men and women. The wealthy have no privileges; and the poor are valued, treated well and their opinions listened to. (Compare this to those societies in which only mature, land-owning males had any legal status.)
Judaism applied laws, and rules of moral behavior, to all its members equally. The laws of Moses form much of Western legal background.
Some of the concepts that Judaism introduced were:
- The rights of every individual, including the elderly, the unwell, the poor etc. Infants are to be protected and cared for, whether or not they turned out to be the gender you were hoping for. Compare this to societies in which unhealthy babies, or females, were killed. Aristotle, who was among the greatest of the Greeks, and Seneca, the famous Roman, both write that killing one's young babies is perfectly acceptable.
- Women's rights also were carefully maintained in Judaism. Israelite women could own property, could initiate court cases, could have their own servants, and could own fields and businesses; and the Torah specifies marital rights for women (Exodus 21:10).
- The concept that all people are equal.
- The requirement of all societies to have just legal systems.
- Limitations on punishments for crimes. For example, a robber repays double to his victim, or works it off. Cutting off the hands of a robber is a punishable crime. Debtors are not imprisoned or harmed. They are made to sell property and/or work to repay what they owe. Compare this to the Roman practice by which anyone could accuse a man of owing them money and the debtor could be killed.
- Workers' rights, including the obligation to pay them on time.
- A weekly day of rest for everyone.
- Illiteracy among Israelites, in every generation, was rare. Universal education in the Western world is taken for granted today, yet this is a recent development. In Judaism, however, it goes back 3300 years. Judaism has always maintained that education is the highest goal of man in his pursuit of Godliness. This tradition has now been passed on to Western culture.
- Western jurisprudence in general is based in part upon Judaic Torah observance. A quick look at the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20) and the laws that follow (Exodus ch.21-23) gives a very good summary of most modern law.
- It is the responsibility of the community to support the widow, the orphan, the poor, and the stranger passing through.
A trailer bill is a bill that is attached to the state's budget (CA), meaning it bypasses the regular legislative process and could be passed in less than two weeks
upward mobility upward mobility
How does one become a leader in democracy?
Generally speaking, democratic leaders attain power through a popular vote.
Why does democracy cause gridlock?
In a dictatorship, only one person's opinion matters. In a democracy, multiple people's opinions matter. As a result, you are more likely to have disagreement in a democracy than a dictatorship. This disagreement is usually termed as "gridlock" by those who are annoyed by it.
Can a nation stand without democracy?
Yes, there are countries around the world that are not democratic. China is a communist country and Russia is still run by a communist. Some nations are kingdoms while other are socialist. There are places in the world that have no true government and are in chaos like Somalia. A democracy is just one form of government that exists.
Within modern democratic countries who has the legitimate use of violence?
Usually, in all modern states, be they democracies or dictatorships, the only authority with the legitimate use of violence is the STATE and its appointed actors (military, police, security agents, etc.).
What is a coalition government?
Answer 1
Coalition government means alliances of several parties. This situation arises, if no party on its own can achieve majority in the Parliament. To have strong coalitions, it is necessary that political parties must moderate their ideologies and programme.
Answer 2
A coalition government is where two or more political parties join together in parliament/assembly to run the government and agree on a policy programme. Examples are Wales where Labour and Plaid Cymru have agreed a set of policies, but still campaign against each other outside of the national assembly and Luxembourg where the CSV and LSAP work together for the good of Luxembourg.
Compare how citizens vote in a democracy and Oligarchy?
Democracy:Decisions based on majority rule,and citizens vote by secret ballot
Oligarchy: Elections are held,but only with one candidate
What are the two types of democracy?
Direct and indirect democracy.
There is Direct democracy, which is also called a pure democracy, that exists where the will of the people is translated into public policy (law) directly by the people themselves, in mass meetings.
There is also Inderect democracy where a representative is chosen to represent a larger group of people. These select few represent the popular will of the people. ( This is the type of Democracy the US uses)
What were the People called who proposed complete democracy for great Britain?
They were called Chartists.
What historians referring to when they use them the term jacksonian democracy?
Historians are referring to the period of expanding democracy in the 1820s and 1830s. :)
It means the electorate must be well educated enough to make informed discussions and be convinced by evidence and all being underlined by doing the right thing instead of being swayed by ideologies and demagogs.
Fortunately, we still have the electoral college.
Which is a potential criticism of American democracy?
Democracy allows the under-educated to have an equal voice in politics that have far-reaching consequences for all citizens.
