phil

• Purpose of government


  A question as old as civilisation itself
• Democracy


  • In theory should embody the principles of equality, freedom and participation, wherein citizens have the right to vote, express their opinions and hold their leaders accountable
• Democracy has merits: It protects rights, maintains peace and order, and embraces pluralism and diversity
• Historical events


  • Spanish civil war which segregated the nation into nationalists and republicans
• Franco's rule


  Did not respect human rights, promoted violence, censored and suppressed opposition
• No individual should possess such immense power
• Ruler's ethics


  Can be subjective and influenced by personal feelings and behaviours
• We do not fully comprehend the person in power to a deeper level, whatever promise could just be an act, a fake persona
• Putting a nation in such a position is extremely risky not just nationally but also internationally
• Ruler might not follow utilitarian or egalitarian ideologies, meaning that the purpose of their ruling isn't exactly to favour the country or to make proposition supporting the greater good but wrongfully for personal longings
• Governmental systems like monarchies, oligarchies and dictatorships cannot possibly result in an evolved and content nation
• When we aspire for a democracy, we aspire for a system which can listen and act on civilian concerns and opinions without violating human rights by abusing their power
• Democracy might have its pros, but we shall not ignore its cons
• Constitutional/parliamentary governments


  • Can be corrupt, give power to a group of people over the nation, encourage division, can manipulate minds, votes and media, do not favour minority groups
• Countries accused of restricting press freedom, attacking minority groups and using executive power in inhumane ways

  • Italy, Hungary, Poland
• Thomas Hobbes


  Argued that in a state of anarchy, life would be brutish nasty and short, so one should obey government, even of a very imperfect kind
• John Locke


  Argued that governments should have limited power to protect our natural rights (liberty, property and life) and that the population should be able to overthrow the ruler/s if they do not protect these rights
• Potential criticisms of Locke's views: potential of instability (constant overthrowing of leaders), focusing only on individual rights marginalising minority groups as the focus shifts to achieving greater good, and it would give individuals which lack political expertise power
• Democracy fails on many occasions, as order was not preserved in examples like the Weimar Republic
• The context, the environment and the history of a country affect the way populations perceive the world
• Historical examples


  • In Germany in 1929, people searched for a strong leader and revenge, and Hitler was tremendously loved until his true intentions became clear; In Seattle in 1919, workers overtook the government and handled things themselves through delegation and organisation peacefully for a brief period
• No matter what system, the result will eventually lead to consolidation or abuse of power
• If states had a perfect leader, a 'philosopher king' as envisioned by Plato, ensuring fairness and equality and responsiveness to people's wishes, while including minority groups, aiding the poor and keeping a humble lifestyle, societies might thrive
• Having one singular person in charge is a gamble, a dangerous game, since one could very easily mask their true intentions
• Having a society where everyone is treated equally although we are not equal, we are not the same beings, we all have our own identity, perception and experience of the world, is also not-so-favourable
• We should not so readily be against one system or in favour of it either just because it worked out or failed in the past
• Democracy is the best system we could fight for, but we should not allow that to limit us into aspiring for a better or coming up with a more inclusive solution