- Join over 1.2 million students every month
- Accelerate your learning by 29%
- Unlimited access for just £4.99 per month
Can the use of the First Past the Post electoral system be justified in a modern democracy?
The first 200 words of this essay...
Can the use of the First Past the Post electoral system be justified in a modern democracy? [50]
The 'first past the post' electoral system is a simple majority system whereby the country is divided into single member constituencies and voters select a single candidate who only requires a simple plurality of votes to win the election. It is extremely difficult to define a modern democracy, but the core ideas would be that it allows the people to govern (in most cases through elected officials) and fair and equal representation for all. Thus, for the FPTP system to be justified it must meet this criteria, and whilst it does usually fulfil it's role of creating strong, single party government it unquestionably fails in encouraging participation and providing equal representation and therefore it is hard to justify.
One of the main reasons why it can be seen as justified is the fact that it provides strong and single party government. The United Kingdom has always employed a first past the post system and for this reason there has only been six coalition governments in its history and only two since 1940. These consistently single party governments for many have
Found what you're looking for?
- Start learning 29% faster today
- Over 150,000 essays available
- Just £4.99 a month
Review of essay
Rating: 5 star(s)
Response to the question
In this question, candidates must use their knowledge of First-Past-the-Post and how it operates to both defend and criticise it, before making a judgement about the system, and answering the question of whether it can be justified in modern democracies. There is also the possibility, and this candidate demonstrates it, of bringing in other electoral systems in order to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of First-Past-the-Post by comparing it to the other systems. This candidate's response to the question is strong and well-developed, and shows other students of A Level Politics how an essay should be written.
Level of analysis
The level of analysis in this essay is one of its strengths; the frequent use of and variation in examples from political history (the UK, India, Germany, the US, etc.) is impressive and demonstrates that the candidate has an excellent knowledge of politics. However, what makes this essay particularly good is the fact that examples are not simply tacked on to the end of an argument or point. Instead, the candidate makes reference to their example and then goes on to explain why it is relevant and the significance of it in their argument. This is the critical part that gains this candidate access to the top grades, as it shows the examiner that the candidate can adapt and apply their knowledge of politics under pressure. The inclusion of equally-weighted analysis on both the argument and counterargument in this essay allows the candidate to discuss both sides before coming to a conclusion, making for a balanced essay which comes across as well-written.
Quality of writing
The candidate shows a mature style of writing which flows well, and uses appropriate and specific vocabulary ("majoritarian system", "Electoral College", for example). There are also no spelling or grammatical issues. The use of a clear structure which introduces the essay, focuses on the argument, then the counterargument before concluding is effective because of its clarity and simplicity. Some prefer to write an argument and then follow it with the counterargument, and both structures are good, but the one this candidate has used can be best under pressure, and is less complicated for the student writing the essay.
Found what you're looking for?
- Start learning 29% faster today
- Over 150,000 essays available
- Just £4.99 a month
Not the one? We have 100's more
Political Philosophy (view all)
