Democracy and Majoritarianism

I believe that the elite democracy plays a major role in how each federal and state government divides its power. A reason that I say it’s elite is because usually the people running for these elected positions are people who have money and power and they rule through the consent of the people who elect them, especially in the local government a lot of the times the people going into office are well known in society. It is also a popular democracy because people have a lot of say into what laws or changes in general get

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 elite theory believes that a small group consisting of powerful people holds the most power, and that this power is independent of a state's democratic elections process. Elite theory argues either that democracy is in all unrealistic, or that democracy is not able to be achieved within capitalism. Within the elite theory not everyone is going to have the power when making decisions only the most powerful group. Overall meaning the elite theory can determine the trajectory of the society, and therefore the conditions which the members of that society must exist and function. When considering who’s interest does the elite theory compromise it would be hard to find an answer considering that all these groups work together to protect each other’s

With each having a hold or at least an influence on a specific type of policies. Majoritarianism in the sense that people have the control over who they elect as their representatives or president. Another example could be the ballots measures and referendums where the side with most votes wins. The pluralism side of the American democracy manifested itself lately when couples of same sex groups won their rights to get married, after years pushing for equal rights and advocating until getting their case approved by the supreme court, Last but not least, the elite theory part of the America democracy has been gaining ground for decades until its influence is mostly seen in economic policies, where big corporations and the rich are getting their voice well heard throughout the states legislatures. A study published in September of 2014, conducted by Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page, concluded that rich people had much bigger influence on policy decisions compared to the rest of the population. One of today’s example could be the tax code written in a way that allows the rich to use legal loopholes to pay little to nothing on their taxes. Another present example is the probable passage of the trans pacific partnership that would not benefit the common citizen, even with overwhelming disapproval from the

The majoritarian electoral democracy, gives the people the power and/or right to participate directly in a political part and to self-represent. Followed by Abraham Lincoln’s famous slogan “ of the people, by the people, for the people”. The majoritarian political system, influence whether or not a person vote for a particular candidate or a particular party. This is known as the elections. Where the citizen has been giving the opportunity to choose a single person based on ones on belief or a whole party ( Ex; in the U.S we have two major parties from where we can choose on , democratic party and republican party. Among others single small parties). We called it Economic Elite Domination when the minority or small portion of a party gets the

Along with the majoritarian democracy, there is also relationship in the models of pluralist democracy. Everything slightly revolves around one another; elections, majoritarian, and pluralist democracies. As said in Dr. Overton’s PowerPoint, “Majoritarianism is growing in the Congress due to the rise in party unity. Problem is: they hate each other!” (Overton). The pluralist democracy can be defined as the top of a pyramid

The Elite theory best helps explain another form of government being the Judicial Branch. The Judicial Branch of government is the technical term for the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court is the highest level of court and is looked as the interpreters of the Constitution. Their soul job is to help clarify the Constitution when parts of the Constitution aren’t so clear. The Supreme Court is made up of nine judges selected personally by the President and are approved by Congress. None of this is done by any outside group, you could argue however that other people somehow influence the opinion of one person or the other on a certain decision but overall very clearly this form of government is ran by elites. Although this branch is run by Elites that does not necessarily mean it should be ran that way. The Supreme Court is suppose to be the interpreter of the Constitution and it is said by Marshall, in the case Mabury vs. Madison, that the constitution is the “"the fundamental and paramount law of the nation.” This leaving the question to: Why would you want someone deciding the law of this nation when they aren’t even elected by the people they are running? Since the people are not involved in this

Majoritarian government is a good idea in theory but this system would not last. When you think about a government ruled by majority, you tend to think that it would be a good thing because it is simpler than the electoral college and it would be what the majority of America wanted. However, you have to think about the downsides of this idea. It would not create a lot of stability in our government. It is no secret that we elect our president and the idea is that the majority of America favor that presidential candidate. Still, you see all the time that people are not happy or satisfied when their preferred candidate is not elected. I believe that majoritarianism would make this problem worse. It would allow for minorities to be excluded easily because if they did not have the majority support then they would never be able to win representation in government. Quickly, the government would end up being overtaken by a specific party. A big danger would be a political party becoming too powerful if they continue to control representation in election after election. The reigning majority could end up just becoming like a monarchy if they stay in power long enough.

The Elite theory describes government in three different parts. The composed of corporate, political, and military leaders. C. Wright Mills would rank their importance in that order. Even if there importance is not all the same. For the Elite theory  to work correctly "The leading men in each of the three domains of power- the warlords, the corporation chieftains, the political directorate-tend to come together to form the elite of America." This explains that all three parts most work together or else the system just will not work. The development of anything that happens in the government must coincidence the interests among them.

Pluralism stems from the idea that “a multitude of groups, not the people as a whole, govern the United States” (Udel.edu). These groups include labor unions, civil rights activists, lobbyists, and environmentalists, as well as many others. Pluralists argue that “Public policy is the outcome of group forces pushing against one another” (Barry 4). Some would say that a Pluralist government is undemocratic, seeing as the power does not lie with individuals, and therefore should not become the American way of life. Pluralists themselves, however, would argue that in fact a democratic government is undesirable, seeing as most everyday people are not educated on politics, and therefore really should not have much of an influence on political decisions. Furthermore, they would argue that Pluralism is

As politics and government becomes more complex and involved, more effort is required to keep up with and understand it. As a result, many Americans have lost touch with current events and happenings. Therefore, when election time rolls around, many people lack enough information to develop an educated opinion and support a candidate with their vote, so they just do not vote at all. This lack of information is also related to the belief that one vote will not matter. People believe that their vote will not count, and are therefore following the news less and becoming out of touch with public affairs and politics (Is the System Broken?”). This lack of information is also more strongly apparent among the younger voting population. When interviewed

Some long standing societies have failed to become democratic, even with popular support for such a political system for many different reasons. One, tradition and change is hard. Some states have such a thick religious, cultural, etc. history that they do not know how to incorporate democracy with what their state has, needs and wants. Two, they do not want a democracy. They want to be different and try something new to become better or even equal to the presence that the United States used to play as the main actor of politics worldwide. They see the United States diminishing in ways that it does not wish to, so it does not go with the democracy route. Three, some leaders may find that fear works better than anything else. Isolating people

On the contrary the pluralist view claims that government is ruled not by single elite, but there are a number of elite

Democracy varies in every country depending on the type of government or regime they have. There is the liberal democracy, which is all about giving people their rights and liberties; everything is done through fair voting and electing. The people are aware of everything that happens in their government. Illiberal democracies are basically the same as liberal, but the people in power are more secretive of their activities, and there is less civil liberty. It is essentially a partial democracy. Now Authoritarian regimes designate any political system that concentrates power in the hands of one leader or a small elite. There are no free elections and very little regard for the law. Political institutions, social structures, and the democratic rule of law all affect liberal, illiberal, and authoritarian regimes democratic quality differently.

Winston Churchill once remarked that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”. In agreement with his statement, this paper will examine the problems of democratic governments using specific examples, and compare it to the failure of fascist governments in Nazi Germany and Italy and communist governments in the Soviet Union and China.