The Philosophical Insight into Democracy - Essay Example

This paper seeks a philosophical insight of democracy in general and American democracy in particular by unfolding the paradoxes entailed to whittle a credible conclusion. It attempts to explore contradictions of democracy whether democracy is a best system of governance? Is true democracy possible? Has it to be moral in character? Why other systems of governance tend to challenge the basic fabrics of democracy? Why democracy has turned out to be more productive than other forms of government? Then focus shifts to paradoxes entailed in self evident truth of American democracy. Is American democracy a representative of a true democracy? Does it cater the smaller factions of society? Has the democratic system fostered the rights of liberty, justice, life and pursuit of happiness to good effect for masses once challenged by terrorism, racism, poverty and recession? What good it has brought to its people? Why does America deserve to lead world community? Finally, conclusion is inquired about by addressing the question that How American dream can be pursued in its true democratic meaning? Isn’t it strange that few render democracy as the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people? On the other hand, for some, it is a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people; a government after the principles of eternal justice, the unchanging law of God; the idea of freedom. Idea of democracy as rule of people traces its expression from Athens in ancient Greek. From a philosophical stand point doctrines of natural law evolved into the idea of natural rights, i.e., all people have certain rights, such as self-preservation, that cannot be taken from them. Then, why should majority rule minority? Tocqueville (1945) argues that the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people and the power of public opinion are corollaries to the idea of equality. If all are equal, then no one person has any basis to claim the right to rule other. The only just way to run a society, therefore, is to base decisions on the will of the majority. But does the fact accord moral justification to it? This question has triggered a debate between two main schools of thought in philosophy, naturalists and positivists, for centuries. Naturalists believe that a system of governance should primarily be moral in nature whereas positivists believe that question does not necessarily have be answered in a moral dictate as any law or system of governance posited by man should be taken as such and can be debated for its pros and cons independent of moral enquiry. Many positivists justified Nazism using the argument. John Finnis (1983) argues that it was only the end of Nazism which marked revival of moral justifications of laws/system of government. Ironically, question of whim of a majority more moral than the whim of a dictator struggles to provide a definite answer.Yet the problem with democracy is that it can quite easily lead to despotism. Tocqueville (1945) believes that if there are no checks on the power of the majority to influence the government, then it will have absolute power and those in the minority will be helpless to resist. If all are equal then no opinion has greater weight than another. It is logical to conclude that the opinion held by the majority must be the best one. As a result, there is a tendency to abandon freedom of thought in democratic societies. Going against the opinion of the majority is seen as an indirect claim to the superiority of one's own opinion, which is directly contradictory to the principle of equality. Kimon Lycos (1987) points out that Plato described democracy as a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequaled alike. Likewise, Tocqueville (1945) argues, "Formerly tyranny used the clumsy weapons of chains and hangmen; nowadays even despotism, though it seemed to have nothing to learn, has been perfected by civilization. . . Under the absolute government of a single man, despotism, to reach the soul, clumsily struck at the body, and the soul, escaping from such glows, rose gloriously above it; but in democratic republics that is not at all how tyranny behaves; it leaves the body alone and goes straight for the soul." Before exploring the question of American democracy as a representative of true democracy, we need to understand the dynamics of American democratic system. Most liberals see tension between democracy and liberty as inherent character. Bernard Bailyn (1998) explains that Madison argued for representative democracy, because of its power to "refine and enlarge" public opinion and to direct energies of the people, who if permitted to make government policy directly might bully individual rights. A balance between majority rule and individual liberty could be struck if the people's representatives ruled on their behalf. Once sufficiently removed from constituent pressure, legislators would be able to discern a good for the nation that surpassed the sum total of voter stipulations. Madison's opponents the anti-federalists charged that representative democracy was at too far a remove from citizens. On matters of importance power needed to reside closer to the people, if not exercised by their direct consent. Although Madison's scheme protects only some groups from majority tyranny until 1954 it did nothing for black people in Southern states. Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on race or color. Robert Goldstein (2000) asserts that series of Supreme Court decisions in the 1950s and 1960s, as well as the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and its extensions, declared most of the racial discrimination practices unconstitutional. Direct democracy allows for unmediated citizen deliberation and decision making on public matters; representative democracy permits citizens to elect representatives who act on their behalf. American democracy is representative in design and function, yet it is clearly influenced by the ideology of direct democracy. Michael Kammer (1986), points out that the development of democracy is closely related to changes in the American party system. From intense rivalry between Whigs and Democrats in the 1840s, American democracy has turned out be a two-party system eventually. Shouldn’t a real democracy include parties of all sorts such as liberal, conservative, totalitarian, communistic, not just democrats and republicans? As a result, smaller parties suffer from under representation or no representation at all. Tocqueville (1945) identifies that a related constitutional issue that weakens the independence of the executive, therefore indirectly increasing the power of the legislature, is the ability of the president to be re-elected. The problem is that if the President has hopes of being re-elected, he will lose much of his ability to make independent decisions based on his judgments. Instead, he will have to bow to the whims of the people and go for popular decisions.. Other problems democracy face include the excessive power of corporations, excessive power of the Presidency, narrowing of admissible issues and choices to the public, contested elections, erosion of civil liberties, corruption in high places, troubled domestic , foreign programs, and widespread public dissatisfaction and disengagement. Since elections are where it all begins and since America's claim to a government by the people rests squarely on free and fair elections, that is where the origins of problems can reasonably be found. America has so far enjoyed great successes and many obstacles along the way against challenges such as Nazism, Communism and terrorism. Best argument that democracy offers is adhering to whim of the majority as people have right to choose for themselves. Edmund(1982) argues that power to govern is legitimized by the consent of the governed. Consent is expressed in a variety of forms, including free and fair elections and gives legitimacy to governing processes. Tocqueville (1945) does recognize the existence of institutions which can help to preserve liberty even in the midst of despotic tendencies such as judiciary; jury and administrative decentralization and their role to maintain freedom in the United States. Other strengths include are the right of association, the freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Tocqueville (1945) believed not only in the ultimate triumph of democracy, but also in the eventual emergence of the United States as a global power in his famous conclusion to the first volume of "On Democracy in America," . Modern democracies will face difficult new challenges fighting terrorism, adjusting to globalization and they will strive for a better system than their present one. That means making democratic decision-making effective and improving corrupt political institutions. Perhaps most important is to embrace standards that are not only legal, but also moral. Without this, democracy will become an empty crust, not simply insufficient but potentially precarious, bringing with it the erosion of liberty, the manipulation of freedom, and the decay of a common life. America in the twenty-first century is faced with questions about how a democratic government should work. Recent events and circumstances have made questions about the use of democracy ever more pressing. Rise of china as economic giant, the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, recession, job growth have raised issues concerning the efficacy of democracy in America. Democracy requires more than effective institutions that hold leaders accountable and prevent them from abusing their powers. It is also essential that the rights and liberties of individuals be protected from possible abusive actions of the government and its leaders. These protections are provided for in the Constitution and its amendments. American democracy requires that such rights and liberties are defended and upheld. So, the success that American Democracy has so far, also enabled new challenges that we must overcome in pursuit of our great American dream. References Alexis De Tocqueville, (1945), Democracy in America, New York: A. A. Knopf John Finnis, (1983), Fundamentals of Ethics, Oxford: Clarendon Press Kimon Lycos, (1987), Plato on Justice and Power: Reading Book I of Plato’s Republic. Albany: University of New York press Bernard Bailyn, (1998), the Federalist Papers. Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress. Robert Goldstein, (2000). Flag Burning and Free Speech. Kansas: University Press of Kansas Michael Kammer, (1986), The Origins of the American Constitution: A Documentary History. New York: Penguin,. Edmund S. Morgan, (1982), The Birth of the Republic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Diary Most daunting task for me was to choose a topic from array of different topics for this paradoxical essay. I chose democracy as a main theme because of its larger than life ideas and perspectives. The way, democracy has championed the rights of humans, mainly liberty, right of life, freedom of expression, equality has been an inspiration to this essay. Being national of the oldest democracy of the world, this essay gave me a great sense of pride and relief as I discovered the journey of reason and fortitude which helped my forefathers to combat the challenges of racism, women rights to vote, nepotism, economic recessions and world wars in order to realize the American dream. Next challenge for me was to identify the paradoxes which should encompass my essay. At first I was tempted to make it a democracy vs. totalitarianism essay but then I realized that this may not do justice with intellectual prowess democracy has to offer to other systems of government. So I decided to work around the quotations of Oscar Wilde abhorring democracy and Theodore favoring democracy. This gave me margin to analyze the intellectual challenges posed to democracy in general and American democracy in particular by other systems of government. Next troublesome task was to choose from huge amount of literature to cover the paradoxes entailed in self evident truths of democracy. To sum it up in 5 pages was an exercise that has taught me to articulate with precision in order to form a plausible argument. While trying to carve a conclusion I realized the potential a democratic system of governance can bestow on its individuals and difference a super power like America can make to lives of millions across the globe by advocating democracy in the world. In a nutshell preparation for this Diary essay helped me realize the depth of the message given in inauguration speech by John F Kennedy; My Fellow Americans: Ask not what your country can do for you- ask what you can do for your country-My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you but what together we can do for freedom of man. I realized that America needs to support democratic process throughout the world and work with the people of oppressed communities. True aspiration of American dream is to export the values of liberty, freedom of expression, religious tolerance and peace to the whole world. We all need to work with each other to make this world a better place for generations to come. I shall conclude by admitting that I now have a better understanding of my existence as a responsible citizen of United States of America. Read More