Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Structure of american government
Essay on Woodrow Wilson
Essay on Woodrow Wilson
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Structure of american government
Polarization can be described as “An intense commitment to a candidate, a culture, or an ideology that sets people in one group definitively apart from people in another rival group” (Kernell & Smith 494). Two distinct political parties without any overlapping policies may make it easier for the voter to identify with a party. However, party polarization has a hidden cost which is only evident when politicians of these parties are elected to office. Party polarization leads to an inefficient government and at the end of the day, the voters suffer as their preferred policies are stalled in the House of Representatives and Congress respectively. Polarization creates two conflicting ideologies and an unwillingness to negotiate that eventually leads to government failure. Thus, from the façade it may seem as if the voters are the beneficiaries of party polarization but in reality, society as a whole suffers. The average American citizen would benefit from an effective government. An effective American government is one in which legislation as well as legislators truly represent the constituency. True representation leads to the successful passing of legislation that supplies the public goods that represents what the people want and need. In passing legislation on behalf of the represented, the process must be efficient; time should not be wasted. The government must also have sufficient capacity to adapt to society: while the status quo may be favored in certain circumstances, there are times when the government needs to pass new legislation in response to the ever-changing society. Last and not least, the government is expected to protect the rights of everyone, including minorities. When good legislation that represents the c... ... middle of paper ... ...e governance needs a middle groundin which parties can agree on stable solutions. The current state of government lacks what the majority want: compromise in the middle. Polarized parties do offer one aspect of effective government: it ensures a strong voice from the minority. However, as shown, the other factors that determine effective government heavily outweigh the protection of minorities who “represent no opinion but their own” (Clemmitt 398). Government must represent the majority of the constituency’s demands for public goods by efficiently passing legislation that responds to the ever-changing American society. Increasing polarization is a trend that cannot hope to yield effective governance. As Woodrow Wilson once said in 1917, it only takes “a little group of willful men” to make “the great government of the United States helpless and contemptible.”
Because the most polarized individuals are often the most politically active, they have the most influence on the government, which results in the election of polarized candidates and policies.
8.In order for political success, both sides of the political spectrum must be critically examined in order to omit mistakes and for cultural advancement. Over two hundred years of United States politics have seen many changes. The names of parties may have changed, but the bi-partisan feature of the party-system has not. Republicans and Democrats are our two major partisan groups in present day America. Sometimes there are disagreement amongst party members that lead to dispute and a less concentrated effort. That is the beauty of a democracy, everyone is allowed to put their two cents worth in.
There are two ways to get rid of the causes of factions, or political parties. The first way of removing these causes is to destroy the liberty essential to their existence. The second way to get rid of the causes is to give everyone the exact same o...
Party polarization is the idea that a party’s individual stance on a given issue or person is more likely to be liberal or conservative. Typically the rise of political uniformity has been more noticeable among people who are the most politically active, but as of late, the vast majority of the American public is spilt down the middle. The broad gap between liberals and conservatives is growing rapidly through the years. Which brings on questions of why there is a cultural division? While it is agreed by most political scientists that the media, elected officials, and interest groups are polarized on given issues, in James Q. Wilson’s article How Divided Are We? he discusses the factors that contribute to the division not only to those major
The government of the United States of America is very unique. While many Americans complain about high taxes and Big Brother keeping too close an eye, the truth is that American government, compared to most foreign democracies, is very limited in power and scope. One area American government differs greatly from others is its scope of public policy. Americans desire limited public policy, a result of several components of American ideology, the most important being our desire for individuality and equal opportunity for all citizens. There are many possible explanations for the reason Americans think this way, including the personality of the immigrants who fled here, our physical isolation from other countries, and the diversity of the American population.
In Sinclair’s analysis, voters, political activists, and politicians all play significant roles in creating and enforcing the ideological gap between the two major parties in Congress. This trend of polarization is rooted in the electorate
Americans have become so engrossed with the rhetoric of political parties that many are unable have real discussions about “freedom, fairness, equality, opportunity, security, accountability.” (Lakoff p.177) The election of 1828 gave birth to the “professional politician” it demonstrated how “ambivalence” on issues, how image and the right language or narrative can influence voters. Partisanship did increase competition and empower voters to a greater degree, but it has also divided Americans and obstructed communication. As one historian declared the “old hickory” killed the ideal of nonpartisan leadership. (Parsons p.184) For better or for worse American politics were forever be changed in 1828.
Partisanship is a natural phenomenon for Human beings; we seek out, long for, and align ourselves with others who share our views. Through these people, we polish our ideas and gain courage from the knowledge that we are not alone in our viewpoint. Factions give breadth, depth, and volume to our individual voice. James Madison, the author of the Federalist #10 underlined the causes of factions, the dangers factions can pose, and solutions to the problem.
Whether political polarization is good or bad for the nation is still up for debate, but the general consensus is it exists due to a variety of reasons. From the construction of our Constitution, it is clear that the intent of our founding fathers was to create opposition in order to prevent tyranny from prevailing. Polarization is a result of the dividing of a nation into political parties. Though polarization has fluctuated throughout the years, it has caused a great deal of trouble in regards to passing legislation and has resulted in a gridlocked Congress. Even though some fear congressional polarization is destined to get worse, “it is mathematically impossible for congress to get much more polarized” than it is now.
All countries, whether big or small, draw support from their governments but receive power from the people. Even in a monarchy, a king without subjects cannot be a king. America has a long and proud history of exemplifying the idea that, together, people can make the right decision. They trusted each other, God, and the economy to work together for a greater good. Most Americans followed politics and took care of their neighbors. Unfortunately, most great things end and Americans began to doubt. They questioned each other, God, and the free market. The progressive movement claimed that government needed to intervene on behalf of the people. Instead of the uneducated masses making important decisions, they should delegate that ability to the educated upper-class. Such a government could only result in a “Great Society.”
In discussing the problems surrounding the issue of factionalism in American society, James Madison concluded in Federalist #10, "The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of cannot be removed and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects." (Federalist Papers 1999, 75) In many ways, the nature of American politics has revolved around this question since our country's birth. What is the relationship between parties and government? Should the party serve as an intermediary between the populace and government, and how should a government respond to disparate ideas espoused by the factions inherent to a free society. This paper will discuss the political evolution that has revolved around this question, examining different "regimes" and how they attempted to reconcile the relationship between power and the corresponding role of the people. Beginning with the Federalists themselves, we will trace this evolution until we reach the contemporary period, where we find a political climate described as "interest-group liberalism." Eventually this paper will seek to determine which has been the most beneficial, and which is ultimately preferable.
We often wonder about the importance of government. Is it necessary? Does it really benefit society? The answer is yes. Many countries have diverse forms of government such as totalitarian, monarchy, theocracy, and much more. The United States of America specifically runs a democratic type of government. A democratic government gives power to the people. Citizens over the age of eighteen are allowed to elect leaders based on their individual opinions through voting rights. The main purpose of the American government is, to protect people’s inalienable rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness as our Founding Fathers intended.
There is much debate in the United States whether or not there is polarization between our two dominate political parties. Presidential election results have shown that there is a division between the states; a battle between the Democratic blue states and the Republican red states. And what is striking is that the “colors” of these states do not change. Red stays red, and blue stays blue. Chapter 11 of Fault Lines gives differing views of polarization. James Wilson, a political science professor at Pepperdine University in California, suggests that polarization is indeed relevant in modern society and that it will eventually cause the downfall of America. On the contrast, Morris Fiorina, a political science professor at Stanford University, argues that polarization is nothing but a myth, something that Americans should not be concerned with. John Judis, a senior editor at The New Republic, gives insight on a driving force of polarization; the Tea Party Movement. Through this paper I will highlight the chief factors given by Wilson and Judis which contribute to polarization in the United States, and will consider what factors Fiorina may agree with.
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.
The current relationship between the United States government and the American citizens is a “parent-child” relationship; where the government are the parents and the citizens are the children. The children give up certain rights to be protected and cared for by the parent. Citizens give up rights such as being able to make their own laws and rules, judging others, and creating their own form of rulership to have their basic rights of life, liberty, and property be protected by the government. This relationship is powerful, but like all “parent-child” relationships, the child often gets mad at the parent for being “unfair” or “too strict”; most of the time, however, the relationship works well and allows the people and government to smoothly coexist through a system