one is that a majority, one is that representatives, one is a bunch of groups, and the last one is those in affluence
run the show
For those who know this situation pretty well (–the battle between Gov. Perdue and the US Army Corps of Engineers — & him trying to stop them from releasing any more water from Lanier to Florida), I need your help……Could someone relate the terms "majoritarianism" and/or "pluralism" to Georgia’s current drought issues?
I’m wanting to use this topic for my discussion in my government class next week. And I have to discuss whether the way Georgia is handling the drought issue is majoritarianistic or pluralistic.
This may seem like a ridiculous question, but keep in mind I’m not politcally savvy…..so any help would be greatly appreciated! thanks!!!!
In regard to the terms you specify…
Majoritarianism: Does rule by the majority apply to Georgia’s current drought issues?
I’d argue "no" to that one. If majority rule applied, the extra 2.2 billion gallons a day that the Army Corps of Engineers releases into the Chattahoochee would come to a screeching halt. The majority in this issue is 5 million people in Atlanta who are suffering from a drought, compounded by that extra release to benefit two species of endangered mussels and a small coal-fired plant that serves 27,000 homes in Florida. The majority are at an extreme disadvantage here.
Pluralism: Does government by a broad spectrum of groups apply to Georgia’s drought issues?
Perhaps. You have the federal courts, who have mandated the extra release of water. You have the Army Corps of Engineers, which blindly obeys that order, regardless of what it’s doing to Lake Lanier (and which misread a gauge that led them to release 22 billion gallons of water in a single day). There’s the state, which has imposed a statewide outdoor watering ban, and which is petitioning the President for federal disaster aid. And there are the various municipalities that are having to enforce the watering ban.
The struggle for power is pretty much a battle between Georgia, the federal courts, the Army Corps of Engineers and the President. The President, with a stroke of a pen, could change the entire situation. In that light, one could argue political pluralism does apply to this situation.
So If we are a constitutional republic, ( not a democracy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_republic
which is in place as a way to get ride of a mobocracy ,
doesn’t it seem as if we are heading towards majoritarianism these days?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majoritarianism
And if so, since we arn’t a true democracy, does that give major populations, ( for instance the Christians, etc) a right to govern the lives of those who are in the minority?
And if so then , what is the point of this fighting tooth and nail with them? Although I certainly don’t believe we should call oursleves a christian nation and accept religious pundits in our hightest office ( it goes against the fact that we are a diverse people ) can you justify the practical rush to call America a "Christian nation" or understand why people would flee to Canada because of this ? Listen, I do want my country to be a place where I can live and others can live in peace. Together and in relative peace.
In relation to this question!
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AovDRuxraD1SC0.jWUg8iKnsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20080224092552AAa45Tx
I am not telling you to agree with me. I just want some direction.
A country that would make war and cause harm to beings in order to protect America’s financial interests cannot call itself a Christian nation.
They only use religion to gain power over those who refuse to think. To them, religion is exactly like a leash around your neck. They use it to make you heel and to make you bite others. Religion, like any institution is nothing more than a political machine.
What if society as a majority decided to(in other words, volunteered) abolish private property, and replace a trade based economy with one based on free access… Whether or not you like this idea, would you not support this form of "voluntary socialism"?
Another point… if you answer no, you are opposing the will of the majority… While this is fine if you are against majority rule entirely, if you on the other hand were for prop 8, you understand that was majoritarianism, which you claim to oppose…
Expecting intelligent answers from intelligent people… If you cannot give a decent answer… if your answer consists of rants on how obama’s a socialist or all that bs, please don’t waste your time… i read all answers and will simply ignore yours at the first mention of president obama, who isn’t in any way relevant to this question.
Whether or not you are willing to admit it, charity is a socialist activity… not socialism per se, but it is a voluntary socialist activity, as you are voluteering your work for the betterment of others.
There is this assumption of socialism requiring a state… maybe i should have clarified that the socialism i speak of is not the socialism assumed in this thread. I don’t talk about state ownership, but rather common ownership, without an existing state. States are tools of oppression, by their very nature, and the reason i am a socialist is to eliminate all oppression.
No. I do not support any form of socialism
What are the roots of the American understanding of republicanism, constitutionalism, liberty, justice, equality, pluralism, and majoritarianism?
Please help! I can’t figure out a good answer.
A lot of it is based on old world ideas. Plato, and his Republic, was an influence. Franklin was a great influence from his studies of ancient governments. There are very few roots, as you may say. Mainly because there has been very, very little personal freedom in the history of the world. Democracy has never really worked. It is not working here. The Republic has as it worked in ancient Rome and England after the Magna Carta was enacted.
some people describe three different types of democracy–majoritarianism, elite theory, and pluralism.
Which type of democracy best describes the American democracy? What examples in current day society can you point to that support your claim? Do you believe the form of democracy you described is good or bad? Do you believe it adheres to the principles put forth by our founding fathers?
Or there are others that claim none of the theories are applicable because the US is not a democracy at all. Do you believe that?
Take a stand.
I am curious about your opinions
I am sorry about the god-awful responses by my fellows on YA! They simply don’t understand your question.
There are 2 types of democracy: Direct and representative. Each of these has sub-variants, but all types of democracy will fit into one of these two categories. What you listed are actually different types of Representative democracy, or rather different theories.
For the record, we are both a representative democracy and a republic (saw some idiot say that we are a republic not a democracy). Representative democracy is in fact a type of republic.
You are also wrong about there being 3, there are many smaller theories (majoritarianism being one of them). The MAIN 3, but not the only 3, are elitism, pluralism, and hyperpluralism.
As for which type we are, most political theorists would agree that we are a mixture of elitism and hyperpluralism.
some people describe three different types of democracy–majoritarianism, elite theory, and pluralism.
Which type of democracy best describes the American democracy? What examples in current day society can you point to that support your claim? Do you believe the form of democracy you described is good or bad? Do you believe it adheres to the principles put forth by our founding fathers?
Or there are others that claim none of the theories are applicable because the US is not a democracy at all. Do you believe that?
Take a stand.
I am curious about your opinions
I am sorry about the god-awful responses by my fellows on YA! They simply don’t understand your question.
There are 2 types of democracy: Direct and representative. Each of these has sub-variants, but all types of democracy will fit into one of these two categories. What you listed are actually different types of Representative democracy, or rather different theories.
For the record, we are both a representative democracy and a republic (saw some idiot say that we are a republic not a democracy). Representative democracy is in fact a type of republic.
You are also wrong about there being 3, there are many smaller theories (majoritarianism being one of them). The MAIN 3, but not the only 3, are elitism, pluralism, and hyperpluralism.
As for which type we are, most political theorists would agree that we are a mixture of elitism and hyperpluralism.
some people describe three different types of democracy–majoritarianism, elite theory, and pluralism.
Which type of democracy best describes the American democracy? What examples in current day society can you point to that support your claim? Do you believe the form of democracy you described is good or bad? Do you believe it adheres to the principles put forth by our founding fathers?
Or there are others that claim none of the theories are applicable because the US is not a democracy at all. Do you believe that?
Take a stand.
I am curious about your opinions
I am sorry about the god-awful responses by my fellows on YA! They simply don’t understand your question.
There are 2 types of democracy: Direct and representative. Each of these has sub-variants, but all types of democracy will fit into one of these two categories. What you listed are actually different types of Representative democracy, or rather different theories.
For the record, we are both a representative democracy and a republic (saw some idiot say that we are a republic not a democracy). Representative democracy is in fact a type of republic.
You are also wrong about there being 3, there are many smaller theories (majoritarianism being one of them). The MAIN 3, but not the only 3, are elitism, pluralism, and hyperpluralism.
As for which type we are, most political theorists would agree that we are a mixture of elitism and hyperpluralism.
I need some help relating these 5 major themes to this topic: the Southeast drought (specifically the current drought issues in the state of Georgia):
5 major themes:
1) Order
2) Equality
3) Freedom
4) Majoritarianism
5) Pluralism
If you can relate any of those themes to this topic, be creative and give me reasons to back up your opinion. Anything you can think of would be interesting to hear. I need help brainstorming some ideas for a discussion in my gov’t class!! Thank you so much everyone!!!
1. Order is needed in order to regulate water supplies… in order to make sure water is not wasted, etc… so that ppl will survive.
2. Equality. During a crisis, equality is important. Ppl must be treated as equals. No one neighbor should be able to wash his car while the other neighbor goes without watering his lawn as an example.
There’s two for you.
1. one-party dominance of elections.
2. multi-member constituencies.
3. proportional representation.
4. majoritarianism.
5. the winner-take-all, or plurality, system.
Just look at the electoral system in force where you live and the answer is obvious.