The U.S.Pure Democracy

Indeed, this is more pure body politic than even the Greeks could manage, and they invented the concept.

The word country comes from the Greek demos, for " throng," and kratos, for "rule." Greek democracy involved only a goful of the people; slaves and women, for interpreter, were excluded from the decision-making process. No matter its exclusivity, the nonion of Greek democracy has resonated throughout the horse opera world for more than two millennia. For example, Abraham Lincoln, in the Gettysburg Address, exhorted the American people to continue the fight in the elegant War to visualise that " . . . a government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not cronk from the earth" (Fehrenbacher, 1989, p. 536).

Lincoln's "government of the people" could be traced back to Plato's Republic, where the reason described an ideal state that continues to capture the imagination of many. " archetypical of all, they are free. Liberty and free speech are dominant everywhere; anyone is allowed to do what he likes. Every man leave alone arrange his own manner of life to suit his pleasure. The resolving will be a greater variety of individuals than chthonian any other constitution. So it may be the finest of all, with its piebald pattern of all sorts of characters. . . .A democracy is so free that it contains a sample of every pleasant. And perhaps anyone who intends to found a state, as we have been doing, ought first to visit this emporium o

Aristotle severalized this dilemma, declaring that societies that die by their own hand are "a variety of democracy that for the straightforward does recognize every status of citizen as equal. . . but here the people, and not the law, is the final sovereign; and that is a result which is brought about by leaders of the demagogue type." Pure democracy, Aristotle warned, can be just as bad as a lone despotical ruler. "Demagogues arise in states where the laws are not sovereign. The people whence become an despot a single composite autocrat made up of many members, with the many playing the sovereign, not as individuals, but collectively. . . .

It grows despotic; flatterers come to be held in honour; it becomes analogous to the tyrannical form of single-person government" (Barker, 1958, p. 168).

The Civil War is an example of the fact that no matter what kind of government, sometimes the absolute mass cannot rule. The leaders, acting in the best interests of society, mustiness reject majority rule. Of course, this involves a fine line amidst freedom and despotism, for rulers often take actions counter to the majority's wishes while claiming to be acting in society's best interests. If the government has legitimacy, then the majority will go along, even with a policy they reject. As John Stevens, Jr. wrote "in free government the majority must necessarily govern; and that, therefore, it becomes the indispensable duty of good citizens to acquiesce; to attempt an opposition by means of squelch and violence, would be to commit a crime of the blackest dye" (Bailyn, dismantle One, 1993, p. 459).

Bailyn, B. (Ed.). (1993). The debate on the Constitution, part one. New York: The Library of America.

From a practical standpoint, the majority eventually will have to marriage that policy, or the government will fall. A good example came during the Civil War, when support for Lincoln tottered on several occasions, peculiarly after Union setbacks in combat. Lincoln also track the line to des
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.