Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Thesis of Athens Democracy
Thesis of Athens Democracy
The history of the Roman governments
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Thesis of Athens Democracy
There are many problems that the United States has right now some of the problems have to with the economy, but the biggest problem of the United States are the 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. In my opinion the U.S. should let the immigrants stay, but under the watch of the government. Back then the two cities Athens and Rome had many differences between the two. For example, the two had different education and military, but the two that separated the cities apart were government and the path to citizenship. In my opinion, Rome had a better government and path to citizenship.
The Athens had a more direct democracy where the men of the assembly could vote on laws. The Athens chose their Council of 500 by a lot or in other
…show more content…
words they chose random men to be in the Council of 500. In Document E it say, “Athenians chose their official, including the Council of 500 by lot from the general citizenry.” In citizenship native-born men were given citizenship, but native-born women were not. In Document A it shows a chart of the genders that can be citizens or not in both Rome and Athens. The Romans were a bit different instead of the citizens voting on the laws a group called the Senate made the laws for the people. In Document F it says, “The Senate had primary responsibilities for foreign relation, including selecting ambassadors, making treaties, and creating alliances.” Unlike the Athens native-born women and men were given citizenship. Rome had a better path to citizenship because native-born male and female adults were given citizenship, but only if their parents were married in certain areas of Roman Empire.
In Document C it says, “In other words, the Athenians were more stingy with their citizenship. The Romans more freely gave it away. But gave it away in measured amounts.” This shows that the Athens were very picky to who they gave political rights and citizenship to. The Roman were very generous about giving citizenship and political rights but they also gave it equal amounts. The Romans based one’s privileges and benefits of citizenship by a list of requirements for example they would be based on their wealth, heritage, administrative competence, and e.t.c. In Document D it says, “The censors’ ranking, based on wealth, heritage [family standing], . . . and his military service.” The Athens on the other hand passed a law stating that if the majority of the citizens write the name of a person with the most power they would be exiled from the native land for 10 years. In document D it says, “ And the law is as follows: Each citizen wrote the name of the man . . . to go into exile from his native land for a period of ten …show more content…
years.” Ami Bera once said, “Our nation is built upon a history of immigration, dating back to our first pioneers, the Pilgrims.
For more than three centuries, we have welcomed generations of immigrants to our melting pot of hyphenated Americans: British-Americans; Italian-Americans; Irish-Americans; Jewish-Americans; Mexican-Americans; Chinese-Americans; Indian-Americans.” This is why I believe that all those 11 million undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the U.S., but under the conditions of a set of requirements. In those requirements immigrants should have never been convicted of crime, they need to have a high school diploma or a GED, they needed to have completed at least 2 years of college, serve in the U.S. military or served in public services, they need to work at least the minimum of a 100 days, they also need to have an income higher than the federal poverty level, and finally they haven’t spent more than 100 days unemployed. The reason I have chosen these as my requirements is because the U.S. should not take those who have convicted crime just so that they can bring more trouble to the U.S., they need to have a general education, they should also serve the U.S. in a way, and finally I chose the last three because an immigrant should be working to show that they are getting an income at least above the poverty level so that the U.S knows that they can support
themselves. In conclusion I have come to the say that the Roman had a better form of government and a greater path to citizenship. I have proven my statement with evidence that sources for both Rome and Athens. Even though the Athens allowed anybody to hold office the Romans had a better way of selecting those to join the Senate. And finally the immigrants of the United States might have a complicated time to get themselves legalized, but it is only fair to those who have gone through the long process. Just like how Ami Bera said ," Our nation is built upon a history of immigration, dating back to our first pioneers, the Pilgrims. For more than three centuries, we have welcomed generations of immigrants to our melting pot of hyphenated Americans.” I believe that the United States should give the immigrants a chance to do right and become fully fledged citizens of the United States of America.
In comparing the Ancient Athenian system of government, and the Modern Day American political system, there are many similarities. In Ancient Athens, democracy was developed in response to a long history of oppressive rulers who used their position of power for their own benefit. Ancient Athenians sought a government where all citizens were considered equal under the eyes of the law, and all had a fair say in the running of their country. Following a series
In reference to Rome, Athens’s citizenship system was less accepting by only allowing free, native born males to nationalize. While this aspect was considered a drawback by the Romans, truthfully it is actually a major tradeoff by Athens. As shown in Document A, Rome was more lenient to upcoming citizens. Although this adds to the power and development of the empire, it also creates holes in its security. Citizens with non-native origins are free to express their hatred and idea of change to the Roman government, by creating a negative cultural diffusion, and contributing to the downfall of Rome. On the other hand, Athens was free from any possible revolts and riots from any non-native Athenians.
On which they would scratch the name of the person that represented a threat.”(Doc E)This demonstrates why Athens was a democratic society since not only did civilians get to decide on who is in office and who is not. Furthermore, because democracy means rule by the people, and male citizens of ancient Athens voted laws and officials into place.(doc c) This exemplifies how salient the majority's opinion was instead of opinions of just a few rich men .In addition, Athens “....constitution favors many instead of few.”(doc a) Also Athenians had the freedom to do whatever they desire a long as they did not disrupt any other citizen or violate a law. “The freedom which we enjoy in our governments also to our ordinary life…...we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbor for doing what he likes. But all this ease in our private life does not make us lawless as citizens.”(doc A) Therefore, this exhibits that this is a democratic government because this is a characteristic that can be seen in democratic governments today. To summarize why Athens was a democracy.Citizens were free to do what makes them jubilant as long as it did not interfere with the laws or fellow citizens. Male citizens could vote and elect the rulers and vote laws into place. These aspects all demonstrate why Athens
Athens was one of the largest Greek city states. (Stockton, 4). It was about one thousand square miles (Stockton, 4). Athens was founded in the 8th century BC (Muller). It was at first ruled by the college of archons. (Muller). After a term of one year, the archons became members of the Council of Elders (Muller). The people had a voice in the popular assembly, the Ekklesia (Muller). However, it did not have real power until 600 BC. By then, it was an established institution of Athens (Muller). It became the central policy making body in the 5th century. There were two main governmental bodies, the Assembly and the Council. (Acropolis). The Assembly was responsible for policy making. (Acropolis) The Council was responsible for administration and implementing the Assembly’s policies. Not everyone could participate in Athenian politics. Slaves, resident aliens, and women were excluded.
The United States’ government instilled a closed door policy with the creation of many immigration laws in an effort to make America a melting pot of similar ethnicities. However, the prejudice of American society that was enforced by immigration policy forced immigrants to form their own communities for the purpose of survival and protection, turning America into a mosaic of different cultures. The Burlingame Treaty of 1868 and Naturalization Act of 1870 both created a false image of acceptance for immigrants while simultaneously restricting immigration. The United States’ government only began clearly restricting immigration with the Page Act of 1875 and Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.
Athens is an example of a direct democracy. A point should be made here that
As shown in Document A, most of the people in Rome had citizenship. But, the people of Rome got citizenship in measured amounts, instead of getting full citizenship. In contrast, Athens granted full citizenship only to those who were fully qualified. As outlined in Document A, “Free, native-born adult males in Rome had citizenship. Free, native-born adult females had citizenship in Rome. Free, native-born children (male and female) also had citizenship, along with the sons of freed slaves.” This means that Rome was more generous when giving citizenship, whereas Athens was more careful about who qualified as a citizen. According to Emperor Claudius (Emperor of Rome in 48 CE), what contributed to the downfall of the Athens was that its leaders
The steps to becoming a Canadian citizen are comprised of several components. The fact of the matter is that citizenship does not end when an individual obtains the documents that enable them to participate within civic duties and responsibilities. Based on the evidence of expert T.H. Marshall, within his academic essay entitled “Citizenship and Social Class”, the formation of social citizenship “promised greater economic equality, improvements in social welfare, services and education, and the opportunity for individuals to "share to the full in the social heritage and … live the life of a civilized being according to the standards prevailing in the society” (Marshall 1964). Social citizenship is also attributed as the basis of all forms of citizenship, yet is often debated whether it is currently possible and exercised by those of who it would benefit. According to the principles of T.H. Marshall’s literary work, social citizenship is active, as demonstrated through: the four core aspects citizenship, the basis of social policy, and the resulting actions taken by governing bodies.
A Path to Citizenship “What makes someone American isn’t just blood or birth but allegiance to our founding principles and faith in the idea that anyone from anywhere can write the next chapter of our story.” - President Barack Obama. The United States is the melting pot of the world. The great American country was built on immigration. Look around, so many people have ancestors that risked everything to come to the United States to make something of their lives, and the lives of their children.
The country of Canada is known for its celebration of diverse population and multiculturalism. For years foreigners have been immigrating to Canada to find better opportunities for themselves and their families. Citizenship offers protection of human rights and freedoms including mobility and equality among others, under the Charter. (Canadian Charter, 1982, s 6(2)(b)) The status of Canadian citizenship first started with the official Citizen Act in 1947, which distinguished Canada from other parts of the British Commonwealth. “Before 1947, residents of Britain, Australia, and New Zealand could without limitation immigrate to Canada whenever they chose … Canadians had the same rights to move to those countries and exercise political rights” (Dickerson, Flanagan & O'Neill, 2009). As the country has become more developed, the state of immigration has changed with it. The process of obtaining legal citizenship today is varied according to the applicants’ circumstances. The current state of immigration into Canada is shaped by these paths to citizenship.
Immigration is the greatest part of American history. In the beginning, Immigrants brought a vast variety of cultures and beliefs and turned America in to the beauty it is today. Immigrants are still doing this. However, the issue with immigration can be it 's illegal status. Many undocumented immigrants are entering this country causing questions among the American citizens. Rather than asking if this is right or wrong, a solution can be found. Illegal immigrants come here for a purpose and can be helped with this purpose. Most come fleeing persecution, although some come here for more demented reasons. Those, illegal immigrants will be done away with. However, Those immigrants who come here for pure reasons need to be taken Care of in proper
In Athens only free, native-born males were granted citizenship. This meant females, children, freed slaves, or people who were native-born could not have the luxury ever holding office in government or to vote. In Rome this was quite different. The empire granted free males, females, children, and sons of freed slaves all to have citizenship. This meant something different for each person who was a citizen because the Roman Republic didn’t offer equal rights. Males could vote and hold public office as well as owning land. The females of Rome could only own land, not vote or hold office. (Document A) This was a better and more effective way for the empire to run because it gave many people chances to have a voice. Although everyone had different rights, Rome offered their citizenship more generously unlike Athens. Overall, Rome was without a doubt had the more preferable
Immigration has always been a large conflict people have faced all across the world. There are plenty of reasons why people migrate to a country, whether it may be the United States or any other particular one. Many people often come in an attempt to escape poverty, crime, or to simply have a better opportunity to better their lifestyle. Although there are people who migrate and commit severe crimes, there are others who sacrifice themselves in order to live a better life. In addition to that, I believe the government should approve new immigration laws in favor of immigrants who come to better their life and achieve their dreams.
However Athenian democracy formed the basic structure of many western societies today and has influenced them significantly. A continuity when comparing modern society’s and Ancient Greeks form of democracy is that the Ancient Greeks had a judicial system much like today people were chosen to sit on juries (What did democracy really mean?, 2015).However there wasn’t a cross examination and imprisonment was not used as a punishment, instead if someone was found guilty they either had to pay a fine or was put to death (ABC, 2003). A major difference is between Athenian democracy and modern day democracy is eligibility in Ancient Greece as only male adults were allowed to vote and had to adhere to strict birth criteria (Cartledge, 2011) this meant only 10-20% of the overall population were allowed to vote (What did democracy really mean?, 2015). Today the voting age varies however there is no discrimination between sexes in modern democratic governments. Another key difference is that Ancient Greece was a direct democracy whereas modern society is a representative democracy. This means that in Athens the whole citizen body would go to assembly and vote on every decision. Today we vote people to represent everyone and to make decisions on behalf of the whole body of
To truly understand why women or why some women continue to accept their second class citizenship status to men, one must become aware of the lived experiences of these women. As Patti Lather suggests, people must be the narrators of their own stories (Critical inquiry in qualitative research: Feminist and poststructural perspectives: Science “after truth”). Until we become aware of these perceived “second class” citizens’ stories, we are only left to postulate based on our own experiences.