In this case the hunting act 2004 is arguably protecting the autonomy and private interests of the animals, thus conforming with liberal political theory. Proponents of the hunting act 2004 argue that animals have rights that must be protected. Both of the acts effectively remove hunting and methedrone from the private sector, bringing them into the public sector. Capitalism an economic system in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the private sector (i.e the individual, representing the minority) as opposed to the public (i.e the government, representing the majority). Both of these acts reduce the autonomy of the individual to make choices independently and freely.
In relation to the liberal concepts of autonomy and capitalism these acts have an adverse effect! Autonomy in relation to liberal democracy means that individuals are independently self-governing i.e may make decisions free from government coercion. This act passed by the majority effectively criminalises the minority of people who used (or abused…) methedrone. This amendment to the misuse of drugs act schedules 4–Methylmethcathinone (popularly known as methedrone) among others, as a class B drug. Another example could be the recent The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Amendment) Order 2010. Regardless of the merits of the act it forces the minority to conform to the majority otherwise known as tyranny. For example the Hunting Act 2004 designed to ban hunting with dogs (particularly fox hunting), passed by a vote of 356 to 166 in the house of commons… This act forces the opinion of the majority (that fox hunting should be banned) onto the majority (who believe it shouldn’t be banned).
There are many examples of tyranny of the majority in politics, in fact in EVERY vote in which there is a single vote opposed to the majority we could define as a tyranny of the majority. However this also creates a problem that the minority may be tyrannised by the majority (tyranny of the majority). In either type of democracy, for any action to take place it must be supported by the majority of the votes, ensuring that the majority of the people support the action. In a representative democracy the people do not participate or vote themselves, but rather they elect a representative to do this on their behalf. Today however we use a type of democracy we call ‘representative democracy’. In a direct democracy, citizens (those eligible to vote) participated directly in the government, for example they voted themselves in the assembly. The original Greek democracy was what is now called ‘direct democracy’. The word ‘democracy’ can be used to define any state where the people have power as opposed to in a ‘liberal democracy’ which denotes the concept of democracy together with both autonomy and capitalism. Today it is largely used interchangeably with the concept of ‘liberal democracy’ however there is a crucial difference. Traditionally it is said to mean rule by the people, however there is no universal definition on what constitutes a democracy. The word democracy comes from the Greek words demos meaning people, and krátos meaning power. Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp