Since 2016 is a presidential election year, and arguably, one of the most pivotal elections in American history, almost every front page article covers the whereabouts of the election. “The Case Against Democracy” is an article written by Caleb Crain and was published on the New Yorker Today’s headlines on Tuesday November 1st and fits the common theme of election headlines but speaks on the electorate rather than the candidates. It discusses the possibility of an epistocracy, the logic and means of instilling one, and how the relationship of epistocracy to democracy.
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 United States government is a democracy, a system of elected policymakers and an organized government so that policy is created in favor to the people 's wants and needs. Many like to categorize this system of government off of its characteristics and patterns. Three theories have been grouped into the three contemporary theories of democracy, where the United States fits into each in a different way. Pluralism reflects the use of groups advocating for a single cause, while Hyperpluralism is Pluralism that did not go correctly because groups are so strong that the government weakened itself. In addition to pluralism and hyperpluralism, the Elite and Class Theory introduces the idea that a government has an elite, wealthy ruler who runs the classes below it. These three contemporary theories of democracy are all applicable to the United States government, but pluralism is the most prominent out of these three theories because the United States is based off of political and advocate groups that press for changes in policies with a balance that prevents the scales from tipping onto the hyperpluralist side.
Pluralist theory views politics and decision making as a competitive phenomenon where different groups and individuals have different views and that there is no single elite group that exercises influence (Davis & Go, 2009). The theory holds that power is relatively broadly distributed among different interest groups. These groups hold different views of the same aspect and compete with each other for
In layman’s terms, “the government ought to do what the majority of people want” (Ch. 1 Pg.7). This theory has a pejorative connotation due to the idea that the minority would be ruled out, allowing the majority to further advance their bias agenda. Many political scientists see this theory prevalent in modern society. In this circumstance I am unable to see the majority rule, therefore I do not agree with the idea the Majoritarianism sufficiently depicts American
The first element of government that halts progress in America is the hyperpluralist theory, an extension of the pluralist theory. Edwards, Lineberry and Wattenberg state that “According to pluralist theory, because of open access to various institutions of government and public officials, organized groups can compete with one another for control over policy and no one group or set of groups dominates” (16). Basically, the pluralist theory states that for every group, there exists another group with opposing views or goals and they help serve each other through compromise. The hyperpluralist theory, on the other hand, argues that these different groups can counteract each other, diminishing any progress that the other group achieved. Without power over the others, a group cannot push its agenda without the opposing group pushing its own agenda to set that group back. A positive aspect of this theory is that it prevents one group from dominating; however, it discourages any changes from happening in government. Edwards, Lineberry, and Wattenberg
Democracy is defined as “A system of government in which ultimate political authority is vested in the People.” The Declaration’s
America’s democracy is an important part of our history and what has made this country what it is today. There are many pros and cons in relation to how our country is run when it concerns the U.S. Constitution. Something that is important is that America is how the framers came up with the idea of what democracy is to help this nation to succeed and to help provide a good model to be followed throughout the world. There are different parts of our government which has powers yet they must consult with the other powers before following through and executing their proposals. Another factor that has played an important role in the development of our American democracy is where there is a big separation of government and religion. Our American democracy has our U.S. Constitution which relies on the three branches of government where the political parties have candidates which are voted into office. This paper will discuss how federalism is incorporated into our Constitution and what the purpose is in having three branches of government, the reason behind having the political parties and how this is incorporated into our American Democracy.
The ideology of pluralism is based on creating balance by distributing power evenly across culture and population. Political elitism is most often a small group of upper-class people who hold political positions solely with the intent to gain economic wealth, even in opposition to the public’s best interest. Plural-elitism is a mix of the two, where many elitist groups share a pluralistic relationship with each other. The American government uses neither fully pluralistic, nor fully elitist views, but a mix of the two resulting in a plural-elitist
Referring in a detailed and specific way to a relevant aspect of US political institutions, personnel or processes, illustrate how US democracy can be considered elitist.
Governments are labeled by the groups of people that dictate the control of power of the State. The common sentiment of early American history was “the few versus the many”. The question of how a democracy lead by a few people would fail to materialize into an aristocracy was firmly addressed within the Federalist papers, notably number 57. Madison argues that limited terms as well as the heavy involvement by the population would keep the few elected from trampling the rights and interests of the many. While a distinct class system fails to materialize in the Constitution, a layered system shows that there are still divisions amongst both the few and the many. The few are divided by the offices that they hold. The Senate holds more prestige than the House by the limited capacity of its
America is synonymous with the word freedom, even being dubbed “the land of the free” by its own national anthem. But, what makes America so much more “free” than other countries? Some would argue that it’s America’s system of democracy, despite the fact that democratic governments are now the most common form of rule found in countries around the world. American democracy, although effective, is not the best democracy style for all nations; because, like many other countries, its government contains many flaws, including: its low voter turnout, two-party political parties creating division and deadlock in congress, and government positions of power being bankrolled and controlled by the rich.
Churchill’s claim that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” is deliberately provocative and intended to challenge the reader’s simplistic ideal that democracy is without faults. There are an estimated 114 democracies in the world today (Wong, Oct 3rd lecture). A figure that has increased rapidly in the last century not necessarily because democracy is the best form of government, but primarily for reason that in practice, under stable social, economic and political conditions, it has the least limitations in comparison to other forms of government. Be it the transparency of a democratic government or the prevalence of majority rule, all subdivisions of democracy benefit and hinder its
Although our nation’s government relies on the fundamentals of liberal democracy, it still has many flaws. Articles written by Francis Fukuyama share a clear message suggesting that America’s political institutions are decaying and its flaws will not be fixed unless we have good leadership within the government that yields good policies. It is still not too late to make reformations in the system. Today, US citizens share a distrust for the inner workings of our government, and through the years, there are many things that must change. Although our government is able to withstand failures right now, it may cause an expansion of problems that will cost us indefinitely. The existence of interest groups has caused an exponential increase in the elite control of the system, thus creating people’s lack of trust for the government.
Take it all the way back to when the constitution was being written. The founding fathers had a big choice to make; did they establish a direct democracy or a representative democracy? They had to weigh the pros and cons of each and they ended up deciding on a representative democracy. In this paper I will tell you why they made things the way they did and certain compromises they made along the way.