Explaining the assertions in the quotation in your own words Essay

Explaining the assertions in the quotation in your own words - Essay Example In other words, the quotist asserts that a tyrant does not need to face an electorate to approve his leadership, since it is authoritarian. On this note, the author asserts that in a democracy, politicians use languages that are polite, and convincing to lie to the people on the importance of their policies, and why they ought to take office. In his own opinion, in a democracy, there is no honesty, and people take power through dishonest means, for purposing of advancing their own agendas, at the expense of the citizens of the state. The author also asserts that, in a democracy, a leader is praised by the same crowd when he is doing good, and his failures unknown. Immediately his failures are known, he faces hostility from the same crowd that praised him before. On this note, the author asserts that in a democracy, in as much as leaders are not honest, people are also not honest. They are unstable in their minds, concerning a particular leader, or policy, and on this note, they do not know what they need. Their needs are only defined by those in authority. The author further asserts that the people of Thebes cannot manage democracy. He is of the opinion that, the people cannot form true judgments, and therefore lack the ability to govern a state. He also asserts that, people in Thebes are so much pre-occupied with economic benefits that they do not put their minds on politics. On this note, the author asserts that democracy gives an opportunity to a person with no values and morality, to take office. The person depends on his wealth, and once in office, he will serve his own interests. Some of the assertions on this quote are right, and some are wrong. For instance, the assertion that in a democracy a ruler must consult in order to enact a policy is true (Tilly, 51). Democracy provides an opportunity to the citizens of the state, to engage themselves in the governance of their state (Kraut, 41). In a democracy, people choose their

Future of the Court POLS640.F.8 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Future of the Court POLS640.F.8 - Essay Example For instance, President Eisenhower appointed both Chief Justice William J. Brennan and Justice Earl Warren. He was later disappointed by their broadminded inclinations on the Supreme Court and referred them to as â€Å"the biggest damned-fool mistakes† (Kommers et al 13). A justice can be appointed for life especially if he or she has a long and distinguished career in law and a good record of public service. Majority of justices start their careers as members of congress, aspires of presidency, and judges of lower courts (Gibson and Thurgood 111). There is a need to appoint justices for life when it comes to handling cases in the Supreme Court. This is because the longer the Justices remain in court; the more they become experienced when it comes to making decisions in Court. Deciding on which cases to be heard, requires effective decision making procedures. When petitions are reviewed and summarized by law clerks, the Chief Justice is required to make a good list of petitions to be discussed. In this stage the Justices agree on which petitions to reject and accept for discussion (Kommers et al. 18). The surviving petitions are then discussed in the conference at the beginning of Court’s term. The â€Å"Rule of Four† criterion is used by justices to decide on the cases to be heard. If four Justices disagree to hear a case, then the petition is dismissed (Gibson and Thurgood 85). Cases that qualify to be heard must always have various factors. These factors include the magnitude of the issue raised by the case; clarity of the involved issue; development of a complete and clear record of the case by the lower court; and the case’s potential impacts on the Court’s own prestige and credibility (Kommers et al. 18). Highly experienced Justices are able to make effective voting on cases, as well as, writing opinions. Each Justice reveals his or her views on the case being discussed and indicates how he or she intends to