Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Questions about checks and balances
The concept of checks and balance
Questions about checks and balances
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Over the course of the semester, the class has discussed a variety of theories about legitimacy and government. In Hobbes, authority hinges on the Leviathan, with Locke, authority rests on the people and with Rousseau, an extreme version of Locke. Yet in each case, there appears to be a focus on one individual or one group of people. What institutions can enforce that the group who possesses legitimate power do not overstep their authority? Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu advocates for a solution that results in a system of government that has the sovereign not abuse his or their power. Thus, a system of checks and balances. Through his research, Montesquieu notes that each government has three powers: the legislative, the executive …show more content…
It makes sense that there should be a system curbs against power abuse and his basic framework can be applied to a variety of rule, whether it be a presidential system or a constitutional monarchy. Yet I wonder what Montesquieu would say to the rise of presidential powers in the United States, especially in the 20th and 21st century. In both World Wars for example, the president obtained certain war powers that made the executive the most powerful branch during the war. While it is understandable that during a time of emergency, certain liberties have to be sacrificed for the collective security, I question if it is absolutely necessary. In President Wilson’s case, the legislative branch (Congress) still had some power since it did not pass the Treaty of Versailles, which was Wilson’s ultimate goal. Yet by President Roosevelt, he enlarged the administration of the executive and thus increased his ability to influence laws, economy and the side to which the U.S. would support, even under the banner of neutrality. Also, throughout the latter half of the 20th century and the early 21st century, the president has had the ability to send troops around the world to fight, for example, Communist uprisings, while not declaring war (Congress’s power). In recent memory, President Obama used his presidential/executive powers to simply grant amnesty to many illegal immigrants (he is not the first to
Raven, Bertram, and John French. Jr. "Legitimate Power, Coercive Power, and Observability in Social Influence ." Sociometry Vol. 21.No. 2 (1958): 83. Web. 2 Aug 2010. .
Next, Montesquieu influenced the US Constitution because he created a new way for the government to function, with the Separation of Powers. The Separation of powers is not located in just one spot, but in all three articles, of the Constitution. This is used to keep the government away from having all of the power in the land. Another way he influenced the Constitution is from the use of checks and balances, which is where each of the three branches of government can limit the powers of the others. This can be found
Montesquieu states “government should be set up so that no man need be afraid of another”. From this doctrine American Political Philosophers derived the separation of powers into the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches. Montesquieu’s presentation of the branches of government were adopted into American political documents upon their creation. The idea that there wasn’t one governing body, but three was unheard of. Most occupants of the new “America” came from England a country ruled by a King. Therefore making it a Monarchy where a single family is seen as divine and ordained by God to be the ruler over that country. The power is passed down generation to generation and each firstborn son is then placed in power after his father. So, the idea of having a government that does not just depend on one family, but many different persons to run it was not a common philosophy. But, the writers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights thought that this would be a new and honorable way to run their fledgling country. So thus, the Democratic Republic of the United States was born. Designating the three branches with their own roles in society guaranteed that no one branch would have more power that the others, but it would just have different powers. The three branches are like a triangle. They balance eachother out and support each
middle of paper ... ... The sovereign is able to hold absolute power but is equally controlled by the actions of the people as they are considered to be a servant of the people. Hobbes’ political thought is said to be the foundation for Parliamentary sovereignty in Canada. He believes society's main goal is to provide a safe, functioning life without the constant fear of death.
Thomas Hobbes believes that the optimal form of authority is one that has absolute power over its people, consisting of just one person who will retain the exclusive ability to oversee and decide on all of society’s issues. This Sovereign will be constituted by a social contract with the people. With that, the Sovereign will hold all of the citizens’ rights, and will be permitted to act in whichever way he or she deems necessary. The philosopher comes to this conclusion with deductive reasoning, utilizing a scientific method with straightforward arguments to prove his point.
When Alexis de Tocqueville traveled to America, he hoped to acquire a better understanding of the principles of democracy that the young country was exhibiting. Tocqueville had noticed his native country France slowly but surely moving towards those democratic standards He saw that over the past 700 years events seemingly beyond anyone’s control had been driving the nation towards that specific form of government. He believed that eventually the rest of France and the rest of the Western World would follow at least the principles of equality shown in the New World. However, he also noted that there were certain impediments slowing down the change to democracy. Tocqueville did not think that democracy was the right form of government for every
His system of three branches substantially influenced the United States’ government as we know it today as he seeked to modify the system by assigning different roles to the three different branches with an equivalence of powers; furthermore, his system managed to maintain law and order, liberty of the public, and the property of the individuals without creating violence and corruption with the government. Each of the branches also has it’s own job of casting votes, making laws, and ensuring that these laws are constitutional and beneficial to it’s citizens; as stated by Rousseau: “The conjuring tricks of our political theorists are very like that; they first dismember the Body politic by an illusion worthy of a fair, and then join it together again we know not how”. He points out that Montesquieu’s ideas are just an illusion that lures people into thinking that the branches are separated but is actually branches separated as one whole system; despite Rousseau’s accuracy and attempt to denigrate Montesquieu’s theory, this manipulative system didn’t cause corruptions, oppress
Is the purpose of government today, similar to that of philosophers of the past, or has there been a shift in political thought? This essay will argue that according to Machiavelli’s The Prince, the purpose of government is to ensure the stability of the state as well as the preservation of the established ruler’s control, and that the best form of government should take the form of an oligarchy. In contrast, in his book, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes argues that the purpose of government should be to preserve the peace and security of men and, that the best form of government would be an absolute monarchy which would sanction such conditions. This essay will utilize themes of glory, material advantage, peace and stability to illustrate
A longstanding debate in human history is what to do with power and what is the best way to rule. Who should have power, how should one rule, and what its purpose should government serve have always been questions at the fore in civilization, and more than once have sparked controversy and conflict. The essential elements of rule have placed the human need for order and structure against the human desire for freedom, and compromising between the two has never been easy. It is a question that is still considered and argued to this day. However, the argument has not rested solely with military powers or politicians, but philosophers as well. Two prominent voices in this debate are Plato and Machiavelli, both of whom had very different ideas of government's role in the lives of its people. For Plato, the essential service of government is to allow its citizens to live in their proper places and to do the things that they are best at. In short, Plato's government reinforces the need for order while giving the illusion of freedom. On the other hand, Machiavelli proposes that government's primary concern is to remain intact, thereby preserving stability for the people who live under it. The feature that both philosophers share is that they attempt to compromise between stability and freedom, and in the process admit that neither can be totally had.
Forward thinking John Locke described the government’s purpose in his Second Treatise on government. To this great thinker, political power is “a right of making laws…only for the public good” (Locke). This idea of organization is key to liberty. Government is made to protect the rights of a free person, not to remove or tarnish them. Thus, it is the type...
Legitimation refers to people’s beliefs about political authority and the ability to defend these beliefs with justification. The three main sources of legitimacy are typically understood as acceptance of authority and the need to obey its commands. People have faith in political or social order because it has been there for a long time (tradition), have faith in the rulers (charisma), or trust its legality, specifically the rationality of the rule of law (rational) (Weber 1990 [1918]; 1964). Whilst legitimacy is constantly evolving due to current perceptions of society; texts such as ‘Oedipus the King’ (Sophocles) and ‘The Apology’ (Plato) that date back to fifth century BCE explore the notion of traditional, charismatic, and rational legitimation in a comparative way.
Locke, whose ideas emerged in the 1690’s, argued that all men should be guaranteed basic rights, such as the right to life, certain liberties, and the ability to own property. He stated that the people should have the consent, much like a social contract, with their government. He believed that the people must obey the law, while the government maintains the right to create and enforce laws. In addition, Locke stated that if the government becomes unjust and unlawful, then the people have the right to overthrow and create a new form of government. Montesquieu was much like Locke, in the sense that he viewed a self-ruling government more beneficial than a monarchy. Similar to Locke, Montesquieu believed in a republican government where the people established a social contract with the government. On the other hand, he did not find a democracy, founded on majority-rule, as a viable form of government. He also emphasized the importance of separating and balancing powers within the government. The separation and balancing of powers is very important to insure the freedom of the people, as it is a defense from one branch of the government having too much power over the country. These ideas from Montesquieu and Locke, would help form a philosophical basis during the
They are not only its inert or consenting target; they are always also the elements of its articulation” (Foucault, “Two Lectures” 34). Power may take various forms, all of which are employed and exercised by individualsand unto individuals in the institutions of society. In all institutions, there is political and judicial power, as certain individuals claim the right to give orders, establish rules, and so forth as well as the right to punish and award. For example, in school, the professor not only teaches, but also dictates, evaluates, as well as punishes and rewards.
In this paper, it is my intention to discuss the issue of legitimacy as it relates to government. I will explore what a legitimate government necessarily consists of; that is, I will attempt to formulate a number of conditions a government must meet in order to be considered legitimate.
...he reading was that in fact Montesquieu did not actually care whether a government was a monarchy or a democracy as long as there was a separation of powers. I believe this is true, whether there is a King, Queen, or President, they should not be the single ruler making all decisions with no input from the people or another branch of government.