Question #01:
Would you call Plunkitt’s style of politics ‘’Democracy’’ ? If not, what is it?
Answer:
No. I wouldn’t call his style of politics as democracy. The system may have been to elect a leader through democratic election, but after the election political machines like Tammany Hall and its leaders like Plunkitt would shift most of, and sometimes nearly all of the, jobs and benefits to their supporters and workers which had helped the organization in winning the election.
Whilst to some extent it may look good, but to people from other parties who may have been sounder, be it technically or politically, would not be given the rights to serve the country in a better way. After all, they are patriotic too. So since the merit system became in place, I believe it supports all the patriots without differentiating between them on the basis of their ties with other political parties.
Therefore, I wouldn’t categorize Plunkitt style of politics as democracy. To me he was more like a leader from a political machine who used patronage and spoils system to promote himself and the organization.
Question #02: Why does George Washington Plunkitt object to civil service reform? What arguments does he make against it, and do you find what he says convincing?
Answer:
He puts it very simply: If you vote in the best …show more content…
As he says, honest graft constitutes the knowledge and information of future development decisions before they are made public and thereafter using that information for personal benefit, and most of the times, charging the government a higher price than that would have been for the services or goods required, had Plunkitt not had the insider information. Most of the wealth he made was purchasing the land that he knew would be needed for government projects, then reselling those properties at a higher price as government would pay higher amount as it needed the place to complete the
Would you call Plunkitt’s style of politics ‘’Democracy’’ ? If not, what is it?
Answer:
No. I wouldn’t call his style of politics as democracy. The system may have been to elect a leader through democratic election, but after the election political machines like Tammany Hall and its leaders like Plunkitt would shift most of, and sometimes nearly all of the, jobs and benefits to their supporters and workers which had helped the organization in winning the election.
Whilst to some extent it may look good, but to people from other parties who may have been sounder, be it technically or politically, would not be given the rights to serve the country in a better way. After all, they are patriotic too. So since the merit system became in place, I believe it supports all the patriots without differentiating between them on the basis of their ties with other political parties.
Therefore, I wouldn’t categorize Plunkitt style of politics as democracy. To me he was more like a leader from a political machine who used patronage and spoils system to promote himself and the organization.
Question #02: Why does George Washington Plunkitt object to civil service reform? What arguments does he make against it, and do you find what he says convincing?
Answer:
He puts it very simply: If you vote in the best …show more content…
As he says, honest graft constitutes the knowledge and information of future development decisions before they are made public and thereafter using that information for personal benefit, and most of the times, charging the government a higher price than that would have been for the services or goods required, had Plunkitt not had the insider information. Most of the wealth he made was purchasing the land that he knew would be needed for government projects, then reselling those properties at a higher price as government would pay higher amount as it needed the place to complete the