Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Soft tyranny is an idea first developed by Alexis de Tocqueville in his 1835 work titled Democracy in America. [1] It is described as the individualist preference for equality and its pleasures, requiring the state – as a tyrant majority or a benevolent authority – to step in and adjudicate. [ 2 ]
Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people.
soft power: using economic and diplomatic sanctions against another country as a form of punishment. soft tyranny: when a democratic government uses its power in a manner which diminishes the rights or power of the voters. big stick diplomacy: using displays of military force against other countries to show dominance.
Alexis Charles Henri Clérel, comte de Tocqueville [a] (29 July 1805 – 16 April 1859), [7] was a French aristocrat, diplomat, political philosopher, and historian.He is best known for his works Democracy in America (appearing in two volumes, 1835 and 1840) and The Old Regime and the Revolution (1856).
He concludes that only by devolving power back toward law-abiding citizens can sanity be restored. [14] In addition, Thomas Fleming describes anarcho-tyranny as "law without order: a constant busybodying about behavior that does not at all derive from a shared moral consensus." [18] He suggests stoicism as a survival skill. He wrote,
In political science, despotism (Greek: Δεσποτισμός, romanized: despotismós) is a form of government in which a single entity rules with absolute power. ...
One of the five articles of impeachment alleged "tyranny and oppression, and abuse of the powers of his office." [9] The House voted to impeach by a vote of 306 to 60, but the charges were dismissed following English's resignation. [10] He had been accused of abusive treatment of attorneys and litigants appearing before him. [10] [11] [12]
In social choice, a tyranny-of-the-majority scenario can be formally defined as a situation where the candidate or decision preferred by a majority is greatly inferior (hence "tyranny") to the socially optimal candidate or decision according to some measure of excellence such as total utilitarianism or the egalitarian rule.