In the article Yes, people really are turning away from democracy by Yascha Mounk and Roberto Stefan Foa, the authors detail results of study survey questions, as well as an analysis completed by Joe Noonan. These results do show a changing trend in how people view democracy; the position is trending more to one of disenchantment towards democracy. Specifically, as young people have a more critical perspective towards democracy than the views of their parents. Additionally, 10-20 percent of young respondents feel a strong leader is required as opposed to parliament and elections. Furthermore, Americans are increasingly frustrated not only with politics but also with the divisions within America and a general inability to discuss politics in a civil way. …show more content…
However, this negative view of democracy can be dangerous as many young people lack experience living under the control of an autocracy. There are times when this may sound reasonable and a good thing, but they have very quickly forgotten the reason this Republic began; the King of England held autocratic rule over America. Furthermore, these same people do not realize that without a democracy, they would not have the ability to choose their autocrat. In addition, without democracy, we would have very little say when it comes to issues such as taxes, war, human rights, and the rule of law applied equally to all. In conclusion, I do not believe that a move away from democracy would be
What is democracy, do we really understand the concept and the implications of the freedoms that our society enjoys. Democracy by definition is a “government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections”.(1) The United States democracy in current times can be a difficult situation to grasp, due to the fact that we are operating off of the Constitution written over 200 years ago, and individuals modern
“We’re a Democracy”, by William P. Meyers, states that we have become a democracy overtime but we are also still a hint of a republic as well. People who are so against democracy only see democracy as a direct democracy. But in reality, there’s also the representative democracy, which is quite similar to a republic. Over the years, with the help of all the amendment changes the U.S. has moved greatly towards a democracy. I actually agree with Meyers, both of these forms of government choose representatives to speak on their behalf, so whose to say we don’t actually have a democracy.
Democracy did not occur in a matter of seconds, it took years of evolution to become what it is today. The thought of a self-government during a world ruled by monarchs would have you locked up in a mental hospital. As you can figure, democracy did not just come out of the nowhere, it had to be planned out and modified over the years. The earliest contributions and influences of The American Government came from philosophers, some of them are the part of our founding fathers and others influenced them to develop the strong nation we are today.
Democracy is first stated in the chapter by Hofstadter, democracy is evil according to our founding fathers. Men are selfish and argumentative. Hofstadter says, “Calvinistic sense of humor, evil and damnation.” Basically saying that our democracy is bound to fail. It also has been said that the most seen dangers rest in the democratic parts of America’s constitution. Our founding fathers believed that democracy could potentially be the root problem in our country. During the time period democracy wasn’t seen as a political party that brought progression to our country and didn’t last very long. Elbridge
Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines democracy "as a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by the people" (www.merriam-webster.com). But the one big problem is that "We the people" are not exercising their "supreme power" to determine the U.S. government. Less than half of the eligible electorate showed up at the polls for the 1996 U.S. presidential election. While lower turnout has marred previous presidential elections, 1996's voter turnout dipped below 50 percent for the first time in more than 30 years. It appears that the people's increasing cynicism about politicians that they lie to get elected and the perception that people have no respect or confidence in the
Democracy, as most people think of it today, did not exist during the first few decades of U.S. history.
The United States is no longer the democracy it stands for. Democracy stands for a government controlled by the majority of the population. The United States is no longer controlled by the majority. America is controlled by the powerful corporations and rich elite. The combination of an uninformed, disinterested public, a flawed election process, and an economy controlled by 1% of the population have all led to the formation of the American Oligarchy.
Second, I completely agree with Berman’s arguments. A stable democracy is not going to happen over night. Democracy takes time. Look at the United States as an example. Yes, we are a democracy (or a Republic), but that does not mean that this country did not go through some hard times to get to where we are. In the beginning, we were apart of the British empire. Then after a lot of unrest will the British monarchy, its legislation, the quartering of troops within homes, etc. the colonists fought a war to gain its independence. Still the hardships did not end there. Our country broke apart because of its difference and had to fight another battle to
When writing the Constitution, one of the most prominent arguments focused on whether America should be considered a Democracy. A large percentage of the founding fathers feared the term “Democracy” because they strongly believed that if the people had control, then there would be disorder and violence. As James Madison stated in Federalist No. 10,
It’s hard to define something big as democracy in few short words, but president Abraham Lincoln does it best by defining democracy as a “Government of the people, by the people, for the people” (Bleicherstrasse). The Merriam Webster Dictionary barely scratches the surface of what democracy really means. It tries to define democracy as “a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting, a country ruled by democracy, an organization or situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights”, but democracy is so much more than that. For a government to be considered true democracy it must support these four key elements “A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections, the active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life, protection of the human rights of all citizens, a rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens” (Diamond, 2004). If we go by this definition of democracy than America is not consider to be true democracy.
So democracy is a system of government wherein the people elect their rulers; in the case of Athens, it was, more or less, a direct democracy, where all male citizens voted in an assembly and decided by majority rule (elected officials were chosen by allotment). Why would this be a bad thing? Is it not better than dictatorships or oligarchies, where anywhere from one man to a small group of elites have power over all? Why exactly would a government that has its decisions made by the very people it represents be considered something worthy of criticism?
Fourth, the definition of the word "democracy" has changed. The way Americans see the word doesn't refer to a static system as it once did, it is ever changing and improving.
It is thought that Democracy is most desirable in our current state, that it opens many more freedoms then other political philosophies. Believing that many are benefiting from these freedoms and citizens are holding the power. Philosopher Aristotle notes “For democracy is said to be the government of the many. But what if the many are men of property and have the many” (Aristotle 72). He is arguing that only a certain character is actually exercising their beliefs, others are just being controlled. Aristotle’s concept leads to my argument that in democracy individuality is taken away and we unknowing become controlled therefor democracy is not a desirable political philosophy,
Yes, I believe too much democracy can be a bad idea because can a country work without a working and stable government? Democracy is a system of government by the whole population or all eligible members of state, typically through elected representatives. A major problem are Americans believing Congress doesn’t have a clue and are out of touch, due to failures in the past and present. Therefore, we may suffer from too much, not too little, democracy. Budgeting is major problem in America, especially during presidential elections which cost an significant amount of money. France and America were influenced on enlightenment ideals to change to a representative government. Both were originally ruled by monarchs, however it ended in the American
The American democracy is one of the most peaceful kinds of government in the world although it is a long way from utopia. The democracy in which we live has many strengths and weaknesses. Neither strengths or weaknesses out weigh one another, but it is necessary to have both due to the varying definitions. A democracy is a government that is run by the people. The politicians that we elect to run our government are human and they are susceptible to mistakes based on their own strengths and weaknesses. The strengths and weaknesses they possess are reflected into our government but at least “we the people” elect them and they are not chosen for us.