To those Who are Social Thinkers! or...... they are!

[Jamster]

1.What are the advantages and disadvantages of the separation of Powers for a representative democracy?

 

2. Is Social and Economic inequality inevitable?

 

3. To what extend are people just puppets whose strings are pulled by the environment?

 

For those who take great pleasure in writing about political science, I challenge you to do 500 words minimum of the one of the above titles.

 

You need not to have an extensive knowledge of the subject matter, but your piece will be judged upon three categories.

 

1.Whether the information you use to argue your case is generally accurate

2.Whether your argument is clear and well organised

3.Whether you have a good command of political science generally.

 

Lunge in and let the game begin.

 

Farah

[Thinkerman]

Farah i detect an in-genius nomad @ work here , are u perhaps attempting to get some ppl to do an essay u have due under this guise?

 

or am i just imagining things as usual

[Paragon]

Seperation of powers! meaning what?

 

The right to power

The right to wealth

and The right to equality?

 

I have have an essay along those lines - i'll see if i can post it.

[Jamilah]

Interesting, very very intersesting.

[Observer]

Farah

very interesting and indeed stimulating topic which required brooding. :rolleyes:

[Khayr]

Salams,

The thought of writing an essay just to impress others and show off my writing and persuasion skills isn't my style and probably others too.

These forums are made for disussions and not for essay writings.

I come in here because there is no pressure and no one is scrutnizing my every response.

These forums have so far given if that 'sense of comfort' that u don't find in the real world or on most websites.

If u want to spark debates on an issue, just start the thread and inshallah, u will get a healthy discussion flowing.

[StarGazer]

Farah:

 

How many credits is it worth upon completion of the essay(s)? And is it tranferable (UK-->US)?

[Gabbal]

Farah I don't understand why u respect Winston Churchill. Don't you know he was a leading Zionist, who is one of the top reasons Isreal became a yahuud country, instead of a Palestinian Muslim one?

 

1 love y'all.

[Jamster]

Cynical Somalis my God you are all seem to mirror my persona- and they say Somalis are not ethnically homogeneous.

 

Dear, I respect Churchill because he stood up for his principles. You shouldn’t take this that I like Nalash dheerayaasha!. I hope that made sense.

[Somsamurai]

This kinda reminds me of the four week deadlines that I used to hate

 

Oh by the way everyone has the right to chose who they think is their idol....

 

Somalis can never agree to disagree...they want everyone to have the same one way of thinking which is wrong.. Having different opinions should enrich us rather than make us weak.

[TIIMBARO]

Khayr: No one would go through all that trouble just to show someone how clever they’re. People do things according to their self-interest, if you find yourself not interested in this particular topic, simply do not comment on it.

[Jamster]

Salamu alaikum,

 

Social and Economic inequality inevitable?

 

The proposition of inevitability in the social sciences invites the analysis of a natural state or trend and a rigid defence, or attack upon the potential forces of change within a particular system. The proposition in this instance is whether the natural state of the society inevitably veers towards inequality in terms of wealth and status apportioned to its members. The analysis must therefore focus on the merits of arguments that seek to steer the circumstances away from this allegedly inevitable proposition.

 

Social theorists that sought to affirm the inchoate and orchestrated vision of society often proclaimed society as their founding proposition, to be a primitive rag bag of angst and violent communal discord. Hobbes’s diagnosis of the life of man being nasty, brutish and short was the most explicit vent of this chaotic view of man and society in its primordial nudity. Hobbes1 and his fellow social contract theorists embarked on a task of dynamic social engineering, aiming to use the malleable pre-existing notions of social structures and institutions to structure the social fabric into an ordered and coherent communal whole. However equality was never on the agenda of these pre-enlightenment social theorists, theirs was a mandate of order and social and economic inequality was a pre-requisite of such order. This therefore qualifies our founding proposition into one that asks whether the social and economic inevitability can be avoided without doing violence to the cause of social order. Indeed, I would argue that all subsequent attempts at nation building are exercises in solving this conundrum.

 

In the declaration of the Rights of Man (1789) issued by the National Assembly of France during the French Revolution, the following categorical statement is made: ‘Men are born, and always continue, free and equal in respect of their rights.’ A similar statement is found in the American declaration of Independence (1776): ‘we both hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal…..’ These documents make the argument that equality is natural state of man. They put emphasis on the notion that men are born equal. This means that we have a right to equal opportunities; however, all have not the same capacity. The Franco-American constitutions are attempts at trimming the elaborate process ridden analysis of enlightenment thinkers into a socially executable model. A look at Rousseau gives further insight into these ideals.

 

Rousseau formulates three stages in the development of human society. In the first stage there was no human language and people lived in a state that was not that different from other animals. In the second stage, there was simple language, some family life, and "independent intercourse" among small groups of people. The development of the modern society emerged as the third stage. Of the three stages, says Rousseau, the second is the best, during which stage there were some families and some communities, and people lived a simple, independent, transparent and happy life. But it was impossible to stay in the second stage forever. People's envy and vanity to compete with each other brought about the ruin of the second stage and the rise of the third, corrupt, stage. Natural inequality in strength, talent, and appearance eventually led to moral inequality in wealth, social status and political power. In the third stage, writes Rousseau, people are not happy. They are alienated from their true selves. They are pretentious, envious, and controlled by their own lowly desires and also by other people's opinion.

Rousseau presents two solutions to the problems of the third stage. The first is personal or therapeutic, which relies on family education and nurturing. The second solution proposed by Rousseau, therefore, is political, which relies on the social contract and focuses on eliminating alienation through collective forces. Recognising social equality in democratic state means that all citizens are treated alike in respect of the control that they may be legitimately exercised over them and of the measure of protection which may be entitled to demand at the hands of the government. The rights mentioned above provide the necessary armour to be fundamentally equal in democratic state. Nevertheless, some social theorists (Mostly Marxists) argue that without economic equality there can never be social equality.

 

Economic equality has been a contentious subject for centuries. Some political thinkers interpreted Economic equality as literal sense. Bryce writes ‘the attempt to expunge all differences in wealth, allotting to every man and woman equal share in worldly goods’. A reasonable view of equality must dismiss such a conception as being beyond the bounds of practical politics, for, even, we start as some suggest from a clean slate men’s differences in need and capacity are too great to enable equality of wealth to be maintained for length of time. It is argued this gravely interferes with economic liberty of citizens. ‘Render possessions ever so equal,’ said Hume, ‘men’s different degrees of Art, care and industry will immediately break equality. Or if you check these virtues, you reduce society to the most extreme indulgence.’ But it is quite possible and desirable to reduce the excessive inequalities of existing fortunes.

 

General absolute equality is unattainable, unless we live under a tyrannically enforced homogeneity there will

[La Fidele]

Your first quetion reads right out of a midterm essay question for any intro to comparative politics *lol*! Although I would love to discuss the differences between various democratic governments (the Separation of Powers system of the US, parliamentary system of the UK or the hybrid parliamentary-presidential systems of France and Russia) I would rather save my essay-writing muscles for real exams--who knows, maybe the craziest thing happens and somebody will copy and paste my words into their own exam response and attacks of plagiarism come flying! Ha ha. Maybe you should rephrase your topic to be more specific? Thanks.

[Paragon]

LoL Jazera -- Thats what i feared most. I can't have a copy my essay submitted by another. That might amount to the so-called !plagiarism!, I hate that word. Nowadays the educators have an advance way of detecting plagiarism. Visit www.plagiarism.com

[Jamster]

The idea that I posted these questions to get some sort of response to help an essay I need to write for MY academic purposes is far from my nature. Perhaps you guys are giving enormous of credit to where does not deserve. I take great pleasure in writing. By writing I touch and feel my place in this congested universe.

 

Jamal, I thought you knew that I away from Social passive didacticism for a year! It shall remerge from its deep waters this October Inshaa Rahman.

 

Farah