Political Compromise Is Important For Democracy Essay

e.g.: If person A has political power over B, then A is able to motivate, inspire, incite,

Generally speaking, anyone who lives in the United States of America knows that there are two main political parties—the Republicans and the Democrats. Having two main parties has its advantages and, of course, its disadvantages. For example, in By the People James E. Monroe and Rogan Kersh (301) point out having this type of system creates “predictability and stability.” However, they also declare (301) it can “lead to a gridlock.” This is not a new concept either as there has been a divide since the beginning of both parties. The two parties more often than not disagree on various issues, while rarely agreeing on what is best for the country.

The growing ideological gap between the United States’ two major political parties, in other words, rising levels of political polarization, has had a negative impact on American politics as it results in Congressional inefficient, public apathy, and economic inequality.

Why are citizens of the United States of America allowed to have “United States” in their official title? It is because they fought through the rough times their country faced. They fought through being torn apart because of their own greed and when things began to get worse, a group of men came together to face their country’s issues head-on, in the meeting that was known as the Constitutional Convention. To debate the fate of their great country, but to also create compromises between the land. The Connecticut Compromise, the Three Fifths Compromise, and ability to allow more power to their National Government were some of their greatest compromise the country has ever seen, created by none the less a group of wise and great men, also known as the Founding Fathers. With these great compromises set in place their government could run efficiently and effectively, but

Washington saw the countries dividing along political lines, and foresaw endangers of partisan affecting national unity. He urged the American people to avoid political parties, believing that it would lead to the “ruins of public liberty (50).” He strongly believed that the political parties had “served to distract… [and] agitate the Community will ill-founded jealousies and false alarms (51).” Washington exposed the intentions of political parties by saying, “The alternate domination” of one party over another will lead to a “frightful despotism (49).” In other words, hyperpartisan, influenced by a revenge seeking spirit, will hand over trust and absolute power to the

Today, politics vary drastically from what our Founding Fathers precedented in the genesis of the United States. September 19, marks the 208 anniversary of Washington’s Farewell Address, whether bad or for worse, George Washington’s insight is still relevant in today’s political stage of a dominant two political party platform. In George Washington’s Farewell Address, then former president Washington, states the possible weaknesses to unfold as a republic. The ideology of a political party with definite beliefs alters the opinions and pride held for the United States for the domination of one party. History within itself, has had multiple political parties for varying causes, however the split between the Democrats and Republicans, although

In his essay “Polarized Parties Are Good for America”, Matthew Yglesias asserts that the two-party system is ideal for America. He begins by stating that polarization is bad for elites, as it leaves little to no room for “self-styled players”. He then suggests that the two-party system is beneficial for voters, insisting that having clearly labeled candidates creates a “menu” that allows the masses to know what they’re voting for from the start. He concludes by stating that the problem isn’t in partisanship, but with the small number of parties. In this essay I will prove that the two-party system is bad for America.

Imagine our government without the structure and aspects of our modern day. Well, this wouldn’t have emerged without the differing ideas from the brilliant minds of Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. They were both strong political leaders who shaped the country, Revolutionary War heroes, lawyers, and served in the Continental Congress.However,from the beginning, the two men harbored opposing visions of the nation’s path. In George Washington’s Farewell Address of 1796, the president warned that the creation of political parties, “sharpened by the spirit of revenge,” would certainly lead to “formal and permanent despotism.” Despite Washington’s words, he didn’t know two of his closest advisors and cabinet members, would ultimately help form the dual party system of the U.S. Furthermore, contrasting the two is not difficult, simply because of their stark differences concerning each of the men’s visions for America.

The polarization of the political parties is a reflection of a country, not simply a government divided, but the country’s populous in growing further apart. Alan Abramowitz indicates the polarization of the Democrats and Republicans causes them to be on opposing sides on almost all issues and Washington reflects the growing division within Americans (714). Thus the major problem with Polarization and gridlock is not the simply the inability to pass the legislation when gridlock occurs but what it does to the morale of American citizens. D.J. Flynn and Laurel Harbridge completed two surveys in order to study how partisan congress affects public opinion. A result from the study indicated most people will accept legislation in favor of the opposing party than they will gridlock (885) and while more research is needed the result of their survey is gridlock does cause a decrease in the populist confidence in Congress (Flynn, Harbridge 890). It is clear something needs to be done to improve the mindset of the American people. One of the best ways to improve the mindset of the American populace is for them to become more educated. When the country was first established, people were not privy to every action the congress was taking as it happened, and therefore the quibbles within congress were not in the forefront of people’s minds. Even Melnick illuminated the fact that the populist is now bombarded with opinions about what is happing in Washington. He indicated when the constitutional convention took place the meeting was behind closed doors miles from constituents allowing them

Many Americans are aware of the polarization that exists within them and within the government. However, people do not realize the extent of the polarization and the effect that it has on government functions. Susan Page, author of “Divided We Now Stand” explains that many Americans are aware of the increasing polarization, when a political party influences the stance of a person, and that citizens believe that polarization influence politicians more than it influence them. However, Page argues that voters are to blame as well. She uses a survey to illustrate the choices that Americans make on a certain policy. The results of the survey show that Democrats and Republicans choose the stance of their political party, regardless of their own personal opinions on the actual policy (Page). Page’s point proves that politicians are not the only ones that contribute to the government’s dysfunction, and that voters might want to re-evaluate how they process their information and their choices if they wish to see a change.

As a young child, politics has always been a complicated idea that I could never wrap my mind around. Even knowing nothing whatsoever over politics and the government, I could still see that there was something truly wrong with politics, and as I grew older, I began to understand politics as it itself is in a state of dysfunction. The question at hand here is how and why this dysfunction is occurring in our politics today. For many experts, they have found that it can all be centered on one main topic. Even though many experts have various viewpoints when it comes to politics, many can agree that it is partisanship that is causing dysfunction in politics, however there are also those who believe otherwise.

Even with the looming divide, America remains optimistic about the future of the nation, and only 45% of the nation believes that the election did real damage to the nation (Hackman 1). While almost one-in-two Americans believing the nation suffered a blow during the election would seem alarmingly high, with the way the election went, it would be expected that more Americans would agree the election did damage. Also, according to the same survey 59% of Americans think Trump should compromise with Democrats (2). To be sure, this relatively uplifting statistic still remains a headwind to unifying the nation. It remains a fact, according the the Washington Post survey, more than four-in-ten Americans believe Trump should not compromise with Democrats. To say, in a blanket statement, a politician of any stature should not compromise is toxic to its core. Unfortunately, however, both Republicans and Democrats suffer from this never give an inch mentality. When citizens or politicians believe their positions are so superior that compromise is not an option, there is simply no way to convince these people that they are actually wrong or that there may be a better way to solve the problem at hand.

Since the writing of the United States Constitution, the American government has been structured in a way that only truly allows for two parties. Of course there are numerous other smaller parties, however, the key is that these parties are smaller. The most successful way to become elected to a position in the American governmental structure is to have the backing of the Democratic or Republican Party. Over the two-hundred-year history of the United States the parties have changed names and fundamentally altered their core believes. Today, the distinction has become quite clear as the rise of polarization forces a clear, concise difference between the two parties. The Democrats must uphold the liberal ideals while the Republican Party carters to those of a conservative

Since the middle ages, corporatism has taken a leading role in countries by involving different organizations into a group of people to develop cooperative associations on the basis of shared interests. In Europe, corporatism was the main objective of people in a country. For example, Lewis Mumford note that the basic society "was based on classes and ranks" and there was no guaranteeing demand through security and no power that did not recognize the legal obligations of a corporate profile (Mumford). Once democracy began to spread and become definite in the United States, the Americans began to experiment with new ideas and values. In America, corporatism began to evolve into a new system where the knowing of freedom and justice was

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