IMPACTS OF POWER ON AUSTRALIAN DEMOCRACY 1
Impacts of Power on Australian Democracy
Impacts of Power on Australian Democracy
The government controlled by the people for the interest of its residents through various representatives is a democratic state which every individual aspires for (Munck, 2016). The system develops the tradition for the inhabitants of a State to choose their representative on the basis of love and convincing power that is bestowed on them. Adler & Webster (2016) argues that social power, money, muscles and leadership intelligence have a direct influence on the residents’ expression for democracy in elections of the representatives. Politically, power is the ability possessed by different individuals to shape as well as take full control of different behavior and activities that citizens are taking (DeNardo, 2014). The Australian government has been known for its democratic nature in running the activities and operations of the entire Country through its different branches and control systems. The Authority within Australia have exercised their power in a variety of ways which has impacted various things on residents’ voice in voting, and they include; reducing the influence of the minority parties, rising in the unemployment rates, increasing the formation of the rules that favors those in power, and finally affecting the electorate outcomes of the Country as argued by Carr (2014). This paper provides the analysis of the impact of authority on the Australian democracy.
Impacts of power
The minority parties’ influence and right ideologies have significantly been reduced by the majority leadership through execution of their might (Beasley & Kaarbo, 2014). The formation of different coalitions within the country aims at ensuring that a larger merger is made which will automatically have the route to winning the elections at the expense of the minority coalitions. Zingher & Farrer (2014) argue that the mind of the residents is always corrupted to vote on the majority lines with the belief that the ideologies presented by the large group always work best for the entire State. Democratic government dictates that a candidate with the highest number of votes have the power to rule, a principle that greatly favors the large mergers as they have the authority and the resources to help them conquer and convince citizens for the votes. The resources at their exposure as well as the ideas they sell give them an upper hand in challenging and beating the minority parties or coalition. Opposition parties in most cases are viewed as rebels of development as they rarely support the ideologies of the dominant coalition or party. Citizens tend to have the belief that if they support the majority party, then the investment and developments will easily be directed to their society as a reward for their support (Zingher & Farrer, 2014).
The power exercised by the authority has resulted in an increase in the levels and rates of unemployment in the country («On the Brink — Four Corners», 2016). The authorities always have their way towards retaining their position as well as controlling the State. By virtue of remaining in power, they always try to maintain their status quo for their benefit achieved through suppressing those with the ability to rise to their positions. Maintaining the status quo ensures that nobody other than those from their legal background rising to power a practice that is slowly killing democracy within Australia as leaders are forced on people (Brevini, 2015). The leaders do not have the mission of creating the employment opportunities through various investments, but they have designed a system which favors them in getting their positions back without investing to create jobs opportunities. The Australian population grows every day, and as the population grows, job opportunities available are filled up creating the need for opportunity creations (Gurran, Norman & Hamin, 2016). Once the faith for getting new opportunities of employment are lost, the majority of the citizens do not take part in the elections resulting to electing representatives with a low number of votes having a great impact on the democracy within Australia.
Power expressed by the majority coalitions has greatly reduced democracy within Australia as it has resulted in a reduction in the voter turnout during elections (Shore, 2016). Despite the low voter turnout, leaders still emerge since winning is based on the largest votes count from the few individuals who engage in voting. The idea kills democracy as most people on power finds their way back into the system through various awkward means like voters’ intimidations and voter apathy. Most individuals in power employ the resources they have to frustrate their opponents, and this discourages the democracy practice within the Country. In some situations, the population is threatened by the authority by development and investments leading to voting by fear of not benefiting from the ruling coalition. The democracy of Australia is built on propaganda that is used by the authority resulting in a reduction in the truth and rightful practice of the democracy. The intimidation makes voters have the informed mind and decision which discourages several people from voting as they believe that their exercise of voting will not have any effect on the outcomes as the majority party will always win (Shore, 2016).
Marston & Dee, (2015) argues that power always tries to convince people on the equality of expressing democracy which is not the case. The lies are fed into the minds of the society as the citizens remain to live in a worsening system as most benefits go to the authority. The majority makes rules and policies which favor them, and when passed by a referendum, the same people in power use their influence to determine the voting outcomes. The society is left celebrating as the passers of the laws, but the fact remains that they are greatly influenced to make their decisions on voting. The oppression that the authority expresses to the society is continued through lies that are availed to the residents to ensure that they remain silent and happy for all the situations at hand. The few individuals who realize the effects and the exploitation that the authority expresses to them tend to avoid taking part in any democratic activity resulting in the loss of democracy practice among the citizens. The ignorance that the society shows towards democracy is what benefits the authority in maintaining and controlling the society (Marston, & Dee, 2015).
The power that has been given to the ruling parties has undermined the democracy of the Australian citizens in a common means (Carr, 2014). The opposition coalition within Australia has the mandate to criticize as well as question the action of the parliamentary government. The minority coalition has been given the mandate to ensure that they act as the watchdogs for every action the government takes through the power given to them democratically. When the opposition tries to make the complaints, the ruling coalition ensures that they democratically mobilize the residents to make sure that the opposing ideas are regarded as noise by the citizens. The residents are given the hope for a better tomorrow, which only aims at ensuring continuous support for the majority coalition. Once the support is assured by a large number of the citizens, the legislators’ only struggle to ensure the support is maintained, leading to the undermining of the democracy within Australia Carr, (2014).
The impact of power on democracy is that it can result to voting in of leaders who are enemies of democracy (Klingemann, 2014). The aspirants past records regarding democracy are not evaluated during the verification process an indicator that even the dictators may find their way into the leadership. The system only provides the power to the leaders or the aspirants with the ability to convince the residents to be put in the authority irrespective of the agenda and ideologies presented. The practice has ensured that those who get into power does not have the heart and passion for practicing democracy resulting to fading of democracy as the powerful believe they will still clinch their position irrespective of their actions Klingemann (2014). The aim of the non-democrats in the system has only resulted to illegal acquiring of the resources which help in confusing the voters during elections.
The power and trust that different opinions polls have in providing their view and data concerning the elections for the top most posts within Australia interferes with the democracy McNair, 2014). Once the opinion poll puts a given candidate ahead of others, voters quickly lose hope regarding their candidate who is put behind by the polls resulting in abandonment for taking the responsibility to vote as they trust that their candidate will finally loose in the major exercise. Opinion polls majorly result in low voter turnout as well as loose of faith to some promising candidate as they are heavily discouraged in their campaigns. The polls kill the democratic rights of the citizens through discouragement and the fight to reduce gaps between the majority, and minority parties are profoundly affected.
Despite the negative impacts of power towards democracy, it also has some positive results as discussed. It has ensured a huge voter turnout in the areas which directly benefit from the authority. The urge to maintain power as well as to receive constant resource allocation comes with the election of the representative from the closest society. To achieve the latter, most of the people from such society try to vote in large numbers to win the election than those residents from the power starving areas (Xenos, Vromen, & Loader, 2014).
The power that citizens are given in electing the leaders through democratic voting has ensured that leaders are kept informed of different activities in various levels of work (Xenos, Vromen, & Loader, 2014). Despite the election favoring the majority coalition, the citizens still have the potential to bring in a new leader to join the majority coalition through voting which ensures that the leaders work hard to maintain their positions within the ruling coalition. Though the development may be unevenly distributed within the areas of residents, there are specific areas that will be developed as a result of the democratic pressure and power that it possesses about the demand for the votes. The firm belief of democracy is realized with the realization of the power that the citizens are given towards electing the leaders.
Finally, the separation of power ensures a better democracy practice through constant monitoring of the various forms of power within the country. For instance, in the Australian system, the constitution provides the provision for the representatives of both houses, the roles of the president and other arms of the government. This activity ensures that the rules are democratically followed, and any breakage of the rule is punished regarding the constitutional interpretation. The constitution itself is protected by virtue of democracy, and the power separation ensures the continuous exercise of democracy in the country (Xenos, Vromen, & Loader, 2014).
From the discussion, democracy is still regarded as the rule of the people for the citizens which is greatly affected by the belief and the love for the resources by different stakeholders of a given state. The power that most people express in running and working with the democracy is what makes the citizen’s rule to have a wrong taste of what it was initially meant to achieve. It is hard to achieve the best form of democracy in a country, but with the help of the authority and practicing of the good policies then a better leadership can be achieved through the expression of good power. Despite offering power to the majority in a ruling, the minorities are also capable of expressing their voices and ideologies in a well-organized democracy set up. The citizens should evaluate their ways of treating democracy and elect leaders with the understanding of the culture and the needs of the society irrespective of their power and resources. As citizens, we should exercise our voting rights to achieve the required power provided to us in electing leaders to serve our interest. The power given to each and every individual in the society should maximize in a positive way to ensure the development of a sustainable environment and society. The Australian democracy despite having some challenges in its operations, it remains to be one of the world best democratic countries.
Adler, G., & Webster, E. (2016). Transition to Democracy in. Labour Worldwide in the Era of Globalization: Alternative Union Models in the New World Order, 133.
Beasley, R. K., & Kaarbo, J. (2014). Explaining extremity in the foreign policies of parliamentary democracies. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), 729-740.
Brevini, B. (2015). From Media Policy to ‘Big’Media Policy: The Battle for Pluralism in Australia. In Media Power and Plurality (pp. 116-130). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Carr, A. (2014). Is Australia a middle power? A systemic impact approach. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 68(1), 70-84.
DeNardo, J. (2014). Power in numbers: The political strategy of protest and rebellion. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Gurran, N., Norman, B., & Hamin, E. (2016). Population Growth and Change in Non-Metropolitan Coastal Australia. Parallel Patterns of Shrinking Cities and Urban Growth: Spatial Planning for Sustainable Development of City Regions and Rural Areas, 165.
Klingemann, H. D. (2014). Dissatisfied democrats: evidence from old and new democracies. The Civic Culture Transformed: From Allegiant to Assertive Citizens, eds R. Dalton & C. Welzel, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (forthcoming).
Marston, G., & Dee, M. (2015). The social inclusion policy agenda in Australia: a case of old wine, new bottles?. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 50(2), 119.
McNair, B. (2014). Mediated politics in Australia: towards a qualitative evaluation. How We Are Governed: Investigations of Communication, Media & Democracy, 108-123.
Munck, G. L. (2016). What is democracy? A reconceptualization of the quality of democracy. Democratization, 23(1), 1-26.
On the Brink — Four Corners. (2016). Abc.net.au. Retrieved 26 August 2016, from http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2013/07/01/3791178.htm
Shore, J. (2016). Political Inequality: Origins, Consequences, and Ways Ahead. In Understanding Inequality: Social Costs and Benefits (pp. 225-240). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Xenos, M., Vromen, A., & Loader, B. D. (2014). The great equalizer? Patterns of social media use and youth political engagement in three advanced democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 151-167.
Zingher, J. N., & Farrer, B. (2014). The electoral effects of the descriptive representation of ethnic minority groups in Australia and the UK. Party Politics, 1354068814556895.