At the time, the financially and militarily weak Germany was seen as a minor threat compared to the colossal communist state that was Russia. Britain especially was worried about increasing Marxist and Socialist influences within Western Europe, allowing Germany to grow more powerful would create a "buffer zone" between Western Europe and the USSR, many people actually approved Hitler coming to power because he was so anti-communist.
The cost which is incurred during campaign process is very high. Current Indian election system is hampering in the growth of India as well as in policy making also. Moreover, the procedure is also very time consuming and chaotic.
Former President Pranab Mukherjee also showed support to this initiative. Recently, Election Commission has said it is ready to conduct the elections at once after September, This reignited the debate - some opposing, some favoring and some giving solutions to the problems Ex: Cost Savings - The election process is not only tedious and hectic, but also expensive.
Each party spends so much of money in every election. By opting for One India, One Election, we can save huge amount of money which can be used for other schemes.
If they make only one election for both Lok Sabha and Legislative Assembly seats. Government will use all its expenses to woo voters, rather than using partially based on the region in which election is to be conducted.
Time Saving - Half of the year is spent by the parties to focus for the next election of one or the other state. Time is wasted on designing strategies and discussing the actions of the opposition parties. The name calling and blame game takes a lot of time that could rather be used for productive policy criticism.
Vote Bank Appeasement - With elections around the corner, most political parties resort to gimmicks to win or destroy the reputation of other parties. They formulate policies only those which would earn an advantage for the vote bank and in turn, help in elections.
For instance, road construction and infrastructure development seem to occur only when elections are around the corner. Most importantly, people are tired of this kind of appeasement.
The fear of losing voters, politicians prevent the passage of long-term useful policies but promote those which give immediate dividends. Hampers Policy Formulation - Policies should be formulated without thinking about the votes being lost or won.
Policies should be formulated so that the destitute and downtrodden are able to benefit from its fruits. However, due to constant elections policy makers are only concerned about winning votes but not about the welfare of underprivileged. Reducing Vices - Casteism, communalism, corruption and bias is seen almost every election.
This will only stop when the elections are held in common and the odds of winning or once and for all to lose prevail. The remaining duration of his career, he would not try to stir up the evil that is destroying the peace of the nation. Not possible - Lok Sabha elections along with elections to assembly and panchayats is not as easy as it looks like.
It will have various complications as the villages and the cities together gear for voting. There may also be shortage of administrative staff, equipment, logistics and security. Less care at the voting centers may further incite trouble and corrupt processes being carried out unchecked.
Expenditure can still be reduced - By bringing a strict limit on election expenses for all parties. Transparency in funding can help in making parties accountable and thereby, reducing the expenditure.
State funded elections will be an even better option in reducing the costs. Politicians may become complacent - Politicians are kept on their toes when they are regularly worried about the routine elections where they will be accountable.
They know that they are responsible for the actions of his party members and something goes wrong, they will be held responsible.
This fear is good to keep them under control. Reducing the number of elections would make them lazy for the rest of the term and suddenly become hyperactive during the election year.Appeasement policy was adopted by Neville Chamberlain in the final stages leading to WWII during was this pragmatism or pure folly?
Appeasement policy was adopted by Neville Chamberlain in the final stages leading to WWII during was this pragmatism or pure folly? Review and summarise the pros and cons of Appeasement and. The cons of appeasement outweigh the pros of appeasement.
Major, devastating events in WWII, like the Rape of Nanking and the Holocaust stated above, could .
There are many pros and cons that go with the idea of appeasement, but overall appeasement is a poor method used to resolve situations. To appease means to pacify or conciliate, basically it was a method used by the great powers in Europe to keep Germany from becoming an international threa.
Pros and Cons of Appeasement Pros Cons. The policy of Appeasement successfully delayed the war for a few years. It momentarily stopped Hitler's advancing when the policy was enacted.
The Allied countries were still weakened from WWI and appeasement postponed the next war so countries like England and France could become empowered again. Pros and Cons of Appeasement Bibliography; Appeasement in Action Chamberlain along with his constitutes of the League of Nations are known today as cowards, due to their use of the appeasement policy.
Chamberlain used appeasement as an attempt to retreat from the threat of war and to stabilize his reign as Prime Minister. This idea was. Level up your code with IntelliJ IDEA.
I'll keep it short, sweet and relatively general. Take Facebook, who IPO'd in From Zuckerberg's perspective, the pros are that talent at Facebook becomes less poachable (from the Googles, Microsofts, etc.) the second you IPO.
This was a huge factor for.