Theories of Democratic Society - Essay Example

Theories of Democracy of Theories of Democracy Introduction Man by nature is a political animal, and democracy is the light to such animal farm where good and bad potentially exist in equal measure. Through the prism of Abraham Lincoln, the concept of people has been observed to the foundation of democracy. Regardless of whatever model of democracy is used, democracy can only be seen to be in place when the people have put the system of government in place through to serve the people’s interest. That is the basis of government of the people by the people. Besides, such a government serve everyone irrespective of their voting patterns, thereby achieving the clause “for the people” as preempted by the framers of the constitution. To that extent, one can say that democracy is a form of government that brings people together and allow them to have different views without being victimized. Models of democracy exist to allow people have various choices on how they wish to be governed. The existence of a number of models of democracy is in line with various freedoms so that people do not feel compelled to conform to only one direction. One should note that although classical forms of democracy may not have been as elaborate as present day models, they laid the corner stones upon which principles of modern democracy is anchored. From that observation particularly from ancient Athens (Held, 2006: p. 18), one can say that democracy is an evolving concept although many of its principles have been firmly established. Even so, one should understand that democracy is also supported by several assumptions, most of which are justifiable and some of which are not. Some may still need further elaboration and perhaps ameliorations so that they can remain consistent with the needs of the current society. Somehow, the masses have to understand why pluralism is justifiable as well as why Marxism and republicanism may still need further academic analyses and discussions. Pluralism as Justified Pillar of Democracy At the birth of democracy, Abraham Lincoln had honored the soldiers of the Union who died defending the rights of others with a statement that defined democracy. He had observed that democracy, as a political ideology should be centered on the people. That is why he implicitly expressed that a society can only stand the test of time when the masses are allowed to wield power either directly or indirectly. A government of the people, by the people, and for the people is the ideal manner in which pluralism can be used to ensure that there is a stable system of government in place (p. 159). Although pluralist arguments may be seen not to go hand in hand with all the principles of democratic politics, the core foundation in the ideology is inclusivity. Democracy does not champion for inclusivity, but its principles dictate so. Many democrats have subscribed to the philosophy that while the majorities have their way, minority should also have their say. Pluralism may be seen to have been informed with Madisonian acknowledgement that factions may exist, and the government has a duty to protect the interest of each faction. Pluralism rests on the foundation that whereas people have the freedom to prefer a particular direction, they should also have the duty to respect and treat equally those who chose different approach from theirs. It can be argues that they foundation of democracy is found from the concept of pluralism. This is particularly so since pluralists believe that “the existence of diverse competitive interest is the basis for democratic equilibrium (p. 159).” That way, one may understand that whereas democracy provides the masses with the freedom to legitimately define their own political, economic and social path, pluralism serves to provide the oversight role. Such oversight role under pluralism may be seen in the form of a multiparty system where one party oversights the one in power. Pluralism is the most justified since it reconciles different factions that although there may be competing political interests, the need to work together for the benefit of the people overrides any other interest (P. 161). Pluralism is also justifiable because it establishes a balance between political competition and constitutional provisions. Pluralism guides the political class that although they are constitutionally and legitimately in power, they have a duty to make sure that everyone benefits equally from their policies. That way, pluralism encourages consensus and distribution of power (p. 165). To that extent, one can say that pluralism is justified within any model of democracy. Marxism: The Dividing Line from Democracy Marxism as a theory offers an apparently radical approach to the question of equity. Marxism claims that there are two groups of people in the capitalist society. On one side, there are the bourgeois class who owns means of production and wealth. On the other side, there are the Proletarians, who are the working class. The Bourgeois exploit the proletarians. He further argues that the bourgeoisie’s agglomeration of population, centralization of means of production and of wealth in the hands of a few, is not a good practice to the society. It is against the social justice in the society. That, according to Karl Marx, leads to centralization of political power (p. 267). Regions in a given society tend to be independent though loosely attached. They have different political interest, laws and taxation policies. After centralization, they suddenly become one with a common law, one frontier, one class-interest and similar costs. The theory offers that there are all sorts of unfairness in such a society, given the gap between the upper class (the rich) and the lower class (the poor). Laws governing such a society, especially taxation laws and policies, might not reflect true scenario on the ground. Marxism argues that the bourgeoisie take advantage of the proletarians since they can easily influence decision using their wealth or resources. The theory offers that the working class has to accept terms of employment from the bourgeoisie because they have no otherwise. A critical assessment of Marxism reveals that the theory still need to be questioned as it is strongly anchored on many assumptions. To begin with, the theory assumes that property owners or the bourgeoisie are inclined to exploit the proletariats all the time. Consequently, it is seen as hostile and skeptic about concentration of economic power in the hands of the bourgeoisie. Like pluralism, Marxism attempts some form of inclusivity although it does not recognize individual effort (p. 227). It is overly concerned about the affairs of the majority without offering a thought on how to respond to the needs of the minority who also deserve to be treated right. In short, Marxism is overly concerned about what possible outcomes may be experienced without offering tangible solutions about how best to mitigate the identified problem. It is not stable and reliable on its own as a political economic theory. The fall of Stalinism exemplify the difficult nature of Marxism (p. 225). Republicanism as an Undefended Assumption After the archaic and renaissance forms of republicanism, modern forms of republicanism have embraced almost similar concepts through with variations. It has developed over the years, though with assumptions that other forms of democracy do not offer enough to address public interest. In fact, republicanism argues that there is a possibility that public interests can be corrupted in the event that citizens are excluded from political participation (p. 140). Protective republicanism, while advocating for democracy, appears to be more concerned with protection of political participation so to avoid dominance by others. It is more concerned about balance of power, liberties amongst others. Developmental republicanism is more advocates for political and economic equity and involvement of the citizens in the determination of the common good. Over time, the classical models have developed so that modern republicanism as a model for democracy grants recognizes the rights of every citizen. Individuals and the state are still considered fundamental tenets of the model. Although republicanism has continued to be applied in some models of democracy, one should understand that the assumption upon which the model is based do not apply in some scenarios. It can be argues that given that republicanism originally developed from rural economies and small cities, it jumped the gun, coming way ahead of industrial revolution and mass production. Other developments that later took place, mass production included, were some of the unforeseeable circumstances for republicanism. The model has since then faced many dilemmas, as it needs to conform to the current means of production and the constitutional nature and provisions of human rights. The old model is no longer sustainable, as the masses increasing prefer models that address contemporary needs (p. 267). The principles upon which I was founded need to be readdressed, for instance, its narrow scope of pluralism. To that extent, there is a need to questions the undefended assumptions in republicanism. In short, one can observe that democracy remains largely dynamic. It is transformative and adaptive to the changing needs of the society. It is probably the only political ideology where people are free to express their different opinions while working together with those who subscribe to completely different view. Democracy is the destination through which the masses can access from various. Reference Held, D. (2006). Models of Democracy, 3rd Edition. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press. Read More