Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Session 7: Distorted Versions of Democracy


     The reading allotted for session 7 was enlightening in the sense that it revealed those characteristics which show that democracy in itself is clearly a complicated notion and not just a way of government embodied to provide satisfaction to its citizens. A way of government presumed as always just being ‘by, of and for the people,’ it is often not seen as fulfilling its purpose. A quick look at America should explain this understanding.
     America was, one upon a time, dreamt to be a democratic nation but it might not be proper for one to perceive it as that now. Martin Gilens and Benjamin I.Page refer to it as an oligarchy, where the power to determine how the government is run is possessed by the wealthy few who seem to benefit from a standing in American politics. This doesn’t sound surprising. According to the elitist view( which serves as a critique of the concept of democracy), the power thought of as being possessed by an entire nation might as well just be the power being used by the elite in society to manipulate the majority.
      The pluralistic approach (also acting as a criticism for the idea of democracy) can also be used for the instance of America, where people from a diverse range of backgrounds feel themselves having to submit to rules that only serve to avail a certain group within society. While pondering over these criticisms it is important to take into account the fact that the right to vote is not the only important right to be considered for an individual. As mentioned in the reading, ‘freedom of expression, freedom of movement and freedom of arbitrary arrest’ are also rights to be considered, and it is evident in America that these are not rights which every race feels like it is being offered. Moreover, it is essential to be fully aware of how the media is run and what views the media regards as necessary and of little value to know whether a proper democracy is in play or not.  It is interesting to note that even Obama’s election as the first black president (which despite representing a ray of hope for some) did not do much to quell the extent of racial discrimination prevalent in America. France might claim to be a democratic state itself and might value the concept of ‘freedom of expression’ greatly, but it is this very freedom of expression that it has expressed disapproval against when Muslim women don the hijab (there are restrictions as to when and where they can wear it).
     John Mills feared that the idea of democracy would cause the use of ‘debate, criticism and intellectual life’ to cease because of the overriding majority to have everything go the way it preferred. It’s appalling to see that some nations of today seem to correspond with the critique based on the elitist view, where the power vested by a few determines the way things go.
     The Greek word ‘demos’ may have been a reason to consider democracy as biased as ‘demos’ means poor, but it’s startling to notice that where that idea might be associated with the help of those who needed it, the so-called democracies of today’s world can have the reverse effect, that is, of further benefiting the prosperous and further depriving the needy of their rights.


(The following link was used: http://mic.com/articles/87719/princeton-concludes-what-kind-of-government-america-really-has-and-it-s-not-a-democracy)

No comments: