Consepts in political science - Essay Example

?Essay on Concepts in Political Science Most nations across the globe are having problems with regards to the number of people that participate in voting during elections. While being one of the basic human rights, many people choose not to vote due to their indifference to the political system, as well as discontent to the actual results of their votes (Hoffman and Graham 108). It is therefore beneficial for government officials to find ways for the people to vote, not just to exercise their right of suffrage, but also to prevent unprepared officials from creating disturbances in the political system. Before further analyses regarding the increase of low voter turnout or political indifference would be mentioned, some concepts regarding issues and concepts that jumpstarted the concept of democracy would be discussed. Three ideas of well-known writers of political ideas, John Stuart Mill, Alexis de Tocqueville, and John Rawls will be discussed, as well as the federalist ideas of a group of writers under the pen name Publius would be summarized. The impact of their ideas or the possible influence in affecting the participation of citizens in politics would also be integrated in the course of the analysis. Democracy as seen from a foreigner’s viewpoint can be read in Alexis de Tocqueville’s book titled Democracy in America. Coming from a country where political power was previously owned by the aristocrats, Tocqueville wanted to see how a country such as the United State would be implementing democracy despite having not many leaders with deep political roots. During his stay in America around early 1830’s, he saw a kind of radical liberalism that stems not from the fall of power of the aristocrats, but rather as the result of the rise of the working class into power (Hoffman and Graham 105). However, as Tocqueville was touring the rest of the country, he noticed that while the implementation of democracy has not been halted in any way, there are still some places where slavery is still commonly practiced (Hoffman and Graham 106). He also noticed that aside from the slaves, the Native Indians were also marginalized in the spirit of democracy, thus making it seem that only the white-colored people of the nation have a chance in participating under democratic governance (Hoffman and Graham 106). This also implies that democracy could also create tyrants out of the majority, since it would be expected that they would be able to give representations as to what the public needs, without having to answer for any from the minorities. Thus, while the democracy in America during Tocqueville’s time may have been borne out of the need for changes, there was still more work to be needed. Due to this view, he was able to generate the idea that democracy is a dynamic concept, which has no stopping at any point, and is constantly remodeled and reformulated to suit the needs of the people (Hoffman and Graham 140). In line with democracy, other principles such as self-accountability in maintaining peace and order in a society were also developed. One of the most influential essays to be written, Mill’s work On Liberty discusses the main premise that freedom must start from the happiness, or intended pleasure of the people (Hoffman and Graham 40). Identifying with this kind of freedom would make sure that the peace and order within a group of people would be maintained, since the citizens experiencing liberty are expected to be satisfied and content. Also, by implementing such humane principles of freedom, the lives of human beings grow into a distinct and separate existence from animals (Hoffman and Graham 41). In Mill’s belief, in order to be fully recognized as a rational human being, the ability to think, express ideas, and to live as one chooses to without doing any intended harm would be the ultimate expression of freedom (Hoffman and Graham 41). While Mill’s definition of freedom and liberty may seem at most utopian, this kind of freedom would only be effective if it is rightfully exercised, without the intent of harming to oneself or others (Hoffman and Graham 41). Any action that would cause negative effect on others would be a ground for a restriction in freedom, since harming others in any way is like disregarding their own right at being free (Hoffman and Graham 45). Physically harming others, setting negative examples to others, instigating competition are some of the possible harms that Mill defined, and such harms can give either physical or psychological harm to those that are susceptible to such ideas (Hoffman and Graham 45). However, it is the nature of humans to be able to select those that may or not harm them, as well as being affected by non-consensual harm much more than harm in general that gives further problems with Mill’s concept of harm (Hoffman and Graham 54). This adds to the complexities in the definition of freedom using his guidelines, and is the subject of further debate and other criticisms (Hoffman and Graham 55). Publius was a joint pseudonym of three important political figures in the creation of the American constitution: James Madison; Alexander Hamilton; and John Jay (Cohen and Fermon 335). Under this name, the constitution was defended by articulating and explaining the concepts that surround the decision of ratifying the constitution. The papers were published in periodicals in order to educate the people as well as to counter those that oppose the constitution, or the Anti-federalists. The main argument of Publius in writing the papers was to prevent the overall destabilization that could arise from too much division in the state. Also, the loyalty of the people must also shift from loyalty to their localities or party, to loyalty to the state as a whole (Cohen and Fermon 338). Also, there is too much danger in the delegation of the government to many leaders, as it could create tension between them, as well as a greater liability of one of them to commit corrupted acts (Cohen and Fermon 341). There is also the danger of the rise of factions if there are too many leaders under governance, which could create instability within the ruling body (Cohen and Fermon 346). The government seeks to unite the people as much as possible in order to minimize instability as well as to retain the loyalty of politicians to their own causes. While freedom entails the need to be accountable to one’s deeds, the idea of justice and equality ensures that abiding under the law and keeping one’s self away from doing untoward harm to others would keep peace and stability in society. Rawls’ concept of justice and equality is summed up in a few ideas: being under a veil of ignorance; and putting one’s self in other people’s shoes (Hoffman and Graham 63). The two ideas simply mean that in order to achieve equality and justice, people should set aside their differences and be able to know what others in other situations feel. By doing so, the people would be able to select their actions not because of the culture that dictates it, but due to the rationality of choosing such actions. However, before such methods can be implemented properly, the people must be familiar with the idea of equality regardless of their characteristics or traits. In his book, A Theory of Justice, Rawls presented methods on how to distribute resources to all of the citizens as equally as possible. The distribution of material resources, freedom, as well as political power is presented as an egalitarian form of governance (Hoffman and Graham 82). There is also the need to distribute “benefits” and “burdens” within the state, such as enforcing several principles to prevent inequality among citizens (Hoffman and Graham 83). For this to become successful, Rawls proposed for changes in the structure of the society, since this could greatly affect the quality of life of its people (Hoffman and Graham 83). By being able to create delineations that would ensure the equal distribution of resources to all citizens, a person may be able to enjoy freedom as much as possible, which in turn would give assurance to all that not one citizen is above the law, and that everyone is treated equally as an important part of the society (Hoffman and Graham 84). While this concept of equality is a good approach in attaining freedom and peace within a given society, for it to become effective people should not become purely self-interested, and that they should not only be familiar with their own identities but with others’ as well, since not knowing would make them impartial to others. Such beliefs could ultimately turn them into individuals that actively pursue their own interests and betterment (Hoffman and Graham 84). In summarizing the concepts of Mills, Tocqueville, Rawls, and the Publius: while it is true that by enticing the people with the idea that under democracy, they would have greater freedom in their choices, it is also a challenge to perform their duties as citizens. The price of being able to choose what one thinks or does is to commit in ensuring that peace and order in the society is maintained. Not only that, but the equality of all citizens under the law must also prevail, and for this to happen each must be able to have sensitivity with regards to the needs of others. With such actions, liberty and freedom for all citizens can be maintained. However, even if the concepts have noble beginnings, because some people are too impartial to think of the needs of others before themselves, inequalities and injustice may rise from such actions, which are the opposing ideas of democracy. In defining democracy as a political method, politicians are elected based on the number of votes. The main role of the people is to select the candidate whom they see as the most appropriate in the position (Hoffman and Graham 107). Also, the elected official is chosen by the people as the one who would be able to be their representative should certain needs must be raised, or if changes in the system must be made. While this is a very effective method for the people to exercise their rights to vote and select those that would lead over them, if the course of the governance starts to shift or lean towards a selected group of people, there would come a time when most of the people would become indifferent to the selection of leaders. If people notice this kind of inequality under the law, not only would they feel helpless but also trapped in a system that would ultimately drain them of their freedom. Also, because of this same injustice the same people that had the right to vote would never see it as a moral obligation since they do not feel that such exercise of basic rights would give them any gain (Hoffman and Graham 108). In this light, the ideas of the Publius may not be as applicable as expected, since it would be difficult to rein in all of the people in supporting only a single party, and without powerful parties capable of addressing their needs, indifference can be the result. Such an indifference to politics would result to a lesser voter turnout, and in the long run instead of being able to represent the people due to the number of those that voted for them, politicians would just win simply due to either the few choices for candidates, or due to popularity ratings. A vicious cycle of indifference to the law and the selection of inappropriate rulers would arise from such a situation (Hoffman and Graham 108). The popularized notion that democracy is able to give benefit to all citizens under a clear, unbiased law has been challenged by many analysts. One of them is Joseph Schumpeter, an Austrian economist and socialist who believes that democracy itself is not a means to an end, but a continuous method of politics and governance (Hoffman and Graham 107). It is not fool-proof and universally-inclusive, and the rules by which is controls the order of the state is defined by the kind of people who are under such laws. For example, under democratic governance all citizens have the right to vote or run for any position in the government. But despite this right, there is discrimination against certain ages (e.g. minors) in voting or in pursuing political ambitions (Hoffman and Graham 107). Thus it is important that aside from adhering to the concepts of democracy, changes must also be made accordingly to include all kinds of mindset within the population, for empowerment and belonging (Hoffman and Graham 108). Works Cited Cohen, Mitchell and Nicole Fermon. Princeton Readings in Political Thought: Essential Texts since Plato. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010. Print. Hoffman, John and Paul Graham. Introduction to Political Theory, Second Edition. Essex: Pearson Education Limited, 2009. Print. Read More