James Mill Form Of Government Analysis

Great Essays
Countries all over the world are run by some sort of government. Each country has its own type of government be it a Democracy, Monarchy, or Dictatorship. Every country needs some sort of government to establish laws and ensure that the country runs properly. Without a government system a country is full of conflict and chaos. Since all humans have desires and have certain things that they want if a country is without a government system stating what is right and what is wrong there would be nothing but chaos in that country. It would be much like a country in the state of nature as according to Hobbes. There would be no balance amongst the people just a constant battle over what every individual wants for themselves. As according to James …show more content…
As according to James Mill a representative government is the type of government that is needed. Through that the people vote on their representative to speak and or vote on their behalf on what they wish happens for their country. The representatives are the voice of the people. The people of the country do not directly create and pass laws but they have a representative which on behalf of the people of the country passes laws and votes based on what the majority of the people are wanting. Every human has a desire and that desire according to James Mill leads to conflict which leads to government. James Mill believes that a government system is needed in a country to run properly. “In the grand discovery of modern times, the system of representation, the solution of all difficulties both speculative and practical…” (124, Mill). The type of government Mill’s suggests a country needs is a representative government. This type of government is one in which the people of the country entrust the power of law making and regulating of laws to one individual or multiple individuals. Much like that of the United States of America. The government system held in the United States is a …show more content…
“…if entrusted with its powers, and as the community itself is incapable of exercising those powers and must entrust them to some individual or combination of individuals, the conclusion is obvious: the community itself must check those individuals, else they will follow their interest and produce bad government” (124, Mill). In other words there needs to be a checks and balance in order to ensure that those in power are doing what is best for the country and the people. Much like the United States system of checks and balances. The United States government is split into three branches; Legislative, executive, and judicial. The system of checks and balance is to ensure that one branch of government cannot become too powerful. It is to ensure they all remain equal and do not do something they should not do. For instance the legislative branch has the power to make laws but at the same time has the power to check over the executive branch by overriding the president’s veto by two thirds vote from both houses, and can impeach the president. The Executive council carries out laws but at the same time has checks over the legislative branch by being able to veto bills. Over the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    On one hand, John Locke believed that the state of nature is unsatisfactory, the government was therefore formed by social contract since people agree to transfer some of their rights to a centralized government in order to secure enjoyment of their properties. (Locke, 1764) Obviously, the formation of the American government is an example to illustrate Locke’s idea. The United States government derives its legitimacy and legal authority from the consent of the majority…

    • 638 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The framers of the Constitution made these concepts important in the Constitution so they could separate the powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branch; and limit what they could do. One branch of government is the legislative branch-- made up of Congress-- and their main responsibility is to make laws. They also have other powers, which are divided into two houses, the house of representatives and the Senate. They have shared powers, like for instance, they can attempt to impeach the President. On the contrary, both houses can have special duties, like how the Senate must approve of any treaties or appointments made by the President.…

    • 630 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    “ …the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that they may be a check on the other…. [The three branches] should not be so far separated as to have no constitutional control over each other,” wrote Madison in Federalist Paper 51 (Doc C). The main idea of checks and balances was that the three separated branches would have the each have powers limiting the others, such as the legislative branch having the ability to make laws, but the judicial branch would decide if the law is constitutional and the president, who pertains to the executive branch, has the power of vetoing the newly passed law.…

    • 684 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The separation of powers was meant to protect minority rights and ensure that no one branch of the government became stronger than another. The Framers of the Constitution also made sure that the Constitution set up a government that has numerous checks and balances to prevent majority rule. Each of the branches of government – executive, legislative, judicial – checks and balances another. Checks and balances are extremely necessary in a representative democracy like in America. Although factions generally balance out, governing bodies need checks against corruption.…

    • 1300 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Enlightenment Dbq

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages

    First of all, a philosopher named John Locke believed that the people had the right to choose their government and change it if they so pleased. “When the government is dissolved, the people are at the liberty to provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative…”(Doc A) This means that if the people did not feel like their government was providing and leading properly they could discard the previous government and start again. This would be highly beneficial because if the government failed they could not only get rid of it but prevent it before it became inadequate.…

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Karl Marx and John Stuart Mill explain their views based on the control government should possess. Mills, for example, believes that…

    • 911 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill saw the problem with modern society as resulting from the power of both the tyranny of the majority but also the tyranny of public opinion. He believed that public opinion had grown too strong to the point where “At present individuals are lost in the crowd. In politics it is almost a triviality to say that public opinion now rules the world.” (On Liberty, chapter III). The “lost in the crowd” metaphor is a powerful one that illustrates Mill’s view.…

    • 996 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Many individuals believe liberty is tied to democracy, and political choice is extremely important to Mill. Mill believes that the best form of government is Representative Government. In Representative Government, an individual has the ability to protect himself and his views. As Mill says, “Let a person have nothing to do for his country, and he will not care for it.” Meaning that if you do not let an individual have a choice, then he will have no motivation to be productive for society as a whole.…

    • 2226 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    First the citizens must give themselves up to the law of the society, they must allow restrictions and limits to be placed upon them for the society to run effectively. Secondly the citizens must put themselves under the protection of the society and trust that they will be defended and taken care of. When this trust is given to the society and the government then they can effectively protect and ensure “the peace, safety, and public good of the people. This is contrary to what Mill would argue as he does not believe citizens should submit themselves to society and give away their rights. He believes that as an individual citizen you should fight for your opinion and never give into society.…

    • 1161 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In order to guarantee the loyalty of its members, the law should also appropriately protect the individual freedom of its people. In regards to Mill, it appears that he somewhat agrees with Rousseau’s argument of the function of government. Mill argues for a representative democracy that would facilitate the development and evolution of liberty for its members. He believed that a representative democracy would only represent the interests of its people and would therefore lessen the resistance between the ruler and its people. Mill…

    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Mill, for instance, supported government, however, expressly stating that the power of government should be limited to prevent the government from “preying on the flock.” He believed that there needed to be certain political rights or liberties which would be regarded as a “breach of duty” if the government in place were to violate it. In fact, Mill felt that a rebellion was a justifiable response to such breaches of liberty akin to Marx’s belief that a proletariat revolution was necessary for progress. Such breaches may include the removal of certain freedoms such as the freedom of speech, which Mill believed was necessary for the advancement of society. Moreover, Mill believed in the establishment of “constitutional checks,” in which the community or its representatives gained some power of consent in important acts of the governing power.…

    • 1298 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Locke And Hobbes

    • 219 Words
    • 1 Pages

    Everything started with the philosophers John Locke and Thomas Hobbes whom had different thoughts. Locke believed that by having a government the people would be allowed to have protection for themselves and their natural rights. If there was no government it would lead to the state of nature. Which Locke and Hobbes both believed it was a horrible idea because there were no rules. Locke viewed people very differently because he believes that each human being is born with a tabula rasa mind, and they develop their learning by being exposed to a variety of things.…

    • 219 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    As the Federalist paper states “ The three branches should not be so far separated as to have no constitutional control over each other.” This proves that by having the checks and balances system, it can help them to keep impartial and to prevent one branch from gaining too much power. Another piece of evidence from the Federalist paper “The constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that they may be a check on the other.” This confirms that other branches of the government make sures that they have the same and equal power. If one branch had too much…

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This is because it is the most powerful branch. The first reason is that they have the ability to create laws. Many people might argue that they can not get laws passed without the Presidents approval. Although this is true to an extent, it is not always the case. Congress can overrule the Presidents decision by simply getting 2/3 of Congress to agree that a bill should become a law.…

    • 1331 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Every nation and country has a way of running itself; a way to govern what is considered lawful and unlawful. In the United States of American, there is a massive controversial debate about whether our democracy is majoritarian or if it is more pluralistic in nature. Some may argue that the mass public, or every citizen in the country, is able to control the government’s actions. Others will state that many groups are able to work together amongst themselves to be able to allow more involvement of the citizens in a majority of the nation’s decisions. Both of these ideas of how our government works are similar in ways as well as different in many other ways.…

    • 1617 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays