Chapter four of Neil Weinstock Netanels essay discusses the democratic paradigm of copyright and democracy. Netanel attempts to find the link between democratic governance and civil society. The first part of the chapter discusses the role of civil society and its association with democratic governance. Shared purposes and norms identify various civil societies. Civil society plays an active role in bolstering democratic governance.
Civil societies are participatory. They help in fostering a democratic culture. In addition, civil societies provide avenues for self-rule that are outside the control of the government. Civil societies facilitate debate and determination of various policies and social norms.
However, civil societies are not completely autonomous. Government intervention helps in sustaining the activities of civil societies. In addition, government intervention ensures that civil societies engage in activities that provide opportunities for democratic governance. The market may be a barrier to the advancement of the democratic character of civil societies. It may facilitate the development of disparities of power.
In addition, it may provide people with uneven opportunities to engage in civil life. However, the market may also play a critical role in enhancing democratic governance. It may facilitate the development of centers of power that are not under the control of the government. This helps in reducing citizens dependency on the state.
It is a fact that democratic governance should also be a critical component of the governance of civil societies. It would be contradictory to claim that civil societies foster democratic governance when it is clear that they do not have democratic governance in their management. The author did not provide insights on civil societies and democratic governance using this perspective.
The government uses copyright as a tool that enables government institutions to support democratic civil societies. Copyrights production and structural functions help in supporting a democratic civil society. Copyright laws have various incentives that encourage free communication.
Electronic communication is one of the fastest developing communication mediums. It facilitates the broadcast, distribution, and transmission of millions of works of original authors. Democracy enables people who have high rhetorical skills to acquire the greatest share of political power. Therefore, free communication is an essential component of a democratic culture. In some instances, free communication may violate copyright laws. The author did not explain how free communication may pose a serious threat to copyright.
Copyright enables authors to have a proprietary entitlement to their works. This facilitates the development of an autonomous sector that encourages the formation and distribution of novel expressions. Copyright enables creators and publishers of the novel expressions to earn financial support for their undertakings in the sector.
This enables them to cease from depending on the government or the assistance of the elite. The paying audience is the source of funds. Copyright imposes certain restrictions on the exclusive control of cultural works. This enables the government to diversify the communicative power structures without unwarranted interference on the expressive content. However, the restrictions of copyright law do not provide a neutral endpoint.
The endpoint of copyright law may signify the beginning of another proprietary right. Therefore, the restrictions may portray the ability of copyrights to enhance democracy. They enhance the democratic notion that expressions and ideas should be free for all people. The limits on the duration and scope of copyrights act as a boundary on the private control of publicly distributed expressions.
The USA is probably the country with the most frequent jury trials. A Jury Service is a kind of go-between for the judiciary and ordinary citizens. It involves active citizens of different classes, different ages, and various professions in the functioning of the courts. It also gives them the right to protect the accused against bias or unjustified verdicts. Therefore, jury duty is a crucial element of the judicial branch of government, contributing to the development of a democratic state.
Impact of Jury Service on Democracy
A Jury Service is an integral part of the U.S. judicial branch, due to which people can make responsible decisions and understand that their opinion is essential to the state. It reminds citizens that they live in a truly democratic state. Thomas Jefferson has claimed that trial by jury is the only anchor, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution (as cited in Kolbe, 2020, p. 16). Moreover, those involved in Jury Service become more educated and know how the judicial system works. They realize that a persons fate depends on their decision and try to be as objective as possible. Thus, jury duty is a significant civic responsibility, strengthening democracy.
Trial by jury also contributes to increasing trust in the state. It convinces the accused that their case will be examined impartially. Although many people think that the main thing in such a trial is to appeal to the jurys emotions or even move them to pity, juries can be more objective than professionals. Juries Service eliminates the likelihood of corruption, injustice, and bias (Kolbe, 2020). Therefore, the accused will be sure that active and objective citizens will judge them.
The Seventh Amendment: Importance and Effect
Due to the Seventh Amendment, the position of the Jury Service has strengthened, and its powers have expanded. Firstly, this Amendment limits the judges power to change the decision of the jury. Secondly, it allows that cases to be considered by Jury Service if claims exceed twenty dollars. This Amendment also means that juries can hear any civil suits, considering all facts, evaluating them, and pronouncing the verdict (Kolbe, 2020). As for its potential effect on my life, this Amendment suggests that if I file a lawsuit where the claims are more than twenty dollars, the case can be tried by juries. It also guarantees that my case would be heard and decided by those who cannot be bribed. Hence, the Seventh Amendment is a significant law that is a base for the functioning of Jury Service.
Conclusion
Jury Service is significant for U.S. democracy: it involves citizens in state affairs and increases residents trust in the government. The Seventh Amendment expands the powers of juries, giving them the right to examine different civil cases at common law if the value in controversy shall is more than twenty dollars. Thus, Jury Service is a critical component of democratic states and the fundamental right of any U. S. citizen.
Reference
Kolbe, D. C. (2020). The American criminal jury trial: Justice and democracy in action. Law and World, 14, 14-20. Web.
The political powers are not always shared among the strongest political parties that establish well-planned political platforms to meet the expectations of the electorate and win the elections. The importance of the political platform should be taken into account while planning the electoral campaign even if the part has a candidate nominated for the role of a president in case of victory.
However, the economic and social aspects of the political platform are significant for a candidate who is planning to become a representative of the peoples will and demonstration of democratic power and freedoms of the country.
The President Franklin D. Roosevelt is widely known for his struggle with the economic instability in the United States of America right after the Great Depression and enthusiasm that is believed to have contributed greatly to the effect of optimism he shared with people of his country.
The political platform of Democrats can be clearly seen in the inaugural speech of the elected 32nd President of the United States of America, Franklin D. Roosevelt, which has a few bright recognizable features such as optimism, emphasis on the economical situation in the country, need for social changes, and interweaving of these concepts and problems that occurred in the country due to the crisis with the discussion of moral values and virtues that should be the primary driving forces of each citizen of the United States.
The employment issue is one of the greatest concerns of Franklin D. Roosevelt and his administration and he managed to express this concern in his inaugural speech: Our greatest task is to put people to work (Roosevelt, Inaugural Address 4).
This means that the President and his administration were going to bring some changes into practice concerning the social and economic stability to foster the prosperity and rise the number of their supporters for the future electoral campaign.
The more the president was talking about the social and economic changes and moral values of people, the more people wanted to believe that their will is influential in this case.
Besides, the structure of the speech was well-planned in order to make people think more positively towards the coming changes and cultivate the willingness in them to become a part of the anti-depression program and serve in the name of good reasons.
The president adds after mentioning the employment opportunities, this is no unsolvable problem if we face it wisely and courageously (Roosevelt, Inaugural Address 4). The rest of the paragraph is devoted to explanation of how the administration is going to solve the problem of employment which would be the basis for all other programs and steps planned by the president and his team.
The issues of currency and its safety were also raised by the president in his inaugural speech along with the questions of safety of investments and problem of speculations (Roosevelt, Inaugural Address 5). This fact also supports the idea of the economic and social orientation of the political platform adapted by the Roosevelt administration.
In addition, it is necessary to investigate how the president Roosevelt delivered his speech with the help of the first radio address with the suggestions of the New Deal as the program that was aimed at bringing the relief and recovery for social and economic sides of live in the country.
As such, the president talked about the negative side of the situation to emphasize the current conditions in which the population of the country finds itself. The contrast was made with the help of the focus made on changes that are claimed to bring the recovery (Roosevelt, Radio Address ).
The inaugural address and the radio address of the President were aimed at informing the people that have elected Roosevelt about the changes that are planned to be made and the expected effect of those changes with regard to the current problems and the outcomes of such policy.
Every address of the president was aimed at making people believe that the President is their friend when he talked to each and every of the citizens of the United states and emphasized their status by addressing them as my friend (Roosevelt, Radio Address ).
In addition, the clear contrast depicted in his speeches enabled people to understand the current situation and the effect of the changes; it resembled a clear psychological approach when the patients are informed about before and after conditions.
The next source to be addressed that helps us to reveal the democratic platform of President Roosevelt is the letter by Frank E. Gannett who criticized the Roosevelt administration and his attempts to bring the changes into the court system of the United States.
Though there were no active public demonstrations against the reform to be enacted to change the court system of the US, some individuals claimed that those changes served as means to cover the egoistic intentions of the president and his administration. Besides, the critical letter contained the depiction of real purposes of the court reform (Gannett n. p.).
The author of the letter was claiming that the president wanted to control the Supreme Court of the United States of America though this was one of the symbols of democracy and means for establishing and maintaining democratic freedoms and principles among the citizens of this country.
The content of this letter provides a clear idea of the division that could be observed in the country regardless of the fact that the President Roosevelt was reelected more than one time which can be considered a sign of the trust established by the president to himself and his administration.
People saw the positive changes in the social and economic sectors of life and trusted the president though he tried to change the structure of the Supreme Court by increasing the number of judges from nine to fifteen and bringing the presidential control over the performance of the US Supreme Court.
The letter by Frank E. Gannett was aimed at opening the eyes of ordinary Americans onto the actions of the president and his decision to control the judiciary power of the country as a symbol of dictatorship or monarchy. In addition, this letter can be treated as the evidence of the divided views about the power of President Roosevelt and actions of his Administration.
The economic decisions and the democratic principles can be also seen in the Bill passed by Democrats as a method for changing the situation in the country. The New Deal was expected to become a document and a program pertaining to it that would bring positive changes and bring relief from the depression.
As provided by the section 301 under the title Earnings Tax, Commencing on January 1, 1937, there shall be levied and assessed upon every employee as defined in this title an earnings tax, to be collected from and paid by every employer subject to this title (Doughton 15).
This demonstrates a clear evidence of the first steps for bringing the idea of social security and its main principles into practice because the taxation system is sure to be the great device for filling in the treasury and providing the national budget with costs necessary for pensions that would come as a part of the social security package.
The Bill was also aimed at establishing the rules of actions by the Social Insurance Board as the body that was supposed to regulate the social insurance processes in society. As we can see nowadays, the idea of social insurance was not neglected and most citizens of the United States of American currently have social insurance which can also be regarded as the part f the social bonus package in terms of employment.
In addition, the bill can be considered one of the positive issues that can be analyzed with regard to the New Deal positive program aimed at protecting the instable economy of the country and bringing positive changes into it including social issues such as employment, taxation, and social insurance and economic changes related to the economic growth reached through building of infrastructure.
Employment was one of the most important issues for the New Deal program as it was expected to make some positive changes in the social and economic areas of human activity. The Social Security Act of 1935 contained all major regulations and rules under which the people should have been provided with security in the workplace and employment trust measures as well as unemployment compensations.
In this respect, the old-age benefits as well as taxes paid by employed people were parts of the Social Security Act of 1935 to ensure that every citizen who works receives reasonable payment while those who are not able to work and those who are suppose to retire and receive old-age benefits are provided with appropriate payments.
To conclude, the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt can be evaluated in different ways as well as presidency of each of the presidents who obtained the seat though the number of positive changes that were brought to action surpasses the number of negative issues that are reflected in critical letters of people who try to claim that the actions of the President were inconsistent and aimed at eliminating the principles of democracy.
In this respect, it is necessary to think about the positive effect made by the president and his policies and reforms, namely the New Deal political program aimed at establishing the principles of social security into operation through the adoption of social insurance bases and other regulations necessary for normal maintenance and performance of these reforms.
Every reform was not a method for attracting more electorate on the coming elections and reelections; it was rather the method for bringing the relief and taking care of the people who trusted the president and his policy.
Two initial sentences in the introduction to the book Overthrow: Americas Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq written by Stephen Kinzer state the problem and briefly consider it, Why does a strong nation strike against a weaker one? Usually because it seeks to impose its ideology, increase its power, or gain control of valuable resources (Kinzer 1).
The statement is true, but when it goes about the United States of America, it is a rule to talk about democracy and the necessity to help Americans and other nations understand what democracy is and to implement it by all means. The modern situation in the world and the latest events which made the USA interfere into the life of its country and other nations allows us to look at the issue critically and to point to the problem which exists in the contemporary world.
Paying attention to the modern American history, it is possible to consider a number of specific examples when the USA tried to impose its rules (and it is necessary to state that it was rather successful in its attempts) on other countries and limit the freedoms of its citizens claiming about the importance of democracy and helping the whole world become free in its actions.
Dwelling upon democracy and the desire to help Americans and other nations become free, the government of the United States of America have been providing constant interference to the private life of different nations, calling it democratic idealism, and making its citizens remain speechless contradicting to their first amendment right to free speech; the overthrow in Hawaii in 1893, the President Woodrow Wilsons declaration of war message to congress (April, 1917), and the Espionage Act of 1917 are brightest examples of the American imperialism in the whole world.
The Dynamics of Capital Expansion
Considering the modern history of the USA and trying to remember the most striking events connected with the American interference into other countries, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 is remembered. However, being the most vivid case of American expansion, Iraq is not the only country where Americans tried to interfere. The USA constantly tries to implement its capital expansion on other nations. To make it clear, the main idea of capital expansion (read imperialism) should be described.
Deeping into the history, Parenti in The dynamic of capital expansion states that the expansion as form of ruling was popular, e.g. Persian, Mongol, Roman, etc. empires functioned on the principle of imperialism. The development of the financial relations made it possible for the more powerful countries to spread capital expansion as a form of imperialism.
Parenti declares that a central imperative of capitalism is expansion (3). The relations within the capitalist society are based on profit. To make more profit, companies should expand and increase its productivity. Having created the manufacturing in different countries, the companies have an opportunity to manage human resources in those countries and make the society act as they want.
Thus, using different financial and economic leverage, a foreign country has an opportunity to interfere in the affairs of the society, even though that interference is indirect. Let us explore the situation which took place in Hawaii in 1893 with the information considered above in mind.
The central event which provoked Americans and made those implement active actions is considered to be the desire of Queen Liliuokalani to change the Constitution. The central change the queen wanted to apply was the change of vote procedure.
According to the new law, only native citizens of Hawaii might have an opportunity to vote. This change would have influenced the life of all islands which created a country. Having a queen and being a separate country, Hawaii was ruled by a few dozen American and European families (Kinzer 9). The elite were interested in this ruling, but the natives experienced pressure and inconvenience on their own lands.
The desire of the queen to change the political structure of Hawaii would mean nothing good for Americans and Europeans. But, being aware of the capital expansion as a form of imperialism, it is possible to state that Americans could not react somehow differently. America did not have the right to lose influence in Hawaii as it had already invested too much there. The USA had made too much to be defeated.
Performing the role of capital imperial country, the USA provided its expansion on Hawaii by means of investing in that country, dominating its economy, culture, politics, and integrating its productive structures into an international system of capital accumulation (Parenti 3). Having spent too much affords and time on implementing its domination over Hawaii, the change of constitution was not included in the US plans. This would mean that the USA did not have political influence on Hawaiian life.
The overthrowing of the queen with the help of American diplomat was the problem of one day. The USA, a country which cared about all peoples in the world, could not allow the nation to remain without a leader. Thus, Hawaii appeared under direct influence from the USA (Kinzer 32). The long history of these two counties was not over. Looking at Hawaii as one of the US states, it is possible to conclude that the providing capital expansion of a weaker nation, the dominant one will always win.
American Democratic Idealism and Imperialism
Considering the examples of American imperialism in the overthrow of Hawaii, Cuba, Philippines, and Nicaragua in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it is possible to state that the democratic idealism the United States of America try to apply is nothing more than American imperialism in practice.
Reading President Woodrow Wilsons, war message to congress, it is accepted as the declaration of war to Germany. This document passionately discusses how German army wants to sink very vessel that sought to approach either the ports of Great Britain and Ireland or western coasts of Europe or any of the coasts controlled by the enemies of Germany within the Mediterranean (Woodrow n.p.).
The President of the USA dwelt much about the crime against all nations. The discussion was directed at the friendly relations between the USA and Germany, but the importance of their continuation due to the existing situation. It seems that the USA aims to protect all the nations from Imperial German Government. This is exactly what it does.
But! This message has a phrase which may explain the overthrow of such governments as Cuba, Philippines, and Nicaragua, Neutrality is no longer feasible or desirable where the peace of the world is involved and the freedom of its peoples, and the menace to that peace and freedom lies in the existence of autocratic governments backed by organized force which is controlled wholly by their will, not by the will of their people (Woodrow n.p.). This was one of the main reasons of American expansion to foreign countries.
Being covered by the Spanish war and the consequences of the Treaty of Paris, the USA has managed to gain control over Cuba and Philippines. Stating that this domination is only official and it is not going to interfere into its national affairs, the new Cuban Constitution created under the guidelines of a new President, made it possible for the USA to intervene into Cuban inner affairs. The amendments in this constitution gave the USA the power to rule the country.
The operations in Philippines, as well as in Cuba, were a part of a larger war (Kinzer 70). Isnt it exactly what Woodrow told about neutrality and the desire to maintain peace? It is all about the USA.
Pointing to the peaceful operations, declaring about the highest purposes, it always persuaded its own interests. Political and economical influence, the domination in these questions on those territories is one of the main signs of imperialistic expansion. Dwelling upon democracy, the USA helped Cuba get rid of Spanish domination, but Cuba did not become free. The same had happened with Philippines and Nicaragua.
Stating that one of the main desires of the USA in the Spanish-American war was to create the conditions for implementing democracy in many the mentioned countries, the USA managed to release them, but their independence became possible only with the constitutional right of the USA to interfere into the countries inner affairs. So, what is it, the American democratic idealism or the practice of American imperialism? The first option is closer and is considered to be more correct.
The Freedom of Speech during the World War
Trying to establish imaginary democracy in the whole world, the US government has realized that the democratic freedoms they have implemented in its own country should b limited. The cause of the limitation of the freedom of speech served Eugene Debs The Canton, Ohio Speech, Anti-War Speech which was declared on June 16, 1918. From the very beginning of the speech, it can be seen that the US government had what to worry about.
Debs said that, it is extremely dangerous to exercise the constitutional right of free speech in a country fighting to make democracy safe in the world (n.p.). The main idea of the article is declared. The further discussion turns to the representation of the examples of unfairness of the USA on the world arena.
The danger of this discussion for the USA is that its main reasons for implementation of the peace in the words are declared in the whole world. A person has appeared who dared to say it. Saying that it has become dangerous to express personal thoughts in the relation to some specific events and actions which happen in the world, Debs tries to attract social attention to the problem of what the USA tries to impose on human thinking and what it really does.
The focus of this speech was the exposure of the imaginable democracy American people lived. Trying to show examples, Debs asked about the jurisdiction and law system. Is there a simple worker who has ever appointed a judge to his/her position? Federal judges have never been named by the working class. This means that there is nothing to talk about the democracy in the country which does not allow people rule the country.
Americans are the nation which believes its president. If the president states that they live in the democratic society, all the actions the government implements are directed at the support of the regime. The same situation occurs in other countries of the world. One of the main dangers of this speech was the exposure of the real purposes the USA persuaded on the world arena and the creation of the Social Party which could become a problem to the implementation of the US expansion.
This speech is considered to be a reaction to the Espionage Act of 1917 which clearly limited the nation n third sire to express their thoughts. No one could speak about the US enemies and promote their success. The information devoted to false reports which could influence the US success on the international arena was also prohibited. People were deprived of their right to express personal opinion, one of the main characteristic features of the democratic society.
The desire to prevent people from the discussion of the international affairs during the war was caused by the government desire to eliminate any possibility of disclosure of main reasons of the American democracy in the world. Being afraid of expressing personal opinion in public, people became to remain silent even in the problems which do not seem prohibited under the Espionage Act of 1917.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it should be mentioned that the desire of the United States of America to create the democratic regimes in all countries in the world is contradicted by the action the USA does. Trying to prove the whole world that the main purpose the USA persuades is the democracy, we can easily see that this is not true.
Having considered the examples of Cuba, Hawaii, Philippines, and Nicaragua, it is possible to state that the only thing which the USA desired was the capital expansion of those territories concealed under the mask of the implementation of the democratic society.
The change of the regimes in different countries under the declaration of their independence or in the frames of the long lasting wars, the USA managed to maintain its imperialism almost in the whole world. Picturesque examples are offered in the book Overthrow: Americas Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq by Stephen Kinzer, where the author strictly provides the examples of the American ideal democracy in the world.
Looking at the contemporary world and the situation which has been established, it is possible to say that there are a lot of countries which function not under the American democratic rules and which the USA wants to control.
All the conflicts which happen in the world are based on the issues of power, control and influence. Those who manage to keep the economy and politics of different countries under total control always win. This is exactly what the USA wants to do, but considering the recent case of the invasion of Iraq and the inability of the USA implement its control in that country it may be stated that there is a chance to avoid American imperialistic influence.
Works Cited
Debs, Eugene V. The Canton, Ohio Speech, Anti-War Speech. Internet Archive, 2001. Web.
Espionage Act of 1917. 1917. Web.
Kinzer, Stephen. Overthrow: Americas Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq. Times Books, 2007. Print.
Parenti, Michael. The Dynamic of Capital Expansion. Against empire. Ed. Michael Parenti. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Books, 1995. 3-5. Print.
Woodrow, Wilson. War message to congress. Joint Session of the Two Houses of Congress, 2 Apr. 1917. Web.
One of the things that make the fundament of the United States, democracy is not merely a word, but the long-suffered result, won in the hardest battles. However, the process of the state democratization is far from being over yet.
Another step that brought the country closer to establishing the democratic society and providing the rights and freedoms to all of its citizens were the presidential elections that took place recently.
Once choosing the man who is bound to lead the country to another victory over the economical standstill, the financial complicacies and the international misconceptions arising between the United States and the rest of the world, the country will necessarily see its expectations come true.
For those who still consider the presidential elections an international show-off, Gibbs says,
Barack Hussein Obama did not win because of the color of his skin. Nor did he win in spite of it. He won because at a very dangerous moment in the life of a still young country, more people than have ever voted before came together to try and save it [Gibbs].
Thus, it must be admitted that the result of the elections was another step towards the principles of democracy. With help of the politics conducted by Obama, the country is bound to prosper. A nation does not need a big President in small times; it needs one only when the future is spitting out monsters [Gibbs].
From 1920 to 2011: The Pillars of Democracy
Considering the history of the USA, one has to admit that the country has seen hard times, yet there has always been someone or something to help the country rise from the ashes. Encouraging the economical progress and making people strive for the new discoveries, the XX century was a huge step towards the brand new world.
Perhaps, one of the greatest discoveries that started the machine of the U. S. progress was the invention of electricity. Electric motors replaced steam engines as the basic source of energy in factories, [Divine 736]
Divine marked, and clarified that this is where the progress was launched. Who could have thought that in several decades, overcoming the economic weakness, the country will start a completely new epoch the Jazz Age, when the city replaced the countryside [Divine 764]?
Comparing the new and the old vision of the past events suggested by Divine, one can consider the 1920ies not only as the age of Great Depression, but also as the time when the transition to modern America [Divine 735] was carried out.
Conclusion: Some More Steps Left
Considering the current state of the country, one can still claim that a lot needs to be done. For the progress to continue, people must not cease their efforts in shaping the country and establishing the democracy [Morris 04/26]. Therefore, planning the further improvements is one of the most important tasks nowadays.
One of the most evident spheres that require mending is the one of the Peoples Rights [Morris 05/05]. Started in the distant 1909, the campaign for peoples rights [Morris 05/05] still continues, taking various shapes, such as the rights of women, the rights of the disabled, etc.
Helping people to have their rights acknowledged by the rest of the world is one of the most essential issues at present. Therefore, this seems to be the sphere that deserves further improvement, along with the country economics and the home and foreign policy.
Works Cited
Divine, Robert, et al. America Past and Present, Brief Edition, Vol. 1, 7th Ed. New York City, NY: Pearson, 2007. Print.
Gobbis, Nancy. This is Our Time. TIME, Nov. 17, 2008. Print.
Morris. Class Lectures. 2011. Microsoft Word file.
One of the things that make the fundament of the United States, democracy is not merely a word, but the long-suffered result, won in the hardest battles. However, the process of the state democratization is far from being over yet.
Another step that brought the country closer to establishing the democratic society and providing the rights and freedoms to all of its citizens were the presidential elections that took place recently.
Once choosing the man who is bound to lead the country to another victory over the economical standstill, the financial complicacies and the international misconceptions arising between the United States and the rest of the world, the country will necessarily see its expectations come true.
For those who still consider the presidential elections an international show-off, Gibbs says,
Barack Hussein Obama did not win because of the color of his skin. Nor did he win in spite of it. He won because at a very dangerous moment in the life of a still young country, more people than have ever voted before came together to try and save it [Gibbs].
Thus, it must be admitted that the result of the elections was another step towards the principles of democracy. With help of the politics conducted by Obama, the country is bound to prosper. A nation does not need a big President in small times; it needs one only when the future is spitting out monsters [Gibbs].
From 1920 to 2011: The Pillars of Democracy
Considering the history of the USA, one has to admit that the country has seen hard times, yet there has always been someone or something to help the country rise from the ashes. Encouraging the economical progress and making people strive for the new discoveries, the XX century was a huge step towards the brand new world.
Perhaps, one of the greatest discoveries that started the machine of the U. S. progress was the invention of electricity. Electric motors replaced steam engines as the basic source of energy in factories, [Divine 736]
Divine marked, and clarified that this is where the progress was launched. Who could have thought that in several decades, overcoming the economic weakness, the country will start a completely new epoch the Jazz Age, when the city replaced the countryside [Divine 764]?
Comparing the new and the old vision of the past events suggested by Divine, one can consider the 1920ies not only as the age of Great Depression, but also as the time when the transition to modern America [Divine 735] was carried out.
Conclusion: Some More Steps Left
Considering the current state of the country, one can still claim that a lot needs to be done. For the progress to continue, people must not cease their efforts in shaping the country and establishing the democracy [Morris 04/26]. Therefore, planning the further improvements is one of the most important tasks nowadays.
One of the most evident spheres that require mending is the one of the Peoples Rights [Morris 05/05]. Started in the distant 1909, the campaign for peoples rights [Morris 05/05] still continues, taking various shapes, such as the rights of women, the rights of the disabled, etc.
Helping people to have their rights acknowledged by the rest of the world is one of the most essential issues at present. Therefore, this seems to be the sphere that deserves further improvement, along with the country economics and the home and foreign policy.
Works Cited
Divine, Robert, et al. America Past and Present, Brief Edition, Vol. 1, 7th Ed. New York City, NY: Pearson, 2007. Print.
Gobbis, Nancy. This is Our Time. TIME, Nov. 17, 2008. Print.
Morris. Class Lectures. 2011. Microsoft Word file.
Zinns and Schweikarts opinions concerning the issue of democracy in |American society are often seen as polarizing since their perspectives have been significantly politicized and typically attached to the Democratic and Republican type of rhetoric accordingly. Despite the attempts to distance their views from each other, they share quit a range of characteristics, including the focus on the general well-being of all citizens (Grabar, 2019). However, there are significant distinctions in Zinns and Schweikarts personal assumptions, beliefs, and values, which can be traced in their key writings.
Specifically, Zinns writing portrays the authors democratic position and liberal views quite accurately. Namely, Zinns personal assumptions concerning the problem of racism and colonialism as the cornerstone of inequality in the U.S. are represented clearly in the book. In turn, Schweikarts assumptions regarding individual freedoms are also demonstrated accurately in his work, opposing those of Zinn.
Key Distinction
Similarly, the major distinction between Zinns and Schweikarts beliefs can be summarized as the differences in their perspectives on the Cold War. Particularly, unlike Zinn, who tended to emphasize the limitations and problems of capitalism, thus conceding that certain middle ground could be located between the two opposing sides, Schweikart insisted on reinforcing the traditional perspective on capitalism as the crucial driving force behind the U.S. progress.
Biases Noticed
Due to the uncompromising perspectives that both opponents held in regard to their views, each of them was prone to a certain amount of bias in his perspective. Namely, the presence of personal judgments in both opponents ideas, as well as the propensity toward using a straw man in the development of their arguments, reduced the validity of their arguments. At the same time, it would be wrong to dismiss the authors perspectives as overly politicized; instead, they should be viewed in the context of the argument as suggestions worth considering and incorporating some of their elements into an improved policy.
Reference
Grabar, M. (2019). Debunking Howard Zinn: Exposing the fake history that turned a generation against America. Simon and Schuster.
Aristophanes is known as one of the greatest comedians of his times. Across all ages in history, his artistic work emerged as one of the most excellent plays in ancient Greek playwright. His play, The Acharnians is one of the classical works in the category of satirical genre of old comedy. It is also notable that Aristophanes develops the plot of the play with absurd humor and imaginations that captures the Peloponnesian war which Athenians had waged against Spartans for six years (Sommerstein 6).
As the plot unfolds, he attracts the attention of his audience including prominent poets and historians. Aristophanes engages himself in general politics that naturally appeal to the struggle of Athenian citizens against tyranny, mass representation and civic rights. According to him, democracy is the only form of unrestricted and complete system of governance that can allow a satirical suppression of private usage political and social power to torture other citizens (Sommerstein 17).
Nevertheless, the author continues to satirize the democracy which he has supported as he argues that it has turned Athens into a city of jurymen. It is against this backdrop that this paper argues how democracy works and proves whether it is a viable type of government or not.
Back in 5th century, democracy was used to denote peoples power in ancient Greece. Therefore, the mode of governance became a popular manner of spreading politics.
On the other hand, Aristophanes define democracy as a form of government where there is a definite system of reforms that are meant to protect the masses such that there could be no folly, vice or any form of misconduct to defile their private lives. He emphasizes that this form of government derives its legitimacy from public opinion.
This is evident from the play where the main protagonist, Dicaeopolos (who is one of the citizens in Athens) makes up his mind to adopt a peace policy (Sommerstein 7).
As the plot unfolds, the author reveals how Decaeopolos has faced misery after being invaded during Lacedaeminian attacks. In this case, the author uses his persona to expose his fear and frustrations of the Pelopossesian war (Sommerstein 7). According to him, a good government should advocate for peace rather than vengeance that has easily led to the destruction of the state and eventually caused it to decline.
The fact that Aristophanes uses his main persona to indicate how a democratic government should operate; there should be palpable manners through which it abides and defends the citizens against their assailants. Symbolically, his main persona makes a peace treaty with his frontiers where he makes an enclosure around his house (Sommerstein 33). This symbolizes the presence of peace and freedom to trade with other countries.
Nevertheless, this is ironical since democratic form of government does not always guarantee free market. Regardless of the fact that a democratic government should rule on the majority principle, Aristophanes feels that the leaders get pressured by the strong manipulators to deviate from majority rule for their selfish gains. This implies that in some instances, democratic governments can turn out to be the majority tyranny against the minority and vice versa (Sommerstein 20).
The author notes that democracy can take many forms and thus continues to be an intricate concept. To some extent, it is difficult to define it accurately (Sommerstein 6). Throughout the play, the author gives his audience an immediate insight on the nature of the Greek democratic system and its mass representatives. He notes that six years after the Peloponnesian Wars begun in 431 A.D, the natives suffered a lot.
As the plot unfolds, Aristophanes explores the suffering of his state, Athens and the episode triggers him to write the play (Sommerstein 19). In his play, he is compelled to express his strong feelings against the war. It is apparent that he makes a mockery of democracy and leaders representing the citizens in public offices.
At this point, Aristophanes intends to convince the Athenian citizens of how ridiculous the war was. In addition to this, his heightened emotions directly relates to his mistrust of a democratic government. Furthermore, he is annoyed with the perspectives and actions of the leaders (Sommerstein 46).
According to him, the only way of bringing peace and stability in Athens was by being honest and transparent to the citizens. Besides, the author feels that for democracy to work, leaders need to diatribe themselves from fierce criticisms that easily lead to war. In his view, were it not for the lack of proper policies, the Peloponnesian war could not have occurred (Sommerstein 31).
However, the fact that he rules out democracy as the best form of government does not imply that it could never work. In this case, he highly emphasize that democracy can only work when the electorates submit to serve the demos with honesty and accountability without being compelled to act against the law for vested interests.
Empirically, it is evident from the play that democracy will only work better than any other form of government only if leaders are able to eradicate corruption, tyranny, make sound policies and become competent in representing the true will of the people (Sommerstein 12). It is worth to note that if this does not happen, democracy might not do better than other forms of government.
To recap it all, it is apparent that democracy can emerge as a viable form of government as Aristophanes points out in the play. It is also essential to note that democracy works well when applied in the most suitable manner. As Aristophanes points out, democracy can be vicious especially when mass representatives fail to operate according to the rule of the people. In this case, approaches used by leaders in enforcing democracy can determine whether it will work or fail.
Works Cited
Sommerstein, Alan. Aristophanes, Lysistrata and Other Plays: The Acharnians. New York: Penguin, 2002. Print.
The American government is based on the principles written down in the countrys leading document the Constitution. Written more than 200 years ago, this document plays a central role in shaping American laws and traditions. Moreover, while other constitutions undergo constant changes, the American Constitution remains almost unchanged, with few amendments introduced over the years. The principles of government established in this document were elaborated in a bitter struggle between the Democratic Radicals and the Conservatives. The need for consensus and compromise helped to crystallize the essence of what was acceptable to both parties. Limited as it was, the American Constitution was a progressive document and determined the path of development for the country for years ahead.
The roots of the American government can be traced back to the aftermath of the American civil war and the results of the American War of Independence. The first governmental document adopted at that time was The Declaration of Independence. In the article found in the Interactive Constitution, The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Revolution in Government, it is stated: Americas Declaration of Independence, drafted by the young but rapidly-rising revolutionary leader Thomas Jefferson, and adopted by the revolutionary Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, marks the first attempt by the United States of America not only to justify their decision to separate themselves from the Empire of Great Britain but also to define some of the unalienable rights on which their revolutionary action was based (Interactive Constitution. The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Revolution in Government, para. 3). The Declarations adoption was a victory for the supporters of independence and a triumph of radical democratic views over conservative ones.
The Declaration of Independence differed significantly from the later, more moderate documents adopted by the Americans. It was an anti-feudal and anti-monarchist manifesto that proclaimed democratic freedoms: equality before the law, the peoples sovereignty, and their right to change the form of power. However, these proclaimed freedoms and equality did not mean the abolition of slavery; as Jeffrey Ostley states, Some of those who sought independence aimed to protect the institution of slavery (Ostley, 2021, para. 3). The true aim of this document was not to create equality in the literary sense but to finally separate the US from Great Britain, working on peoples feelings.
After the War of Independence, it became evident that the colonies could achieve independence only by uniting. The Second Continental Congress, held in the same year, was the central authority of the colonies throughout the war. The need for unity to oppose Great Britain overwhelmed the differences between Democratic Radicals and the Conservatives. The Articles of Confederation were adopted in 1781 as the first legal document of the USA.
Although the Confederation of American states did not have a unified government, some political foundations of American statehood were laid within its framework. Though Congress existed earlier, in this document, it was named a collective legislative organ, the tasks of which were to discuss the questions related to the whole territory of the USA. The fifth article of Confederation states: For the most convenient management of the general interests of the United States, delegates shall be annually appointed in such manner as the legislatures of each State shall direct, to meet in Congress on the first Monday in November in every year (Yale Law School. Articles of Confederation, para. 5). Thus, the need for deliberation between at that time independent states was recognized, and parties were getting ready for a compromise.
After the victorious end of the War of Independence, Congress adopted the landmark Northwest Ordinances, which created the legal basis for the territorial expansion of the United States and established the procedure for creating new states. However, when Congress tried to govern American states, it soon became clear that the restrictions imposed on this legislative body by the Articles of Confederation made the work of Congress inefficient. The All-American convention, held in Philadelphia from May to September 1787, was called upon to correct the situation and create a new constitution.
When the text of the Constitution was published, the split in American society reached its highest point. The radical Democrats accused the federalist Democrats of pushing through monarchical principles, indulging oligarchic tendencies, and forgetting the values of freedom (Interactive Constitution, The Federalists vs. the Anti-Federalists).
However, the federalists managed to convince the American society of the need for a closer union of the states. The federalists claimed that the united government would not curtail the states rights, and creating a single economic and political space would improve citizens quality of life. As a result, the state of New York, and other states, ratified the new Constitution, the first line of which says, All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives (Yale Law School. US Constitution, para.1). In the latest version of the Constitution, the role allotted to the central government is strengthened due to several amendments introduced over the years. However, the essence of the main document is not changed.
American Constitution, elaborated in the heat of debates and sharp rhetoric, has recently celebrated more than 200 years of its existence. The differences, which accompanied the creation of this document, served to draw bridges between opposing views and find solutions acceptable for everyone. It can be inferred that the struggle between the Democratic Radicals and Conservatives led to the creation of a document, the principles of which remain unchanged due to their universal and genuinely democratic character.
References
Interactive Constitution. The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Revolution in Government. Web.
Interactive Constitution. The Federalists vs. the Anti-Federalists. Web.
Ostler, J (2021). The shameful final grievance of the Declaration of independence. The Atlantic. Web.
Yale Law School. Lilian Goldman Law Library. Articles of Confederation: 1781. Web.
Yale Law School. Lilian Goldman Law Library. US Constitution. Web.
For Latin America in the mid-19th century, a distinctive feature was the tendency to democracy and equality. Contrary to the European countries, which were starting to build their colonial empires, and the United States with its slavery, people in Latin American countries made claims about the personal freedom of everybody. Intellectuals, politicians, and public speakers in Mexico and Colombia wrote that all people should be treated equally, regardless of race, class, and sex. Such democratic positions were widespread there in the 1840s 1870s and halted at the end of the century.
In the 1840s, Latin American countries, which were Spanish colonies before, started to build their republics and democratic societies in them. In 1849, Liberal Party became ruling in Colombia and performed many democratic reforms. All men obtained the right to vote, and all citizens gained a long list of rights provided by the government. Intellectual elites of Colombia considered the country the most progressive in America, including the U.S., where, at those time, was slavery.
Mexican government of Benito Juarez in the 1850s 1860s conducted a wide range of liberal reforms known as La Reforma. When France invaded Mexico in 1862, with the support of Mexican conservatives, it claimed that it came to bring modernity to the country. As Mexican people wrote in those times, in reality, they brought only murder and tyranny. Eventually, Mexico won the war and managed to re-establish its republic. Mexican intellectuals wrote that the 1860s were prominent for spreading and establishing democracy: slavery was abolished in the United States, and European governments became more democratic. They emphasized the role of Mexico and its republican, democratic, and liberal principles in those changes. However, at the end of the 19th century, everything had changed to the opposite: people in Mexico and other Latin American countries stopped considering themselves as the vanguard democratic countries. They started to imitate the political principles in Europe and the U.S.: class inequality started to grow, and governments became more autocratic and less free.