Were The Federalists Democratic Essays - United States, Democracy

Were The Federalists Democratic? The idea of democracy is both vague and is often over-simplified to mean majority rules. In theory, such a notion sounds both just and efficient. However, in practice, the concept of majority rules is much more complex and often difficult to implement. Modern-day versions of democracy, such as the one utilized in the United States, simply guarantees a persons right to voice his or her opinion in all matters involving the public. American democracy merely provides a forum for the expression of such viewpoints; it does not guarantee the ability of any individual to bring about change. The Federalists, who were greatly responsible for the ratification of the beloved Constitution of the United States, recognized the impracticality of Jeffersons town-hall democracy and simple majority rules and settled on a type of government which could merely guarantee an individuals right to representation. In some regards, the Federalists were pragmatic democrats-supporters of democracy who recognized the shortcomings of the voting public while at the same time suggested certain instruments to protect John Q. Public. The Federalists were opposite of idealists; they were realists. And it is this realism that is directly responsible for the success of democracy within the United States. Democracy, the ideal, is held dear by most Americans. What Americans would not dofor the vindication of a fundamental first principle: the right of the people to determine their own future, comments Albert R. Papa in his article The Allure of Civics Book Democracy. While nearly all Americans recognize the benefits of a democratic nation, the Federalists maintain that often times, minority and majority factions of society act contrary to the good of the whole. Madison, a staunch Federalist, defines a faction in The Federalist Papers No. 10 as a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community. While Madison maintains that factions, by definition, are detrimental to the good of the whole, he does recognize their right to exist. What could be more democratic than allowing all grou ps to assemble, even those which violate public good? Never does Madison suggest restricting the rights of such groups; Liberty is to faction, what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could be a less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency writes Madison. The pragmatic nature of Madison realizes the corrosive function of factions and he explains within his writings why such entities will not pose problems for America- a larger Republic. He argues that in Republics composed of larger populations, factions fail to play significant roles because of their decreased ability to exert influence on others. The smaller the societythe fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of indiv iduals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression, suggests Madison. Although Madison and most Federalists recognize that factions simply exist because of human nature and therefore cannot be eradicated, they believe the system set-up within the United States will prevent factions from dominating the political process. The fact that Madison includes the line whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole in his definition of factions is quite significant. Can the majority ever be wrong? Since most Americans believe that democracy should serve the interests of the majority (majority rules), how can a majority faction ever represent views inconsistent with the good of the whole? Critics of the Federalists Papers argue that Madisons definition of factions is extremely anti-democratic in nature. Even though a factions viewpoints may be destructive to the institution of American government, the governments main role is to represent the will of the people regardless of subsequent effects. However, certainly one

Chinese Under Imperialism essays

Chinese Under Imperialism essays In the 19th Century, countries around the world had been experiencing a disturbing trend. At their own expense, Western powers invaded their lands to obtain personal profit, even if that meant exploiting the natives. This was apparent in Africa, as European countries rushed to obtain as much territory as they could, and divided the country as if it were nothing more than just an uninhabited wasteland. It did not end in Africa, as the Europeans turned toward the Middle Kingdom and its immense riches. At the cost of Chinas economy, Britain prospered as it gained considerable amounts of tea and silver, by merely trading a cheap drug called Opium. This is where I come in, my name is Ching. I live outside the Great Wall, the ghetto of china. I was hired by the British to drug run all their merchandise into the city. It was a dangerous job but I was making good money. I usually wouldnt take a job like this but my family was starving. One day as I was walking across the green sunny hills just north of Jingcharok I was stopped in my tracks by the call of a wild animal. The growl was like something I had never heard before! It was that of a savage beast! I saw it as it came running out of the undergrowth towards me, it was huge, ten feet tall if it was an inch. Its mouth was full of rows of razor sharp teeth and the largest eyes I had ever seen. It then spoke to me these words Resist the British from our lands, defend ancient China. It was just about this time that I woke up, it seems that some of my friends had been playing a joke on me and had put a kilo of opium in my rice that morning, none the less I was sure that the vision I saw were a warning. From that dream I discerned my destiny. I was to become a pokemon master and fight the British with my pokemon. First I set out to capture some good ones, but wait! Pokemon do not exist! I would have to fight the British with guns! So I went down to the hardw ...

Medical Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Medical Law - Essay Example Moreover, the evaluation of the physicians, with regard to the continuance or otherwise of the patient’s life, is bestowed with primacy. In many instances the courts have agreed with the physicians’ evaluation that it would defeat the best interests of the patient to continue with life prolonging medical measures (Mendelson & Jost, 2003, p. 131). The 1993 case of Airedale NHS v Bland proved to be a landmark case in the area of cessation of artificial feeding and therapy. The court permitted the withdrawal of treatment from persons in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). In this case, the defendant Anthony Bland was in PVS as a result of having been asphyxiated in a stampede. The physicians attending upon him proposed the discontinuation of artificial feeding and antibiotic therapy (Tibballs, 2007, p. 233). Subsequent to undergoing a persistent vegetative state for three years, a court order was procured by the physicians attending upon Bland. This order permitted the me dical authorities to write finis to the indignity and degradation that had become an integral and overwhelming component of this hapless individual’s life. It was the considered opinion of the judges, ruling in this case that the inability of Bland to execute a will had prevented an earlier end to his pain and indignity filled life (Docker, 2000). It was clearly realised by the medical authorities that such cessation of feeding and treatment would result in death by starvation. However, such a course of action would not cause discomfort to the patient. It was also assumed that it would be in the best interests of Bland to legally discontinue the life sustaining treatment and tube feeding. Lord Hoffmann opined that the discontinuation of treatment was not only in the best interests of Bland but was also aimed at stopping the humiliation being undergone by him and to prevent distress to his family members. According to Lord Mustill, Bland had to be allowed to die in the best in terests of the community. He further stated that this decision was in the best interests of the family members of Anthony Bland (Tibballs, 2007, p. 233). While pronouncing judgement in the Bland case, one of the presiding judges stated that the States of the Union in the US, which had enacted laws to permit living wills, there was an explicit exclusion of terminating life by discontinuing nourishment and hydration (Ozimic & Fleming, 2011). It is the duty of a doctor to take into account, the best interests of a patient. However, there is an erroneous presumption that the best interests of the patient can be determined only by reference to the patient’s wishes, prior to his becoming incapacitated. The choice exercised by a patient need not necessarily be in his best interests, on every occasion (Ozimic & Fleming, 2011). In addition, ignoring the wishes of an incompetent person, should not be invariably be deemed to be disrespectful to the patient, and in contravention of his r ights. Although, patient autonomy is of considerable significance, doctors take other factors, such as life and health, and the provision of adequate health care in order to support the health and life of the patient. With respect to an incapacitated individua