How Democratic Is the Constitution - Literature review Example

Introduction Dahal in his book How Democratic is the American Constitution examines, how truly the US Constitution has embodied the real democratic values. He explains how Constitution falls short of the spirit of real democracy as its design has major flaws. This essay will review Dahal views and offer the analysis of his work. According to Dahal no doubt the Constitution framer were “men of exceptional abilities” who did their best to form a democratic state, but the founders were stressed by the public demand and the alliance of the states were two main reasons, which made it hard to have an ideal Constitution. The basic “undemocratic” aspect of the Constitution is the tolerance of slavery. The reason for this leniency was to guarantee the support of Southern states, where slavery was common compared to rest of the country. He points out that the Constitution did not bestow voting rights to all American, as African American, Women and the indigenous people were excluded, which is against the spirit of freedom and democratic values. Article II empowers states to select the number of electors proportional to its population, but as the current status of population is changed in all states, it has be changed, which can change the whole process of president selection. According to Article I, the senators had to be appointed by state legislature, which was unfair practice in real democracy. He mentions that the judges are empowered to rule any law unconstitutional, even if it is approved by legislature and president. Ironically the judges do not come through election but rather appointed, empowering them so enormously is subverting a democratic government to judiciary. Constitution is supposed to have comprehensive powers and should reserve supremacy in the regulation of the state, yet congress powers are limited. He cites the example of Sixteenth Amendment, where the Court narrowly interpreted Congress powers and little powers were given to the Federal government to influence the economy. Dahal thinks Constitution has a gap and Court often seems to fill that space for which they are not entitled according to the Constitution. Dahal compares American Constitution with constitutions of the other (22) nations. He mentions that no doubt, US Constitution has been trimmed through amendments and has been made practicable for the modern times, but he questions, is American Constitution really democratic and ideal, as believed by majority of the Americans? He set the following criterion for measure an ideal Constitution, as he explains them, one by one. The first one is federal unity, in order to be a federal unit; the states should have extensive autonomy to practice and pass legislation. Next comes, autonomy, as how power the states enjoy. The third issue is, Bicameralism, which must be empowered to pass legislation, without enough power in both houses, the system will not work. And next he adds, does the upper house have “unequal” representation of the population? What is the role of judiciary, how much power they have .Is court too comes under the government or can subordinate the government? How is the electoral system based? Does it really represent the population? Is it two party or multipart state, as more parties mean more influence in legislations? And what is the structure of government is it presidential or a parliamentary system. Dahal mentions that countries where majorities are ruling, it is very easy to manipulate and empower any group or party, whatever the majority desires. If government powers are evenly distributed, it will create a “fair” system, which will lead to consensus building. As American system is hybrid due to the bicameral legislature and a strong executive separating the powers as a result it is not easy to mould any category. Dahal declares that the issues, such as economic growth, unemployment, inflation, economic inequality, social spending, energy efficiency, and foreign aid is a criterion to check the performance of a government. The more successful a government is successful to solve these issues, the better its performance is. He concludes that changes in constitution are crucial, as it will make American more democratic and recognized. Counter Argument Dahal talks about slavery and equal rights, and according to him it was due to southern states pressure that the founder succumbed to slavery. The truth is, it was more essential for founders to stay together, rather than fight about an issue, which could be solved at a later stage. Right and wrong are formed by culture we all live in. Slavery, at the time was practiced in many countries around the world, America was no exception. Even at the time of Plato, who is the founder of democracy, slaves were part of society and had no rights. Despite Greeks advancement in knowledge and philosophy, their society was dependent on slavery. It is not about right and wrong, even in today’s world, different societies have their own unique beliefs, judging a past culture in 21st is not a realistic approach. Had the founders pushed hard for things, which were against the time and tide, perhaps the southern states would have gone their own way. There was possibility that, the disagreement could have lead to many countries in the continent in North America rather than one United States of America. Dhal calls selection of the senators an unfair practice, however the reason behind this selection was to create a strong bonding between state and national government through state legislatures as it provided a direct involvement in affairs It worked well for long time, however problems came during the civil war, as a result in 1917, Seventeenth Amendment changed this system, and senators are now popularly elected rather than selected. Dhal has criticized the “undemocratic” ways, and his main objection is to set more seats for the populated states, but how far it can work, if the population of California is 34 million and Nevada 2 million and there are 9 more states like it. Politically both are equal and have equal representation in the government. Changing the system according to population size is creating more trouble rather solving it. Dhal also states, that size and diversity of a country creates economic prosperity and high performance, as he does not give any praise to American economic and technological achievements. America is not only a economic giant of the world, but it has developed evenly in all areas, be it military, technology, or gaining political power. For example America was successful to dismember Russian, its archrival of cold war without going for a war. America has engaged his next rival China in slow process of democratization and transforming the communist state for last two decades and lessening tension. Being an economic giant one swing in American economy can create ripples across the world. Once such example is the recent hike in fuel prices in US has lead to increase in prices all over the world. Today America is the most technological advanced country in the world. If we compare America of 1950s with today’s America, without any doubt the nation has progressed in many areas enormously. However not every one agree that the criteria set by Dahal is really the true measure of ranking a country successful. For example Japan is an economic giant and one of the richest country in the world, but it does not have as much freedom as people in America have. And till 2004 Japanese people had worse human rights record despite being a developed country. Italy, in the past fifty years had dozens of governments and had very corrupt governments with a frail democracy, yet the country thrived and learned from its mistakes and today its better than the past, rather much better Italy of 1940s. Dahal refers that ordinary Americans are not bothered about Constitution, which is far from true as majority of the Americans are law-abiding citizens. During any public and military service, Americans are bound by the Constitution to take oath for offering their allegiance to the nation, which is accepting and supporting the Constitution. Conclusion Every country and its system of government have its own reasons of flourishing, which cannot be duplicated. Politics systems are not laboratory experiments, which can be replicated or copied from one country to another country over night. Had that been the case, Iraq would have become democratic country overnight. All nations have their own ways of learning through the course of history and develop their own form of democracy. Democracy is not some thing universal, nor is it some scientific which can be created like a product, democracy has many forms and is practiced all over the world in various forms, yet nations are successful in their democracies in their own ways. The time and circumstances were different at the time of framing the Constitution. There may have been shortcomings in the American Constitution, yet no constitution in the world is ideal. It is very easy to look at the faults and criticize the founders of the Constitution after 250 years, but the truth is creating a nation is no joke. Many articles in the Constitution may not be workable in the modern times, but they were workable in their own time. There is always opportunity for amendments and making a nation more democratic by tailoring the Constitution, and Americans have been doing it faithfully. We should not forget, that the founders have given us freedom and democracy, which today has become ideal in the world. Had the original thirteen stated not agreed, Northern America may have ended up a continent of countless small countries rather than one great United States of America. Resource Dahl,Robert. How Democratic Is the Constitution?. Yale University Press, 2002 Read More