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,
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
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
What are the reasons for the increasing importance of pressure group activity?
What are the reasons for the increasing importance of pressure group activity? First appeared in Ancient Greece, democracy now is undoubtedly the most popular form of governance. Today representative democracy is accepted by most of the countries and the UK is not an exception. Representative democracy is an indirect form of democracy, where policy making responsibility is placed in the hands of decision-makers, who are elected, accountable and can be got rid of peacefully. Certain rights and freedoms are recognised and the Rule of Law exists. Although this sounds good in theory, it is, perhaps, not so "sunny" in practice. In recent years a strong disillusionment with politicians who form the government happened as they seem not to represent the citizens. Thus a shift occurred: from party politics to pressure groups. A pressure group can be described as an organised group that does not usually stand for elections - there were several cases when some pressure groups actually did, but perhaps they were trying to attract attention, - but seeks to influence legislation. In recent years pressure groups became extremely popular, the number of them runs into thousands starting from small local organisations such as Save the Radley Lakes to those huge as Amnesty International. There are a lot of reasons for such a shift the most important of which will be now examined. They are:
To what extent are pressure groups a threat to democracy?
To what extent are pressure groups a threat to democracy? There are many thousands of pressure groups in the UK. Pressure groups are formed to bring influence to bear on decision makers in accordance with the views of their members. Pressure groups do not seek to govern the country, instead they often seek to influence the government to take their views into account when formulating policy and enacting legislation. Many people argue that pressure groups are a threat to democracy. They say that insider groups, those who work closely with the government, often have the capacity to influence the government prior to formal proposals being made to the public. This is significant as insider status is often linked to political leverage and the resources available to an organisation. Therefore, it is argued that those groups which are well resourced and represent the privileged in society are often better placed to influence government decisions than others which attempt to protect the interests of the disadvantaged. Some people also say that some of the most important decisions made by government involving insider groups take place behind closed doors which is not democratic as only certain people are involved. People with these views feel that the success of pressure groups in this regard can undermine democracy as the government may be required to compromise its programme in
Revision notes on pressure groups
Pressure Groups Short Questions What is a pressure group? * A pressure group is an organisation which seeks to influence public policy in relation to a particular issue. * Pressure groups tend to have a narrow issue focus and are bound together by shared interests or a common cause. * An example would be the CBI which represents 150,000 business and helps to influence government policy. What are the functions of pressure groups? * Representation * Political participation * Education * Policy formulation * Policy implementation. Outline 2 differences between a political party and a pressure group * A political party seeks to win power at various levels via elections like Labour, whereas pressure groups seek to influence those in power e.g. Make Poverty History. * Generally pressure groups focus on a single or narrow range of issues e.g. Countryside Alliance wanted to legalise hunting * Whereas political parties have to fight elections on a whole range of issues, released in the form of their party manifestos. Outline, with examples, 2 types of pressure groups * Promotional: a group that promotes causes, generally with moral concerns "for" people * Open to anyone and benefits all of society, such as Amnesty International which seeks to protect human rights everywhere, thus helping everyone. * Sectional: a group that protects causes, generally with material
In what way have pressure groups become more important in recent years?
In what way have pressure groups become more important in recent years? In recent years, the importance of pressure groups in politics has risen. This is due to a number of reasons including media influence, the use of different tactics and membership of the groups. In the 1970's Labour government, the first 'pressure groups' were formed, however they were very different to the pressure groups of today. The functioned under 'tripartism', an alliance between the government, businesses and state affiliations, to discuss and set out legislation applicable to them. Under the same government, the relationship between the trade unions and government grew stronger; the trade unions had influence on government policies and even some control over them. However, under Thatcher, this 'relationship' was completely diminished, they no longer held any power, they became outsider groups. Under New Labour, trade unions had links with them inside government and they encouraged 'responsible groups'. One possible reason for the rise in importance of pressure groups could be media and technology now used. Technology has vastly improved since the early seventies, with a computer being in nearly every household now, and now the media has the ability to reach those who didn't have access before, this can then raise the profile of certain pressure groups, an example of this would be the coverage
To what extent do pressure groups undermine the democratic process
To what extent do pressure groups undermine the democratic process There are several significant methods through which pressure groups undermine the democratic processes. However, to some extent these factors are balanced out by the ways in which pressure groups aid democracy within the United Kingdom. Pressure groups educate the public on a number of important issues which affect the society we live in. The information they provide may help us to come to a judgement about a particular problem and how we feel the government should respond. In this sense they aid democracy by empowering the public with knowledge. However, pressure groups hinder democracy in the sense that they sometimes hold a disproportionate influence over the government due to the power which particular groups hold. For example, the BMA represents only a small proportion of the country. Yet it has great influence over the government because its members provide an important service. A further example of this factor is the Farmers association. Again, they represent a very small proportion of the country, but retain much influence over the government as they provide much of Britain's food supply. Another democratic feature of pressure groups is the way in which they collectively represent most, if not all, members of the public. In the vast majority of our activities there probably exists a group who is
What factors lead to a pressure group being successful?
What factors lead to a pressure group being successful? There are many factors that may lead to the success of a particular pressure group. A good example of this would be the pressure group 'Friends of the Earth' (FOE). The main reason why this pressure group has had a huge success is that they have many branches all around the country and a huge number in size. There are more than 200 local groups in the FOE network in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, including the Channel Islands and Isle of Man. However the Scotland branch is a separate organisation. Another main factor to their success is that the FOE campaigns to improve the standards in 'their own back yard' and to join their forces with other groups nationally and internationally. This way when they appeal for their cause and have a much more of an impact against their opposition because of their power combined. A good way of saying this is by saying 'one group of people will not have a very good affect against the government where as ten groups of people will have a much larger affect,' this is what FOE are doing. Another factor which lead to the success of FOE is, FOE local groups use a wide range of campaigning tactics, ranging from political lobbying to public education through street stalls, and promoting citizen action. Many groups are also actively involved in injecting genuine policies and practices on