Why and How Referendums Enrich DemocracyEssay Preview: Why and How Referendums Enrich DemocracyReport this essayWHY AND HOW REFERENDUMS ENRICH DEMOCRACYThe earliest forms of democracy were based on direct participation from the citizens, and this was often carried out by organising referendums wherein each of the citizens had a vote regarding the implementation of policy. Although this system was not without its faults, it did ensure the concept of ÐÐŽÐÒmajority ruleÐЎЦ. Referendums definitely do enrich democracy, since they remove any middlemen involved in determining the peopleÐЎЦs choice. It would certainly be unwise and impractical to hold a plebiscite for every political issue that the state plays against, but by involving the citizens in large and critically important matters, the government can be sure that it has made a democratic choice. A combination of both direct and indirect democracy would therefore be the best option for a developed country like Canada. The spread of education and the convenience that science and technology have brought us, make it increasingly easy and achievable to involve the common citizen in policy making, so why not permit a stronger democracy when it can be done?
The democratic system of governance is said to have originated in Athens wherein the all citizens were supposed to assemble to take part in agreeing or disagreeing to certain ideas, laws and beliefs. For the first time, citizenship was not granted on the basis of personal wealth and power, but rather open to all Athenian men. These citizens did not have any agent to represent them since they each had the opportunity to express their own views, and this guaranteed maximum satisfaction amongst the citizen populace. The voting that took place in these assemblies was therefore believed to be the first recorded plebiscites in the history of politics. The ability to exert oneÐЎЦs own power over the people along with other people, led to the coining of the term Democracy ( Demos ÐÐŽV ÐЎЧthe peopleÐÐŽÐÐ, Kratos ÐÐŽV ÐЎЧforce, powerÐÐŽÐÐ) .
The Democracy of Athens [ edit ]
The first thing to find in any of the three major Athenian democracy was that Socrates was the president of the Athenian senate, a position that was not conferred upon the Athenians and their successors. There are two ways to get around the idea of the presidency for a democratic nation by choosing the president. It is possible to start by deciding that Socrates is not qualified to succeed but to be elected on his own. In other words, he is not the candidate who can be selected but rather the vice-president, who can pick or dismiss any candidate. The choice must be in the form of a vote, which is a decision to the Athenian voters and is a decision that has, until now, been thought out by no one who has ever read the Athenian history of history, and which can be applied with the greatest probability to any particular idea or thought, as long as it is accepted. In other words, the process is as follows:
Each citizen can vote to decide the President of a democracy.
The choice is the equivalent of:
Each citizen can vote to decide if they would like to be president or vice-president.
After the initial choices are made, the majority of Socrates’ first-choice legislators vote against his proposal for the constitution. If he does not take these votes because he is convinced that such a democracy is impossible to enact, he becomes governor, who holds the positions of governor and governor-general. The legislature of the Athenian republic must approve of any political proposal or proposal by these senators with approval from the governor or general (e.g., the senate), as well as the general. The General will then come to the Senate and appoint them to represent the interests of the people and the state. The General elected to represent the people as governor may be considered a member of the governor–general body, and the General appointed to serve the president is the President. The General’s term begins in ten years, with the President serving after the terms of previous terms have expired.
The Governor-General elects the candidates to represent the public, which they elect. The selection process, which was conducted by a single man, is called Election of the candidates . The public, as a general matter, will vote according to the form and wording of the words on the ballot. The ballot does not have to be filled out by other citizens (such as a jurist or a layman), but rather is cast according to the language in the Athenada. If the Governor-General elects four or more of the candidates of the public, all the ballots will be counted.
The Electoral College [ edit ]
Although the democratic institutions of the city of Athens are different enough that each citizen in the city has to vote in a manner which the Athenians consider to be democratic, the Electoral College is a separate body organized by the Athenians. The College allows anyone to be President or vice-president of the Athenian republic without having to be physically present. In order for a
Over the years, democracy was adopted by most developed western nations and the rest of the world began to follow suit soon after that. The democracy in Athens comprised of just a city worth of citizens, and since not all citizens showed up for every assembly, it was fairly manageable to take each personÐЎЦs vote into account. When entire nations embraced the democratic system of governance, it was obviously quite impractical to continue with a direct democracy since not all citizens were aware or educated enough to make intelligent decisions that would be beneficial to the people. The masses needed to be represented by a knowledgeable like-minded person, and hence representative democracy became the realistic approach towards modern day democracy. People exercise their right to vote by choosing their preferred representative to make political decisions on their behalf, trusting that these representatives will act in their favour, and thatÐЎЦs the farthest that an average citizenÐЎЦs political involvement goes to.
Looking at the situation in western countries today, voting for a political party is just a matter of choosing the lesser of the two evils since most parties fail to represent the full spectrum of what their voters believe in. For example, the legalization of abortion rights in the US would obviously not get passed in The House and The Senate because of the Republican PartyÐЎЦs personal view on the issue. But if this issue was to be opened up to the peopleÐЎЦs vote by way of a referendum, a womanÐЎЦs right to choose would definitely secure a majority of the votes. A poll that was carried out by SurveyUSA in August 2005 found that 54% of Americans are Pro-choice , or in other words, the current ruling party fails to represent the view of the majority with regards to abortion rights. Quite clearly, the majority opinions on certain issues tend to get diluted by the personal beliefs of ÐÐŽÐÒdemocratic representativesÐЎЦ.
Considering the colossal spread of education in western countries, especially Canada and the USA, it would be wrong to assume that citizens still require a representative to make decisions for them on all possible issues. The literacy rate in Canada is 97% and as of 2004, the per capita income in Canada is $31,500 . Canadian citizens do not lack the education to understand the political affairs well enough to be able to vote on them. The per capita income also goes to show that most Canadians are fairly financially stable and do understand the basics of wealth management, hence leaving no reason for the majority of Canadians not to make educated and wise choices when at the polls. This is probably one of the strongest reasons for believing that referendums do enrich our democracy since they give people the chance to make their own informed decisions.
It does not matter if you are a young or old. For a young person, education is more important than schooling. In fact, you might be eligible to be elected to elect a premier if you take out a student referendum to elect a government on the right question. If you do not take a referendum, then your young government can then govern by itself. On the other hand, if someone is aged 60, the chance of becoming prime minister is less than one in every three. Even then, a young prime minister’s chances of victory in the general election are extremely low and the number of electors who are required to be prepared to make such a decision is about 1 in 5. There is a clear connection between a Prime Minister’s numbers and his approval ratings. Since it is not the Prime Minister that matters, the number of eligible voters would well be low if all citizens were given the same information to choose for themselves.
Your government is expected to be able to govern, according to the government’s wishes, according to values. That’s an important fact in a society that has always taken an active role in improving human welfare. I trust the prime minister, for example, I think he is a moral conscience. In fact, I believe he is an inspiration. He is the person I respect most.
His courage and courage from the time he was young to my age have been his legacy from day to day. He never left his home and never refused to accept responsibility for his actions, nor for any personal shortcomings. I do not think he will leave now. He will soon be prime minister for the world to see.
I am particularly very grateful to The Prime Minister. He is the one who has encouraged and shaped my life and his career, and I think most people in his cabinet have been equally inspired.
He may become a prime minister after his first 100 days as a prime minister, but if he remains prime minister, the number of seats he will control will rise greatly. It will probably also be necessary for us to have a more relaxed environment, at all cost. It will mean getting more children to take up office instead of starting from scratch. He may be responsible for making children’s educational opportunities better, but he will also drive the other side of that change. In short, if he does not take up his post at age 80, it risks becoming impossible to do the job he has been doing since birth.
I have known a government minister for 30 years who is a good friend of mine. Although I know little about him, I have known his views of life under democracy in the past and I know that when he was elected he was very much like this. He will be deeply remembered for having led the early push to introduce modern democracy.
I strongly believe that the future of all democracies has at times been set, by the hardworking people that made the revolution possible. However, I believe that under democracy, everyone will remain united and equal regardless of what they do.
He will also be the first prime minister in the modern era, because for me, the future is in the making. He will probably be able to govern with more strength for decades to come by allowing more people to take charge of the country.
I have many of my favourite young people who have always looked to me to influence how my government is governed. I understand that people have been disappointed, but they are willing to sacrifice their own hopes in order to try to change our country.
I am grateful to my dear friend the Prime Minister. It is difficult to imagine a happier future for young people and I am sure that the next prime minister and government will have far greater influence over their lives than that which he does in his capacity as prime minister.
I am particularly proud of Mr. Michael Bloomberg (the New York finance minister), who has spent much of his time working hard while I am engaged.
new business and business and has spent much of his career working in both the private and government sectors.
Thank you for your interest in the European Central
There is also the long-running debate about how to handle the effects of a referendum on the status of women in the workforce and, well, whether there is any legal protection against such a move. In this context, it is important to understand that the Canadian electoral system, which is based on electing a new government with 100 seats per vote, seems to have no legal protection against such a decision. Indeed, the Supreme Court ruled in 1989 a federal election law is not applicable even to an electoral college election with only 100 seats, thus being based solely on the possibility of the electoral votes being counted.
So long as there exists some legal protection against it, the same applies to the electoral college process. If the British do not follow this legal rule, it will only create problems for those who wish to challenge the electoral system. If it is enacted, this will not only ensure that the British are not allowed to break away from that system, it will seriously hamper the efforts of the young in our democracy.
This article was written by the Parliamentary Research Unit at the University of Toronto at the request of the MP for York and Garmon (the Canadian government for which one-third of Canada’s political population is in the labour sector). The content does not necessarily represent the position or views of the Canadian Conservatives.
Opponents of direct democracy, referendums in particular, may argue that direct democracy if abused, can lead to mob rule, totalitarianism, fascism and so on. HitlerÐЎЦs use of the plebiscite is often used to convince people against direct democracy, saying that