THOERY ON GOVERNMENT Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement ii POSC209

The Formation of Government The Nature of Man

It seems as though by mere fate or random circumstance people have come to congregate among each others presence. They define the word social beings, almost everything they do significant involves some other person. In fact the most important activity, with regards to survival of the species, requires at least two participants of different genders. By that, there are no worse or more hurtful inflictions to a person than isolation. Such agony would drive a man to madness and desperation. And yet we go back to the previous inquiry, is it by fate or random circumstance that man has come together to form associations? It would seem that it be only natural and the answer would be in the positive. But, it is not the whole story. For they are free to leave as they were free to come together. It is a calculated and advantageous notion of the human instinct for survival. It has been noted by scholars that man had been a hunter gatherer, a master of his environment, of the plants, of the birds and the bees, of nature. However, it is an arrogant notion, for centuries and even now, man has been at the mercy of nature and of its forces. Cunning predators are no exception. Let us say man is social, for it is his nature. It is only natural for him to express longing and demand the company of his fellow men. But it is also because of necessity and mans weakness. For it is quite possible that man was been hunted by the predators we have presumed to have feared man. For what chance does a single man have against, say, a pack of wolves? Or a pride of lions, and even yet a single leopard or tiger. Man has agreed to tolerate each others company for they are weak and depend upon each other in self-defense from his environment. And with that one of the most destructive inflictions to a man is isolation. For when all communication is cut off from a single person, no one would wish a similar fate, for even in death men wish for it. But with this, it would be on the contrary. More advantageous to the isolated man would be to become deaf for he can signal his thoughts, be blind for he can feel his environment and listen to instructions. Man needs contact from another man, to be left alone, he would surely favor death. The natural instinct to congregate together and form packs or groups is one the main driving forces for their association. They, as social beings are just conforming to their natural behavior, to be with members of their own kind. Whether for fear, protection, or for self-gain, but mostly because they have come to understand that there is power in numbers, so they travel

together. Surely the people there are the more work that can be accomplished within the day. For it is easier to divide task among reach other them than for a single person to do all the required work needed for a single day. It just makes the task much simpler if you only have to worry about some tasks rather than most work. The division of labor is a mutual organized effort of the civil person. Man is fearful for he is weak, he may or may not be totally aware of this but he is afraid of animals to other humans. He fears more than he would ever admit. For almost all men fear most things, there arises courage and bravery to overcome such braces. For a group of men surely is a much more intimidating sight than a lone person, which in itself will already deter would be attackers from hostile thoughts. Truly there is safety in numbers. And when it comes to a point where it is time to attack a prey or an enemy, an organized group effort will be the key to success. Men are naturally inclined to be cunning and plotting to whatever it is that will be to their advantage. A tactical approach is most suitable when you have the pieces to be move, with the use of manpower; hence to play the numbers game, more is better. To separate man from other social animals, man have the desire to pleasure themselves and will hold that it be most enjoyable to pleasure themselves in the company of others. For only with others can man experience the greatest joys, whether it be acknowledgement of achievements or simple gatherings of merry-making. And parallel to reality, man cannot be as happy when he is not with the people whom he associates with. To simply put it, people enjoy the company of others. It is their desire to experience their greatest joys with other people. For man is a being filled desires, he is overrun by them. Desires are the prime moving force to make man do the things he does, second only to survival which in itself would also fall under desire. Some men only live to fulfill their darkest desires. While some are said to be rid of desires, it is erroneous. Man desires more than just survival. He wants a life more than just thinking about how to get through the day. He must have a purpose. Money, power, beauty, knowledge are of the most desirables in a mans life. To chase them can be one of the most fulfilling endeavors a man can encounter. However, greater would be the desire to have. To be a true man, you must follow your own dream. And man having an animalistic side, it would be correct to say that the greatest animalistic desire of man would be to have sex. Sex, in order to pass on his genes to the next generation, it is the one of the most basic animalistic desires. Reproduction drives living beings against each other in desperate times. In order to have sex, their desire drives them to great lengths. Men strive for power, for knowledge, for wealth, for prestige to gain access to a large number of women. That is the goal, it is a basic instinct

We may all be nave and push for the goodness of man. That he thinks for the ware fell of his fellow man, that he is honest, generous, kind, compassionate, hardworking, respectful and we might think of other good qualities to describe a man, yet this not always the case. But, I will say this, that man is fundamentally good. Given all things equal, he would do whatever he think would be right, regardless of what his perception of right or wrong is. But again man is weak, hes principles are broken and integrity breached. He gives in to his desires, which more often than not only serves his advantage rather than to his fellow. And pleasure to their hearts content they do, as well as things seem to go, there is trouble in paradise. As with societal life, people being social animals, they form relations with other people. This relation can be anything. It can be merely on a low-level that is observable between passersbys and by standers up to those of the family and intimate partners. Inherently with these associations there are implications. Due to mans innate uniqueness and difference, conflict among its unorganized members ensue. With their innate characteristics they form their own conceptions which lead them to ideas and thoughts that may contradict one anothers own way of thinking. With the free flow of ideas, this inevitably leads to conflicts. In this sense conflict is merely the communication of the divergence of viewpoints. This discrepancy in thought, the presence of it rather is not dire. In different circumstances it is quite advantageous. For disagreements opens up discourse, this would lead to exposing the loopholes and weaknesses to plans, ideas, and assumptions. Without it one would not be able to think more thoroughly the merits of ones thoughts. But in this circumstance it causes the people to go against each other for self-advantageous reasons. A diverse viewpoint in this case has turned its back against society. It has become a spark to light up a furnace. They quarrel and bicker among themselves for each is trying to achieve their hearts deepest and grandiose desires. From the smallest of things to the most dire of issues they talk each other down. However, talk is cheap, as they say when emotions have built up and patience run out it would be an ugly sight, to see the darker the side of humanity. When the people have talked the talk it would then be time to walk the walk. Violence is never the answer, but for some it is the only way, even though they forsake it in the beginning, when push comes to shove, people push back, and they can sure do push hard. And with mans gregarious tendencies, it would not be in the wrong if he forms groups within the community to which he belongs. Along with his unique characteristics, he may find in common with hes associations characteristics, things that he favors in common with. So, he favors their accompaniment and identifies himself with them. As different associations interact with each other, interest endorsed by the groups members also arise. So in turn the voice of one is concentrated to be heard against a crowd

of advocacies. The different associations struggle for their share in the community and a hierarchy soon follows. Friction naturally occurs since the interest of one that clashed with another is now amplified by the groups that are formed. Since it is impossible to sustain a stable state in an unorganized setting, one will naturally be under and another over, group that is. The conflicts between the groups start erupting out of nowhere. The group that is on top of the pecking order would logically be in power to control the underlying groups. They are the ones fit to hold dominion over the others. It also would also be in the positive for the other groups to not be contended to be in such a position for the sake of advancing their interest. They would surely challenge those at the top. The conflicts of desires now instigate a skirmish among the present groups. Then just as that, the weakness of man trigger. They start to fear, they fear violence, disorder and chaos. Conflict arises within the depths of society and the early spark of the furnace that is. They just cant stand it. Then just as suddenly they thought there was safety in numbers, the fire of chaos is sparked from within the group. But, the genius that brought them together comes up with a compromise. They organize themselves, for insecurity drives them once to form to form together now drives them to organize each other. Necessity is the mother of invention, no, I would say, it would be insecurity. A tactical agreement forms between the struggling groups. With the concept of having something in common they form the idea of an organized government based upon agreed social values and norms as fundamental uniting factors. However the success of the suppression of violence will only taste success if only, and only there would be a universal agreement of all parties involved; which is the members of society. Based on this agreement, society must follow the rules, values, customs and roles for the maintenance for the said order. Thus, they form the government as a means to control the violence coming from mans weaknesses. That is to give in to desires that conflict each other. They form an agreement to lessen the harmful effects of the government. He fears instability which could hinder the advancement of his self. The mutual bond to benefit all. TYPE OF GOVERNMENT Federalism

And so the government of people was now formed. But the question is what kind of government was formed? What type of government will fit the different characteristics, ideas, and interests of the people? The clash of different ideologies and ideal system of government would never end, but this does not mean that you only have to choose one. All of the types or system of government are created in their own perfection, the structure of

all the governments are formed in accordance to what the people/society need or demand. An autocratic government is ideal when there is chaos, the voice of one man is needed to rule, decide, and solve the conflict in the society. But when there is too much use of authority or there are abuses of power happening, the voice of many is needed, the people will struggle or fight for freedom from any oppression. But democracy, most of the time, will turn into its perverted version. Total mob rule is wrong, people lack the knowledge or intelligence to lead. This is where the role of aristocrats come in. The aristocrats must be the one to hold influence among all. For they are the one knowledgeable and educated. For a government to serve the differences of their people fairly, a federal system is needed, for it is the best way to balance the different beliefs of the people. Federalism is a system of government where power and authority is divided into national and regional government. Often federalism means decentralization, which power and authority is vested among the chosen leaders of the every state. Combining it to other type of government particularly to a parliamentary type will bring forth a sole leader among the states that will create a federal government which will be refrain from the concept of decentralization because there is a leader presented (a central authority) in the national government. The governors or representatives of each state are distinguish as local government officials who have their own allocated resources and funds for the state, but since they are in union of the national government it is still under the jurisdiction of the central authority even though they are recognized to manage their own state, they are still subjected to the power of the chosen leader among the representatives. Authority and power in every federal state is given among the representatives who are elected by their constituents. Authority and power is important, certain qualification (This will be discuss on the last part of this paper) is given in a state leader. In every, focus and proper governance will be put into. The main goal of a federal government is having unity in diversity. There is one constitution that should be followed upon, which is the supreme and highest law of the land. People from every state will choose their representative to the national government, and their representatives will elect among them the head of the national government. In order to exercise democracy, communityparticipation is necessary for they will elect a leader in their state. Like a local government, each state is given privilege to have their own laws and to exercise a free form of government. Duties and responsibilities are given to the leaders of the state. Flexibility is an important factor of adopting a federal type of government in terms of laws. One state may have different law to the other state. A federal state has its own limitation of exercising powers, of course they do not have authority to the other states as it is not

cover by their jurisdiction. Another thing is that each state has its own identity, having their own standard of running their state which will suit to the type of service they will bring to their people. For example, one may establish on how will they develop their territory base on the natural resources of their place, number of residents, including man power. They may have their own way on how the state will prosper and develop, which is of course a just action and in accordance with the supreme law of the land, the constitution. A federal government is more transparent to the people because it is closer to them. Every action done by the governor or the head of their state can be clearly seen by his or her constituents as it is only limited to their place. Transparency, one of the important characteristics of an ideal government is shown in a federal system. A state can manage their resources well; they will continuously develop these resources as these are their assets. The federal state would use their resources well in order for them to benefit from it. It is going to be advantageous to every state (and to the national government) if they could take care of their own resources as these could be their means towards prosperity. A federal state is also ideal to preserve the culture, tradition, and even language in a certain place or province (a state) which serves as their identity. All states can create laws in accordance with the customs and tradition of the people inside their jurisdiction. This characteristic of the federal system is good because it will avoid conflict between the laws and belief of the people. But of course, those laws created in every state must also be in accordance with the constitution. The central/national government could focus on larger issues which involves the whole federal state. It would be easier for the central government to handle national issues because the representatives of every state are the ones in charge in maintaining peace and order in their place. The prime duties of the national government are: protection, managing foreign policy, international representation, and other issues concerning the whole federal state. Each state in a federal system can focus well on the needs and concerns of their people. Their local government could surely see these needs and could respond to it faster and more easily. The prime duty of every representative are: to be the voice of his or her constituents to the national government, manage their resources well, maintain peace and order in his/her jurisdiction and do their very best to serve the people. Unicameral Parliamentary System

Parliamentary is a system of government wherein the head of the (national) government is called as the prime minister. Power and authority is vested on him by the members of the parliament. The parliament is composed of representatives of every state elected by the people. Every representative will hold his position for six years. Six years is enough for a leader to fully develop the state. Two years is needed for adjustment, another two years for rehabilitation of the place and the last two years for developing the state. So this would simply mean that there would be election of representatives every six years. Parliamentary system will bring stability in the government. The prime minister will stay on his/her position as long as majority of the members of the parliament is not against him/her; with this a stable government will be established. The representatives of the people are, of course like any other parliamentary setup, also the lawmakers of the land. A unicameral parliamentary is better than adopting a bicameral setup because the members of the parliament would be more accountable to the people in the way that if we have a bicameral structure, lower and upper house, members of the lower house may tend to just vote for or against the pending bill even though he didnt really support it. This maybe cause by the awareness that even if this bill will be approved in the lower house it will still goes through the upper house which is subject again for a long process and approval. But if we have a unicameral system, the members of the parliament would be more accountable in the sense that they do not have the upper house to put the blame on. Practicality is also a great factor in adopting a unicameral structure. Government would be nothing if there are no funds to be used. Every government activity or process needs a fund. In passing legislation under a bicameral system would require a bigger fund than in a unicameral setup. Parliamentary system is known for its faster passage of bill compared to any other government system (which is going to be discussed on the later part). But having a unicameral parliamentary type of government is more time saving in passing legislation than a bicameral one. In a lower and upper house setup, a bill must be debated and approved upon by the lower house before going to the upper house and then subject for the approval of the head of the government (a president in case of a presidential system). Compared to a one house system, laws will be decided faster which would really help especially if the law is really a must. In parliamentary system, both legislative and executive powers are usually conferred on the same order of government. This form of government offers the advantage from an executive viewpoint of being both responsible and accountable for the implementation of its own legislation. One of the good characteristics of a parliamentary system is that the

passages of laws are faster. This would root from the concept that the executive being the majority in the house will surely possess more votes than the members who will oppose it. This setup would save time in passing laws as the one who create laws are also the one who will execute it. Power, in a federal parliamentary system, is also evenly spread or distributed throughout the whole state because every state is given its local autonomy or freedom to govern their state without the intervention of every other state. Although having a parliamentary system is also like adopting a monarchial type of government because the power to control the whole federal state is vested on the head of the government, the prime minister. Aristocracy is also observed in the parliamentary system as the ones who composed the parliament are those people who are capable in running for public office which requires wealth/resources plus the qualifications that they need to meet. Democracy or the power of the people on the other hand (which will be discussed on the later part of this paper) is also present in this system of government. This will be simply manifested by the presence of election; the people are the one who chooses and elect the leader (representative) of every state. The mixture of governments shown in this structure gives each government (Monarchy, Aristocracy, Democracy) their roles. The Prime Minister is the one who holds power, the aristocrats for the influence, and the people for the decisions. In this concept, checks and balances is needed to neutralize each other, as monarchy or the rule of one man may turn into tyranny, aristocracy to oligarchy, and democracy to anarchy. In a parliamentary system, the judicial body is, of course, separated from the parliament. Separation of powers must still be observed, even though the executive and legislative powers are vested on one body. An action done or a decision made by the parliament may be deemed unjust or unconstitutional by the judiciary which will make that action/decision to be null and void. Democracy

Of course the power of the people should never be neglected, as they are the one who primarily composed the society where the government belongs. The participation of the people should never be put aside, it is always important to give focus on them as they are one of the elements of the state. Democracy is said to be the rule of the people, be it direct or indirect. But in a federal and parliamentary system, an indirect democracy would be more appropriate than direct democracy. One of the most important characteristic of democracy is the presence of election. The people in every state would elect their representative in the parliament which shows a feature of an indirect democracy. In this matter, the chosen leader of the

people is accountable to them as he/she is the one who carry their will. Every action done by all of the representatives must be in accordance of what their people need and want. Democracy would also encourage participation of the people in the government. Since there is election, the people would use their right and privilege to vote (of course the idiots will not). This would make them feel that they are really a part of the government process. It would make them feel that they have contributed to the welfare of the society. The sense of belongingness would be clearly seen in a democratic system. Another advantage of an indirect democracy (with qualifications to run for public office) is that people would choose or vote for someone who is more knowledgeable than they are. This would give an assurance to them that as they are busy on their own work/task; they would not think that much of their state because they know that their leader is knowledgeable enough in administrating the government. Democracy goes with the word freedom. If everyone is entitled to have freedom, one can do what he/she wants as long as he/she does not violate the rights of any person. Freedom could never be absolute as this will result to the perverted version of democracy, anarchy. There would be chaos if freedom would not be limited. One of the most important kinds of freedom a person must have is the freedom of expression. Humans are unique compared to any other living things in terms of expressing our thoughts, particularly in expressing it through speech/speaking (freedom of speech). Trees may bleed when they are hurt, animals could cry when they are suffering from pain, but only man has the gift of language, a way where we can express what we think and feel and it will depend on the people when they want to use it as long as they are now violating another persons right. People are also given different rights in order for them to live just. Rights can also be considered as the protection of the people as this would safeguard them in any kind of abuse/oppression. The right to life, right to liberty, and right to property are some of the basic rights a person must possess. THE MOST DESIRABLE LEADER Leaders must be fitted in the position and power given to them by the people. To be a leader, one must meet the qualifications needed to run for public office. And these qualifications are: age, physical and mental fitness, citizenship, residency, and education.

A person must be 40 years old and above to occupy a position in the government. For the age that arrive wisdom and age dictates how broad the experience of his field of expertise. When someone reaches the age of 40, he/she surely knows what life is all about, that person has a lot of good and bad experiences, and every experience that he have gone to taught him/her lessons in life. With this, a leader is armed of different experiences and wisdom which will help him/her in making decisions for his/her people. But no matter how experienced a leader is, if he/she has a serious physical or mental disability he/she would not be able to perform his/her duties. Thats why physical and mental fitness is also a factor to become a leader. Anyone who desires to be a leader must be a natural born citizen of the country. A natural born citizen is the one whose mother or father is also a citizen of the country (blood relationship). Citizenship is important because it will strengthen the loyalty and love of the leader to his country and fellowmen (patriotism). A leader must also be a resident of the particular state where he/she is running for public office of at least 20 years continuously. It would take that long to full understand the way people live in a particular place. A leader should be familiar to his/her place to know what the people really need and demand. Another factor why a leader must live on that place for that long span of time is to be well exposed to the culture, tradition, and beliefs of the people on that state. A conflict would arise if the decision made by a leader is contrary to the factors mentioned. Education is also a must to be a leader. A leader needs to have a college degree for it is already the highest attainment an individual could have to exercise his/her expertise. For it is better to know than not to know, ignorance is bliss but a cowardice conviction. For true men handle the truth, and truth comes from education. For the government will handle education and will monitor and make sure of its proper implementation. An education has to have focus, and this form of education has no exceptions. For men yearn for many things. And as we have said it is best for mans desire for the growth of the state and the welfare of the citizens. If that is the case, then, why not make the focus of our education the interest of the state. Through education we can put the right desires in a person. With proper conditioning and the right techniques starting from the early years, the control of desires will be put on top. Discipline and focus shall be crucial in accomplishing the goal that would be to condition the mind and strengthen reason. With these qualifications given, every elected leader would surely handle/run the government well. These qualifications are primary

requirements a person must meet to run for public office. Of course, there should also qualifications for the people in order for them to exercise their right to vote. A voter should be at least 18 years of age. Having this as the starting voting age would show and encourage youth participation in the government. The youth plays a big role in our society as they are the one who are next in line. Future leaders would also come from them so they need to be familiar in different government practices/processes. This cycle is constant as generations come and go. A voter should also be a resident in a particular state of at least one year for him/her to fully analyze their place and be very familiar to it. And lastly, a voter definitely needs to be a citizen of the country. Aside from the qualifications needed to run for public office, people should also look for good leadership qualities to those people. But this obviously depends on the voters as this is subjective. People should choose a leader who has a good track record. Background check should always be done by the voters because this would help them to know the person that they are going to elect and put in power. Achievements, experience in leadership and clean criminal record are just some of the factors the voters should look for. As what the clich said, good leaders are also good followers. Leaders are accountable to their people. Leaders are put into position to serve his/her constituents. A leader must be a good servant to the people, he should knows how to listen to his/her people. He must be open for any suggestion coming from his/her people as he/she does not have the monopoly of knowledge. A leader must be trustworthy of the votes given to them. Once the people voted for him/her, it means that they trust that person. And in order for a leader to return the favor, he/she must be responsible to the people. This would make him earn the respect of the people and true authority comes from respect. A leader must have passion for what he/she is doing. Willingness to lead, willingness to serve, willingness to sacrifice something for the benefit of the common good, these are things a leader should acquire. A leader should be capable to function properly especially when the whole state is experiencing harsh conditions and uncertainty. The leader is the one who gives hope to his/her people during hard times. A leader must show courage during these times in order to motivate the people to cope up and overcome the problem successfully.

A leader must always be confident in every action that he will do. The confidence of the leader would result to the people also being confident on how they are being governed. This will also make the people to fully trust their leader. But in the end, no one can truly possess all of these qualities. Some are good in a particular area and some are not. But this should not be considered as a big problem, leadership is not about being perfect, it is about how you are going to serve the people well despite of your weaknesses. NATURE OF LAW When the ground rules set during the agreement (social contract) are completely thought out and implemented, we can call it law. For the idea of law contains such qualities as fairness and equality. Equality in the sense that everyone is under the law and the law is applicable to everyone in the society. Law is the highest reason implanted in nature, which commands what ought to be done and forbids the opposite. This reason, when firmly fixed and fully developed in the human mind is law (Curtis, 2008). Law is the product of human thought. Its power originally arise from the consent of the parties involved in the contract. It is something imprinted to the human thought since the formation of government. And when law is not enough, punishment shall be sufficient in suppressing the peoples action. A law shall be formed upon when it is implemented for the benefit of its proposers. For it is a law that is unworthy of its name. In itself it is wicked and wrong, For that is why law was born. Laws are created not for the good, but for those who choose to sway from the path. CONCLUSION In the theory of government that we have made, government was formed because of consensus. People have the instinct to be with their own kind, the sense of belongingness could never be separated from them. We have adopted the system of federalism, unicameral parliamentary system, and democracy as the main basis of the structure of government that we made. Federalism is necessary to balance and maintain the different beliefs of the people. Parliamentary is for having an indirect democracy and democracy for the participation of the people.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abueva, J. V. (2005). Philippines: Some Advantages of Federalism and Parliamentary Government. Retrieved March 15, 2012, from ace: the electoral knowledge of network: http://aceproject.org/eroen/regions/asia/PH/Abueva-Federalism.pdf/view

Advantages and Disadvantages of Federalism. (n.d.). Retrieved March 15, 2012, from Sparknotes: http://www.sparknotes.com/us-

government-and-politics/americangovernment/federalism/section4.rhtml Curtis, M. (2008). The Great Political Theories. New york: First Harper Perennial Modern Classics. Dewey, L. (n.d.). Five Qualities Good Leaders Express. Retrieved March 15, 2012, from Girl scouts: http://www.girlscouts.org/for_adults/leader_magazine/2004_fall/five_qu alities.asp Dogra, A. (n.d.). Advantages and Disadvantages of Federalism. Retrieved March 15, 2012, from Buzzle.com: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/advantages-and-disadvantages-offederalism.html Jr., A. A. (2006). Federalism: The next Disaster? Manaoag Pangasinan: Manaoag Research Home. Jr., A. B., Ilago, S. A., Santiago, E. V., & Esden, B. P. (2003). Decentralization and power shift. Philippines: CORASIA. Qualities in a Good Leader. (n.d.). Retrieved March 15, 2012, from Ehow: http://www.ehow.com/info_8214279_qualities-good-leader.html taylor, D. (2011, April 13). Advantages and Disadvantages of Parliamentary Government. Retrieved March 13, 2012, from Ehow: http://www.ehow.com/info_8216763_advantages-disadvantagesparliamentary-government.html

White, B. (n.d.). Seven Qualities of a Good Leader . Retrieved March 13, 2012, from Groco: http://www.groco.com/readingroom/bus_goodleader.aspx