Unequal Distribution of Property and Factions - Research Paper Example

 Unequal Distribution of Property and Factions Individuals on the earth’s surface do not equally own property on the earth’s surface equally as God wished. Scripturally, God created man in his own image and meant that resources were to be shared and distributed equally among all the human beings on the earth surface in the same proportions (Machiavelli et al 1955). It has though proved otherwise, as we can witness that the ability to own property on the surface of the universe depends on the individual’s ability and talent; whereby those with more talents and ability tend to hold more of the property, as compared to their counterparts with less ability and talent (More and Smith, 2012). The government must therefore protect these rights as they develop on the identified individuals with the abilities and the talents, as the key responsibility of the state is to protect its entire citizen and their wealth (Mill and Ryan, 2006). The government will tend to do this by enacting policies and rules that are geared towards the protection of both talent and ability. Talent and ability are one of the greatest resources of any given country since as the individuals become creative in the efforts to enrich themselves resource wise, they in turn lead to the growth and development of the whole country and its inhabitants. It is certain that property in the society is not divide equally and the property that is not divided equally exist in different forms which include the following:- there is the category which involves either land or business property. Some of the property owners in the society own property in form of land and indeed large tracts of the land depending on their ability to acquire the land (Rousseau and Cress, 1987). The other groups in the society own property in form of business ventures and franchises operating them jealously and zealously practices that are normally unfair and unjust. Moreover, it is coupled with a lot of irregularities and unfair practices; some of these practices are either ethical or unethical in nature. The round objective though is one that of acquiring property; hence, a protection from the government of the abilities and the talent if called for (Mill and Ryan, 2006). The other reason that individuals in the society own wealth or property in an unequal manner is because of the sole reason that there are many injustices in democratic governments of the day. James Madison in his writings argues that the governments of the day more or less tend to favor those who support or supported them in their efforts to become the government (Janda, Berry and Goldman, 2008). The property is used to reward such loyalties is none other than the public property, which in real sense needs to be used for the sole benefit of the public. The public as a result ends up getting lees of what they should actually get while all that wealth goes in the hands of the rich few and who support the government fully (Rousseau and Cress, 1987). Depending on the interest that an individual would have on a given property, distribution across the society is quite vast and much different in terms of both composition and ownership. There are those who are passionate about having quite a large volume of property while there are still others in the society who are contented if their fellows also get something; the proportion of the latter is minimal while the interest by the former is so enormous (Mill and Ryan, 2006). This passion and heightened interests misguides the steps that are owned by same individuals and may even drive them in cats that are so antisocial like corruption and corrupt engagements. The other reason is the nature of the society in which the American society encourages a lot of individualism and capitalism in the progress and development of its citizens with quite low dependency rates. This is a case where individuals in the society have the will and the right to work and own their own in an adventure to acquire property. This is due to the argument that everyone in the society has an interest and the natural faculties as well as the character to raise themselves in their desired heights. The only remaining thing is for the individuals to express their desires and urges to work tirelessly hard and this makes the difference between the greatest ownership of property and the less ownership (Machiavelli et al, 1955). Another and key reason for the unequal distribution of property is the fact that most of the laws in countries support the vice amassing and grabbing of properties.. As opposed to laws helping the government to protect he citizens against being robed off what belongs to them, the same laws are crafted by hungry and greedy human beings who in the process of trying to help, they instead are aligned to help the key figure that needed to help. There is therefore no equality in the form of being universal and the suffrage (Rousseau and Cress, 1987). This is because the holders of property would find it quite hard to infringe on the rights of their fellows and this is attributed to the fact that they find nothing fascinating to make them behave in such a manner. This drives us to the other reason of unequal ownership of property, which is the objective of oppressing the poor though this has arisen of recent. With this respect, the state owes every citizen a right to be protected against any forms of malpractices (Mill and Ryan, 2006). According to James Madison, the resource endowment on the surface of the earth itself is not equal whereby some areas are more endowed with natural resources that the others. While some natural resources may be of enormously higher values, the other group of resources will be of much lesser value (More and Smith, 2012). This also explains why depending on the abilities and talents some people may be in the position to exploit the resources and make the necessary property out of them. Considering the variance in resources and property capability of the individuals forming a society, the fact is others will have more than the others will always. The propping question will then be how to maintain a balance between the two extremes in the society so that they are able to live happily and in harmony. The famous federalist No.10 that James Madison advocated for put more emphasis on the nature and type of politics that should prevail in America. While supporting Federalist No10, Madison advanced the view that the new American political system should be based on non-tyrannical republic as opposed to pure democracy (Janda, Berry and Goldman, 2008). In federalist No10 Madison argued that, one of the core strategy for ending the evils and violence that were linked to factions was by creating a majoritarian democracy or large republic. He holds the view that the more diverse a society was, Consequently, Madison underscores the need for the separation and partition of power to address the issue of factions. In federalist.No.51, He advances the view that it is imperative for separation of power to the ensured since the exterior provisions of the government structure are inadequate and incapable (Epstein, 2008). Madison further asserts, in federal 51, that the interior structure and other constituent parts of the government structure should be designed in such a way that they are able to offer checks and balances to each other. In other terms, Madison argued for the divergent and distinctive exercise of various powers emanating from the internal government structure. In such a society, the likelihood that people will form factions due to the difference in common goals and interests is quite high, hence, James argues that those with more property will always come together under one goal of protecting what they have (Mill and Ryan, 2006). On the other hand, those without any property or have little will also gang together to protect them from the exploitation that is foreseen from the richly endowed. James Madison argues that this is natural and a welcomed act in any healthy society. The other factors that may lead to a formation of factions in the society are the differences related to ideology and religion, which can fiercely break individuals or groups apart (More and Smith, 2012). However, the greatest cause of factions is the condition described above, of unequal distribution of property whereby factions are bound to happen in any form of society in which the occupants’ possess any significant form of opinion as well as wealth. People will often find themselves only associating with those same people who are similar to them. Factions are not a good idea for any developing society, as they have the ability of resulting into unforeseen enmity among the individuals (More and Smith, 2012). This is not healthy for the development and harmony in the society where every individual lives; therefore, the government has the responsibility of coming in to protect every citizen and their wealth since this is the core role of the state; hence, factions can be eliminated or avoided by the government through two major ways (Grube and Cooper, 2010). One of such ways is to barricade all the causes, if this does not work, the government can then proceed and enhance control of all the effects of the factions. In order to eradicate the causes of factions, the government or state will rush for the aid of two procedures; one is through the destruction and denial of the freedom of the population. In this case, people will not be at all cost in the position of self-expression by way of views, passions or even their interests (Machiavelli et al, 1955). This is not appropriate since it will spoil the essence of diversity and the existence of the society in multiples. Self-expression is also hard to do away with since it is something that comes automatically so long as people are in contact of the other person. Therefore, this procedure is not very prudent and feasible; it seems that as opposed to the prevention of the causes of factions it would be wise if the government works upon the control aspects (Rousseau and Cress, 1987). Furthermore, if the government is not autocratic like the few known examples, it should be in the position of controlling the acts of its population. This is to allow for the freedom that is much needed for the progress of the same state in form of the innovativeness and creativity that a free nation is endowed with. This is because development and progressive growth is very important to every nation irrespective of their state of economy (Grube and Cooper, 2010). The aspects of forming controls on the their hand do not have an upper hand in societies where the citizen have a voice and these examples are as seen in the democracies and countries governed by the rule of law. This makes factions to be very influential in the affairs of governments hence making such countries through their stakeholders have the ability to regulate the government and its objectives to the same citizen (Machiavelli et al, 1955). These are mainly found in countries that are large and with vast structures that are well developed to handle such forms of issues in the society. The citizen in such countries empowers the citizen through the constitution to demand for better service provision hence protecting people from the rule of the few. In the current system, various government structures and procedures are aimed at safeguarding and protecting factions. The existence of constitutional courts and other independent jurisdiction courts that promote and respect individual freedoms and rights is one of the crucial government structures that are seen to be controlling factions. Just as James Madison argued in his monumental paper, the Federalist No.10, the constitution is one of the instruments and structure that was designed to break and control factions. The entrenchment of the bill of rights in the constitution that guarantees for participation in the political process, guarantees respecting for personal beliefs, guarantees personal privacy, guarantees against the overarching role of the government among other guarantees is a perfect example of current procedures that are aimed at controlling factions (Janda, Berry and Goldman, 2008). In conclusion, unequal property distribution is very detrimental and can take any given form of society towards the formation of factions, which are not good for the smooth running of the government. Through proper management of the public affairs of any given country, the leadership is always in the position of ensuring that equality and fairness is achieved (Grube and Cooper, 2010). In addition, a freer environment where all the citizens are able to engage is achieved a factor that contributes to the growth and development of any form of democratic society (Mill and Ryan, 2006). The government therefore has the responsibility of coming in and addressing issues that might cause unequal distribution of property and hence cause factions, and this is because any modern society needs a tranquil environment to achieve success (More and Smith, 2012). References Epstein, D. F. (2008). The Political Theory of The Federalist. University of Chicago Press,. Grube, G. M., & Cooper, J. M. (2010). The Trial and Death of Socrates Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Death Scene from Phaedo. (3rd ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co. Janda, K., Berry, J. M., & Goldman, J. (2008). The challenge of democracy:government in America. New York : Cengage Learning. Machiavelli, N., Marriott, W. K., Fuller, N., & Hobbes, T. (1955). The prince. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica. Mill, J. S., & Ryan, A. (2006). On liberty; and, The subjection of women. London: Penguin. More, T., & Smith, D. (2012). Utopia. London: Penguin Books. Rousseau, J., & Cress, D. A. (1987). Basic political writings. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co.. Read More