American Democracy

Within the United States of America, there seems to be a consensus that this land was and is made for the free people of the earth. Most of us believe that the democracy we have in place is infallible, that nothing short of God could destroy it. And although some of us have complaints with what the government is doing, most of us believe that our voices are heard loud and clear, if only we would be caring enough to say anything. Yet I believe there are pros and cons to our "democracy", that although there is representation, powers that we cannot control keep it from being what some would call total democracy. And to its credit, it might not even be a bad thing to keep it the way it is. Within this essay, I am first going to go over the define democracy and label the type that the U.S. uses, then talk about how it is deemed democratic and undemocratic. Next I will in detail, go over how much our democracy has grown over the years, and lastly establish my two cents on our style of democracy. Yet through all the times, I believe we give freedom to those who still seek such a freedom, which in my opinion is the best thing about American democracy.

The basic definition of democracy is a "Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives". Yet there is so much more to this word than the Webster's dictionary can give. As Berman and Murphy try to explain it, all they can say is that "Democracy has evolved over time in America-and is still evolving,"(5). It is like a living organism, always changing as long as there are freethinking people in this country. Although many people all around the world view America as having the perfect democracy, ours really consists of a representative democracy. "As the size of the country grew, then, democracy became less pure and direct" (Berman, Murphy 13), so to counter that, the people needed to make politics more streamlined. So instead of us normal people voting on everything on boring traffic laws and on the exporting of agriculture, we select people to do the "dirty work" as seen with all of our elected officials; The president, the Senate, Congress, etc. With us being a representative democracy, we are not to the point of becoming a perfect democracy. And as Vaclav Havel puts it:

"As long as people are people, democracy, in the full sense of the word, will be no more than an ideal. In this sense, you too are merely approaching democracy." (Berman, Murphy 8)

Although due to human nature, we will never reach the fullness of the word "democracy", I believe the important thing is that we are constantly trying to be more and more like it.

There are many pros within the representative democracy The United States portrays. The lack of a direct rule within the government prevents the mob to rule. Most of the founders, such as John Adams, feared that democracy "soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself." (Berman, Murphy 13). I agree that it is dangerous to hand over too much power to the everyday Joe within our country. This democracy also does not choose the president with the popular vote, but the people elect people into the electoral college, who then in turn votes for who should be president. This method, although it seems like it prevents the people from choosing the president with the most votes, protects the rights of the smaller states whose votes do matter in these types of elections. Our type of government also brings an order and stability within our borders. Although some people may argue this, if one takes a look outside, we aren't throwing Molotov cocktails at each other, that there is a general peace within this country. The reason may be that the politicians are passing laws that protect us from different dangers of life. If the people had its way, I am sure more and more things would become legal to use within the states. It would become a more dangerous state, but our government regulates these types of issues, so that we can live to a ripe old age without having to fear for our lives everyday. A good example of this is when Berman and Murphy state "Americans who wish to drive a car cannot simply get into a car and start driving," (Berman, Murphy 17) Another pro of our type of democracy is the freedom that is given to all its citizens. 1000 years ago, anywhere around the world, if a man stated anything negative on the government, there would be fearsome repercussions. Yet within our country, "a person can say and write practically anything he or she wants about any political official," (Berman, Murphy 15) Freedoms like this make this country great, and greatly inspires other people all over the world for a country just like us.

That is not saying we are close to perfect. There are many flaws within the system that we live in. One such flaw I believe, is that the politicians are serving not the people but special interest groups. The problem with special interest groups is that they cater to a small portion of the population, "they exclude others, and may be adverse to them," (E.E Schattschneider 357) As these special interest groups lean on politicians to pass their agenda, it leaves out what the masses think. In California, the public voted on a law that would ban gay-marriage. The margin was wide, yet in recent months, the state congress has tried to pass the law through the legislature. These politicians haven't consulted their constituents, but are under the backing of groups such as the ACLU. It leaves to wonder, whether these politicians desire to please those who voted them in, or those who fund their bankroll. As E.E Schattschnieder continues on, he states that, "Business men are four or five times as likely to write to their congressmen as manual laborers are." These statistics seem to show that the playing field in politics is narrow, that it really just represents the minority. Another con that is within this democracy is the rigid ness of the constitution. Although it is not impossible to pass an amendment to the constitution, it is near impossible to pass legislation that people care about. Jane Mansbridge states that although both the 24th and the 26th amendments were important, "even these amendments did not cause enough public controversy for a major survey organization to consider it important enough to ask the public what it thought about them," (30). The amendment in discussion had to be relatively unimportant for it to go through. Even something as essential as the amendment "to limit, regulate, and prohibit the labor of persons under

...