How do British Pressure groups exert influence?
How do British Pressure groups exert influence? The aim of British pressure groups is to exert influence through the people who actually held the power to make decisions. Pressure groups do not look for power of political office for themselves, but instead do seek to influence the decisions made by those who hold this power. Groups who enjoyed momentous "power has been greatly exaggerated" at particular periods of time, such as the trade unions can endanger democracy if sectional groups undermine the public interest or if the methods they use are corrupt or intimidating. A pressure group can be described as 'an organised group that does not put up candidates for election, but seeks to influence government policy or legislation' (Budge, Crewe, McKay & Newton, 1998, pp.286 & 287). They can also be described as 'interest groups', 'lobby groups' or 'protest groups'. Some people avoid using the term 'pressure group' as it can inadvertently be interpreted as meaning the group use actual pressure to achieve their aims, which does not necessarily happen. An indisputable definition of a pressure group, however, is very problematic, due to the several varying forms that they take, which perhaps explain why several definitions of pressure group appear ambiguous. The term 'pressure group' is relatively recent, yet 'voluntary organisations' have been attempting to influence
We Are The 100%. Many agree with the cause and consider the Occupy Movement to have several valid points. Protestors and observers of the movement are outraged by the state of the economy and feel that the government is not doing everything it can to hel
Dok Joshua Dok Hope Yoneshige English 103 2 December 2011 We Are The 100% Whether you are a jobless American citizen, broke college student, or a fed up tax payer, you just so happen to be a part of the collective 99%. Occupy Wall Street is an on-going nation-wide protest initiated by the Canadian activist group Adbusters and supported by the infamous hacker group Anonymous. Social and economic inequality, corruption in corporations, high unemployment, and the towering influence big corporations have on the government are the key issues being expressed by many crest-fallen citizens. The first protest began in Zuccotti Park in New York City on September 17, 2011. Since then, the movement has spawned dozens of camps in not only the major cities across the country, but also globally, including countries such as Canada, Australia, Germany, United Kingdom, and more. The protests are aimed to help raise awareness of the growing discontent that many have towards corporate influence in American society. The highly effective slogan “We are the 99%”, refers to the accumulating differences in wealth in America, where the wealthy are the 1% and the rest are the 99%. Whether you (most likely) happen to be a part of the 99% or the select few 1% both percentiles want one thing: equality. Our nation is clearly on the wrong track which is exactly why the Occupy Protests are
Cuban Government structure.
Executive summary This report includes a thorough description of Cuba's communist state. It also includes a comprehensive description of the similarities and differences of between Australia parliamentary system and Cuba's communist state. Cuban Government structure The communist party of Cuba Cuba is governed by a socialist regime under the rule of a single communist party (PCC). This is a social and economic system where the economic production is controlled by popular collectives eg the state, and the products are distibuted to serve the interests of society as a whole. This current governmnet came to power in january 1959, by the force of mitilary power. This was the overthrow of Fulgencio Batista's which was corrupted and stained in blood. During the 1970's Cuba changed from a dictatorship ruling to a bureaucratic regime, this is when the state owns the means of production, while the profit is distributed among an elite party (PCC), instead among the workers. Political system The current government system of Cuba is based a 'People's Power' system. This system was introduced in 1976 after a referendum was past with 98% in favor. In this system the electorates can elect municipal assemblies, regional assemblies and a national assembly. Some would argue that this aspect of the political system is more democratic than a dictatorship. The electorates are usually
What, in de Tocqueville's view, are the virtues and what are the vices of democratic government?
What, in de Tocqueville's view, are the virtues and what are the vices of democratic government? Democracy in America was written by Tocqueville to see how such a stable and prosperous democracy as America worked and to see why attempts at democratic government in France had failed so disastrously. The theme of the (often disorganised) book that emerges is how liberty is best preserved in the midst of the growing equality of conditions present in America. Tocqueville outlines many of the advantages he sees in democracy from the point of view of a French liberal. On the other hand, he also warns of the dangers of democratic government which manifests itself in many ways. Elements exist, however, within the American political system, that act against these dangerous democratic tendencies, and that is why, on the whole, Tocqueville is so admiring of American democracy. "Democratic laws tend to promote the welfare of the greatest number."1 It is clear that giving each citizen (which does not include certain groups, for example, slaves) the ability to choose the government that their interests will be served, rather than interests of an aristocracy or other minority. Therefore, from a utilitarian point of view, democracy helps establish what the interests of the majority are in society, and helps put those interests at the forefront of decision-making. Tocqueville refutes the
LESSON 1: Pressure Groups
LESSON 1: Pressure Groups . A pressure group is a body which seeks to influence government policy or public opinion, but without actually seeking governmental office itself. Unlike political parties, which offer policies on virtually every issue, pressure groups tend to be concerned with one specific issue or a narrow range of similar issues. For example - animal rights, environmental protection or tackling poverty. 2. A Sectional pressure group is one that represents the interests of a particular section of society, usually on the basis of occupation or profession. As such, their members have a direct, material interest in belonging to the group, for they usually obtain visible, tangible benefits. The most obvious sectional pressure groups are Trade Unions. These groups have "closed" membership, meaning that only those people in the relevant occupation, profession or section of society can join. 3. A Cause pressure group tends to be concerned with either a social or ethical issue (a 'cause') or with campaigning on behalf of others in society who they perhaps consider are not being treated fairly. Many cause groups therefore, are focused on broader issues relating to notions of equality, fairness, and justice, human or animal rights. For example - Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace campaign to save the environment. Unlike sectional groups, cause groups exercise
Compare and Contrast Pluralist and Marxist Accounts of Power in the UK and US.
Compare and Contrast Pluralist and Marxist Accounts of Power in the UK and US. Pluralism and Marxism both offer comprehensive theories about the location of power within the modern state. Both theories to some extent were based on Western governments; with Marxism being developed partly through Engels' experiences in Manchester in the mid nineteenth century and Pluralism being developed through the studies in America in the mid twentieth century; but they both offer radically different ideas about who holds power in the UK and the US. We should, however, be wary about using terms such as 'pluralism' and 'Marxism' without acknowledging that many different variations of the theories exist, and that they have both developed over time. It must be seen, therefore that my analysis of the accounts of power in either system can hardly be holistic. One of the basic premises of pluralism is that the more power is dispersed between different groups within a society, no single group will have a monopoly of power, and the problems of ruling elites or a single ruling class will be altogether avoided. Pluralism is descriptive, and asserts that modern states have developed mechanisms over time which avoid state monism and encourage a diverse range of methods and channels through which a citizen can control political leaders and shape the development of public policies.1 To this end,
Why are some pressure groups more successful than others?
Why are some pressure groups more successful than others? It is worth asking first: what do we mean by 'success'? Clearly a pressure group can be considered successful if it achieves the passage of particular legislation for which it has been campaigning. This has certainly been the case for ASH, which successfully campaigned for a ban on tobacco advertising and on smoking in public places. But groups sometimes seek to prevent unfriendly legislation. Business groups such as the Institute of Directors, for example, helped to persuade the British government to negotiate an opt-out from the European Union Working Time Directive, which limited the working week to 48 hours. Similarly, amendments to legislation may be sought. Pressure group activity (mainly religious groups) certainly resulted in changes to the Gambling Act of 2005, which partially deregulated gambling activity in the UK In a wide range of technical and specialised areas of policy too, pressure groups, large and small, are constantly successful in moulding proposed legislation for their own benefit. However, pressure group success should not be measured merely in terms of legislation. In some cases, such groups simply wish to raise the profile of an issue, to place it on the political agenda where it has been ignored in the past. In recent years, for example, such issues as rural problems, child abuse, mental
Why Have Pressure Groups Become More Popular Than Political Parties?
Why Have Pressure Groups Become More Popular Than Political Parties? The definition of a 'Pressure Group' is; "Any organisation which - normally working through lobbying rather than standing for office - seeks to influence public policy and decisions at local, national and European or International levels usually within a particular, quite limited sphere." (Coxall, B. & Robins, L. - Contemporary British Politics) Pressure groups, particularly within Britain are a fairly new concept. Since the post-war times of 1945 onwards we have seen the continuation and expansion of these groups. Although, not in the same way that we see today. There has always been more importance placed on these groups to represent the interests of its members within society, each in their different ways. Although, many pressure groups tend to have only one issue in which they stand for, others however represent more broader. The questions that I will attempt to answer for this essay is that are pressure groups more popular than political parties, and if so, why is this? I will use a number of academic texts and other sources to try to answer this question in both a factual and informative way. Pressure groups are not a political party. Nor are they seen by many, for example, the Government, the media and the public, as being so. The main differences between political parties and pressure groups
This house believes that democracy is undesirable for a good society".
Introduction to Political Thought Debate Log "This house believes that democracy is undesirable for a good society". Seminar four took the form of a debate between supporters and opponents of democracy. Two speakers made their case, each putting forward their argument. The remaining members of the group then discussed the issues raised and decided if they were in favour or against democracy. This log seeks to record the events of the debate. The argument for the case of democracy was presented first. The following represents how the argument was put forward. For democracy * The word democracy comes from the Greek for ruled by people through any form of government they choose. * The public must obey the rules so surely they should, at least, have a hand in creating the rules. This way they public are more content and happier to obey the laws as they are less likely to feel alienated by them and indeed there would be less discrimination. * Rousseau set out the idea of a 'social contract' where by citizens agree to obey the law. They give their consent to be governed and that also constitutes an agreement to obey any laws the government makes. * Every citizen should take part in democracy, and participation should not be limited to those with education or wealth. * Locke argues that basic right of human beings cannot be taken away, so therefore, the people cannot hand
'The existence of pressure groups makes government more democratic; the activities of pressure groups also make democratically elected governments more effective
'The existence of pressure groups makes government more democratic; the activities of pressure groups also make democratically elected governments more effective.' Discuss Before deciding whether pressure groups democratise government or make them more effective, it is essential to define what a pressure groups consists of. A modern democratic society involves active citizenship, an open government, the right to vote over the age of 18 years, community, free speech, participation and pluralism. Although elections provide an effective opportunity for people to play a part in politics they are only held once every four years, therefore pressure groups provide continuous involvement in politics. Pressure groups provide an open freedom for citizens, especially minority groups. When like-minded individuals organise events such as demonstrations, campaigns and petitions, governments have no option but to sit up and take notice. Moreover, as pressure groups are based on a single issue, which a large group of people support, they can put their time and effort into being heard by the government. In the USA however, the term "pressure group" is not favoured amongst academics. They see it as a tool that implies force rather than persuasion, thus refer to them as "interest groups"1. This issue will be discussed further in the American politics part of this essay. Pressure Groups In