Social Science (087) — AI-generated practice question

A democrat would object to the way the law was passed, not its content. In a democracy, people are the source of all political power and have the right to be consulted on how they are governed. Bypassing public debate and legislative scrutiny violates this principle.

Key reasons for objection:

• It concentrates power in one person or group, undermining the system of checks and balances among legislature, executive, and judiciary.
• Democracy requires power-sharing; laws must be debated in the legislature where elected representatives take part.
• A legitimate government is one where citizens acquire a stake through participation. Without public debate, the law lacks legitimacy, even if beneficial.

The outcome (benefit) does not justify an undemocratic process — moral reasons for power-sharing make the act of participation valuable in itself.

Source: Democratic Politics II, Chapter 1 (Forms of Power Sharing; Why Power Sharing is Desirable)

---

The examiner expects you to separate content (the law may be good) from process (how it was made). The core democratic principle is that power must be shared and citizens must be consulted — this is the "moral reason" for power-sharing from Chapter 1. Mention: (1) people as source of power, (2) checks and balances/legislative scrutiny, (3) legitimacy through participation. Avoid writing about political parties here — that's Chapter 4 and not directly relevant.