| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "DEMOCRACY ESSENTIAL DEVELOPMENTAL STATE": |
|
|
Democracy is Not Essential to a Developmental State, 2005.
A paper on the political development of post-war Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 4 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines how democracy was not a primary concern in the development decades following World War II, despite the American need for this. The paper assesses the desperate circumstances of economic destruction of wartime, the Cold War, and the need to build a secure future. It notes that interest in democracy tended to evolve after the achievement of security. The paper looks at the Japanese aggression in Asia and the resulting power struggle in the region.
From the Paper
"The day of Globalization involves much propaganda to do with 'Democracy', as the path to development. However, 'Democracy', in this sense, means a set of arrangements favouring American or other foreign interests. Examples in Asia show that the state can be developmentally effective, in what the West would see as non-democratic methods, including a rather corporatist relationship with business communities. The political institutions of Democracy need to be historically legitimated, as our day's propaganda of Democracy ignores. It is not a system that can be "applied" in a top-down fashion, as much as American propaganda continues to assert that Democracy belongs in.."
| |
|
Democracy and the Developmental State, 2005.
An analysis of the necessity of a democracy for a developmental economy in the non-Western world.
2,475 words (approx. 9.9 pages), 2 sources, $ 97.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the question of whether democracy is a necessary precondition for a truly developmental state. This paper contends that although there exist valid arguments on both sides of this issue, democracy is not necessary for a developmental state within the parameters as it will be defined in this paper.
From the Paper
"Democracy and the Developmental State Introduction The question of whether democracy is a necessary precondition for a truly developmental state is one of the most important issues confronting developing economies in the non-Western world in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. In this paper I contend that, although there exist valid arguments on both sides of this issue, democracy is not necessary for a developmental state within the parameters as it will be defined in this paper. As will be seen, the examples of the rapidly industrializing economies of Asia allow us unique insights into this question from a range of cultural perspectives."
| |
|
A Comparison of Modern Democracy and Classical Athenian Democracy, 2002.
Compares modern constitutional democracies and the democracy of classical Athens.
914 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Discusses the major differences between Athenian democracy and modern democracy. Differences include voting and citizenship rights, gender and background bias in the Athenian social and economic system, the type of representation that each society offered and the 'participation factor' in Athens.
From the Paper
"There are several significant differences between modern constitutional democracies and the democracy of classical Athens. Even though the classical Athenian democracy was a major step forward in political thought, at its height there were still many areas in which it was decidedly unlike any democracy existing today. These differences fall into three major categories: differences in who could vote, in the type of representation, and in the overall participation factor.
One major and clearly recognizable difference is that in the Athenian democracy there was only a certain selected element of the population that was allowed to vote. This difference in voting behavior stems from the fact that the Athenian social and economic system was supportive of the suppression of groups of people according to gender and background in ways that are not acceptable in today?s western cultures.
For example, women were not given full rights of citizenship. They were also socially and economically kept in a subservient role to men. Women?s function was seen as primarily that of propagation and managing a household. Women were not allowed access to the marketplace of ideas that was so important to the Athenians.
These conditions set up an interactive cycle between the social and political institutions; since women were regarded as inferior and not deserving of full citizenship, they were not allowed to vote. However, without the ability to vote, it was very unlikely that any of these restrictions would be modified or lifted. The role of women in Greek society was too firmly entrenched to be easily changed."
| |
|
A Comparison of Modern Democracy and Classical Athenian Democracy, 2002.
This paper looks at several significant differences between modern constitutional democracies and the democracy of classical Athens.
864 words (approx. 3.5 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The writer shows that even though the classical Athenian democracy was a major step forward in political thought, at its height there were still many areas in which it was decidedly unlike any democracy existing today. The paper divides these differences into three major categories: differences in who could vote, in the type of representation, and in the overall participation factor.
From the Paper
"One major and clearly recognizable difference is that in the Athenian democracy there was only a certain selected element of the population that was allowed to vote. This difference in voting behavior stems from the fact that the Athenian social and economic system was supportive of the suppression of groups of people according to gender and background in ways that are not acceptable in today?s western cultures."
| |
|
"Democracy?s Discontent" vs. "Democracy in America", 2003.
A comparison of Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America" and Michael J. Sandel's "Democracy?s Discontent".
3,845 words (approx. 15.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 105.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how Alexis de Tocqueville in "Democracy in America" and Michael J. Sandel in "Democracy?s Discontent" both address issues of democracy, freedom, the role of government, and the good citizen. It looks at how their viewpoints differ because they write at different times of history. De Tocqueville writes at a time when democracy is a novel ideal. Aristocracy has been the main form of government, and this, therefore, plays a major role in his writing. Sandel, on the other hand, deals with contemporary issues such as the global community and the implications of new technology and diminishing boundaries among people.
From the Paper
"De Tocqueville stresses the importance of civil equality in the achievement of true democracy. This equality implies the lack of divisions and barriers between social classes. This is the equality that he sees in American culture as opposed to European culture that still subscribes to the aristocratic means of government. The democratic ideal implies more freedom than would be possible with an aristocratic government: ?Let us suppose that all the people take a part in the government, and that each one of them has an equal right to take a part in it. As no one is different from his fellows, none can exercise a tyrannical power; men will be perfectly free because they are all entirely equal??(De Tocqueville, Book II, Chapter I)."
| |
|
The Essentials of Essentialism, 2001.
An overview of Martin Heidegger's philosophy of essentialism and the way it is similar and different to Jean-Paul Satre's philosophy.
2,650 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
A look at Heidegger's main teachings focusing on the essential aspects of his essentialism. The paper then explores his criticisms of Jean-Paul Sartre?s far more famous version of existentialism as well as examines the ways in which ? despite Heidegger?s criticism of Sartre ? the two are in many ways the same.
From the Paper
"Heidegger, like all modern philosophers (and possibly the ancient ones as well), incorporated the work of a number of earlier thinkers into his own formulation of existentialism and his understanding of the nature of reality of the place of humans in the world. As an existentialist, Heidegger believed in a philosophy that was relatively concrete, that is concerned with addressing the place of people in the world, dealing with concrete, real problems. This is a cornerstone of existentialism, this insistence upon the reality of existence in a real world, and an existence moreover that is marked by no Cartesian dualism. Heidegger (along with Sartre and other existentialists) would soundly reject the kinds of ideas about consciousness that were promulgated by Descartes, a form of human consciousness that hovers somewhere outside of consciousness and that is used to intuit or to infer the existence of other things in the world."
| |
|
Democracy and the U.S. Constitution: A Discussion of the Successes and Failures of the Founding Fathers in making an Obtainable Democracy, 2000.
After discussing the successes and failures of the founding fathers, the author of the paper concludes that they mostly did a good job, but disputes that America now has a pure democracy.
1,360 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 2 sources, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
" A perfect democracy would be a democracy where everyone- the poor, the rich, the weak, the strong- get to have a say in what the government does. Wherein the supreme power ultimately rests with the people. However, this is not reality. Instead, representative democracy can be defined in two ways: the responsible model and the popular model. In the popular model, ordinary people have a great deal of freedom and ability to participate actively in government. In this type, elections express the popular will and determine policies. Examples of this model include the House of Representatives, the Virginia Plan, and citizen initiatives. In the responsible model, citizens play a more passive role. Government officials have a great deal of freedom to act on the behalf of the country as a whole. Elections here, grant popular consent and determine leaders. Examples of this model are the Senate, the New Jersey Plan, and the Supreme Court. Although the people of the United States live in a democracy that has both popular and responsible elements, democracy here has always been more denoted by the popular model. "
| |
|
Benjamin Barber's "Strong Democracy", 2005.
This paper discusses Benjamin Barber's views on "thin democracy" and "strong democracy" as expresses in his book "Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age".
1,050 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that Benjamin Barber in his book "Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age" defines 'thin democracy" as a democracy in which leaders are elected but they are left to their own devices concerning the majority of issues; people have the powers, which democracy provides, but the demonstration of these powers is primarily manifested in the form of elections. The author points out that Barber is convincing in making his point that "thin democracy" has a tendency to strip citizens of their sense of purpose as manifested by the voter participation rate stagnating in the U.S. at about half of those eligible. The paper stress that Barber loves the thought of a "strong democracy" in which it is not the leaders who make a democracy great but rather an active, informed citizenry.
From the Paper
""Thin democracy" takes the stance that average citizens are not interested in political matters and are not capable or adequate enough to directly participate in the political process themselves, beyond electing officials. Benjamin Barber feels that the United States democracy is thin and poorly represents the entire population at large. Significant portions of citizens are unable to vote due to restrictions or simply choose to be complacent and abstain from voting. Citizens under the age of eighteen are restricted from voting, as are prisoners, and persons living within the borders who are not nationalized. Citizens who are active in a thin democracy mainly participate in it by electing persons and then monitoring their political decisions (if they choose to do so), allowing the elected (those seen by the majority to have the most expertise and capability to discern what best represents the will of the majority) to do the actual work."
| |
|
Quality of Democracy in Iraq, 2006.
A study on democracy in Iraq, looking at how much progress the country has made towards establishing democracy, the quality of its democracy and how well its institutions are functioning.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper takes three of the fourteen topics provided on the Democratic Audit web site and apply them to a study of democracy in Iran. Specifically, the paper assesses the country's progress towards democracy, the quality of its democracy, and the functioning of its institutions - all by using the following three topics as a "measuring stick". These topics are a) civil and political rights, b) economic and social rights, and c) the extent of participation in the political process by various Iranian citizens.
| |
|
Democracy in Chile, 2002.
A description of the history of democracy in Chile and further developmental blocks to a stronger democratic system.
6,098 words (approx. 24.4 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 143.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a survey of the forms of government in recent Chilean history and how these have developed into a quasi democracy. It shows how Chile has long faced problems in instituting a true democratic system of government. It explains that while the earlier Chilean government was strongly democratic, the military coup under Pinochet has done harm to the image of democracy in Chile.
From the Paper
"It has been stated that the failures of Democracy in Latin America are due to a lack of democratic tradition. Authoritarian rule is the norm, and democracy is ever an experiment, tried, but often rejected. Yet, every Latin American country is different, and has taken a different approach towards government. Chile has proven that the troubles of Democracy in Latin America are not due to a lack of democratic tradition alone. Chile had a long and stable democracy for most of its history, yet its democracy fell in one quick swoop. Democracy has made a comeback in Chile, but the question is, will it remain? Will the existing democratic traditions as well as a return to democracy make a lasting impact, or will it fall back to Authoritarianism like so many others? To answer this, the fall and return of democracy in Chile bears examination, as well as the current political situation in Chile."
| |
|
Government, Human Development and Democracy, 2008.
This extensive paper is a research study asking if a democratic systems of governance remain the most ideal form of government to effectively achieve a state's developmental aims.
7,165 words (approx. 28.7 pages), 12 sources, MLA, $ 159.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper investigates the connection between the types or forms of government and their performance in terms of the human development index (HDI), which is a more reliable measurement of development as a referent of its effect and contribution to the human person. The author argues that democratic forms of government are better able to provide for the advancement of human development because they allow for more meaningful public participation. The paper indicates that more than 60% of all dominant-assembly-oriented types (mostly referred to as parliamentary systems of government) and 20% of accountable-executive-oriented (mostly referred to as presidential systems) fall within categories regarded as "high human development" and roughly 24 percent of the former and 57% of the latter countries are within the "medium human development" category.
Table of Contents:
Abstract
Introduction
Related Literature
Structures of Government
Table. Riggs's Classification of Polity's (Political Systems)
Democracy and Development
Human Development
Classification of Forms of Government
Table. Classification of Forms of Government Used in the Paper
Human Development Index and Forms of Government
Table. High Human Development
Table. Medium Human Development
Table. Low Human Development
Distribution of Each Governmental Type across HD Levels
Table. Distribution of Each Type of Governmental Form across HD Levels
Table. HDI by Designated Regions and Clusters
Conclusion: Democracy for Human Development
From the Paper
"There are governments as well, which may have plurality in terms of decision-making but it is dispersed among a few like-minded individuals advancing a common cause and not allowing for existence of competing groups or parties. This characterizes the third type of governmental system which still greatly persists in the present era--the ruling-party oriented type (Type 3). Theocratic governments are sub-classified under this since theocratic governments whether multi-party or not, allow a rather very little room for ideological dissent and since their main goals are to conservatively advance a particular religion and way of life and sometimes at the expense of political rights and civil liberties."
| |
|
"Democracy in America", 2002.
A study of freedom and democracy using Tocqueville's "Democracy in America".
650 words (approx. 2.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay explores the interrelation of the concepts of equality, freedom and democracy in history as portrayed in Alexis de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America".
| |
|
Democracy and the Libertarian Ideal of Self-Ownership, 2002.
This is an argument for the libertarian conception of self-ownership as the foundation for democracy, as opposed to other values such as republican non-domination and deliberative democracy, with treatment of empirical work on the phenomenon of voter igno
4,060 words (approx. 16.2 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 109.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the notion of western democracy, and how by its very definition, impinges on our everyday lives. The author defines democracy, and looks at what democracy was intended to be, and how, as government expanded, and its influence expanded that democracy has had the opposite affect, and is not limiting our freedoms. The author also suggest ways in which we can regain the benefits that democracy was designed to provide.
From the Paper
"Indeed, if we did otherwise, we would be treating people not as full members of the community among equals, but as sheep unto a shepherd, or a child unto a parent. While such relationships are certainly appropriate between the incompetent and the competent, they can hardly be countenanced for the competent, who are entitled to their own private sphere in which they can determine the meaning of their experiences and define their own ends. After all, since people are different, and even individuals change through time, no one can better know his own conception of the good and his unique set of ends better than the individual himself. The state, far removed from the individual, is in no position to make that determination, and therefore, must be neutral to conceptions of the good. The state's disallowing one to choose for himself the sort of life he leads is, in fact, a principal criterion by which we can judge its goodness."
| |
|
Socrates' Criticisms of Democracy, 2008.
A discussion of the writer's views of democracy and of Socrates' problems with democracy and the democratic man as seen in Plato's, "Republic."
2,037 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 64.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Socrates' view of democracy and the democratic man as related in Book 8 of Plato's "Republic." In particular, the paper attempts to ascertain what specific problems Socrates has with democracy and democratic man. The paper then relates Socrates' criticisms - both those that the writer agrees with and those that he does not - to the state of affairs within the United States.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Criticisms of Democracy and Democratic Man
Freedom in Democracy
Equality in Democracy
Freedom and Equality in Democratic Man
Afterthought: The Democratic Ruler(s)
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Although it is clear that Socrates holds an uncomplimentary view of democracy, to say the least, it is equally clear to me that, conversely, in today's world democracy is largely respected and admired; countries strive to be "democratic" because of the positive connotations attached to the concept. What I have difficulty understanding is not the fact that countries today manipulate the definition of democracy to fit their own agenda, but rather why the concept, democracy, was chosen as the emulative term. Why isn't "socialism" seen as the "good" form of government? After all, in our country we are lacking a lot of the basic qualities that are supposedly essential to democracy. Yet at the same time the U.S. is arguably the most powerful, most economically well-off country in the world. There are many more questions like these that need to be explored, and I hope that throughout the course of this essay, through an examination of Plato's thought in the Republic, I have shed some light on some of the possible answers."
| |
|
Hitler and Democracy, 2004.
An analysis of Adolf Hitler's notion about the philosophy of democracy.
2,476 words (approx. 9.9 pages), 17 sources, MLA, $ 75.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how and what Adolf Hitler may have considered to be a concept of democracy. It looks at how democracy and Hitler crossed paths on numerous occasions and reviews a number of Hitler?s known ideas and public utterances and provides some speculation and interpretation regarding Hitler?s opinions about the democratic philosophy. It also attempts to show how Adolf Hitler manipulated the democratic process because of how he understood the concept; in order for him to attain true power, the German people needed to elect him into office.
Outline
Introduction
Democracy
Hitler, the Checks and Balance System of Democracy
Hitler and the Competition of Ideas Essential for Democracy
Hitler and the Freedom of Expression
Hitler and the Freedom of Religion
Hitler and Exercise of Power Through Elected Representatives and the Right to Vote
Hitler and Economical System of the Democratic Style of Government (Capitalism)
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Adolf Hitler was obviously not a pious man. ?The Old Testament conceived of as a volume written to expound the nationalistic philosophy of the Jewish race is now a favorite item on the Nazi cultural menu. Rosenberg writes in Mythus des 20n Jahrhunderts (Myth of the 20th Century): 'As a book of religion, the Old Testament must be done away with once and for all. That will end the unsuccessful attempt of 1500 years to turn us mentally into Jews.? (Hitler) In the sense that freedom of religion is an essential part of a democratic way of life, Adolf Hitler was totally against several religions other than Judaism. But because his position was strong against the Jews, all of democracy was wrong because of the concept associated with a freedom of religion."
|
|
|
