Political Theory

Capitalism hadn't existed long enough to fail.

In Canada, it is ensured that democracy protects minority rights and maintains a majority rules through the House of Commons. The appointed prime minister is usually the current leader of the political party that can obtain a plurality (a relative majority of the vote) in the House of Commons, thus ensuring that the majority rules. Then, there is Her Majestyâ??s Loyal Opposition or the Official Opposition. This is usually the party with the second-most seats in the House and serves as a check on the government. They maintain a shadow cabinet that can speak on the governmentâ??s portfolios and, if need be, take over the government in the case that the sitting government lose the confidence of the House.

Self-government can't be forced on another country. It just doesn't work that way. People have to want it. And it's ironic that the US is the one who is trying to install these democracies all over the place, when our own democracy is so disfunctional. The real reason we are doing this is because in order to do business with these countries we need to be dealing with governments that are friendly to our corporate interests. Saddam wasn't playing ball with our oil companies, so we overthrew him. We did a similar thing in Venezuela a couple years ago for the same reasons. US sponsored coup overthrows a popularly elected government that refuses to deal with our oil companies and replaces it with a new government that is willing. Does that sound like a government that really cares about spreading democracy?

As for our own democracy, I don't think electoral reform - direct democracy rather than representative democracy - would change things all that much. But after the last presidential election, when the electoral college system backfired on us and Bush got elected despite getting fewer votes, it seems obvious that we should get rid of that antequated system. That little technicality was never supposed to come up. But it did and no one did anything about it! Probably because it worked in favor of those in power, the republican party.

Media reform is more important. The horrible state of the news media is the main reason people are so uninformed, and so uninterested in politics. This leads to corruption since no one in power is ever held responsible for their crimes. These issues are deep and complex. I suggest checking out this thread and the writings mentioned in it, especially Bob McChesny's... http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30172

I think the key to the people regaining control of our government, is the spread of information - the truth. If people really knew what was going on they wouldn't stand for it. That's why the government goes so far out of their way to keep the truth from us.

It simply boils down to the fact that Israel is made up of Jews whereas Pakistan is made up of Muslims. It is socially acceptable to demonize Jews and their beliefs, but unacceptable to demonize Muslims and their beliefs. All other logical reasons to separate Pakistan from Israel make the Pakistani case look more illegitimate than Israel.

For example, the four main ethnic groups of Pakistan: the Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashto, and Balochi, were never united as one nation prior to the creation of the British Colonial India project. These were peoples who had fought one another at different times, lived entirely different styles of life, saw the Islamic religion differently at a fundamental level, and who have strong intra-ethnic loyalties. By contrast, the Jews consistently saw themselves as a united people. For example, when Jews became emanicipated and started to join national armies, rabbis from all over Europe passed responsa banning Jewish military participation on the grounds that a Jew could kill another Jew. Jews had similar lifestyles regardless of their country of residence, and the yearning to return to Zion was in all Jews. So strong was the desire to return to Zion that when Messianic Pretenders like Shabbetai Zevi in the Ottoman Empire gave the Jews hope that the End Times were coming, European Jews who lived in countries militarily opposed to the Ottoman Empire heeded the call and returned to Israel.

Most people would point to the fact that a sizable portion of Israel comes from the Diaspora after 1945, as a difference. However, this does not make Israel unique as Pakistan also had a sizable population come from the Diaspora after 1945. In 1950, the population of Pakistan was 37.5 million people of whom 7.5 million were refugees from India. That means that roughly one-fifth of the Pakistani population comes from the Diaspora and should make the Pakistani case equally problematic, if Diaspora immigration is an issue.

Others say that it was the forcible exile of the Palestinians that is the issue. Regardless of whether Palestinians were forcibly exiled or they left of their own accord, there is no doubt that 7 million Hindus fled Muslim rule in Pakistan and similarly fled for a state that would protect their interests. Since independence, Pakistan has routinely discriminated against Hindus with laws prejudicial to them and their interests, school-books that demean them, and occasional violent incidents. Israel by contrast settled with those Muslims who chose to stay, allowed their Imams to govern life-cycle rituals and maintain mosques, and have given Israeli Muslims nearly all of the rights of citizenship enjoyed by Jews.

No, the Democratic Republicans wanted strict interpretaion of the

Constitution.

Divine right theory- holds that the state is divine creation and the ruler is ordained by God to govern the people.

necessity or force theory- maintains that states must have been created through force.

Crude oil is a mixture of compounds called hydrocarbons. Many useful materials can be produced from crude oil. It can be separated into different fractions using fractional distillation, and some of these can be used as fuels. Unfortunately, there are environmental consequences when fossil fuels such as crude oil and its products are used.

confers legitimacy on a goverment.

az

I think that it is because people were poor and some people had so much land then they went into war with someone

TO control all the system of all three forces of India,he can disturb the Parliament at any time according to requirements.

saying science replaces god

A Communist is one who adheres or claims to adhere to the theories of Karl Marx, often supplemented by the ideas of other thinkers. The Ideal of Communism espouses the idea that all people on Earth are in some way responsible for the well-being of their fellow man regardless of his ability to produce goods or wealth. This attitude is as old as mankind but it was given a name by Karl Marx. It implies

the common ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods.

The USSR's abuse of the principle had served as an example of the principles of Communism not working. The People's republic of China is an example of the communist ideology leading to economic progress at the expense of individual rights and strong suppression of opposition.

To succinctly appreciate thes facts, parliamentary system of government still lingers in some independent countries which deserves a praise. British, French and Indian parliamentary system is however predicated on two houses that serves as constitutional and law prosecutors. The major differences however are as follows; in the British system, the house of lords is dominated by affluence and hereditary post including those that titles were confered on, theirby, the queen performs a ceremonial functions and assent to a bill. On the other side of the Frech and Indian system of government their is no ceremonial monarch. The main difference between this two parliamentary system is that , the French parliamentary system however gave more power to the president since the tenure of Charlse de gaulle in 1942. India was a formal colony of Britain but after her independence she also practised a parliamentary government, in her parliament the lower house Rajya Sabha is where the prime minister emerged from. An epitome was in 1966 when mrs Ghandi emerged as the third primus intere pare.

Political theorist, John Stuart Mill believed that in the case of the US Civil War, a US president, such as President Lincoln, should be able to meet a serious crisis even if it meant taking on extraordinary powers that might violate the US Constitution. In such a situation, suspending for example habeas corpus, to protect the Union was to be expected. It was an emergency that required exceptional presidential powers.

Yes. Generally speaking, as Expert Charlie N. notes, these ideals are not completely followed through on in democracies. However, these things remain the ideal. The reason that frequent elections (e.g. at least once every six years) are necessary is in order to hold public officials accountable to the people. Individuals who have their positions with lifetime tenures have no reason to maintain loyalty to the public. Legal equality is necessary in order for every person to be able to defend their interests to the same degree. A group of people that does not have the right to vote or to defend themselves politically has often been a political target by those groups who do have the rights to vote and politically advocate.

If any government abused these rights instead of protecting them then the people had the right to rebel and form a new government.

because thats wat i think

Qustion is mal-phrased: a a communist can be the same as an autocrat (false, because not all communists can be autocrats), but the interesting question is whether communism is always an autocracy. This is for the experts to answer.

In a Dictatorship, power is held by a single person or a small group. Some famous dictatorships have been Fidel Castro in Cuba, Chairman Mao in China, and Adolf Hitler in Germany.

The press have been referred to as the "fourth branch of government", given that political discourse in the media has set and influenced the political agenda since the founding of the republic.

There is a website called Maps of the World and it has maps of the world, of countries, and of states, all of varying types, including maps that color code based on political system.

A republic is the rule of law: the rulers are included in a body of citizens from whom leaders are selected and all people are subject to the laws enacted by that body. A democracy is a regime type where power and legitimacy of power rests directly with the people; they select, check, and are represented by themselves as opposed to any singular social group (e.g.) nobility, monarchy, etc.)