Political Theory

a democracy is a government based on the descitions of the citizens, if no one participates then they would suffer of indecition.

By 1898, several pro-expansionist arguments had developed, including that the US needed to "civilize" peoples of the world ("White man's burden"). Also, businesses that relied on raw material imports wanted to establish a presence in areas where they would be produced in order to import the materials tariff-free.

India's democracy is at the least, sound. India's democracy is huge and the people have the real power. The people of India have many freedoms and are happy in their democracy. It is working beautifully. Besides being stable, India is growing rapidly and is already a super-power.

Jerry Falwell

the states retained the majority of political power.

your welcome

let me guess you went to Woodland Middle School. and this was in 8th grade! huh side kick, jk.

:)

:D

Interest groups are so numerous and have such varied competing interests that coalitions are difficult to form, and thus no bills can garner enough votes in Congress to pass; policy gridlock results.

* True Communism is very hard to achieve. ** It can only be born either through a very carefully and well constructed self-sufficient economy, or (a more beneficial option) if the entire world aims for the advancement to communism. ** Mustering up such a worldwide support is near impossible, especially with class-based society and the millions of greed-ridden people in the world.

* It can be heavily prone to corruption if it not managed properly. ** Marxism-Leninism (A form of communism) requires the establishment of a vanguard party (Which can be likened to that of a temporary dictatorship) to quicken the establishment of what is deemed a "dictatorship of the proletariat" (masses). This worked well when Vladimir Lenin was in power during the initial stages of Soviet Russia. However, as shown with North Korea or Stalinist Russia, this can very easily go badly. ** In this case, the nation is no longer Communist, but Authoritarian Socialist, which can then further descend a pure Dictatorship. (e.g. present North Korea)

* Finally it can lead to economical stagnation if not managed improperly and/or is trumped by offshore nations. ** This issue would be non-existent with a worldwide communist effort. However with other capitalist superpowers existing within the world during the formation of this said communist nation, this can cause many issues. In worst case scenarios (Like what was seen during the Cold War) one/some of these capitalist nations will undertake procedures to stop the spread of communism in order to keep their own nations rich. ** Hence why Soviet Russia has failed, and there exists a worldwide prejudice against the ideology (Which is largely due to propaganda).

The fundamental distinction between Ancient Athenian democracy and US democracy is that the Ancient Athenians had a direct democracy in which all persons entitled to vote would vote on all issues and the US has an indirect democracy in which all persons entitled to vote will vote for representatives who will then vote on all issues.

However, there are other differences. Ancient Athenian democracy was limited in several ways. The first were limits on suffrage. Only ethnic Athenian males who owned property were allowed to vote. This was less than 10% of the population of Athens. There were also limits on who could be the leaders of the state, restricting that to several noble families. Conversely, in the US, because of amendments to the Constitution any person above the age of eighteen years is entitled to vote and any person who follows the requisite conditions (which are conditions for which any citizen could qualify) can achieve any office in the country (excepting the Presidency which requires a US birth).

Communes were self-contained and presumably self-governing living establishments that were organized on a communal basis. They had mess halls and so on. it was a tightly knit community ( at least in theory) and contacts with the outside- though necessary for commercial survival, were held to a minimum. on the lower ranks at leas they tried to impose a moneyless economy. There were a number of societies of this type in the United States- most originally having some Religious basis such as the Ephrata Cloister, now a tourist attraction and such things as convents and monasteries, mission-houses, etc. Therefore they were not (Godless communists). Soe fo the religious ones included the Ephrata Cloister, the Brooke Farm, Oneida Community- portions of which still exist as purely commercial ops, and the Amana society which also manufactures appliances. the Hutterite religion has communistic aspects, and is often confused with the Amish but uses, in fact absolutely requires the most up to date farming machinery and equipment. There were both agrarian and industrial communes. There was one in France, still active that was based in part on a steel foundry- I cannot recall the name. Communes frequently had some religious basis unlilke Marxist Communism.

One reason that individuals enter into political society is because they want to make a change. Another reason one might enter is for the power.

The need for raw materials

Answer this question…Citizens in totalitarian states have less personal privacy.

A responsibility to make laws that are good for the whole of society.

A responsibility to tell the people the truth about what they do with tax payer's money.

A responsibility to adhere to the promises they make before that are elected to the job.

ofcourse not...representative government and authoritarian government are totally opposites, while everyone as equal rights and say in governmenyt in a representative government, only the ruler or leader has complete control over everyone in an authoritarian government.

The Communist Manifesto was a book that described what Karl Marx believed would happen. He believed that the workers would unite and reform a society without government whereby all would contribute what they could and take only what they needed. This is called Utopian Socialism. It differs greatly from the "Socialism" and "Communism" practiced today in that today's Communist governments (Cuba, North Korea, etc) exist only through overburdening regulation and often brutal repression of the people.

In short, anarchy

Direct democracy is the idea that a democracy should be directly operated by the decision of the people and not of elected representatives.

Middle class urbanites from both democratic and republican parties.

Socially acceptable drugs are drugs that can be prescribed by doctors and/or circulated throughout the community commonly and legally.

Examples of these are Tylenol, Acetaminophen, Aleve, and Muscinex

Socially Unacceptable drugs are drugs that are illegal. Such as Marijuana, Methamphetamine, Heroin, Ecstasy, Illegal Amphetamines, and in some cases, Methadone.

how would i know you big dumbo

If you are being asked this on a test or homework, the answer being looked for is probably "False". The tester will believe that a dictatorship is the authority resting upon one man, while in a democracy it rests upon the people.

But in truth, no government ever governs without at least the tacit consent of the governed. The "supreme authority" of a dictatorship thus does "rest solely with the people".

You may see the truth in this by watching how various governments "advertise". Those that are generally more free, are relatively quiet. But the worse a dictatorship it is, the more they "advertise". Which is why there's all those pictures of the Supreme Leader everywhere, and propaganda about how many great things he's doing for his people.

He knows he needs the people to think he is doing good. Or else he'd not waste the money on those things.

First, there is the lack of choice. If there are only two parties, then they must reach towards the majority of the country. Therefore, they need to not have extreme views, so they both are very similar because their options are limited.

Second, by only having two parties, it limits the potential for change. New ideas that don't follow the norm will most likely be thrown out than be adopted by the two major parties. The policies and the government change very little over time due to the two parties being so closely related.

Third, the two party system does not always provide the best leaders. Each party wants to win, so they will pick the person who has the best chance of winning. That being said, these people they choose may not always be the best leader.

There are three branches of government, if that's what the question means. The president, the supreme court, and the senate and the house of representatives.

Democracy, Absolutism, Aristocracy, Oligarchy, Monarchy, Republics, Totalitarian, Despotism I cant think of anymore and you can do the research to find out what they mean, because we all know you are trying to get the answers for your h/w.

You are entitled to ask questions here: The reasons for your asking are not in question. Chances are the better you ask the Q the more likely you are to get a good reply.

Communist, Benevolent Dictatorship, Meritocracy, Theocracy might be added to the above.

ideological, political, economic, exploratory, and religious