Benjamin Barber And Joseph Schumpeter

From the early 1840s to the present day, a democracy can be described as a flawed establishment which has been shaped by the power of wealth and control, complex social relations, and most importantly the people’s desire to live a fulfilling life. Throughout this time period the principles of democracy, such as equality, protection of the people’s interest, and promotion of human rights were shifting in order to increase the democracy efficiency. Therefore the continued importance of the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and Constitution remain significant since, in American today, democracy is a system that is continuously being shaped by the people within it.

The conflicting ideas about how to operate in a democracy stem from the notions of serving the public good or indulging self-interest; these two ideas focus on the maximalist and minimalist citizen, respectively. John Mueller argues in “Democracy and Ralph's Pretty Good Grocery” that a government of the people works best when it happens naturally and celebrates political inequality, going so far as to say that “any dimwit can do it” (Mueller, 990). The minimalist model strives to include everyone who wishes to participate, but it can also function autonomously without any citizen participation. It’s rooted in self-interest and what each individual wants to get out of their democratic rights; the citizens have the right to vote, but also the right to not vote. On the other hand, the maximalist point of view, outlined in “Why Democracy Is Public” by George Lakoff, says the concept of morality should play a significant role in a democratic government as it teaches Americans to “care about our fellow citizens, … act on that care and build trust, and … do our best not just for ourselves, our families, and our friends and neighbors, but for our country” (Lakoff, 1). No one is exempt from working for the greater good, and the hope is that everyone benefits from the shared resources. In that case, the country thrives on the participation of all people in self governance.

(2005). In D. Bjelajac, American Art: A Cultural History (pp. 37-129). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, Inc.

When determining what designs and creates a democracy we look at what makes up its economy, what is the role of a citizen in that state or what defines a citizen, and how government should be acting in this democracy. This is what Lia and Hanauer did when they wrote the Gardens of Democracy, this descriptive book brings forth an idea that sees society as a garden which needs active tending and sustainability to better improve its situation. With the right gardeners and setting the garden will be able to prosper and adapt into the most suitable environment. The authors use this metaphor of a garden to describe that society needs citizens and government to tend to, that there needs to be an active role for government to provide citizens with

One of the biggest steps in building the democracy that America has to this day began with the Declaration of Independence. Democracy is the idea that consent comes from the governed and this is blatantly seen through text within the Declaration. “…That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” (Declaration of Independence.) This idea was borrowed from the Ancient Romans who had a republic form of government. Republic directly means that political authority comes from the people! In roman history the citizens were largely the source of the law. Roman law was

In the era of the contemporary United States, a country that has had the longest standing democracy, we are used to thinking very highly of its system. However, throughout our history, there have been a couple of critics to the system of democracy. It comes as no surprise that democracy does have its issues. One of the first pieces of literature where democracy was mentioned and analyzed at a deeper level was The Republic by Plato. This ancient Greek philosopher did not completely agree with democracy, regardless of the fact that ancient Athens was the first civilization that gave rise to it. In fact, in a numerical list that he composes on which are the best ways of ruling, Plato puts democracy at one of the lowest levels. In order, Plato’s list of types of government from most desirable to least desirable looks like this: 1.) Republic (The ideal city) 2.) Timocracy 3.) Oligarchy 4.) Democracy 5.) Tyranny. Additionally, In The Republic, Plato tells us his beliefs and values on certain aspects of life through the eyes of Socrates. So, even though Plato himself does not appear in The Republic and instead Socrates does, nonetheless, Plato and Socrates shared the same ideology when it came to democracy. As we know, Plato did not agree with democracy. As a result, in this paper, I will explore the greatest intellectual strengths and weaknesses of Plato’s view on democracy.

When it comes to the science of psychology, there have been a multitude of great contributors, researches who put forth the effort to try and comprehend those who face mental challenges and disabilities as well as those who posse abnormal capabilities. Lightner Witmer and Inez Beverly Prosser are perfect examples of pioneers who have contributed to the science.

In addition to Aristotle, economist Joseph Schumpeter is also of importance because of his theories on democracy. In his book Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Schumpeter explicated his new theory of democracy and defines it as the “rule of the politician.” With this new theory, he makes it clear that he is deviating from the classical notion of 18th century democracy presented by Rousseau and Bentham. Schumpeter writes that this traditional model of democracy could be defined as “the democratic method is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions which realizes the common good by making the people itself decide issues through the election of individuals who are to assemble in order to carry out its will” (Schumpeter 250). His major critique on such democracy entails the assumption of a common good because he believes that people cannot achieve a conclusion of what the general will is. Thus, Schumpeter posits his own theory of democracy, which can be defined as follows: “that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote” (Schumpeter 269). This

With its roots retreating back to the 13th century, the Enlightenment has been a fundamental period in history that has influenced many different contemporary ideologies we see today. There were multiple thinkers, referred to sometimes as “schoolmen” or even “doctors”, during this time that played important roles in creating a society based on human reason and insight. Many of their ideas and concepts help construct the aspects of modern systems of societal government, one of the most evident being Democracy. To this day, we take appreciation to the connections manifested between the Enlightenment and Democracy. Both Democracy and the Enlightenment believe in:

Democracy is a unique type of government, and the purpose of this essay is to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses that a democratic government provides. I will detail that many components of this type of society are both strengths and weakness as each component has beneficial aspects as well as unavoidable pitfalls.

‘The Republic’ is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato around 380 BC, concerning about the order of justice, the order and character of just men and just city/states. The Republic is considered as the best known work of Plato and is considered one of the world’s most influential works of politics, history and philosophy. In this Socratic dialogue, Socrates discusses about the notions of justice and whether the just man is very happy when compared with his unjust, Athenian and foreign counterparts. Socrates considers the various facets of the existing regimes and proposes a series of hypothetical cities that are entirely different from his considerations. Such heated discussions result in the culmination of discussing kallipolis, a hypothetical city-state that was ruled by a philosopher king. In this paper, we are going to consider Socrates arguments about democracy by examining whether the concept of democracy always remains inconsistent with philosophical goals.

Democracy is often referred to as the rule of the many, but Aristotle called this definition incomplete. In his book “Politics”, he explained that in a city if the majorities are aristocrats and if they have political authority, then it is an aristocracy not a democracy. He therefore defined democracy as when “free people have authority and Oligarchy as when the wealthy have it” (1290b). Plato viewed Democracy as a flawed system with too much inefficiency that would make any implementation of a true democracy not worth it. While Aristotle viewed democracy as a system that could work if it is limited to certain restrictions and if it is the regime that best fits the culture of the people to be governed. In this essay it will be argued that Plato’s view on democracy as a flawed system is more prevalent or more compelling if the current political arena around the world is observed.

one essential conviction, expressed in the word democracy itself: that power should be in the hands of the people. Although democracy today has been slightly inefficient in this idea, with the wealthy, elite class challenging this right, “it nevertheless claims for itself a fundamental validity that no other kind of society shares….” To completely understand the structure of democracy, one must return to the roots of the practice itself, and examine the origins in ancient Greece, the expansion in the Roman Empire, and how these practices combined make what we recognize as today’s democratic government.

In every form of government system we have two sides of the same equation, (people and power). The kind or form of the democracy depends how these two sides are balanced. The more democratic a democracy becomes the more and the better the two sides of equation will be balanced which means people which is the source of power in a democracy will have less propensity of their rights to be violated. There are two main concepts which are very important in a democracy and especially in a liberal form of democracy; the first is membership of the political community and second is the concept of citizenship which arises in relation to the membership of political community. This paper attempts to examine this relationship and argues that; first, citizenship

The author has been able to fulfill the target of the book, which is to test and answer the questions raised by critics through the provision of evidence of the reason no democracy exists at the present. The author presents the arguments in a chronological way that gives a better understanding of the past, today, and prospective future of democracy. The root of the present democracy is stated in the book and lays the basis of the other arguments in the book. Dahl argues that there are conditions that any state should attain in order for it to be considered as a democratic