Structures And Institutions
Each student will be responsible for selecting a news article about a current issue in politics and government and provide two discussion questions on the article for the discussion board. This article should relate to the corresponding week’s topic. You should post both your article (or the link) and your questions on blackboard by Wednesday. You will be responsible for monitoring that thread through the following week, to guide the discussion, answer questions, etc.
In all cases, postings should reflect college level writing and research (not just statements of opinion) and if sources are used they should be noted.
The attach file is the week topic. please read first then completed the assignment follow the requirement above.
Structures And Institutions
HUMAN NATURE AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS
A society’s basic view of human nature is a reasonable place to start working on a
general understanding of political institutions. As James Madison put it, “But what is
government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?” Does the society
view people as generally cooperative or selfish, rebellious or submissive, active or
passive? This is critical because a political institution that is perfect for cooperative
people, such as the Amish, would be a disastrous failure at dealing with selfish,
performance-drug-abusing Major League Baseball players. We can see this reflected in
the work of Madison himself, because not only did James Madison occasionally comment
on government and human nature, but he is also generally thought of as the father of the
American Constitution. His view of human nature was quite pessimistic, and that
perspective is abundantly clear in the basic construction of U.S. political institutions.
Madison argued: “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels
were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be
necessary.” Clearly, Madison was not anticipating a time when governors and citizens
would come together, hold hands, and hum Disney songs while sitting around a campfire.
In designing the American Constitution, Madison and his fellow architects built a system
based on a basic mistrust of human nature. They drew the blueprints for a complex set of
interlocking institutions with overlapping responsibilities that would pit separate portions
of the government against one another. Each section jealously guards its power and the
power of those that support it, and it is this pursuit of selfish interests that keeps the other
sections honest. The U.S. system, because of its separation of powers, is specifically
designed to make it difficult for a less-than-angelic government to infringe on the rights of
its citizens. The system also makes it difficult for any one portion of society to enact
policies that infringe upon the interests of another. This kind of government has its good
side in that it prevents many bad things from happening, but it also makes it hard to get
much done at all—including passing very popular laws and laws aimed at ending
discrimination or remedying its effects. Other governments based in a stronger belief in
the natural goodness of human-kind are more likely to have simpler governmental
systems that make it far easier to enact policy. We see this, for example, in European
democracies, where the winning party has a much freer hand in making changes.
However, this ability to enact policy easily comes at the cost of stability over time. After
all, the French change their government as often as they change well, let’s just say they
change their government a lot. These less restrained forms of governments also create
an increased risk of putting one portion of society or government at the mercy of another
as they swiftly pass laws and make sudden changes to the rules that define society. The
presumed nature of human beings—good or bad—is key to understanding the creation
and evolution of political institutions. This is a great deal like saying that the intended use
of a motorcycle—drag racing, motocross, or impressing girls with tattoos—shapes the
way its basic structures are built. The exposed plumbing and pretty much every other
aspect of the basic structure of a house built out of a nuclear missile silo are perfect for
impressing girls with tattoos, but all wrong for many other contexts. No amount of altering
and tinkering could change an underground lair into something that a flatulent
claustrophobe could call home. Similarly, it is in the details of the local social context of a
country—the worldview of its people, its geographic situation, and its economic realities
—that political institutions are created and later evolve. Remember this as you seek to
under-stand the underlying political structures that are expressed through the wide
variety of institutions around the world.
THE REALITY OF POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS
Given the opportunity to craft ideal governmental institutions from scratch, we would
all choose the types of institutions that we believe would support the values and traditions
most important to us. Values such as democracy, individual rights, religious footwear,
nationalism, strict regulation of the wearing of spandex at Walmarts, and so forth can all
be bolstered and protected or weakened and repressed by the types of institutions a
nation uses. Similarly, the personal wealth, power, and security of the leader are other
values that can be bolstered or impeded by particular types of institutions. Connect this
back to the personal nature of utopias and the variety of the people found in every
governed society, and you will realize that the push for compromise quickly takes us
away from anyone’s ideal institutions.
Context, Evolution, and the Unbearable Weight of History
Of course, even if we could agree on every detail of the perfect political institution, in
the real world, nations rarely have an opportunity to install their ideal institutions from
scratch. First, most government institutions are not designed or even intentionally
created. Instead, they evolve out of humble and sometimes downright unusual
beginnings.