Systems the Concept of Freedom Term Paper

Download this Term Paper in word format (.doc)

Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formatting

Excerpt from Term Paper:

In the older forms, people could live and work in relative independence if they disengaged from politics. Under a modern totalitarian government, people are completely and utterly dependent on, and submissive to, the rule and whims of a political party and its leaders. Older forms of such a government ruled by divine right, while the modern totalitarian state is ruled and run by a dictator who controls a political party. Examples of totalitarian governments are Germany under Adolph Hitler, the U.S.S.R. particularly under Joseph Stalin, the People's Republic of China under Mao Tse Tung, Italy under Benito Mussolini and Iraq under Saddan Hussein. The ruling party is the elite and the whole society is subjugated to a hierarchical order wherein an individual becomes responsible to another of a higher position of authority. All social groupings are either destroyed or subjected to the purposes of the ruling party and the state. Advanced science and industrial technology make the total subjection of the individual possible under this form or system of government. Its main features made possible by modern technology are the monopoly of mass communications, a secret-police mechanism, a monopoly of all effective weapons of destruction, and a centrally controlled economy. Those who run the various mass communications are required to be members of the ruling party who interpret policy and this interpretation is imposed on the media through censorship. Its secret policy mechanism uses theories and techniques of crime detection and modern psychology, terrorizes the population in more cruel ways than did earlier autocracies, employs certain institutions and devices, such as concentration camps, predetermined trials and public confessions. It possesses weapons like tanks, flamethrowers, and jet airplanes for the strong defense of its dictators against a revolution. And it exploits its population to make them dependent on government. The people cannot work without a permit or it may be withdrawn for refusing to work even under unjust or inhuman conditions (MSN Encarta).

A parliamentary system of government, also called parliamentarism, has an executive branch, which is dependent on the direct or indirect support of Parliament (Labor Law Talk 2006). This support is expressed through a vote of confidence by Parliament. There is no clear or simple separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government but, instead, lays down the distinction between the power of the government and the head of state. The executive is usually a cabinet, headed by a prime minister viewed as the head of the government. The leader of the ruling party or group of parties in the Parliament, is often appointed as the prime minister. The head of state is only a ceremonial position, often occupied by a monarch or president with no politically divisive duties. He or she may have reserve powers during crisis to call for a convention or by constitutional rule but exercised only upon the advice and approval of the head of government. All parliamentary systems operate under a formal written constitution, have a number of parties within the system and establish the relationships between the central and the local governments. Parliamentarism or a parliamentary system of government is viewed as flexible and responsive to the public, at the same time, has the tendency to lead to instability. Examples are the German Weimar Republic, the French Fourth Republic, Italy and Israel. The most popular and widespread parliamentary system is the Westminster System in Britain. The head of state enjoys considerable reserve powers, which are limited in practice by convention rather than constitutional rule. It differs from the parliamentary system outside Europe because of its voting system, called "first past the post (Labor Talk)."

The basis as well as the ultimate objective of all ideologies, doctrines, dogmas and all strivings in society is the promotion, protection and enhancement of individual freedom or liberty and security. This is not achieved under a totalitarian system where such freedom is completely subjected to and sacrificed for the wishes, rule and whims of a political party under a monarch or dictator. Similarly, individual freedom, liberty or security cannot thrive in an authoritarian system of government, which mistrusts the individual's capability to think and decide for himself. A parliamentary system of government does not directly address or fulfill individual freedom and security in that the decision-making is done by his representatives in political parties, who are in turn, represented in the Parliament. It leaves only a constitutional democracy as the best option in attaining the objective. Yet, this system of government itself seems to need to revert to the old Humanist tradition rather than be limited to head counts or number of votes cast (Roy 1990). The people themselves should directly determine the record of performance of a particular government. In assessing that performance, the only test is the extent to which individual freedom and capabilities have been promoted, enhanced, realized and protected by the government or leadership (Roy). Society was developed to perform these functions and, despite limitations to human or individual freedom and security, it remains as the ultimate and unifying objective and motivation in a society and all justification for government derives from it. As it is, even constitutional democracy has not satisfactorily attained that objective but continues to undergo experimental forms towards its attainment. Whatever the binds, man will always, by nature, direct his conscious creative power towards that ideal and only until then will true democracy be established (Roy 1990).

Bibliography

1. Labor Law Talk. Parliamentary System. Labor Law Talk Forum: Jelsoft Enterprises, Ltd., 2006

2. Lee, Dwight R. Liberty and Individual Responsibility. The Freeman: Foundation for Economic Educatin, 2005. http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/articles.asp?aid=2124&print_view=true

3. MNS Encarta. Totalitarianism. Microsoft Corporation, 2006. http://encarta.msn.com/text_761574819_0/Totalitianism_html

4. Mikuriya H.N. Authoritarianism: a Social Disease. SOHOComp, 2006. http://www.mikuriya.com/sp_authority.html

5. Quigley, Charles N. Constitutional Democracy, 2006. http://www.civiced.org/constdem.html

6. Roy, M.N. Democracy and Individual Liberty. New Humanism, 1990. http://www.positiveatheism.org/India/s1990c44.htm[continue]

Cite This Term Paper:

"Systems The Concept Of Freedom" (2006, November 15) Retrieved December 5, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/systems-the-concept-of-freedom-41728

"Systems The Concept Of Freedom" 15 November 2006. Web.5 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/systems-the-concept-of-freedom-41728>

"Systems The Concept Of Freedom", 15 November 2006, Accessed.5 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/systems-the-concept-of-freedom-41728

Other Documents Pertaining To This Topic

  • Free Speech Although the Concept of Freedom

    Free Speech Although the concept of "freedom of speech" as outlined in the First Amendment to the Constitution appears relatively straightforward, over the course of the country's history numerous cases have arisen requiring this concept to be refined and interpreted for situations the framers of the Constitution could have scarcely imagined. However, the framer's motivations for protecting speech remain just as relevant today, and by examining precisely how and why the

  • Freedom Today the Concept of

    After chronic stomach trouble in 1799, the composer became progressively hard of hearing, and finally completely deaf by 1816. Despite this, he continued enjoying and composing music, enjoying great success until his death in 1827. In contrast to Mozart, he not only had a longer and more successful career than his former mentor, but also a much better funeral. Despite being practically friendless when he died, Beethoven had many

  • Freedom and Individuality in Brave New World

    Freedom and Individuality in Brave New World Stories are popular when they enable audiences to escape from reality for a bit. Fiction is unique because it can tell a story while also making appoint. In Aldous Huxley's novel, Brave New World, we have an entertaining story as well as social commentary. The novel's significance lies in its ability to explore several complex, social issues stemming from a thoroughly conditioned society. Huxley

  • Freedom Speech Guarantees Freedom Extend Disturbing Funeral

    Freedom speech guarantees freedom extend disturbing funeral (Armed Forces funerals) support claim, acknowledge claim opponent, find common ground . There is presently much controversy regarding the concept of freedom of speech and the fact that people are often denied the right to speak when they want to express themselves. Even with this, there are a series of situations when one's right to express his or her position needs to be

  • Freedom What Is Freedom Freedom

    " Western world it appears is slightly alienated from the spiritual world that most people in the east like Hindus take for granted. For an average person in the West, physical and material world is the only world and spirit is only an illusion. For those in the east, like Hindus, physical world is the illusion and spirit is the only truth there is. Western social, political and economic systems play an

  • Freedom and Intellectual Libraries

    Intellectual Freedom in Libraries In today's academic world intellectual freedom is a very important issue. In this paper various factors which are affecting intellectual freedom have been discussed along with efforts that need to be made in order to make the access of information possible for all. The issues being faced mainly by the librarians regarding the protection of confidential information of the library users have also been discussed in this

  • Freedom of Speech History of Case Gitlow

    Freedom of Speech History of Case Gitlow v. New York Gitlow v.New York was a decision that was made by the supreme court of the United States on June 8, 1925 which ruled that the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States extended the reach of limitations of the federal government authority that that had been set in the First amendment. The specific provisions were protection of freedom of speech


Read Full Term Paper
Copyright 2016 . All Rights Reserved