How are democracy and capitalism compatible?
They are compatible only to a certain extent. Democracy is a political idea while capitalism is an economic one but both affect people’s lives in major ways as well as each other.In a democratic society the people all have an equal say in how the country they live in is governed as everyone has one vote. They may make rules that govern how people live and what laws are made.In a capitalist society, the amount of say people have in how the economy is run is dependent on how much money they have and how it is spent. The poorer they are the less money they have to spend and the less economic influence they have. The rich have vastly more economic influence than the poor and as a result can dictate how people that are poorer than them live, especially if they happen to be business owners as that gives them direct power over their employees in terms of how they live at work and how much money they pay them. They can also donate money to support businesses and institutions that they like/ favour them while the poor have to crowdfund to get the same result.In a democratic society people can vote on laws that govern how the economy works, what businesses can/ can’t do, vote for minimum wage laws, progressive tax rates and can vote to give poor people welfare to help support themselves. Which helps to make the poor have a bit more economic power in society.However in a capitalist society the rich can affect politics through bribing politicians and affecting policy decisions. Especially if they are business owners how are responsible for local jobs and have a monopoly on the local market. If anything happens that they don’t like it will result in a loss of jobs and an increase in poverty and unemployment which will be blamed on the politicians due to poor economic policy. So politicians have an incentive to make business happy.So while democracy and capitalism can be sort of compatible the fact that capitalism is a fundamentally undemocratic economic system means that it will constantly clash with a politically democratic society as the two work in fundamentally different ways.
How did England become a democracy from a monarchy?
In 1215, King John was forced by the nobles to sign Magna Carta, which placed limits on the king's power and demanded that he seek the consent of the lesser noblemen over whom he governed before he could tax them. In the early 14th century, the need to consult the noblemen for their consent in an organized fashion had led to the development of a permanent Parliament.In 1649, King Charles I was executed on order of parliament for raising taxes, dissolving parliament for years and starting a civil war. The monarchy was replaced by a republic headed by Oliver Cromwell who proved to be a worse dictator than any King. After Cromwell's death, Charles II (son of the executed monarch) was asked by parliament to become King. In 1685, Charles II died without an heir and his brother, James II, became King. James proved to be as tyrannical as his father, and in 1689 parliament removed him from power and asked Mary II (James’ daughter) and her husband William of Orange to become King and Queen. It was at this point that Britain became a constitutional monarchy as parliament insisted that almost all executive power, including powers over taxation, be given to parliament, leaving the monarch as a figurehead. The final step in Britain’s move to becoming a full constitutional monarchy took place in 1721, under George I, when a single parliamentarian (Robert Walpole) became head of government in the office of First Lord of the Treasury, which later became known as “Prime Minister”. By this time Britain had the largest and most powerful Empire in history and the British people were the freest in the world - sadly they didn't share this freedom with the people of the Empire, which is why it eventurally declined. Finally the democracy came in 1918 with the Representation of the People Act which saw the size of the electorate triple from 7.7 million to 21.4 million. Prior to the passage of this act only 60% of British men had the right to vote and women had no right to vote at all.
Why was compromise no longer seen as viable in 1860 when it had been successful in part of the 19th century?
Missouri Compromise worked, Compromise of 1850 was okay but what compromises worked in the early half of the 19th century for agreements to be made between the north and south and why was it in 1860 that the south felt like they had had enough of the north?
What is the difference between compromise and capitulation?
When both sides do it, it's compromise. When only one side does it, it's capitulation. See how the Dem's keep saying the repubs need to compromise instead of saying everyone needs to compromise? That's because they don't understand what compromise is.
How can a society become democratic?
A. You need some form of formal Constitution accepted by the majority of the people (via plebiscite). This Constitution should have uncontested legal status and guarantee the rights of individuals while providing for the delineation of power within the government.B. Elected officials must be free of corruption and undue special interest influence. There must be caps on election funds etc. as well as term limits. A parliamentary system must ensure regular elections overseen by a recognized outside source.C. The military must be funded by and under the direct control of Parliament.D. Universal suffrage and a well educated public is necessary to make and support informed legislation and to elect officials willing to honor their public trust.These are just four of the basic prerequisites required to form any kind a democratic government but often compromised by one shortcoming or another. A classic example is the undue influence of money and special interest on the US government.