Political Theory

John Locke encouraged people to think for themselves, and to question their leaders. Taking part in their government rather than accepting what has been in place for hundreds of years. His theories were imbedded in the train of thought that became the American Declaration of Independence and later influenced the Constitution. Locke was of the school of thought that favored limits on the power of a government.

The ancient Greeks only let men whose parents were ALL Greek, no other nationality. Women, children, slaves, and anyone whose parents weren't ALL Greek were NOT alowed to vote (pretty picky people!).

When the US was forming, communism did not exist. The idea didn't come around till the 19th century under Karl Marx. The reason the US did not convert is argued but most people agree it is because of the failure of communism in Russia.

By setting up laws which suppressed civil rights. He also effectively used Gestapo to interfere with civil lives. The Nuremberg Laws of 1935 were antisemitic laws in Nazi Germany introduced at the annual Nuremberg Rally of the Nazi Party. These laws deprived Jews of German citizenship and prohibited marriage between Jews and other Germans. The Nuremberg Laws also included a ban on sexual intercourse between people defined as "Jews" and non-Jewish Germans and prevented "Jews" from participating in German civic life.

Federal and unitary systems of government have many similar qualities therefore it becomes difficult to decipher between the two. In order to illustrate the difficulty in trying to distinguish between the two, I will first define what each system of government involves and then attempt to compare and contrast.

Federalism is the creation of two layers of government, the federal government and the constituent states, which equally share the legal sovereignty of a country. Each tier of government has its own specific functions. The central government is allocated with the external political issues i.e. Foreign affairs and national defence. The constituent states' main concern is with legislation and education although the intricacies of each depend on which state you are examining.

Unitary governments when a country's sovereignty lies solely with a central tier of government. Subnational authorities do exist alongside the centre and they may make their own individual policies, however this is only permissible if first approved by the central government. The authority of the country lies absolutely within the central government and the lower levels could be abolished if the centre so wished.

Although they appear very similar in operation federal and unitary systems of government immediately individualise themselves from one another in their definitions. Within federalism the constituent states have a shared responsibility with the central government and their existence is protected. The only way they could be removed or modified would be by amending the constitution. The lower levels of the unitary system, however, only exist because they permitted to. The subnational authorities could be abolished almost immediately if the national government so demanded. Federal and unitary systems of government are classed as the two main solutions to the "territorial organisation of power1," Federalism, with some 22 federations in existence today, is becoming increasingly more popular with larger countries seeking to unite a multiethnic and multinational population. Australia, Canada and the United States of America, four of the world's largest countries, are federal. "Federalism seems to promise the military and economic advantages of size while maintaining, even encouraging, more local identities. Federalism, permits diversity within unity and is thus an important model for a world of strong national and ethnic identities.2," (Hague, Harrop and Breslin)

The country most identified with capitalism and its development is the United States of America. As one of the main examples of a non-monarchial industrial republic, its society developed around entrepreneurs and corporations rather than aristocracy.

My short and indirect answer is this- I believe the world is fortunate that Communism has been in control of China for so long. They are an enterprising and intelligent people. Their drive for gain is unequaled. Just imagine a resourseful ,Democratic and determined nation of 1.4 billion, with each individual given capitalist freedom.

The communist government there is slowly pulling the stops out -with a free market economy. We are seeing the results now, the controls can't stay in place much longer. The Chinese are buying into foreign mining companies and buying up huge mineral leases in a scale that's hard to describe.

There are 350 million middle class there and they traditionally like to show their wealth in Gold. The government has recently lifted the possession limit from 3 ounces to unlimited. Watch out world!

Corruption, In a system where the final word is that of the party corruption is rife, the communist party exists by force of arms and in time this may lead to a mellowing in the system where it becomes a socialist system that treats the citizens of the country equally. If it were a totally capitalistic system the poorest would definitely be left to rot.

outspread communism to other countries

Capitalism is an economic system, fasism is a poltical system. There have been times in the recent history of capitalism where a bourgeois democratic state is no longer able to protect capitalism, in these times it has been necessary for fascists to assume power to do what bourgeois democracy could not.

capitalism would lead first to socialism then to communism

Marshall- JS

Socialism has a much higher level of government control and regulation than capitalism does.

The Greek concept of democracy intended to give power to the elite, the "citizens." Only they could vote on proposals to become law. But, it wasn't democracy because, since most Greeks were slaves, its laws were not dictated by the majority of its people. America's so-called democracy is set up almost exactly the same, except that the powerful government officials continuously and falsely try to convince the people that it is a democracy, simply because they have the right to vote for those the elite groups offer as political candidates.

A governor approves a law remaining removing taxes

In United States history, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 created the territories of Kansas and Nebraska, opened new lands, repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and allowed settlers in those territories to determine if they would allow slavery within their boundaries. The initial purpose of the Kansas-Nebraska Act was to create opportunities for a Mideastern Transcontinental Railroad. It was not problematic until popular sovereignty was written into the proposal. The act was designed by Democratic Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. The act established that settlers could vote to decide whether to allow slavery, in the name of "popular sovereignty" or rule of the people. Douglas hoped it would ease relations in both North and South, because the South could expand slavery to new territories but the North still had the right to abolish slavery in their states. He was wrong. Opponents denounced the law as a concession to the slave power of the South. The new Republican Party, which was created in opposition to the act, aimed to stop the expansion of slavery, and soon emerged as the dominant force throughout the North.

The Political beliefs of the government in Iran center around their religion of Islam. Laws & policies in Iran are made in line with their interpretation of the Qur'an, which is why Iran is considered a theocracy. However, it should be noted that a significant portion of Iranians would prefer a more secular and democratic form of government; the problem is that protests are illegal in Iran and all political candidates must be "acceptable" to the Ayatollahs.

It would seem that David Monaco was appointed by Jeb Bush who is a republican, unless you research how he voted on individual issues this might be all you can find to go on.

The people

Improved international relations. Strengthening of traditional values. Membership to the International Monarchist League (IML). All descisions made by one pretender (King/Queen) thus faster and more flexible government (unless we speak of a constitutional monarchy).

Fascism was created as a reaction of a communist rising in russia, as communism was more ''powerful'' than democracy, and with the corruption of Italy, Mussolini began his March to Rome in 1922 and seized the Government, the Monarch, Victor Emmanuel, fearing a Civil War, appointed Mussolini Head of State, Note that all fascist-run states during the World War 2 era had always seized power due to corruption, Hitler, Took the loss of WW1 in his context Mussolini overthrew the Government as it was poorly ran, but consider this, the more corrupt a Government is, the Stable-er the economy is, no unemployment in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or in the Russian SFSR

His belief was militarism; where the military controls all aspects of the peoples lives.

A. Which nations are sovereign

C. Boundaries between governments and their territories

Fascism is a form of government that wants to rid the world of democracy and replace it with a dictatorship. Fascists hold prejudice against a particular group of people to advance their ideas. Racism is a belief that because someone is from a different country or a different color, they are inferior.

examples of collectivism are trade unionism, class solidarity, welfare systems i.e. national healthcare, redstributive tax structures which strengthen social responsibility, and forms of common ownership i.e. the Kibbutz in Israel.

The duties of the State are to provide protection for its people.

I think President Kennedy got it right when he said 'the responsibility of government is to do for the people those things which they cannot do for themselves individually'. While the terms 'government' and 'state' are not synonyms, they are reasonable approximations for each other.

As a state does not exist in a vacuum, the people of the state would have to decide which are duties for the individual and those for the state acting through its government and agencies.

Reason: Lack of Patient nurturing of political systems and institutions.

Brief History of Democracy in Pakistan:

1. 1947 - Independence (immediately indulged in war with India)

2. 1956 - 1st Constitution framed (took 9 long years)

3. 1956 - 1st era of democracy

4. 1958 - DEMOCRACY SUSPENDED - 1st military coup - Ayub Khan

5. 1962 - 2nd Constitution framed

6. 1972 - 2nd era of democracy

7. 1973 - 3rd Constitution framed

8. 1977 - DEMOCRACY SUSPENDED - 2nd military coup - Zial ul Haq

9. 1988 - 3rd era of democracy

10. 1999 - DEMOCRACY SUSPENDED - 3rd military coup - Pervez Musharraf

11. 2008 - 4th era of democracy - present -

12. 2010 - wikileaks suggest the current government is under military influence

As I said, it takes time for ANY government to "evolve" to an effective one - this law holds for any nation.

One thing common to ALL successful nations is that they would have had a stable government for an extended period of time - whatever the system might be.