Answer these Government questions?

Question

What are the 3 types of government power (List and describe)

What are the 4 characteristics of a state?

What are the 4 theories of state origin? (List and describe)

What are the 6 purposes of government (List and describe)

Answer 1

Types of goernmental powers:
Police power- to regulate activities of people like business.
Eminent domain-to expropriate public property for public use.
Taxation - to impose revenues to support governmental functions.

Characteristics of a state:
Territory, Population, Sovereignty and Continuity.

Theories of state origin:
Civilization - development of the people to become a nation.
Unification of tribes - aggrupation of people to become one state.
Discovery - migration to a new territory.
Occupation - subjugation of an ethnic group.

Purposes of government:
Transcendent sovereignty -In feudal Europe, the most widespread justification of the state was the divine right of kings, which stated that monarchs draw their power from God, and the state should be only an apparatus that puts the monarch's will into practice. The legitimacy of the state's lands was due to that the lands were personal possessions of the monarch. The divine right theory combined with primogeniture became a theory of hereditary monarchy, in the nation states of the early modern period. The Holy Roman Empire was not a state in that sense. The political ideas current in China at that time involved the idea of the mandate of heaven. It was similar to the divine right in that it placed the ruler in a divine position, as the link between Heaven and Earth, but it differed from the divine right of kings in that it did not assume that the connection between a dynasty and the state was permanent. Inherent in the concept was that a ruler held the mandate of heaven only as long as he provided good government; if he did not, heaven would withdrawn its mandate and he would be overthrown and whoever restored order would hold the new mandate. In a theocracy, the divine will's primate over human laws is even more stringent, as it makes political authority subservient to the religious leadership.


The social contract -In the period of the eighteenth century usually called the Enlightenment, a new justification of the European state developed: Jean-Jacques Rousseau's social contract theory states that governments draw their power from the governed: its 'sovereign' people (usually a certain ethnic group, and the state's limits are legitimated theoretically as that people's lands, although that is often not, rarely exactly, the case), that no person should have absolute power, and that a legitimate state is one which meets the needs and wishes of its citizens. These include security, peace, economic development, and the resolution of conflict. Eventually, the divine right of kings fell out of favor and this idea ascended; it formed the basis for modern democracy.


Public Goods - an example of the theoretical thinking shifting the emphasis from faith and theoretical principles such as sovereignty to the socio-economic logic, as Karl Marx did. Thus modern political theorists typically legitimize the state with two major ideas: redistribution and the provision of public goods. In The Limits of Government, David Schmidtz (an economist) takes on the second of these ideas. While a market system may allow self-interested individuals to create and allocate many goods optimally, there exists a class of "collective" - or "public goods" that are not produced adequately in a market system. These collective goods are goods that all individuals want but for whose production it is often not individually rational for people voluntarily to do their part to secure a collectively rational outcome. The state can step in and force us all to contribute toward the production of these goods, and we can all thereby be made better off.


Political ideologies - on those questions that one can find the differences between conservatism, socialism, liberalism, libertarianism, fascism, especially the latter, and other political ideologies. There are also two ideologies - anarchism and communism - which argue that the existence of the state is ultimately unjustified and harmful. For this reason, the kind of society they aim to establish would be stateless. Anarchism claims that the community of those fighting to create a new society must themselves constitute a stateless community. Communism wishes to immediately or eventually replace the communities, unities and divisions that things such as work, money, exchange, borders, nations, governments, police, religion, and race create with the universal community possible when these things are replaced.
State socialism states that the degree to which a state is working class is the degree to which it fights government, class, work, and rule. The degree to which it wins such a fight is held to be the degree to which it is communist instead of capitalist, socialist, or the state. Stateless capitalism argues that taxes are theft, that government and the business community complicit in governance is organized crime and is equivalent to the criminal underworld, and that defense of life and property is just another industry, which must be privatized. Anarcho-communism and anarcho-socialism says that taxes, being theft, are just property, which is also theft, and that the state is inherently capitalist and will never result in a transition to communism, and says that those fighting against capitalism and the state to produce a communist society must themselves already form such a community. However, the majority of viewpoints agree that the existence of some kind of government is morally justified. What they disagree about is the proper role and the proper form of that government.

Answer 2

The question is moot because if we really followed true limited-government conservative principles, government would have NO involvement in ANY type of marriage, whatsoever. There would be no such thing as a "legal marriage." No licenses, no forms, no tax breaks, no benefits. So there would be nothing to argue about, and this whole issue would not exist. If two people want to get married that's a personal/religious/spiritual thing. It's their own business, and there is ZERO reason why the government should be involved in it in any way. Under the Constitution, the people of a given state have the power to pass or repeal laws of all sorts, to serve their needs, as long as they don't infringe on the inborn and constitutionally protected rights of any individual. I would consider laws banning gay marriage to be an example of such an infringement, and certainly against the spirit in which the Bill of Rights was penned.

Answer 3

Does not matter. Government does not operate as per the constitution.