| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "SOCIAL DEMOCRACY": |
|
|
Social Democracy, 2005.
This paper studies the subject of social democracy in Switzerland and England.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this essay, the writer compares social democracy in Switzerland and England. The writer examines how the features of social democracy vary from country to country. The writer discusses how England and Switzerland created two different political versions of social democracy.
From the Paper
"Social democracy as a political and governmental movement has always, according to Stefan Berger, represented a somewhat uneasy marriage of capitalism and socialism, a feature of social democracy which has caused to vary significantly from country to country. Berger points out that Alexis de Tocqueville noted that while democracy assigns primacy to the individual, socialism reduces each individual to little more than an instrumental part of a whole. What democracy and socialism share at their most basic is the notion of equality ... "
| |
|
Social Democracy and Communism, 2002.
Discussing differences between social democracy and communism.
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 9 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses that the main difference between social democracy and capitalism lies in the disagreement over human nature and economics. Social democracy is founded on the premise that a certain amount of competitiveness will allow the production of economic growth. This growth, in turn, stimulates the economy further. The competitiveness, meanwhile, derives naturally from the human trait of self-interest. Communism, however, holds that there is no such thing as human nature. Both Marx and Rousseau believed that man was social and that both could be reshaped. In other words, self-interest was socially constructed and man could be changed to reject his own interest. The difference between communism and social democracy, therefore, centres precisely on this disagreement over human nature.
| |
|
Sweden and Social Democracy, 2002.
Looks at Sweden's form of social democracy and how it affected the businesses, industries and working class of the country.
2,650 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 8 sources, $ 97.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the Social democracy of Sweden and how its welfare state regime and workings affected the businesses, industries and working class of the country. Following on from this it is further discussed how once the regime ended and new plans were laid out, businesses began to move away due to high taxation and high unemployment.
| |
|
Social Democracy, 2007.
This paper explores how in the early twentieth century, literature was used for the promotion of social democracy.
1,815 words (approx. 7.3 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines the promotion of social democracy or socialism, at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century, led by H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, H.M. Hyndman, George Orwell and Beatrice and Sidney Webb. The paper explains that World War II presented an opportunity to counter the fascism of the enemy with support for a more equitable social structure and government. The paper explores how propaganda was produced in various forms to further this utopian vision. The paper examines how Orwell reacted to these forces in his fiction with the satiric beast fable of "Animal Farm" and the dystopian novel "1984."
From the Paper
"Pamphleteering has a long history in England and became a means of expression against government policies in the New World as well. As the mass media developed, the practice of pamphleteering expanded as well as various writers produced not only pamphlets and broadsides but longer essays, books, and other printed material to promote their causes. One of the causes that attracted a good deal of attention was the promotion of social democracy or socialism beginning at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century, notably led by H.G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, H.M. Hyndman, and Beatrice and Sidney Webb."
| |
|
J.A. Schumpeter's "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy", 1972.
This paper discusses J.A. Schumpeter's "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy" especially his definition and perspective on the nature of democracy.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 1 source, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"One of the most fascinating aspects of Schumpeter's book, "Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy" , is his definition and perspective on the nature of democracy. Schumpeter sees democracy as primarily a political method, ". . . that is to say, a certain type of institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions and hence incapable of being an end in itself, irrespective of what decisions it will produce under given historical conditions." What seems to be implied through this definition is the propensity for people to give unqualified allegiance to certain ideals and interests which they cherish, and only qualified allegiance to a political method, such as democracy, which they expect will serve these ends.
Schumpeter goes on to document how the 18th-century ideas of "the common good" and the "will of the people" are primarily ... "
| |
|
Social Democracy in Canada, 2008.
This paper discusses the history and present status of the New Democratic Party as a key force in Canadian politics.
2,390 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 73.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The authors argues that while social democracy is rarely spoken of as a dominant, united voice in Canadian politics, social democrats, both officially and as grassroots activists, have played key roles in shaping Canadian social policy; their crown jewel being nationalized healthcare. The authors goes on to discuss that while social democrats in this country have generally found themselves on the outside of the power structure looking in, the official party's job is now more or less to find ways to affect change with limited access to the power structure. Finally, the author states that the past, present, and future of the New Democratic Party (NDP) seems to be based on the party's ability to act as more activist than government.
From the Paper
"So, despite its power outage, while the NDP is a legitimate mainstream party, except in the province of Quebec where it has never elected a New Democrat during a general election, it would appear that there will be limits on that legitimacy. Where the party can continue to be a useful official voice, however, is its persistence to criticize of the effects of free trade and globalization, and the ensuing rate of American ownership of Canadian resources. Historically, the NDP essentially forced a 1970s Trudeau Liberal minority government to form the Foreign Investment Review Agency to act as watch dog (Whitehorn n.p.) of sorts."
| |
|
Economics and Democracy, 2002.
A study of the compatibility and implementation of economics and democracy using the definitions of socialism, capitalism and democracy of Marx and Friedman.
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 6 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper is about the incompatibility of democracy and capitalism. The writer argues, using many classic political economics texts, that socialism would complement democracy's goals better than capitalism, which was developed in a monarchist paradigm of government. Capitalism results in the concentration of power in isolated locations, whereas both socialism and democracy distribute power evenly through a population. The paper cites Marx as well as Friedman, and opens with clear definitions of socialism, capitalism, and democracy drawn from the works of these authors.
| |
|
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)."
| |
|
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. "
| |
|
Theories of Social Justice, 2007.
This paper examines liberal individualism, market individualism and the theory of social democracy.
1,612 words (approx. 6.4 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 52.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the following three main traditions of thinking regarding social justice: (1) liberal individualism, (2) market individualism, and (3) social democracy. The paper looks at the Afrocentric paradigm and explores possible alternative views of justice not captured by the three theoretical frameworks. The paper notes that the three theories of social work were written and developed by white individuals, thus reaffirming the power of white individuals in society without accurately reflecting the true client base in the United States.
Outline:
Objective
Introduction
Market Individualism
Liberal Individualism
Social Democrat
The Afrocentric Paradigm
From the Paper
"Market individualism holds that social justice is less focused on the distribution of justice and more focused on the process by which holdings are acquired. In this school of thought the state is involved only minimally while the market makes provision of social justice through employment, services and welfare thereby protecting the individual's freedom. There is no socially set goals for economic allocation in the theory of "market individualism". Market Individualism is a concept that was introduced in the work of Robert Nozick in his 1970 publication entitled: "Anarchy, State and Utopia" which expressed a belief that the market is the basic provider of social justice employment, services and welfare."
| |
|
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.
| |
|
Political Ideologies, 2005.
An analysis and explanation of liberalism, conservatism and social democracy.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 0 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper analyzes the political ideologies of liberalism, conservatism and social democracy and explains that this requires identifying the basic political principles and tenets of these rival ideologies. The paper explains that this also requires comparing them to one another, for political ideologies emerge and develop in response to other political ideologies. The paper discusses that in general terms, liberalism emerged as a critical response to conservatism and social democracy emerged as a critical response to both conservatism and liberalism.
From the Paper
"Liberalism has been defined by both proponents and opponents as a political ideology that values strong support for a broad and comprehensive interpretation of civil liberties, for freedom of cultural expression and religious toleration and for widespread popular participation in the political process regardless of race, gender or income."
|
|
|
