what is devolutionism and what does it have to do with recent government??? HEEEKP!?
352051
What are you talking about the scandals, the pedophile in the Administration (Brian j. Doyle) or all the gay Republicans in office?\n\nJack Abramoff, Scooter Libby, Tom Delay, Carr, Dick Cheney or just Bush? 'OH" I forgot about "Your doing a heckava job Brownie," now clean your desk out!
401250
Revoultion is long over due in this country, but the only way to succeed in one is for it to be peacful and through the ballot box. We have got to do away with the twoparty system. The Dems are too liberal and the Repubs are too conservative.
317778
Right, I'll do one for you, and that's your lot:\n\nDemocracy:\na) A state in which the government is elected by the majority of the population.\nb)The governemt is elected through anonymous ballot and is representative of the wishes and opinions of the majority of the country's population.\nc) There are no absolute democracies, but three that claim to be are: Germany, France and Switzerland.\nd) Advantages: representative of the majority, egalitarian.\nDisadvantages: Difficult and costly to maintain and instigate, a very small majority is sufficient to win the election therefore there are many people whose views are not being represented.
519953
hmmm, \n\ndemocratic.  \n\n:)
904916
Wait.  Slow down.  Too many questions in one post.\n\nAnarchy is no government, outside of perhaps small, practical, local based government.  There are major pit-falls with this, such as, what do you do when your society grows bigger than the local village?  And, how do you protect your little local village from the large, hostile, heavily armed military under the control of the king who controls five villages, and wants to take over your village and confiscate your nice, fertile fields?\n\nCommunism is different from anarchy, in that while communism's ultimate goal is a classless, stateless society, it relies on government to redistribute property to attain this classless society.  And, as we have all found out after the glorious experiments in Russia, China and Cuba, COMMUNISM DOESN'T WORK.\n\nSocialism is a broader political philosophy which holds that the means of production should be distributed equally among all in society.  Socialism actually encompasses a pretty wide array of doctrines, anywhere from your classic Marxist-Leninist (sp?) Communist doctrine to the more moderate socialism that helped spawn trade unions and welfare programs.  \n\nSocialism, anarchy and communism are all kind of intertwined.  My best advice would be go to the sources, Marx, Engels, Keynes and Chomsky.  They'll give you some nice big ideas to turn over in your head for awhile.\n\nLast note:  "Socialism" has been turned into a dirty word by modern conservatives.  Extreme, unadulterated socialism is not good and does not work, just like extreme, unadulterated capitalism is not good and does not work (do some research on the Industrial Revolution and the "Gilded Age," the economic conditions of which lead almost directly to the rise of socialism and communism).  There are valuable concepts in socialism which can and have made society better - such as labor unions and social welfare programs.
669286
Our political system is now "controlled" by a two-party government. They are well-settled in their newfound power and might. The last thing they want is for someone to change it or shake it up or start something new, or go back to the old, or, heaven forbid, start asking questions.\n\nWe are in the late stages of largesse. It will not last another century before it self-destructs. Gov't never gives back power and control; only increases it. \n\nWe didn't guard our Constitution, or enforce it. Nobody policed the police. The Federal Gov't was never supposed to have more power than the States. There was never supposed to be anyone who could come into your state from a thousand miles away and tell you what your laws should be and arrest you and take you out of your state. \n\nThe lawful authority of the Federal Gov't is very limited. Read the Constitution at the reference below, and be sure to the the Notes of the Amendments. But you can see that they have turned everything around to where they are our King, that dictates to us every day what to do or not and where to stand or not, and even what to think. \n\nThey have dumbed us down through our public education system, taken away our morals and values and given us only them to believe in. Don't you think every person should know something about money and investing when the graduate from high school, or at least how to balance a check book? Don't you think we should know something about the law and contracts and those parasite lawyers? They squash our creativity, teach us to accept their dogma and "Evolution," and then we will accept anything, even the invasion of another country without lawful authority, because nobody knows what the law is.\n\nHow could they possibly allow some Libertarian in there shaking things up. They've got it too good, confiscating our property and throwing us in jail on a whim. \n\ndon't get me started. geez
696898
what does this have to do with politics?
231430
umm... well, theres a democratic republic.. that IS our government, we dont really have more than one government in America. but, each states has its own government, though not as powerful in some areas as the national government, and you also have county, city, and community governments
411343
not many countries have a government UK style. It's pretty unique. It's quite an undemocratic democracy. Find out more from the House of Commons website. I think the only other country that has a similar system is Japan. Definitely not Canada/Australia/India. I repeat! Definitely not Canada/Australia/India!The UK gov has special intricacies that mark it out as v.unique, for e.g. we have no written constitution. Check out the uk.gov. website!
988392
wy {why} is are govement so stuped?{stupid}\n\n    It seams {seems}like everone {every one} in govement {government} is stuped {stupid}. Wy{Why} did thay{they} git {get}allected {elected}? im {I'm} sick of it!\n Hope this helps you out!
782567
Thank you man . Some people are just trying to hypocrite .\nI'm pretty sure all of them didn' t vote for Deval that is the reason why they so mad at you . GOD bless you too .
177205
There is only one government in N.Ireland but other governments interested in helping to solve the problem. At the moment all legislative and political decisions are taken by direct rule ministers from Westminister in the United Kingdom. If the dinosaurs in the N.I. political parties could agree we would return to a local devolved government at Stormont
891044
Federalism is, of course, the division of sovereignty between two levels of government, viz. state governments and the central government (which is often,somewhat inaccurately, called "the Federal Government"). You should note that Americans basically invented Federalism, and they did so for historical reasons.\n\nYou need to know a bit about the history of the United States up to the points where Federalism was created. Basically, even through the Revolutionary War the United States were a collection of states which were all sovereign, but agreed to work together on a number of things (most importantly, armed opposition to the British) while keeping most powers to themselves. The United States didn't really have a central government, Congress was a committee that helped organize things among the states who could pack up and leave any time they wanted to.\n\nAfter Independence (and during the war), the failures of this weak confederation became very apparent. It was seen that a more powerful central government was needed; one that could tax on its own, raise its own troops, and would have its own bureaucracy (all things that the Continental Congress had to beg the states to provide).\n\nThe loosely organized party called the Federalists, lead by Alexander Hamilton, were heavily in favor of a strong national government that would have pretty much all the authority (see: unitary state). The Anti-Federalists, lead by Thomas Jefferson, wanted only a weak central government. These camps were familiar with history, ancient and modern, and looked at a number of other confederations throughout history, including some of the Greek city states and the Swiss Confederacy. They learned from the problems that other such governments had and beautifully solved many of them by the invention of federalism.\n\nIn this form of government, those matters which states can handle on their own are handled by the individual states. But those things which the individual states can't handle (national defense, diplomacy, interstate commerce, etc) the central government would handle. Thus, instead of handling all problems at the same level of government, you can handle problems at the level best suited for them.\n\nThat is the answer in a nutshell. Very importantly, as for (1) why federalism is important and (2) how it differs from democracy  consider the following analogy and I think that your understanding will be greatly augmented:\n\nNOTE: This great analogy is from commentator JonahGoldberg\nhttp://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg200412011600.asp\n\nImagine you've got ten dorms on a campus and a student population divided up into the usual coalitions: stoners, partiers, jocks, and so forth on one side, and study geeks, exchange students and — no offense — nerdy Mennonites on the other. A purely democratic system where all students get to decide dorm policy could result in the tyranny of 51 percent of the students over 49 percent of the students. The party-hardy crowd could pass a policy permitting loud music and keg parties at all hours of the night. Or if the more academically rigorous coalition won, they could ban "fun" of any kind, ever. Similarly, if the administration imposed its own policy from above, you could have a system that makes no one happy.\n\nBut, if you allowed each individual dorm to vote for its own policies, you could have a system where some dorms operate like scholarly monasteries and other dorms are more fun than a pool party at James Caan's house. Theoretically, 100 percent of the students could live the way they want. Maximized human happiness!\n\nThe virtue of a federalist, republican form of government is that the more you push these decisions down to the level where people actually have to live with their consequences, the more likely it is they will be a) involved and interested in the decision-making process, and b) happy with the result. Federalism is also morally superior
770904
When this Kichadi UPA government is tottering, under the weight of number of parties, how come, a national government, with leaders of opposite views, can be formed and expect it to deliver goods.\n\nThere are no states men, now a days, only politicians, who don't bother about the nation, but about themselves only.\n\nI think, this system will continue, because there is one party for each caste in India.. There are no principles involved, but only selfishness.
83501
still no answers? not an advert, just trying to share info.\ngovernment explained simply,\nhttp://weekendinterviewshow.com/InterviewDisplay.aspx?i=98\nmoney,\nhttp://www.philipdru.com/griffin_stream.html\neducation,\nhttp://www.philipdru.com/taylor_stream.html\nhttp://www.philipdru.com/gatto_stream.html\nww1 wilson,\nhttp://weekendinterviewshow.com/InterviewDisplay.aspx?i=88\n\nhttp://www.philipdru.com\nhttp://weekendinterviewshow.com\nhttp://thestressblog.com\nhttp://www.antiwar.com\nhttp://www.kaos959.com
110249
Gee, where do I start.  Let's see, corrupt government. Incompetent officials.  Brutal police force and military.  Deep religious divide.  Lack of accountability (I guess that goes with the corrupt government).  I would be surprised if it's NOT falling apart.  It has been failing apart for a good part of the past few centuries.
253162
An odd mixture of both. Although with the Tories now to the left of Labour and Labour to the right of the Tories UK politics is a bit muddled up at the moment !!