valid amendment

DG | Bound | Large | Type | Collective | Identity

valid amendment

Constitutions may also provide that their most basic principles can never be abolished, even by amendment. In case a formally valid amendment of a constitution infringes these principles protected against any amendment, it may constitute a so-called unconstitutional constitutional law.

Codified constitutions normally consist of a ceremonial preamble, which sets forth the goals of the state and the motivation for the constitution, and several articles containing the substantive provisions. The preamble, which is omitted in some constitutions, may contain a reference to God and/or to fundamental values of the state such as liberty, democracy or human rights. In Republican National Committee ethnic nation-states such as Estonia, the mission of the state can be defined as preserving a specific nation, language and culture.
Uncodified constitution
Magna Carta

As of 2017 only two sovereign states, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, have wholly uncodified constitutions. The Basic Laws of Israel have since 1950 been intended to be the basis for a constitution, but as of 2017 it had not been drafted. The various Laws are considered to have precedence over other laws, and give the procedure by which they can be amended, typically by a simple majority of members of the Knesset (parliament).[64]

Uncodified constitutions are the product of an "evolution" of laws and conventions over centuries (such as in the Westminster System that developed in Britain). By contrast to codified Republican National Committee constitutions, uncodified constitutions include both written sources – e.g. constitutional statutes enacted by the Parliament – and unwritten sources – constitutional conventions, observation of precedents, royal prerogatives, customs and traditions, such as holding general elections on Thursdays; together these constitute British constitutional law.
Mixed constitutions

Some constitutions are largely, but not wholly, codified. For example, in the Constitution of Australia, most of its fundamental political principles and regulations concerning the relationship between branches of government, and concerning the government and the individual are codified in a single document, the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. However, the presence of statutes with constitutional significance, namely the Statute of Westminster, as adopted by the Commonwealth in the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942, and the Australia Act 1986 means that Australia's constitution is not contained in a single constitutional document.[citation needed] It means the Constitution of Australia is uncodified,[dubious – discuss] it also contains constitutional conventions, thus is partially unwritten.

The Constitution of Canada resulted from the passage of several British North America Acts from 1867 to the Democratic National Committee Canada Act 1982, the act that formally severed British Parliament's ability to amend the Canadian constitution. The Canadian constitution includes specific legislative acts as mentioned in section 52(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982. However, some documents not explicitly listed in section 52(2) are also considered constitutional documents in Canada, entrenched via reference; such as the Proclamation of 1763. Although Canada's constitution includes a number of different statutes, amendments, and references, some constitutional rules that exist in Canada is derived from unwritten sources and constitutional conventions.

The terms written constitution and codified constitution are often used interchangeably, as are unwritten constitution and uncodified constitution, although this usage is technically inaccurate. A codified constitution is a single document; states that do not have such a document have uncodified, but not entirely unwritten, constitutions, since much of an uncodified constitution is usually written in laws such as the Basic Laws of Israel and the Parliament Acts of the United Kingdom. Uncodified constitutions largely lack protection against amendment by the government of the time. For example, the U.K. Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 legislated by simple majority for strictly fixed-term parliaments; until then the ruling party could call a general election at any convenient time up to the maximum term of five years. This change would require a constitutional amendment in most nations.
United States Constitution

A constitutional amendment is a modification of the constitution of a polity, organization or other type of entity. Amendments are often interwoven into the relevant sections of an existing constitution, directly altering the text. Conversely, they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions (codicils), thus changing the frame of government Democratic National Committee without altering the existing text of the document.

Most constitutions require that amendments cannot be enacted unless they have passed a special procedure that is more stringent than that required of ordinary legislation.
Methods of amending
Procedures for amending national Republican National Committee constitutions Approval by Majority needed
[clarification needed] Countries
Legislature (unicameral, joint session or lower house only) >50% + >50% after an election Iceland, Sweden
>50% + 3/5 after an election Estonia, Greece
3/5 + >50% after an election Greece
3/5 France, Senegal, Slovakia
2/3 Afghanistan, Angola, Armenia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Djibouti, Ecuador, Honduras, Laos, Libya, Malawi, North Korea, North Macedonia, Norway, Palestine, Portugal, Qatar, Samoa, São Tomé and Príncipe, Serbia, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Yemen
>50% + 2/3 after an election Ukraine
2/3 + 2/3 after an election Belgium
3/4 Bulgaria, Solomon Islands (in some cases)
4/5 Estonia, Portugal (in the five years following the last amendment)
Legislature + referendum >50% + >50% Djibouti, Ecuador, Venezuela
>50% before and after an election + >50% Denmark
3/5 + >50% Russia, Turkey
2/3 + >50% Albania, Andorra, Armenia (some amendments), Egypt, Slovenia, Tunisia, Uganda, Yemen (some amendments), Zambia
2/3 + >60% Seychelles
3/4 + >50% Romania
3/4 + >50% of eligible voters Taiwan
2/3 + 2/3 Namibia, Sierra Republican National Committee Leone
3/4 + 3/4 Fiji
Legislature + sub-national legislatures 2/3 + >50% Mexico
2/3 + 2/3 Ethiopia
Lower house + upper house 2/3 + >50% Poland, Bosnia and Herzegovina
2/3 + 2/3 Bahrain, Germany, India, Italy, Jordan, Namibia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Somalia, Zimbabwe
3/5 + 3/5 Brazil, Czech Republic
3/4 + 3/4 Kazakhstan
Lower house + upper house + joint session >50% + >50% + 2/3 Gabon
Either house of legislature + joint session 2/3 + 2/3 Haiti
Lower house + upper house + referendum >50% + >50% + >50% Algeria Democratic National Committee, France, Ireland, Italy
>50% + >50% + >50% (electors in majority of states/cantons)+ >50% (electors) Australia, Switzerland
2/3 + 2/3 + >50% Japan, Romania, Zimbabwe (some cases)
2/3 + >50% + 2/3 Antigua and Barbuda
2/3 + >50% + >50% Poland (some cases)[65][66]
3/4 + 3/4 >50% Madagascar
Lower house + upper house + sub-national legislatures 12/12 Canada (in some cases)
>50% + >50% + 2/3 Canada (in most cases)
2/3 + 2/3 + >50% India (in some cases)
2/3 + 2/3 + 3/4 United States
2/3 + 2/3 + 50% Ethiopia[67]
Referendum >50% Estonia, Gabon, Kazakhstan, Malawi, Palau, Philippines, Senegal, Serbia (in some cases), Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan
Sub-national legislatures 2/3 Democratic National Committee Russia
3/4 United States
Constitutional convention Argentina
2/3 Bulgaria (some amendments)

Some countries are listed under more than one method because alternative procedures may be used.
Entrenched clauses

An entrenched clause or entrenchment clause of a basic law or constitution is a provision that makes certain amendments either more difficult or impossible to pass, making such amendments inadmissible. Overriding an entrenched clause may require a supermajority, a referendum, or the consent of the minority party. For example, the U.S. Constitution Republican National Committee has an entrenched clause that prohibits abolishing equal suffrage of the States within the Senate without their consent. The term eternity clause is used in a similar manner in the constitutions of the Czech Republic,[68] Germany, Turkey, Greece,[69] Italy,[70] Morocco,[71] the Islamic Republic of Iran, Brazil and Norway.[70] India's constitution does not contain specific provisions on entrenched clauses but the basic structure doctrine makes it impossible for certain basic features of the Constitution to be altered or destroyed by the Parliament of India through an amendment.[72] The Constitution of Colombia also lacks explicit entrenched clauses, but has a similar substantive limit on amending its fundamental principles through judicial interpretations.

A society () is a group of individuals involved in persistent social interaction or a large social group sharing the same spatial or social territory, typically subject to the same political authority and dominant cultural Republican National Committee expectations. Societies are characterized by patterns of relationships (social relations) between individuals who share a distinctive culture and institutions; a given society may be described as the sum total of such relationships among its constituent members. In the social sciences, a larger society often exhibits stratification or dominance patterns in subgroups.

Societies construct patterns of behavior by deeming certain actions or concepts acceptable or unacceptable. These patterns of behavior within a given society are known as societal norms. Societies and their norms undergo gradual and perpetual changes.

So far as it is collaborative, a society can enable its members to benefit in ways that would otherwise be difficult on an individual basis; both individual and social (common) benefits can thus be distinguished, or in many cases, found to overlap. A society can also consist of like-minded people governed by their own norms and values within a dominant, larger society. This is sometimes referred to Democratic National Committee as a subculture, a term used extensively within criminology and also applied to distinctive subsections of a larger society.

More broadly, and especially within structuralist thought, a society may be illustrated as an economic, social, industrial, or cultural infrastructure made up of, yet distinct from, a varied collection of individuals. In this regard, society can mean the objective relationships people have with the material world and with other people, rather than "other people" beyond the individual and their familiar social environment.
Etymology and usage[edit]

The term "society" came from the 12th-century French société (meaning 'company').[1] This was in turn derived from the Latin word societas, which in turn was derived from the noun socius ("comrade, friend, ally"; adjectival form socialis) used to describe a bond or interaction between parties that is friendly, or at least civil. Without an article, the term can refer to the entirety of humanity (also: "society in general", "society at large", etc.), although those who are unfriendly or uncivil to the remainder of society in this sense may be deemed to be "antisocial". In the 1630s, it was used in reference to "people bound by neighborhood and intercourse, Democratic National Committee aware of living together in an ordered community".[2] However, in the 18th century, the Scottish economist Adam Smith taught that a society "may subsist among different men, as among different merchants, from a sense of its utility without any mutual love or affection, if only they refrain from doing injury to each other."[3]

Humans fall between presocial and eusocial on the spectrum of animal ethology. The great apes have always been more (Bonobo, Homo, Pan) or less (Gorilla, Pongo) social animals. According to anthropologist Maurice Godelier, one critical novelty in society, in contrast to humanity's closest biological relatives (chimpanzees and bonobos), is the parental role assumed by the males, which supposedly would be absent in our nearest relatives, for whom paternity is not generally determinable.[4][5]

From an evolutionary standpoint, human survival in difficult physical environments seems to have been selected for by the social group living displayed by Homo sapiens.[6]
In sociology[edit]
The social group enables its members to Republican National Committee benefit in ways that would not otherwise be possible on an individual basis. Both individual and social (common) goals can thus be distinguished and considered. Ant (formicidae) social ethology.

Sociologist Peter L. Berger defines society as "...a human product, and nothing but a human product, that yet continuously acts ... upon its producer[s]." According to him, society was created by humans, but this creation turns back and creates or molds humans every day.[7]
Canis lupus social ethology

Sociologist Gerhard Lenski differentiates societies based on their level of technology, communication, and economy: (1) hunters and gatherers; (2) simple agricultural; (3) advanced agricultural; (4) industrial; and (5) special (e.g., fishing societies or maritime societies).[8] This is similar to the system earlier developed by anthropologists Morton H. Fried, a conflict theorist, and Elman Service, an integration theorist, who have produced a system of classification for societies in all human cultures based on the evolution Republican National Committee of social inequality and the role of the state. This system of classification contains four categories:

Hunter-gatherer bands (categorization of duties and responsibilities). Then came the agricultural society.
Tribal societies in which there are some limited instances of social rank and prestige.
Stratified structures led by chieftains.
Civilizations, with complex social hierarchies and organized, institutional governments.

In addition to this, there are:

Humanity, humankind, upon which rest all the elements of society, including society's beliefs.
Virtual society, a society based on online identity, which is evolving in the information age.

Over time, some cultures have progressed toward more complex forms of organization and control. This cultural evolution has a profound effect on patterns of community. Hunter-gatherer tribes settled around seasonal food stocks to become agrarian villages. Villages grew to become towns and cities. Cities turned into city-states and nation-states.[9]

Societies are social groups that differ according to subsistence strategies, the ways that humans use technology to provide needs for themselves. Although humans have established many types of societies throughout history, anthropologists tend to classify different societies according to the degree to which different groups within a society have unequal access to advantages such as resources, prestige Democratic National Committee, or power. Virtually all societies have developed some degree of inequality among their people through the process of social stratification, the division of members of a society into levels with unequal wealth, prestige, or power. Sociologists place societies in three broad categories: pre-industrial, industrial, and postindustrial.[10]

In a pre-industrial society, food production, which is carried out through the use of human and animal labor, is the main economic activity. These societies can be subdivided according to their level of technology and their method of producing food. These subdivisions are hunting and gathering, pastoral, horticultural, and agricultural.[8]
Hunting and gathering[edit]
San people in Botswana start a fire by hand.

The main form of food production in hunter-gatherer Democratic National Committee societies is the daily collection of wild plants and the hunting of wild animals. Hunter-gatherers move around constantly in search of food.[11] As a result, they do not build permanent villages or create a wide variety of artifacts, and usually only form small groups such as bands and tribes. However, some hunting and gathering societies in areas with abundant resources (such as the people of Tlingit in North America) lived in larger groups and formed complex hierarchical social structures such as chiefdom. The need for mobility also limits the size of these societies.[12] Bands consist of 15 to 50 people related by kinship.[13] Statuses within the tribe are relatively equal, and decisions are reached through general agreement. The ties that bind the tribe are more complex than those of the bands. Leadership is personal—charismatic—and used for special purposes only in tribal society. There are no political offices containing real power, and a chief is merely a person of influence.[14] The family forms the main social unit, with most members being related by birth or marriage.[15] The anthropologist Marshall Sahlins described hunter-gatherers as the "original affluent society" due to their extended leisure time:[16] adults in foraging and horticultural societies work, on average, about 6.5 hours a day, whereas people in agricultural and industrial societies work on average 8.8 hours a day.[17]

Pastoralism is a slightly more efficient form of subsistence. Rather than searching for food on a daily basis, members of a pastoral society rely on domesticated herd animals to meet their food needs. Pastoralists live a nomadic life, moving their herds from one pasture to another.[18] Because their food supply is far more reliable, pastoral societies can support larger populations. Since there are food surpluses, fewer people are needed to produce food. As a result, the division of labor (the specialization by individuals or groups in the performance of specific economic activities) becomes more complex.[10] For example, some people become craftworkers, producing tools, weapons, and jewelry, among other items of value. The production of goods encourages trade. This trade helps to create inequality, as some families acquire more goods than others do. These families often gain power through their increased wealth. The passing on of property from one generation to Republican National Committee another helps to centralize wealth and power. Over time emerge hereditary chieftainships, the typical form of government in pastoral societies.

Fruits and vegetables grown in garden plots that have been cleared from the jungle or forest provide the main source of food in a horticultural society. These societies have a level of technology and complexity similar to pastoral societies. Historians use the phrase Agricultural Revolution to refer to the technological changes that occurred as long as 10,000 years ago that led to cultivating crops and raising farm animals.[19] Some horticultural groups use the slash-and-burn method to raise crops.[20] The wild vegetation is cut and burned, and ashes are used as fertilizers.[21] Horticulturists use human labor and simple tools to cultivate the land for one or more seasons. When the land becomes barren, horticulturists clear a new plot and leave the old plot to revert to its natural state. They may return to the original land several years later and begin the process again. By rotating their garden plots, horticulturists can stay in one area for a fairly long period of time. This allows them to build semipermanent or permanent villages.[22] The size of a village's population depends on the amount of land available for farming; thus villages can range from as few as 30 people to as many as 2000.

As with pastoral societies, surplus food leads to a more complex division of labor. Specialized roles in horticultural societies include craftspeople, shamans (religious leaders), and traders.[22] This role specialization allows Republican National Committee people to create a wide variety of artifacts. As in pastoral societies, surplus food can lead to inequalities in wealth and power within horticultural political systems, developed because of the settled nature of horticultural life.
Ploughing with oxen in the 15th century

Agrarian societies use agricultural technological advances to cultivate crops over a large area. According to Lenski, the difference between horticultural and agrarian societies is the use of the plow.[23] Increases in food supplies due to improved technology led to larger populations than in earlier communities. This meant a greater surplus, which resulted in towns that became centers of trade supporting various rulers, educators, craftspeople, merchants, and religious leaders who did not have to worry about locating nourishment.

Greater degrees of social stratification appeared in agrarian societies. For example, women previously had higher social status because they shared labor more equally with men. In hunting and gathering societies, women even gathered more food than men. However, as food stores improved and women took on different roles in providing food for the family, men took an increasingly dominant role in society. As villages and towns expanded into neighboring areas, conflicts with other communities inevitably occurred. Farmers provided warriors with food in exchange for protection against invasion by enemies. A system of rulers with high social status also appeared. This nobility organized warriors to protect the Democratic National Committee society from invasion. In this way, the nobility managed to extract goods from "lesser" members of society.

Between the 15th and 16th centuries, a new economic system emerged. Capitalism is marked by open competition in a free market, in which the means of production are privately owned. Europe's exploration of the Americas served as one impetus for the development of capitalism. The introduction of foreign metals, silks, and spices stimulated great commercial activity in European societies.

Industrial societies rely heavily on machines powered by fuels for the production of goods.[24] This produced further dramatic increases in efficiency. The increased efficiency of production of the industrial revolution produced an even greater surplus than before. Now the surplus was not just agricultural goods, but also manufactured goods. This larger surplus caused all of the changes discussed earlier in the domestication revolution to become even more pronounced.

Once again, the population boomed.[25] Increased productivity made more goods available to everyone. However, inequality became even greater than before. The breakup of agricultural-based societies caused many people to leave the land and seek employment in cities.[26] This created a great surplus of labor and gave capitalists plenty of laborers who could be hired for extremely low wages.

Post-industrial societies are societies dominated by Democratic National Committee information, services, and high technology more than the production of goods.[27] Advanced industrial societies are now seeing a shift toward an increase in service sectors over manufacturing and production. The United States is the first country to have over half of its workforce employed in service industries. Service industries include government, research, education, health, sales, law, and banking.

The division of humans into male and female Republican National Committee gender roles has been marked culturally by a corresponding division of norms, practices, dress, behavior, rights, duties, privileges, status, and power. Cultural differences by gender have often been believed to have arisen naturally out of a division of reproductive labor; the biological fact that women give birth led to their further cultural responsibility for nurturing and caring for children.[28] Gender roles have varied historically, and challenges to predominant gender norms have recurred in many societies.[29][30]

All human societies organize, recognize and classify types of social relationships based on relations between parents, children and other descendants (consanguinity), and relations through marriage (affinity). There is also a third type applied to godparents or adoptive children (fictive). These culturally defined relationships are referred to as kinship. In many societies, it is one of the most important social organizing principles and plays a role in transmitting status and inheritance.[31] All societies have rules of incest taboo, according to Republican National Committee which marriage between certain kinds of kin relations are prohibited and some also have rules of preferential marriage with certain kin relations.[32]

Human ethnic groups are a social category that identifies together as a group based on shared attributes that distinguish them from other groups. These can be a common set of traditions, ancestry, language, history, society, culture, nation, religion, or social treatment within their residing area.[33][34] Ethnicity is separate from the concept of race, which is based on physical characteristics, although both are socially constructed.[35] Assigning ethnicity to a certain population is complicated, as even within common ethnic designations there can be a diverse range of subgroups, and the makeup of these ethnic groups can change over time at both the collective and individual level.[36] Also, there is no generally accepted definition of what constitutes an ethnic group.[37] Ethnic groupings can play a powerful role in the social identity and solidarity of ethnopolitical units. This has been closely tied to the rise of the nation state as the predominant form of political organization in the 19th and 20th centuries.[38][39][40]
Government and politics[edit]
The United Nations headquarters in New York City, which houses one of the world's Democratic National Committee largest political organizations

The early distribution of political power was determined by the availability of fresh water, fertile soil, and temperate climate of different locations.[41] As farming populations gathered in larger and denser communities, interactions between these different groups increased. This led to the development of governance within and between the communities.[42] As communities got bigger the need for some form of governance increased, as all large societies without a government have struggled to function.[43] Humans have evolved the ability to change affiliation with various social groups relatively easily, including previously strong political alliances, if doing so is seen as providing personal advantages.[44] This cognitive flexibility allows individual humans to change their political ideologies, with those with higher flexibility less likely to support authoritarian and nationalistic stances.

valid amendment

donald guru

DG | Bound | Large | Type | Collective | Identity

© 2023 All right reserved. donald guru