Political Theory

The center cannot hold- the structure is unstable. Government is inhibited in handling hard-core emergency situations on fear of offending minority groups ( consider the very tardy process of welfare reform, which was achieved under Clinton, oddly a democrat). There is no Biblical model, let alone mandate towards popular government! the closest any biblical era group came was at one time in the Old Testament, Israel was governed by a consortium of Judges, who were at least citizens, but certainly not elected politicos. again if you start out with ( Lord I am not worthy) democracy is self-shorted out.

Advantages of indirect democracy include representation of diverse perspectives and the ability of elected officials to make informed decisions on behalf of the population. Disadvantages can include potential for corruption, lack of direct citizen participation in decision-making, and the risk of elected officials prioritizing their own interests over those of the people they serve.

America is a Democratic-Republic, not a Democracy.

If we had a true Democracy, we the people would vote on EVERY issue (every law, every bill, everything). Instead, we elect leaders to make those decisions. If we had a true Democracy, nothing would ever get done because getting 200 million people to the polls on a weekly or daily basis would cost so much money and we would never agree on anything. Easy, the US is a Republic not a true Democracy. The Theory of a Democratic Government is that everyone eligible to vote on an issue has to vote on said issue before it is resolved. You can't grant anyone else your vote. Also, the majority wins all and makes the rules. The minority has no rights and no protection under a true Democracy.

Democracy may have failed due to political instability, corruption, or economic crises, which led to a desire for strong leadership and stability. Authoritarian militarism may have taken its place because it promised order, security, and a sense of control over the situation. Additionally, military leaders may have exploited the situation to consolidate power and suppress dissent.

A system in which multiple political parties have the capacity to gain control of government separately or in coalition; In multiparty systems, one party rarely gets enough support to control the government. Then several parties join together to obtain a majority and then form a coalition government. When groups with different ideologies share power, coalitions break down requiring new elections. As a result of this, many nations with multiparty systems are politically unstable. However, multiparty system also allow for better ideological representation of voters, resulting in policy that reflects voter interests better.

The result of a direct democracy at the national level would be all citizens participating policy making and running the government. In as much as this is a good system, it is time consuming and may be costly.

Capitalism is an economic system, involving wage labour, production for sale and minority ownership of the means of production. It is compatible with various different systems of government, but all involve defending the interest of the rulings capitalist class.

the basic ideas of a democracy are that each individual under the democracy has a say in how the government functions. when democracy was first found by ancient societies like Greece each person had a direct say in the governments decisions however now in modern societies under a democracy the peoples ideas are given to the government through representatives since population is so much higher now.

ideology

In a direct democracy, all voters get to vote on all issues. In an indirect democracy, voters vote for people to represent them, and the representatives are the ones who then vote on the various issues that governments deal with.

market

The goal of capitalism is to add value to commodities such that products can be purchased by an entity, transformed into more valueable products, and resold at higher prices thus paying for all steps along the way and adding profit.

An example would be an entity (in this case an oil company) buying oil at a set price, refining the oil into one or more products with value added (gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, lubrication products) and reselling the products at a price to pay back the cost of refining the oil, transporting the products, and adding profits.

This example is just a single piece of the puzzle. In turn, a trucking company would buy the diesel fuel and transport products for retail companies, the retail companies pay the trucking company because the value added is the retail product distributed around the region, be it city, state, country, world.

This value adding would continue indefinitely, and in a sustainable manner such that all trading entities would ensure safety (environmental - to be able to continue harvesting resources, consumer - to retain a customer base), security (military - to ensure access to resources and maintain trade routes), and a sustainable growth rate (in order to add jobs for expanding populations).

A bicameral parliament has two chambers Canada has the Commons and the Senate, the UK has the Commons and the Lords. Luxembourg is an example of a unicameral parliament with only ONE house, the Chamber of Deputies.

Same as most democracies: popular sovereignty, political equality, political freedom and majority rule. Look to the underpinnings of our Canadian Consitution for more traditionally Canadian aspects though: Responsible Gov't, Federalism, Judicial Review, Constitutional Monarchy, Rule of Law, and Democracy. I'd suggest reviewing Dyck's Canadian Politics: Critical Approaches as a basic starting point.

Yes, a republic is a form of government where the country is considered a "public matter" controlled by the people's representatives, while a democracy is a system where the people have a direct say in decision-making. So, technically, a country could be a republic without being a democracy if power is held by elected officials who are not directly accountable to the people.

Democracy promotion refers to efforts by governments, organizations, and individuals to support and strengthen democracy in other countries. This can include providing financial and technical assistance, promoting democratic values and practices, and working to ensure free and fair elections.

when the poor became active in politics, this was to help better their lives. they came up with socialism. this did not work because the rich saw it as a threat to their fortunes, politicians saw it as a threat to public order, and Americans in general saw it as a threat to deeply rooted American private property, free enterprise, and individual liberty. Labor movements helped the poor people with the fight to gain money. They set up labor unions, some succeed while others did not. only certain labor groups helped certain people. They differ because socialism, everyone works together, they don't compete and with labor movements, there is a competition at every turn.

In the voting system? only white men who were "of age" were allowed to vote.

Some top-ranked programs in Political Theory or Political Philosophy include the University of Oxford, Harvard University, Princeton University, and the London School of Economics. However, the best program for you will depend on your research interests, career goals, and where you want to study. It's important to consider faculty expertise, research opportunities, and resources available at each institution.

You can see the link from two different angles:

On one side, the communist theorists themselves saw Spartacus as a forefather and used the myth of Spartacus as part of their own public myths. This has to do with the way communist thinkers (Marx, Engels etc.) saw history as a never-ending conflict between two classes - the haves and the have nots (they called this class struggle). In this, they saw the communist movement of the 19th and 20th century as having the same fundamental role as Spartacus did in Roman Antiquity - both Spartacus and the communists were representatives and leaders of the "oppressed classes". All schools of communism (Leninism, Trotskyism, Maoism, etc.) subscribe to this analysis of history, so you can say that for all communism this link is self-evident.As such, they themselves created a bond between communism and Spartacus. Moreover, in countries where communism was the dominant ideology, Spartacus was used as a public motive, especially in the field of sports, as the (for example, some sporting events were named "Spartakiads", sport clubs were called Spartak eg. Spartak Moscow etc.)

On the other hand, this link is hard to be seen from practitioners of other historical schools - and they would explain this connection as a founding myth or a legitimizing myth. As communism was a radical ideology breaking away from the past, but still requiring historical legitimization, they could only use extremely recent (and thus potentially weak) figures (Lenin, Marx etc.) or ancient images (of which they chose Spartacus as being a low-class radical figure) for the task, even where there was limited overlap in goals.

Henry Parkes, known as the "Father of Federation," played a crucial role in working towards the establishment of a federated Australia. He advocated for a united Australia with a strong democratic government and promoted the idea of a federal system that would benefit all states. His efforts helped pave the way for the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901, strengthening democracy in the country.

There is no specific individual who can be considered the "boss of the world." Power is dispersed among various world leaders, governments, and international organizations.

There is none because we dont realy know how to define the meaning of democracy.

Incorporating new information into existing theories is to assimilation as modifying existing theories in light of new information is to accommodation?

Athenian democracy helped shape modern concepts of democracy and citizenship, influencing systems of government around the world. The principles of equality, free speech, and citizen participation in decision-making continue to be relevant in contemporary democratic societies. The legacy of Athenian democracy serves as a model for ongoing efforts to promote civil rights, political engagement, and social justice.