The Paradox of Democracy The paradox of democracy is that majority rule may not agree with minority rights, but it is impossible to create a balance between the two; however, it may be possible to get rid of the effects of this paradox, therefore rendering it harmless. An example of the paradox may be slavery; the majority ruled that the minority should not have any rights at all. The Jim Crow Law, passed in 1877, gave states in the US the right to segregate between white people and colored people ("Crow Law"). Segregation as a whole is the perfect example of how majority rule may not agree with minority rights. There is no clear way to eliminate the disagreements between majority rule and minority rights, but it may be possible to reduce
…show more content…
All branches of the government have checks and balances with other branches; for instance, the executive branch appoints Supreme Court judges; in this example, the executive branch is exercising its right to choose Supreme Court judges, which gives the power to regulate the officials of the judicial branch to the President, and subsequently gives them the power to check over the judicial branch. There are other checks and balances within the government, as well. Another example would be that of judicial review. The executive branch of the United States government has the power to create and enact laws, however, the judicial branch has the power to declare a law unconstitutional and can therefore void the law; this is an example of a judicial check over the executive branch ("Checks and Balances"). To create a working system of checks and balances between the minority group and the majority group, both groups should be split up into two. For the purposes of this document I will refer to these groups as Minority Group A and B, and Majority Group A and B. Minority Groups A and B would then be able to check over themselves, as would Majority Groups A and B, which would make it harder for one group to overrule the other without the two reaching a
All branches of the government have checks and balances with other branches; for instance, the executive branch appoints Supreme Court judges; in this example, the executive branch is exercising its right to choose Supreme Court judges, which gives the power to regulate the officials of the judicial branch to the President, and subsequently gives them the power to check over the judicial branch. There are other checks and balances within the government, as well. Another example would be that of judicial review. The executive branch of the United States government has the power to create and enact laws, however, the judicial branch has the power to declare a law unconstitutional and can therefore void the law; this is an example of a judicial check over the executive branch ("Checks and Balances"). To create a working system of checks and balances between the minority group and the majority group, both groups should be split up into two. For the purposes of this document I will refer to these groups as Minority Group A and B, and Majority Group A and B. Minority Groups A and B would then be able to check over themselves, as would Majority Groups A and B, which would make it harder for one group to overrule the other without the two reaching a