I want to begin with an overview of what democracy is. A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections. I want to talk about each of these four elements of what democracy is.
International relations has been subjected to many ideologies: But do theses ideologies explain the present crises occurring globally of terrorism,humanitarian crisis ,diplomacy crises,hunger and wars Monday, August 3, Democracy Complete and true democracy is almost impossible to achieve, and has been the primary goal of many nations, beginning from ancient civilizations of Greece and Roman Empire, all the way to the government of the United States today.
There are a few essential characteristics which must be present in a political system for it to be even considered democratic. One essential characteristic of a legitimate democracy is that it allows people to freely make choices without government intervention.
Another necessary characteristic which legitimates government is that every vote must count equally: For this equality to occur, all people must be subject to the same laws, have equal civil rights, and be allowed to freely express their ideas.
Minority rights are also crucial in a legitimate democracy. No matter how unpopular their views, all people should enjoy the freedoms of speech, press and assembly. Public policy should be made publicly, not secretly, and regularly scheduled elections should be held.
All of these elements and government processes are a regular part of the American government these characteristics are lacking in developing countries in Africa democracy is just a mere world the exist without pratice Zimbabwe as my mother country lacks all theses characterics with political leaders probably not understanding what is democray.
Yet, even with all the above elements present in the governmental operations of our country, numerous aspects of the governmental process undermine its legitimacy, and bring to question if Zimbabwean government is really a true democracy.
Considering the achievement of complete democracy is most likely impossible, the political system of even in American government is democratic, but its democratic legitimacy is clearly limited in many respects.
One of the first notable aspects of the United States government which brings the democratic legitimacy into question is the ever-occurring bias between classes of people that participate in the electoral voting.
Class is determined by income and education, and differing levels of these two factors can help explain why class bias occurs.
For example, because educated people tend to understand politics more, they are more likely to vote.
In fact, political studies done at Princeton in clearly showed that 76 percent of all voters had college degrees. The same studies have been done in the next three years and showed the percentage steadily holding at 76 percent, except inwhen it dropped down by two percent Avirett This four to one ration of college educated voters versus non-college educated voters shows a clear inequality and bias in the American voting system.
This also brings about the aspect of income. People with high income and education have more resources, while poor people do not, and instead, tend to have low political efficacy. This efficacy has been interpreted as feelings of low self-worth in the world of politics.
Turnout, therefore, is low and since the early s, has been declining overall Fox Although in theory the American system calls for one vote per person, the low rate of turnout results in the upper and middle classes ultimately choosing candidates for the entire nation.
This concludes that because voting is class-biased, it may not be classified as a completely legitimate process. The winner-take-all system in elections may also be criticized for being undemocratic because the proportion of people agreeing with a particular candidate on a certain issue may not be adequately represented under this system.
Such was the case with president Carter and the opposing Republican candidate Ford in the presidential election.
Even though democracy is based on the principle of the majority rule, such close elections make the majority not that major at all, and seriously put a question mark on the democratic legitimacy of the United States government.
Another element of the United State government that brings controversy to the democratic process and its legitimacy are the political parties. Because there is no national discipline in the United States that forces citizens into identifying with a political party, partisan identification tends to be an informal psychological commitment to a party.
This informality allows people to be apathetic if they wish, and willingly giving up their input into the political process. For the past fifty years, the Democratic party has been associated with the lower class people and minorities, while the Republicans have been supported mainly by upper class whites Avirett In fact, Republican presidents like Ronald Regan and George Bush were credited with major accomplishments in cutting the tax for the lower income families and boosting the health reforms Avirett This contradicts the idea that Republicans only benefit the interests of the upper class citizens, and clearly shows the apathy of people giving up their input into the political process due to their partisan identification to a certain party.
Private interests are probably the strongest indicators of illegitimate democracy in the United State government. Private interests distort public policy making because, when making decisions, politicians must take account of campaign contributors.Complete and true democracy is almost impossible to achieve, and has been the primary goal of many nations, beginning from ancient civilizations of Greece and Roman Empire, all the way to the government of the United States today.
In any system, which claims to be democratic, a . We can interpret "equality of conditions" as the absence of big differences --of economic, social and cultural character-- among the members of a society We see that where social inequalities and divisions are very deep, democracy is not impossible or improbable --the history of Latin America is a good example--, but it is hard to achieve and maintain.
Complete and True Democracy Is Almost Impossible to Achieve PAGES 3. WORDS 2, View Full Essay.
More essays like this: united states government, democratic political system, achieving true democracy. Not sure what I'd do without @Kibin - Alfredo Alvarez, student @ Miami University.
Exactly what I needed. - Jenna Kraig, student @ UCLA. Aug 03, · Democracy Complete and true democracy is almost impossible to achieve, and has been the primary goal of many nations, beginning from ancient civilizations of Greece and Roman Empire, all the way to the government of the United States today.
Is True Democracy Impossible un-der Capistalism? This article inquires into whether the social condi-tions of a population which are needed for democra-cy to flourish are met by a capitalist organisation of society.
To access the viability of democracy under capitalism, a . “What we can or cannot do, what we consider possible or impossible, is rarely a function of our true capability.
It is more likely a function of our beliefs about who we are.” “There is only one thing that makes a dream impossible to achieve: the fear of failure.”.