The source supports a positive outlook on modern liberalism. The source states that the citizens of a liberal system are exclusively responsible for holding the government responsible for the activities, and if the decisions that are made by the government do not reflect the will of the people, the government “must be removed from [control].” A democracy that follows the ideology of modern liberalism endorses a regulated free market economy and the expansion of civil and political rights. A modern liberal government is expected to address economic, and social issues such as poverty, health care, education, and the climate using government intervention all while also emphasizing the rights, and freedom of the citizen, which was a prevalent issue in classical liberalism. The overall tone of the source is quite serious as the author uses words such as “must be removed” which has a negative connotation towards a centrally controlled government, and any government that does not listen to the will of the people. Thomas Hobbes, an English philosopher would strongly disagree with the source. Hobbes believed that the only true, and correct form of government was absolute totalitarianism. He argued this most forcefully in his book, Leviathan. This belief stemmed from Hobbes's natural philosophy that human beings are, at their core, selfish creatures. John Locke another English philosopher would agree with the perspective in the source. Unlike Thomas Hobbes, Locke believed that human nature is characterized by reason and tolerance, he believed individuals did not need to be controlled by the authoritarian monarchies of his time which he advocated to remove in favor of representative democracy. The idea of listening to the will of the people is significant because it allows the citizens of a country to voice and reason their opinions on certain topics such as minimum wage, and approving and disapproving certain laws that affect the whole. Therefore, we should embrace the perspective illustrated in the source to a certain extent, because it ensures accountability, and limits the power of the government; however, the common person’s input is not always rational and ethical therefore the removal of the government is not necessary to protect the collective.
When nations do not embrace the views and ideas of the quote it will lead to a lack of rights and freedoms (exploitation of the people). There is also a lack of accountability with such political systems, due to the negatives that occur with a controlling government we must embrace the perspective of the source. This is seen in totalitarian states which establish complete political, social, and cultural control over their citizens, and are usually headed by a charismatic leader. For example, Adolf Hitler a German politician and the leader of the Nazi Party was given mass control of Germany in 1933 with the passing of the Enabling Act. The Enabling Act gave Hitler, the right to make laws without the opposition parties' approval for the next four years. Arguably this was the most critical event during this period because It gave Hitler absolute power to make laws, which enabled him to destroy all opposition to his rule. This act soon removed the Reichstag as a source of opposition. Now that Hitler had gained complete control of Germany, he was able to set certain laws and orders without the consent of anybody else which led to the Night of the Long Knives. In June 1934, Hitler ordered the SS (who were Hitler's bodyguards) to murder approximately 400 people. Including Ernst Röhm who was the German army officer and chief organizer of Adolf Hitler’s Storm Troopers. These commands destroyed all opposition to Hitler within the Nazi Party and discouraged potential opponents because they knew they would be dealt with ruthlessly (Jews). In public, Hitler justified the slaughter by accusing the SA of being homosexuals and plotting against Germany. These examples show why the modern liberalist perspective in the source should be supported. Totalitarian leaders such as Hitler tend not to scale back on complete political, and social control, therefore, leading to the neglect of basic individual rights and freedoms because the citizens have no say in anything.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Although nations should embrace the democratic perspective of the source, there may be times when a temporary suspension of rights and freedoms is necessary to guarantee the preservation of democracy. (The government may have to limit the civil liberties of extreme groups or collectives). Therefore, meaning the source must be met with rejection. For example, the USA Patriot Act was passed by Congress as a response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Act allowed federal officials greater authority in tracking and intercepting communication. It also more actively works to close the borders to foreign terrorists and to detain and remove those within our borders; it establishes new crimes, new penalties, and new procedural techniques for use against domestic, and international terrorists. This has not only happened in America, but Canada also has a similar instance where the government has temporarily restricted the rights, and freedoms of a collective. In British Columbia, there were fears that some Japanese Canadians who worked in the fishing industry were on the coastline for the Japanese navy, and spying on Canada's military. British Columbia borders the Pacific Ocean and was therefore believed as easily susceptible to enemy attacks from Japan. In 1942, The Canadian government interned over 22,000 Japanese Canadians from British Columbia in the name of national security. This decision followed the events of the Japanese invasions of Britain Hong Kong, Malaya, and the attack on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. Although this instance is not ethical, the Japanese were seen as a threat at the time which was a concern of the entire nation leaving Canadians to make a rational choice to protect the collective. These examples demonstrate that the source must be rejected, as governments know what is best for the collective when in times of crisis which is often sparked by terrorism or war. When nations do embrace the views and ideas of the quote it will lead to the preservation of rights and freedoms.
The most feasible political system is one that reflects the general population. Numerous nations have a system set up to keep such things from happening called the separation of powers. Separation of powers refers to the division of government responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core functions of another. The purpose of this system is to focus on the concentration of power and provide for checks and balances. Each branch has its very own free powers controlling various parts of the government which incorporates, Legislative: known Congress speaks to the general population, places laws, and endorses official choices. Executive: incorporates the president and has power over remote issues, and the capacity to propose, reject, and veto laws. Judicial: translates and upholds laws that have been put without hesitation. With these branches set up democracy is maintained and rights and opportunities are in place. Often lobby groups(also known as pressure/interest groups) influence a government. For example, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) is a nonprofit organization in the United States and Canada that seeks to stop drunk driving. It also supports those affected by drunk driving, prevents underage drinking, and strives for stricter impaired driving laws. This is positive because it allows the citizens to voice their opinions through lobby groups which the government will pay close attention to therefore the source must be embraced.
The point of view of the source should be partially embraced as the will of the general population should play the most important role in a country. Often the common person’s input is not always rational and ethical therefore governments may need to settle on their own decisions for the benefit of a country. Such as America implementing the USA Patriot Act which was put in place to protect the country from further terrorism after 9/11. Rejecting the liberal viewpoint in the source leads to a lack of individual rights and exploitation, demonstrated by the illiberal acts of Adolf Hitler, in search of total control. On the flip side when nations do embrace the views and ideas of the quote it will lead to the preservation of rights and freedoms with the establishment of lobby groups such as MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving). All in all the presented source demonstrates that the government is working in favor of their citizens, as opposed to themselves.
Stuck on your essay?
