Category: Democracy

Introduction

This paper discusses the contemporary relationship between the adoption of neo-liberal policies by governments, with a special interest devoted to Chile where leftist policies have been in force for over two decades and the related social impact of economic development in geographically adjacent Latin American countries. It seeks to examine some broad themes of the political economy of regional development shifts towards neo-liberal policies and examines generalizations that can be made on how the productive response of economic integration flows between countries. Economic integration between countries will be examined to see if any neo-liberalism is taking place within the regions of Latin American countries. Discussion includes analysis of manufacturing products and those based on renewable resources mainly in relation to regional development in Chile and the growth of non-traditional exports and labor markets.

Neo-liberalism

Neo-liberalism maintains people act according to self-interest and that markets yield the most efficient outcome by free trade balances within liberalized capital markets with minimal government intervention in the economy. ¹ Karl Marx developed the theory that under capitalism, technical and distributional changes tend to follow specific patterns of evolution. This course of changes coalesces the expansion of output, capital, and employment. (Other mitigating factors include the rise of labor productivity, the real wage and the capital-to-labor ratio.) Further in the evolution lies difficulty to sustain the progress of labor productivity without resorting to increased amounts of capital investment. The decline of the profit rate creates the conditions for large crises resulting in recessions and unemployment.²

Marxist economics is deeply rooted in many Latin countries and enjoy a strong historical foundation; however, with the rise of the Cold War and the increasing United States hostility toward anything remotely progressive, the left in Latin America was first, mildly, and then severely repressed. ³ The list of casualties includes: The Arbenz regime in Guatemala; Goulart in Brazil; Allende in Chile and democracy in Uruguay and Argentina. ⁴ In the 1980s, neo-liberal policies provided a framework to keep Latin economies from a collective debt crisis. Neoliberal economic policies were seen to improve the severe financial restrictions of the sudden drop in external business and increased government debt.

Neo-liberalism at work

The package of neo-liberal economic reforms highlights areas of fiscal management, trade, financial markets and privatization of state firms. Fiscal management begins with budget deficits reduction, creating an independent central bank along with a budget and tax office. Trade reform is concerned with achieving an increased global economic outlook by promoting exports by reducing tariffs on imports. Financial market reform eyes manipulating Markey determined interest rates as the objective. Privatization reform increases short-term government income by the elimination of inefficient state programs and departments. In addition, regulatory entities guarantee that the private sector public-use companies will work more efficiently than those of the former public sector.

The political economy of Latin American countries is increasingly characterized by neo-liberal approaches. The use of the term neo-liberal has terminology issues because of its ideological suggestion. In international policy circles, the term tends to be used to indicate a package of economic reforms as opposed to social policies or political reform. As a result, some speak of neo-liberalism as the new economic model. ⁵

Neo-liberalism in Latin America

Neo-liberalism is not a recent occurrence in Latin America. For more than a century, the principles and values of the left have fashioned the establishment of Latin American society. ⁶ Liberal reform in Latin America varies substantially from country to country in the extent of commitment to the economic and social policy. Chile has well over two decades of reform while Venezuelas conversion to neo-liberal reform between 1989 and 1992 was short-lived. Comparisons can be made, though, between governments that have been committed to reform for a period of time in terms of their policies towards the integration of social policies and the objective of achieving greater social equity or neo-liberalism. A significant shift in social priorities occurred with the Chilean transition of democracy after 1990 as tax increases were directed to pay for greater spending on social welfare, education and health. The Chilean case showed neo-liberal reform cannot be only about making economies more market-oriented. Substantial institutional reforms have to take place that in Chile have stretched over a wide variety of political ideologies and include reforms to landholding, ownership of copper, pensions and taxation ⁷ It is the combination of these progressive institutional reforms with market-oriented neoliberal policies that have allowed Chile to develop a competitive economy and society within a globalizing and more competitive world. ⁸

Making it work

In countries that undergo neo-liberal reforms, the prosperity of the region is linked to the success of regional producers inserting themselves into the world economy. A complex collage of regions evolves in terms of the comparative advantage and factor endowments of regions in world markets. Prosperity becomes linked to an areas ability to attract investment and produce for export markets. In regions that did well under the inward-oriented model but find it difficult to attract export-led capital and restructure production for global markets, economic stagnation and decline relative to other regions has occurred, particularly in terms of labor productivity. Furthermore, the old reliance on supplying domestic markets becomes more difficult as regional producers now face competitive import goods and products. ⁹

Factors influencing success

Many factors and thus uncertainties surround regional integration and development under neo-liberal policies. In general terms, the outward-leaning character of economic growth has had an impact on secondary regions. The ability of producers in those regions to export effectively significantly increases prospects for regional investment and as a by-product, a labor force and governmental tax income swell. In countries where producers stay tied to the domestic market alone, economic growth has not normally taken place. Non-traditional exports aid the outward orientation of a countrys economy. Traditional exports experience overvalued exchange. These are usually raw materials and non-renewable resources such as oil and minerals traded on world markets whose value is reflected by the global balance of supply. The demand of the commodity is the key to export products rather than the costs of production.

By contrast, the growth of non-traditional exports (as opposed to traditional) is very much influenced by the costs of production of potential exports. As a result, nontraditional exports have benefited from the shift to outward orientation and more Effectively-valued exchange rates. Quality and reliability of the export product are important considerations as well but the relative cost of production is the crucial factor behind the early growth of a non-traditional export. ¹⁰ Non-traditional exports can best be divided into two groups  those based on renewable resources and those based on manufacturing products. With the move to neo-liberal economic policies, these types of exports have become significant for Latin America. From the middle the to late 1980s, nontraditional agricultural exports grew at rates of 222% in Chile, 78% in Guatemala and 348% in Costa Rica. ¹¹

Chiles unique perspective

In the shift to outward orientation, many firms have been unable to compete in international markets and have closed plants. Other firms, however, have been able to restructure successfully and achieve international levels of competitiveness. Such firms have required access to capital, new technology, best practice in management and a range of labor skills. However, the key factor in the international competitiveness of these firms has been low labor costs. ¹² Chile has been practicing neoliberal economics for a longer time period than other geographically adjacent Latin countries which makes Chile a more accurate country in which to gauge the impact of the growth of non-traditional exports on regional development. The pattern of Chilean regional development also has a well-defined core-periphery relationship. Chiles core is the metropolitan region based around the capital, Santiago. In 1993, this region contained 40% of the nations population and 60% of industrial establishments. The periphery, meanwhile, is divided into 12 regions with 60% of the national population but only 40% of industrial establishments. ¹³

Distribution of income

Regional poverty will be more effectively reduced and labor productivity will be enhanced if the production of the nontraditional export is labor-intensive and involves large numbers of regional workers in the export activity. In terms of Chiles four resource categories, agriculture is the most intensive user of labor, particularly in terms of harvesting and packaging, where a distinct gender division of labor also exists. ¹⁴ The rapid growth of export activities in the peripheral regions of Chile has increased labor in Chile by nearly 40% between 1983 and 1991, with the most striking advances taking place in the export-oriented regions. The regional distribution of investment in non-traditional exports has definitely favored Chiles peripheral regions, in terms of foreign investment 86.7% of investment in primary sectors, 43.7% in manufacturing and 85.6% in transport. ¹⁵

At the regional level, growth in agricultural exports neither automatically improves nor worsens the distribution of income. Export escalation radically changes access to the land of rural populations and employment opportunities. Size of holding becomes a crucial variable as to the incorporation of rural groups into adopting export crops. Owners of larger holdings can become directly incorporated into the export boom whilst those with access to small plots of land find it more difficult. ¹⁶ Three key factors determine to what extent agricultural export growth is inclusive of the rural poor. One, if small-scale farms participate in producing the export crop and enjoy the higher incomes generated from it. Two, if the export crop encourages a precedent of structural change that methodically improves or worsens the access of the rural poor to land and third, whether agricultural exports attract more or less of the labor of landless and part-time farmers. This provides a useful framework within which to gauge the impact of agricultural exports on the populations of rural regions, particularly if these are examined within the context of changes in land and labor markets. ¹⁷

Land-based markets have been more vigorous in export-oriented regions than in agricultural regions still oriented to domestic markets. During the 1980s, high international prices gave the farmers reasonable incomes. As international trading conditions tightened during the early 1990s, however, debts of farmers started to increase as a result and many began to record debts nearly as high as the value of their agricultural land. Agriculture-type production is labor-intensive and can increase labor absorption at the regional level. The combination of waged labor with agricultural exportation in poor rural regions has had significant impacts on income levels for the rural poor. ¹⁸ Rural income levels in agro-exporting regions have improved and labor shortages have even emerged in some areas. The benefits of agro-exportation to a region depend on the type of commodity being developed and on two key variables, the land access effect and net employment effects. The most positive outcome would be one in which small farmers adopt a labor-absorbing crop on most of their land, resulting in high direct participation and greater labor opportunities for the rural poor. The most negative outcome would be one in which small farmers find their participation thwarted by resource constraints and the labor intensity associated with larger farms drops below the levels of previous crop choices. ¹⁹ The reality of the labor situation usually lies somewhere between these two extremes. Efforts to make agro-export growth benefit the rural poor require more than market liberalization and outward-looking policy orientation. In the areas of small-scale export production, government assistance would have to be given to small-scale producers.

Conclusion

It has been argued that neo-liberalism ideals of economic integration and political foundations are superficial and unstable. The sustainability of the neo-liberal economic model requires that it reduces domestic, organizational and social deficits. If neo-liberalism is to be replicated it will require the rebuilding of institutions that react to both privileged and popular interests. The disenchantment with neo-liberalism economic and social ideals is not simply a difference in values. This disillusionment is representative of a more deep-seated dissatisfaction with how economic development was managed throughout the twentieth century. Democracys frail return was cushioned by economic policies which prompted people to re-examine the dispirited and demonized left-wing strategies. The neo-liberal economic direction in Latin American countries, with Chile leading the way, exhibits both a denunciation of failed policies and devotion to the historic values and ideals of a significant segment of people. Technological advances have made comfortable lifestyles for many and the world an easier place to exist but it will be a hard journey to positive, sustained economic development. This ongoing experiment is amassed with complexity and enigmas for which there is no one exact answer or comprehensive version. The history of expansionistic programs demonstrates the necessity to shift this model of the western economy. The governments and peoples of Latin American countries have steadily and progressively empowered the left to achieve this economic and social assignment. Latin American governments and citizens would rather focus on issues that are real rather than imagined such as poverty and fair trade.

Economic development should custom-fit to each countrys and regions circumstances. Since the early 1990s Latin America has struggled under a generic, if it works for us it must work for you, type of economic plan. If these assumptions were indeed a panacea as their authoring economists held them to be, they would have been more conducive to positive changes. The theories were formulated to employ standardized implementation regardless of the countrys distinctive characteristics and multifaceted state of affairs. Economists generally advise that these policy fluctuations cause economic unsteadiness and hinder governments from achieving any long-term economic goals.

References

Apey, A. (1995). Agricultural Restructuring and Coordinated Policies for Rural Development in Chile. [PhD Dissertation]. The University of Birmingham.

Barham, B; Clark, M; Katz, E & Schurman, R (1992) Non-Traditional Agricultural Exports in Latin America. Latin American Research Review. Vol. 27, N. 2, pp.43-82.

Barrientos, S (1997) The Hidden Ingredient: Female Labor in Chilean Fruit Exports. Bulletin of Latin American Research. Vol. 16, N. 1, pp.71-82.

Bee, A & Vogel, I (1997) Temporeras and Household Relations: Seasonal Employment in Chilean Fruit Exports. Bulletin of Latin American Research. Vol. 16, N. 1, pp.83-96.

Carter, M R; Barham, B L & Mesbah, D (1996) Agricultural Export Booms and the Rural Poor in Chile, Guatemala and Paraguay. Latin American Research Review. Vol. 31, N. 1, pp. 33-65.

Clapp, R A (1995) Creating Competitive Advantage: Forest Policy as Industrial Policy in Chile. Economic Geography. Vol. 71, N. 3, pp.273-296.

de Mattos, C A (1996) Avances de la globalización y nueva dinámica metropolitana: Santiago de Chile, 1975-1995. EURE, Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Urbano Regionales. Vol. XXII, No.65, pp.39-64.

Dumenil, G. & Levy, D. (2004). The Nature and Contradictions of Neoliberalism. The Globalization Decade: A Critical Reader. Eds. L. Panitch, C. Leys, A. Zuegue, M. Konings. London: The Merlin Press, Fernwood Publishing.

Edwards, S. (1996). Crisis and Reform in Latin America: From Despair to Hope. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 2.

Gwynne, R N & Ortiz, J (1997) Export Growth and Development in Poor Rural Regions: A Meso-Scale Analysis of the Upper Limari. Bulletin of Latin American Research. Vol. 16, N. 1, pp.25-41.

Kay, C. (1993). For a Renewal of Development Studies: Latin American Theories and Neoliberalism in the Era of Structural Adjustment. Third World Quarterly. Vol. 14, I. 4, pp. 691-702.

Martinez, J & Diaz, A (1996) Chile: The Great Transformation. Washington: The Brookings Institution.

Noble, A. & Weinstein, M. (2005). A Resurgent Left in Latin America: Implications for the Region and U.S. Policy. A Journal of Modern Society and Culture.

Shaiken, H (1994). Advanced Manufacturing and Mexico: A New International Division of Labor. Latin American Research Review. Vol. 29, N. 2, pp.39-72.

Footnotes

1. Dumenil, G. & Levy, D. (2004). The Nature and Contradictions of Neoliberalism. The Globalization Decade: A Critical Reader. Eds. L. Panitch, C. Leys, A. Zuegue, M. Konings. London: The Merlin Press, Fernwood Publishing.
2. Dumenil, G. & Levy, D. (2004). The Nature and Contradictions of Neoliberalism. The Globalization Decade: A Critical Reader. Eds. L. Panitch, C. Leys, A. Zuegue, M. Konings. London: The Merlin Press, Fernwood Publishing.
3. Noble, A. & Weinstein, M. (2005). A Resurgent Left in Latin America: Implications for the Region and U.S. Policy. A Journal of Modern Society and Culture. Web.
4. IBID
5. Edwards, S. (1996). Crisis and Reform in Latin America: From Despair to Hope. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 2.
6. Kay, C. (1993). For a Renewal of Development Studies: Latin American Theories and Neoliberalism in the Era of Structural Adjustment. Third World Quarterly. Vol. 14, I. 4, pp. 691-702.
7. Martinez, J & Diaz, A (1996) Chile: The Great Transformation. Washington: The Brookings Institution.
8. Apey, A. (1995). Agricultural Restructuring and Coordinated Policies for Rural Development in Chile. [PhD Dissertation]. University of Birmingham.
9. IBID
10. Clapp, R A (1995) Creating Competitive Advantage: Forest Policy as Industrial Policy in Chile. Economic Geography. Vol. 71, N. 3, pp.273-296.
11. Barham, B; Clark, M; Katz, E & Schurman, R (1992) Non-Traditional Agricultural Exports in Latin America. Latin American Research Review. Vol. 27, N. 2, pp.43-82.
12. Shaiken, H (1994). Advanced Manufacturing and Mexico: A New International Division of Labor. Latin American Research Review. Vol. 29, N. 2, pp.39-72.
13. de Mattos, C A (1996) Avances de la globalización y nueva dinámica metropolitana: Santiago de Chile, 1975-1995. EURE, Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Urbano Regionales. Vol. XXII, No.65, pp.39-64.
14. Barrientos, S (1997) The Hidden Ingredient: Female Labor in Chilean Fruit Exports. Bulletin of Latin American Research. Vol. 16, N. 1, pp.71-82.
15. de Mattos, C A (1996) Avances de la globalización y nueva dinámica metropolitana: Santiago de Chile, 1975-1995. EURE, Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Urbano Regionales. Vol. XXII, No.65, pp.39-64.
16. Gwynne, R N & Ortiz, J (1997) Export Growth and Development in Poor Rural Regions: A Meso-Scale Analysis of the Upper Limari. Bulletin of Latin American Research. Vol. 16, N. 1, pp.25-41.
17. Carter, M R; Barham, B L & Mesbah, D (1996) Agricultural Export Booms and the Rural Poor in Chile, Guatemala and Paraguay. Latin American Research Review. Vol. 31, N. 1, pp. 33-65.
18. Bee, A & Vogel, I (1997) Temporeras and Household Relations: Seasonal Employment in Chilean Fruit Exports. Bulletin of Latin American Research. Vol. 16, N. 1, pp.83-96.
19. Carter, M R; Barham, B L & Mesbah, D (1996) Agricultural Export Booms and the Rural Poor in Chile, Guatemala and Paraguay. Latin American Research Review. Vol. 31, N. 1, pp. 33-65.

Title of the proposed thesis

The chosen title for the proposed thesis is to strengthen the understanding of the challenges and consequences of the Mexican state to secure the essential conditions of responsibility towards the citizens. The main objective is to examine the challenges and results in order to make more changes to become a full-fledged democracy (Poli and Emily 1). Through the implementation of policies and procedures, it is possible to realize the benefits of a democratic framework in this country.

Background to the research topic

In the year 2000, the transition to democracy in Mexico ground to a halt because of specific reasons. The political party in Mexico was not ready to protect the people and implement real powers on the people. This means exercising powers that are real and legal and derived through a valid election process, or a plebiscite These political parties are not ready to preserve the rights and interests of the public. Their main aim is to make benefit from their political powers and also for fulfilling their economic interest. This brings a distribution gap among the Mexican citizens.

Issues to be examined

The main issues in Mexico are that this government may not respond to the problems that are faced by its people. From this, it is very clear that the democratic process is just divided between the people and the government. Governments need to remedy deficiencies in their administrative machinery which may cause hardships to people, like corruption, political malpractices, odious taxes, unemployment, etc. A government could only be worth its name if it is able at least reasonably to address the baseline needs of the people. What mainly follows from it, so far as the state is concerned, is the doctrine that all systems of property are justified only to the degree that they secure, in their working, the minimum needs of the citizen as a citizen (Laski 87). Perhaps, the channelizing of government efforts may not be directed towards the common good of people, but perhaps to subserve and promote political interests. In a democratic setup, it is imperative that political interests are relegated by public interests, and all actions need to take the best interests of the people into account. This is emphatic in the case of a country like Mexico that is plagued with corruption, governmental ineptitude, and lack of governmental support for public endeavors. The conference proper, which commenced right after the Opening Session, was structured in six Roundtable discussions, on the following sub-themes:

1. Electoral Participation /Competitive Rigging
2. Integrity of the Party System
3. Political Violence
4. Electoral Law/Campaign Finance
5. Election Administration: Organizing the 2007 Election
6. Election Monitoring (Jega 3).

Proposed Methodology

The objective is to understand the obstacles and barriers that confront Mexicos progress towards a democratic setup, underlining the need to alleviate this situation, again, there is a need to implement some strategy that provides a very good solution and that will benefit the Mexican citizens. First of all, the people in power must understand how the political system works. The procession of this power is at once the condition of the states survival, on the one hand, and the guarantee of law and order upon the other (Laski and Pearson 17 ) The main aspect is that there should be no compromising on the safety, security and peaceful co-existence among people in this country. Besides, the cold facts are that no democracy can afford to neglect the proved sources of efficient service. That is the basis of its life (Laski 115).

The method that needs to be evolved would be in terms of seeking a common referendum from all political parties, active or otherwise, and seek a consensus on how to find solutions to solve the current political imbroglio. Giving due weightage to the will and wishes of such de factor powers, could in effect, translate into the preponderance of a strong and unified political leadership that could help Mexico to gear itself to the democratic process ensuring the will of the people and its elected powers that be. The coalition of major political powers would ensure cohesiveness and decisiveness in political decision-making, and by extension, in nation-building.

Conclusions

An important issue to keep in mind is that the Mexican transition to democracy is an ongoing process and, to be fair, it would take some time to accomplish. This country has been languishing with successive dictatorship governments for quite some time, and a transition to a more reformed and people-oriented democratic setup would, naturally, need time to accomplish and sustain. Therefore it is in the best interests of the people and the nation that a broad framework be evolved that could add character and depth into the political process in this country.

References

Jega, Attahiru M. Conference on Electronic Reform: Building Confidence for Our Future: An Overview. American University, Center for Democracy and Election Management. 2005. Web.

Laski, Harold J. A Grammar of Politics. Unwin Brothers Limited, 1967.

Laski, Harold J and Pearson, A Sidney, Jr. The State in Theory and Practice. Transaction Publication, 2008. Web.

Poli, Edmond and Emily. Courting Democracy in Mexico: Party Strategies and Electoral Institution/Mexico Under Fox. Latin American politics and Society. Reference Publication, 2005. Web.

The Use of American Power

America has been a powerful nation for long, and its power is highly manifested within and outside the nation. The purpose and use of American power has mainly been in defending the nation and its citizens from its enemies. With increased cases of terrorism in the 21^st century, the American nation is highly utilizing its powers in combating terrorism attacks and activities within and outside the country. The nation is also exercising its powers in promoting democracy within as well as in the global perspective.

For instance the fund for peace is a mission in America which is helping stimulate debates and dialogue through national conversations on peace and democratic issues in the country. The nation is also extending its powers abroad in instilling and supporting peace as well as helping in restoration of democracy in rogue countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan (Patterson, 2009).

Ethical Issues in the Practices of American Democracy

The American democracy is experiencing metamorphosis, and on the ethical perspective, some issues are emerging. Among these ethical issues is whether the process of promoting democracy is morally acceptable to all the stakeholders involved. In some cases, America is using excessive power in exercising and promoting democracy. A good example is characterized in restoration of democracy in the war torn Iraq where America is being criticized by the international community for the invasion of the country.

The invasion infact was blamed for further detoriation of democracy instead of its promotion. Another ethical issue arising is whether America respects human life in its quest for democracy. A lot of blood is being shed by innocent civilian in the wars and activities to promote democracy, especially outside the nation. Therefore the American democracy is not always democratic, since sometimes it is forced and goes against the wish of the majority (Patterson, 2009).

Major Issues between the Executive and Legislative Branches

The major issues surrounding the executive and legislative branches in the American constitution are division of powers as well as balancing the powers between the two arms of government. The executive which mainly consists of the president and government ministers sometimes has powers to authorize or deny a law passed by the legislature i.e. the parliamentary composition of senators and others. The conflict between the two branches arises in fusion of their powers to act in a certain situation. The legislature may pass various policies and the president (the executive) may be reluctant to sign them into a law. However the two branches are highly depended on each other.

The executive is dependent on the legislative branch in that it draws its members from the parliament, and legalizes laws created by the legislature. The legislature on the other hand depends on the executive, in signing bills passed into laws (McKenna and Feingold, 1989).

The Role of Appearances and Deception in American Politics

All politics tries their best to cover up their bad deeds and deceptions, and this is usually done through making policies which have a good appearance to the general public. The American politics is not immune to these deceptions. For instance, America has deceived the general public in its actual activities in the promotion of democracy and maintaining peace globally. A perfect example is evidenced on the basis on which it took invasion in Iraq, a political deception that Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction, a claim which up to now has not been justified. These negatively affects peoples perspective on the politics, hence their mistrust on the political powers exercised by the government (McKenna and Feingold, 1989).

Bureaucracy in American Political Life

Political bureaucracy entails the hierarchical authority in administration and management of political procedures, usually through many offices and characterized by fixed procedures. The political life in America is characterized by oppressive and strict policies which follow rigid and inflexible procedures in executing a political action. This oppressive and rigidity nature of the American political system has much impact on peoples perspective, to the extend of earning the title red tape.

Ethically, a bureaucrat actions are ethical, since his or her activities conforms to the set rules and procedures of executing an action, however if the procedures are not acceptable to the majority people, a bureaucrat may be unethical in the peoples perception but ethical in his or her activities. Therefore the procedures of action are more important to a bureaucrat than ethics of the action (McKenna and Feingold, 1989).

Limitation of Civil Liberty

During times of wars and conflicts, holding of civilians freedom is sometimes justified, even though it might be morally unethical. For instance in cases where insurgents cases are high, the peoples liberty may be withheld, as a measure to promote peace. However, in such cases of war, there must be an ethical norm or measure, which should detect for the cases whereby such limitations contravene the rule of law of the land and morality.

The ethical norm should be that majority of the civilians should accept the move. Otherwise it will have broken the law of the land, as well as immoral. Torture is unethical and a violation against human rights, and there are no basis to justify torture in any political practice in the society. However, in cases of terrorism, torture may be justified especially when the intention is to obtain vital information from the terrorists (Patterson, 2009).

The Effect of Racism on American Political Life

Racism has led to the weakening of the social solidarity and racial conflicts among the American people, hence weakening the political structure. The whites think that their political ideas are more superior to those of their fellow Black Country men. Racism conformed the American political life to a political system characterized by racial prejudice, in particular, prejudice against the black people.

However, political scientists in America argue that the practical usage of political policies that are race-sighted is greatly reducing the detrimental effects of racial prejudice, even though racism is still evident in the American political arena. In some political parties, race still plays a significant role. In the American political leadership, racism still exists in the election of women officials. Women of color are more considered as compared to those from other racial/ ethnic groups (Sierra, 2004).

Underlying Values that Motivate American Democracy

The Americas advance Act outlines several values motivating American democracy, which include: freedom of thought and expression, justice, values reflecting on the philosophy of protecting human rights, good governance, effective administration as well as governments commitment in further expansion and enhancement freedom. The American government is also cultivating a sense of equality in running the affairs of the government, where it is illegalizing discrimination in terms of gender and race in the political affairs.

The debates and arguments in the book Taking Sides shines light much on the values of ensuring freedom and protection of human rights. In the arguments, democracy can hardly thrive when people are not given the freedom in their thoughts, thus the democracy of America is mainly embarked on peoples freedom of expression (Patterson, 2009).

References

McKenna, G. and Feingold, S. (1989) Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Political Issues (16^thEd.). New York. McGraw-Hill.

Patterson, T. E. (2009). The American Democracy (9^th Ed). New York. McGraw-Hill.

Sierra, C. (2004). Political Science Professors Study on the Role of Gender and Race in Elected Officials with Ford Foundation Grant. Web.

The political life of America in the 1830s  early 1850s was largely determined by the rivalry between Whigs and Democrats. Both leading parties adhered to political and economic liberalism and considered themselves true Democrats and Republicans. Moreover, both also traced their origins to the old Republican Anti-Federalist Party, founded by Jefferson at the end of the 18th century. Democrats and Whigs alike declared themselves patriots and proclaimed adherence to the ideals and principles of the US War of Independence, guided by the views of George Washington and other Founding Fathers.

The Democratic Party preferred to operate with such concepts as democratic doctrine, democracy, people, peoples will, freedom, equal rights, patriotism, Constitution, Union, and laws of the states. Such terminology was widely represented in the appeal of the Democratic-Republicans in 1835, which was the prototype of the pre-election party platform (Murrin, 2016). It contained the classic postulates of the republican-democratic ideology formulated by Jefferson. It was essentially the following: maintaining the unity and inviolability of the Union, protecting democratic freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, free institutions and sacred rights of citizens, and ensuring the rights of the states. The question of slavery was mostly bypassed by the Democrats. Most of them absolutely did not accept northern abolitionism and called for the secession of the southern states (Murrin, 2016). They claimed it necessary to rely on the principle of non-interference in the internal relations and institutions of both sections and take into account the specific southern interests.

The Whig party programs of 1848 and 1852 indicated that the organization had not defined attitudes towards slavery. The Whigs of Massachusetts and some other states of the North advocated the abolition and exclusion of slavery from the territories. Meanwhile, according to Menna (2018), Southern Whigs proposed several measures, beginning with the diversification of slave labor itself: from cotton cultivation to manufacturing, primarily textiles (p. 51). However, after 1850, the Whigs experienced a deep ideological crisis: they approved Clays compromise, but were never able to develop a single position that suited all factions on significant social issues of slavery and race (Menna, 2018). The partys centrist leadership maneuvered between different groups. The unresolved issue of slavery led to the disintegration of the Whig party. Ultimately, in the mid-1850s, the radical and liberal Whigs of the North sided with the Republicans, while the conservatives of the South sided with the Democrats.

The leadership and activists of both the Whigs and Democrats consisted of representatives of the upper social strata. There was a confrontation between the new and less wealthy elite strata, represented by the Democrats, and the old, primarily financial elite, whose interests were expressed by the Whig Party. At the same time, the electorate of both major American parties was mixed in class, social status, and ethnicity. However, the less affluent and educated middle and lower classes from economically less developed areas preferred to vote for Democrats (Murrin, 2016). They were also supported by ethnic minorities, Catholics, and immigrants. Meanwhile, the Whigs social base had more affluent populations, many whites, Native Americans, and Protestants. An analysis of the struggle between the two parties allows seeing in this process signs of an elite revolution, since there was a clash of new social groups and lower status strata with the old elites, whom the Democrats called political aristocracy.

The parties approaches to race and slavery can be considered rather different. Democrats did not take a strong stand on the issue, instead vouching for giving each state the freedom to abolish or preserve slavery as its authorities saw fit. Meanwhile, the views of Whigs varied greatly in that regard, which ultimately became the major reason for the partys disbanding after just two decades of existence.

References

Menna, L. K. (2018). Southern Whiggery and economic development: The meaning of slavery within a national context. In M. H. Blatt & D. R. Roediger (Eds.), The Meaning of Slavery in the North. essay, Routledge.

Murrin, J. M. (2016). Liberty, equality, power: A history of the American people. Cengage Learning.

Introduction

Intellectually, specialists can be of great assistance to independent constitution-scholars in racially alienated nations. This is because such specialists are in a position to create certain suggestions, as opposed to overpowering them with a stream of alternatives. Particularly, the following requires the best precedence and ought to be the center stage of constitutional discussions or consultations. First, ballot votes should be through comparative representation. Secondly, there should be a democratic government and a cabinet in which power sharing is described in adherent or racial terms. The leader of a nation should also be democratically elected, and his/her administrative center of power combined with that of the prime minister, federalism and devolution. A centralized chamber that is low-powered communally funded self-governing institutions for spiritual groupings and less utilization of the referendum (¹) are the other requirements. The essay will examine issues regarding ethnic parties and democratic stability in divided societies.

Several questions have been posed regarding the way political societies ought to react to the chances and predicaments expressed by racial, linguistic, ethnical variations and spiritual sectors and by these reactions, thereafter improve self-governing, permanence, social fairness and tranquility (²). This is one of the hardest and significant matters of current politics.

In several examples like in Nigeria, Sudan, Northern Ireland, Iraq, Canada and Spain just to mention, it is certainly a major issue in political life (¹). As a grouping of constitutional and political evaluation, this phrase does not relate only to the societies which are racially, lingually, spiritually or ethnically diverse. What mostly makes a divided society recognizable is because all these variations are politically significant, meaning that they are important indicators of political individuality as well as bases for political militarization. Political arguments are mirrored by the lens of individuality; hence, political disagreement can be tantamount to disagreement amongst ethno-cultural groupings (³).

In addition, how divided societies react to the opportunities and a predicament expressed by the equality of ethno-cultural individuality and political attention is of great risk. The tremendous effects of a failure to solve these predicaments appropriately are well understood: segregation and unfairness, civil war and racial purification, absorption by force and the worst of it genocide (³).

Literature review

Available literature on the government of societies documents the efforts made by scholars and academicians alike, in their attempt to shed more light on this issue. Amongst the most notable scholars that have had a real impact in as far as the issue of governing divided societies is Lipset and Rokkan. These two scholars were convinced that the settings of a party were a reflection of the existing divisions (or lack of) in such a party. The most recent work by scholars in the area of governing societies appears to examine the existing variables in the management of societies. The presence of variables in the governing of societies is important because this acts as a pointer to the wide range of beliefs and tenets to which such parties may subscribe to. During the 1800s, Christian Democratic parties in Europe had already started to firmly politicize their beliefs. At certain times, parties may be seen to embrace certain societal sections and not others (^{4; 5}). A shift from one societal section to another is also likely depending on the circumstances that inform such a decision. For example, attention to financial matters within a society may result in such cleavages being observed (^{6; 7}).

Even as an increasing number of scholars endeavor to examine the form of communication that exist between on the one hand, the social system and on the other hand, party structures, nonetheless, little attention has been given to the study of how various parties are able to effectively increase the salience of certain actions.

Information that is currently available on mobilization is very insightful. It not only offers a clear definition of a strategy from a political point of view, but also offers an insight into the issue of campaign plans. At this point, it is important to note that much of this information appears to shed more light on institutional issues (⁸). Ongoing discussion on the same has endeavored to identify those institutions that have endorsed the implementation of all inclusive campaign please, at the expense of restricted ones. Nevertheless, the principle informing the decision by these institutions has time and again come under a scathing attack from its opponents who are opposed to the existence of comprehensive campaign please. In this case, those in favor of ballot poling regulations have especially been very vocal regarding this issue. Their argument is that this form of voting that they are so passionate about acts to serve several and not a single ethnic team (⁹).

On the other hand, additional assistance is necessary to enable these organizations experiment and implement partite plans. This is important, because the identification of existing difference can be accomplished here. Such scholars as Horowitz and Reilly appear to favor unusual institutions that operate in moderation. There are also a number of democracies in Africa for example who apart from being governed by one president over a long period of time, have also sought to embrace the policy of single-member regions (¹⁰). Even within a democratic country, we could have parties that are in support of the principle of a comprehensive please, even as other parties frown on this idea. Furthermore, history shows that with time, the strategic plans of parties get altered. In the same way, unsteady organizations may not enjoy transparency and enthusiasm in their daily operations, compared with their steady counterparts.

The role the dimension or size of team play in the assessment of members of a party actively involved in its activities requires to be emphasized. For example, it is far much easier for party applicants to endorse campaign pleas that are restrictive in nature if the party in question can manage its affairs unaided, as opposed to a smaller party that requires assistance to accomplish its operations.

Practical evidence from both the mayoral and congressional voting in the United States hint at a possible bias against party applicants on the basis of whether they are marginalized across the ethnic divide, or not. Even as applicants from large constituencies appear more inclined to favor ethnicity or race their counterparts from areas that are ethnically marginalized do not (¹¹). For example, we could have a candidate of White descent in an electoral district that is predominantly black. In a bid to avoid racism, such a candidate may opt to overlook race. On the other hand, if the same candidate was in a district that is highly inhabited by Whites, the support they get from the Black voters may not be decisive. In this case, such a candidate may opt to glorify the white race for example, and still not compromise his chances of winning an election. The issue of the impact that size has on regions that are politically divided across ethnic lines has also been explored by Dickson and Scheve. (¹²). Separately, Posner (⁴) illustrates how politicians are careful to avoid mobilize only those segments of a constituency that are large enough to have a real impact.The strategy that a party may adopt could also be determined by how powerful its current preferences are. For example, Rabushka and Shepsle (¹³⁾ are convinced that the demands of party voters coerce it to embrace positions that are extreme in nature.

In this case, the assumption of party candidates is that at all times voters shall be drawn to a candidate with whom they share the same ethnic background. The reasoning behind this is that the issue of patronage would take effect, resulting in a choice of a candidate of the same ethnic descent as the majority of the voters. Moreover, candidates who have a moderate stand in the existing party principles are more likely to less support from voters, in comparison with their counterparts who may opt to adopt an extreme stand. Likewise, Chua (¹⁴) is of the opinion that economic injustices are to blame for the voter mobilization exercise by parties who identify the existing animosity between for example, two separate political camps. Nonetheless, one cannot always predict with certainty how powerful the current preferences of a party are. This is because it is not always that parties seek to exploit existing hostility between groups as a conduit to mobilize voters. However, this does not mean that parties would be opposed to ethnic divisions when there is compelling evidence to indicate that such a division would act in favor of a party in question during an election (¹⁵). Time determines the preferences of a party while the relevancy of ethnicity may act as a hindrance to a party. What this means is that in the course of their existence, parties are duty-bound to alter their sizes, in line with their projected results. For example, in a case whereby the fundamental ethnic group of a party is more inclined towards exclusive policies.

In the event that the size of such a group is small when compared with similar groups, there is the likelihood that the party in question (¹⁶). Regarding the issue of mobilization, a lot of the related information in literature appears to view parties as entities that have been unified by common principles. As a result they endeavor to provide a similar and clear message that resonates across the various constituencies affiliated with the party in question. From a theoretical perspective, parties are regarded as teams consisting of politicians with a common goal. Hypothetically, parties are viewed as models that enable its members to assume their stand based on the existing principles. At the same time, such individual can also compare their opinions with those of their peers. However, the likelihood that the candidates of one party may interpret the intended message of the party to their constituents in diverse ways has also been considered, both at the national as well as the national level.

Integration of sustainable democracy

Questions arise on the way one can form a sustainable egalitarianism in severely divided societies. Such kinds of societies are mostly characterized by parties formed mainly around racial individuality or identities like Sri-Lanka, Bosnia and Northern Ireland, and are therefore susceptible to form common or general politics that recompense radical racial pleas as a foundation of voter militarization (¹⁷). This motivates zero amount of political character along racial scales, leading to the deterioration of democracy.

Regardless of the remarkable sector of scholarship concerning the constitutional structure and electoral designing for last several years, there has been astonishingly little interest offered to the techniques on how multi-ethnic parties need to be improved and maintained. This is regardless of some important current studies at forming extensive, cross-national parties in nations like Philippines, Nigeria, Indonesia and Kosovo. This studies or experiment have gotten little attention because of the division that is experienced in different societies (¹⁷).

Ethnic identities- in this case referring to a compartment of identity groups in which membership or relationship- is dependent on the features related to, or thought to be co-related with descent features. Ethnicity refers to an umbrella that readily houses different individuals who differ in race, religion, color and language (¹⁸). Therefore, ethnic identity and models associated with ethnic identity like ethnic riots, ethnic diversity, ethnic conflict, ethnic parties and ethnic violence among others either have no importance or they might have been made to look important by several preceding hypothetical effort on ethnic identity as an autonomous variable (¹⁹).

Several professionals on constitutional designing and divided societies generally accept that serious society divisions create a major predicament for democracy and as a result, it becomes harder to form and sustain democratic government in divided society, compared with standardized society. In addition, the challenge of racial and other serious divisions is bigger in nations that have not yet adopted democracy, or are entirely self-governing than in well-accomplished democracies within the 21^st century (²⁰).

Successes and failure of divided societies

Successful organization of self-governing government in the divided societies needs two major components. These component include; group or team independence and power division.

Power division indicates the contribution of representatives of all important corporate teams in political decision making, particularly at the higher or executive scale. On the other hand, team independence denotes that these teams have power to manage their own domestic issues or affairs, particularly in the fields of learning and ethnicity (²¹). Therefore, for a successful democratic government in divided societies, these two features (power sharing and teams independence) need to be implemented. This is because they are the main features of the type of democratic setting which is mostly defined as power division, democracy or constitutional democracy.

A group of professionals have evaluated the key responsibility of these two attributes and are sympathetic to their adoption by divided societies (²²). Power sharing as one of the attributes that has been used to govern divided societies has been implemented in several societies. For instance, the agreement on the significance of power sharing has been demonstrated by commentators responses to the formation of the Governing or leading Council in Iraq. This council has been condemned on different grounds, though there is no one who has queried its widely representative combination. In addition, the power of power division system has been verified by its regular realistic applications (²³). Long before professionals started evaluating the concept or model of power division democracy in the year 1960s, politicians and constitution scholars had engineered or formed power division resolutions for the predicaments or challenges of their divided societies. Some of the divided societies that shared a common institution included Netherlands, Canada, India and Switzerland, to name but a few. The outcome of these similar institution or feature of power sharing has similar outcome whereby the model or system of power sharing is criticized by several scholars saying that is not ideally democratic or effective way of governing divided societies (²⁴).

Though there have been several criticisms towards power sharing, there are few substitutes. For example, in the situation of Northern Ireland, collaboration without cooptation has been suggested. In addition, the alternative that was applied to the situation of the country of Iraq Governing Council was a Council made mostly and completely of reasonable associates of the Shiite bulk, with the excepted Kurds and Sunnis in disagreement (²⁵). This is a crude resolution to racial pressures and radicalism, and it is primitive to anticipate minorities criticized to everlasting antagonism to remain trustworthy, reasonable and productive (²⁶).

Divided Societies with a similar feature

Although the above alternatives were proposed as alternatives for power sharing, the only feature that has confirmed to be the best democratic system which can be implemented or adopted by the divided societies is power sharing model. More than adequate probable dilemmas and hindrances are already intrinsic in the deliberation of the several substitutions in power division.

Opposite to the argument that power sharing is a primitive system, the power division model implemented before the year 1960 by countries like Bosnia, South Africa, Northern Ireland, Belgium and Czechoslovakia, indicate huge difference (²⁷). For instance, extensive representation in the management has been attained by a lawful need that need to be made up of similar quantities of the two key ethno linguistic teams; by offering all parties with least amount of five proportion of the governmental seats the chance to be stood for in the cabinet.

Similarly, the most significant selection experienced by the constitution scholars is the governmental electoral structure, where the three major groups include; intermediate model, comparative representation and majoritarian model. Therefore, to ensure the election of a greatly representative legislature in divided societies, legislature ought to be the significant contemplation and the best way to do so is through the comparative representation. In addition, if any simplification on institutional structure is maintainable, it is because majoritarian models are advised wrongly for nations with serious ethnic or racial, spiritual, regional or other feeling and polarizing separations. Where cleavage teams are piercingly distinct and groups individuality or identities seriously understood, the superseding essential thing is to eliminate extensive and unclear segregation from authority of any important team (²⁸).

Similarly, the intermediate system can be categorized into; semi-relative models, mixed category and majoritarian models, which give definite representation to certain low-powered societies. Semi-relative models such as the restricted and collective vote and the solitary non-moveable vote might be in a position to produce nonage representation, though not as correctly and constantly as proportional representation. On the other hand, mixed models have resulted to being well-liked since the year 1990. For instance, some of the societies that implemented mixed systems include New Zealand and Germany and in such situations, the proportional representation at that time overcame the popularity of mixed models.

In case of divided societies with geologically intense communal teams or groups, a centralized model or setting is unquestionably an exceptional method to offer independent for these teams (²⁹). For parliamentally models, two governmental sections with similar or considerably similar, authority and various combinations is not a practical agreement. Normally, it is recommendable that the federation should be comparatively decentralized and that its element areas like provinces or states be relatively small in order to improve the future that each area will be relatively homogeneous and to eliminate dominance by large states on the federal scale. On the other hand, in case where in the divided societies, the corporate teams are not geologically intense, independence can also be organized on a non-territorial foundation (³⁰).

A resolution that has been utilized excellently Netherlands, India and Belgium is to offer educational sovereignty by providing similar state economic support to all institutions including the private schools as long as the required standards of education are obtained.

Conclusion

In conclusion, many professional on divided societies and governmental designing generally declare that serious society divisions create a major predicament for democracy, therefore making it hard to form and sustain democratic government within divided societies that homogeneous societies. Several questions are asked concerning the way political societies ought to react to the chances and predicaments expressed by racial, linguistic, ethnical variations and spiritual sectors and by these reactions, thereafter improve self-governing, permanence, social fairness and tranquility In addition, the successful and effective ways of forming a democratic government in divided societies is through the implementation of two major components; team independence and power division.

Works Cited

Abbott, Andrew. Things of Boundaries, in: A. Abbott, Time Matters. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001. Print.

Anderson, Benedict.Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, New York: Verso, 1991. Print.

Barry, Brian. The Consociational Model and Its Dangers. European Journal, 3.5 (2004): 45-64.

Berkeley, Cherty. Power-Sharing in South Africa. Institute of International Studies, University of California, 1985. Print.

Chandra, Kanchan. Ethnic Parties and Democratic Stability. Perspectives on Politics, 2005. 3(2): 235-252.

Chandra, Kanchan. Forthcoming in the Annual Review of Political Science.

Chandra, Kanchan. What Is Ethnic Identity And Does It Matter? 2005. Web.

Chua, Amy. World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability, New York: Doubleday, 2003. Print.

Conner, Walker. A Nation is a Nation, Is a State, Is an Ethnic Group, Is a&. in Ethnonationalism: The Quest for Understanding, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. Print.

Dickson, Eric and Kenneth Scheve. Social Identity, Political Speech, and Electoral Competition. Working paper, 2004. Print.

Fearon, James. Ethnic Structure and Cultural Diversity by Country. Journal of Economic Growth, 8.2 (2003): 195-222

Fox, James and Sandler, Schaller. Separation of Religion and State in the Twenty-First Century: Comparing the Middle East and Western Democracies. Comparative Politics, 37.3(2005).

Geller, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983. Print.

Glaser, Edward. The Political Economy of Hatred. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120.1(2005): 45-86.

Glickman, Harvey. Ethnicity, Elections, and Constitutional Democracy in Africa. In Timothy Sisk and Andrew Reynolds. Elections and Conflict Management in Africa. Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1998. Print.

Horowitz, Donald. Making Moderation Pay: The Comparative Politics of Ethnic Conflict Management. In Joseph Montville. Conflict and Peacemaking in Multiethnic Societies. New York: Lexington Books, 1991. Print.

Kuenzi, Michelle and Gina, Lambright. Party Systems and Democratic Consolidation in Africas Electoral Regimes. Party Politics,11.4 (2005): 423-446.

Lijphart, Arend. Constitutional Design for Divided Societies. Journal of Democracy ,15.2 (2004): 96-109

Marx, Anthony. Faith in Nation: Exclusionary Origins of Nationalism, Oxford University Press, 2003. Print.

Miller, Gary and Norman, Schofield. Activists and Partisan Realignment in the United States. American Political Science Review, 97.2 (2003): 245-260.

Oxford University and New York University of Law. Constitutionalism in divided societies. International Journal of Constitutional Law Advance Access originally published online on International. Journal of Constitutional Law, 5.4:573-575. 2007. Web.

Posner, Daniel. 2004. The Political Salience of Cultural Difference: Why Chewas and Tumbukas are Allies in Zambia and Adversaries in Malawi. American Political Science Review, 98.4 (2004): 529-545.

Raanan, Uri. The Nation-State Fallacy, in Joseph Montville, ed., Conflict and Peacemaking in Multiethnic Societies. New York: Lexington Books / Macmillan, 1991. Print.

Rabushka, Alvin and Kenneth Shepsle. Politics in Plural Societies: A Theory of Democratic Instability. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing, 1972. Print.

Reilly, Benjamin. Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Print.

Segura, Gary and Rodrigues, Halen. Comparative Ethnic Politics in the United States: Beyond Black and White. Annual Review of Political Science, 2006. Print.

Smith, Anthony. The Ethnic Origins of Nations. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1986. Print.

Tilly, Charles. National Self-Determination as a Problem for All of Us, Daedalus, 1993. Print.

United Nations University Centre. Political Parties in Divided Societies. Policy and Institutional Frameworks. 2009.

Wilkinson, Steven. Votes and Violence: Electoral Competition and Ethnic Riots in India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.

Footnotes

1. Conner, Walker. A Nation is a Nation, Is a State, Is an Ethnic Group, Is a&. in Ethnonationalism: The Quest for Understanding
2. Raanan, Uri. The Nation-State Fallacy, in Joseph Montville, ed., Conflict and Peacemaking in Multiethnic Societies
3. Oxford University and New York University of Law. Constitutionalism in divided societies. International Journal of Constitutional Law Advance Access originally published online on International. Journal of Constitutional Law.
4. Posner, Daniel. The Political Salience of Cultural Difference: Why Chewas and Tumbukas are Allies in Zambia and Adversaries in Malawi. American Political Science Review
5. Chandra, Kanchan. Ethnic Parties and Democratic Stability. Perspectives on Politics
6. Miller, Gary and Norman Schofield. Activists and Partisan Realignment in the United States. American Political Science Review
7. Wilkinson, Steven. Votes and Violence: Electoral Competition and Ethnic Riots in India.
8. Horowitz, Donald. Making Moderation Pay: The Comparative Politics of Ethnic Conflict Management. In Joseph Montville, ed., Conflict and Peacemaking in Multiethnic Societies. New York: Lexington Books
9. Reilly, Benjamin. Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
10. Kuenzi, Michelle and Gina, Lambright. Party Systems and Democratic Consolidation in Africas Electoral Regimes. Party Politics.
11. Glaser, Edward. The Political Economy of Hatred. Quarterly Journal of Economics
12. Dickson, Eric and Kenneth Scheve. Social Identity, Political Speech, and Electoral Competition.
13. Rabushka, Alvin and Kenneth Shepsle. Politics in Plural Societies: A Theory of Democratic Instability
14.  Chua, Amy. World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability. New York: Doubleday. 2003.
15. Chandra, Kanchan. What Is Ethnic Identity And Does It Matter?
16. Segura, Gary and Rodrigues, Halen. Comparative Ethnic Politics in the United States: Beyond Black and White. Annual Review of Political Science. 2006.
17. United Nations University Centre. Political Parties in Divided Societies. Policy and Institutional Frameworks
18. Chandra, Kanchan. Forthcoming in the Annual Review of Political Science.
19. Fearon, James. Ethnic Structure and Cultural Diversity by Country Journal of Economic Growth.
20. Fox, James and Sandler, Schaller. Separation of Religion and State in the Twenty-First Century: Comparing the Middle East and Western Democracies. Comparative Politics.
21. Geller, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.1983.
22. Berkeley, Cherty. Power-Sharing in South Africa, Institute of International Studies, University of California. 1985.
23. Barry, Brian. The Consociational Model and Its Dangers. European Journal
24. Lijphart, Arend. Constitutional Design for Divided Societies. Journal of Democracy .
25. Smith, Anthony. The Ethnic Origins of Nations
26. Abbott, Andrew. Things of Boundaries, in: A. Abbott, Time Matters. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
27. Anderson, Benedict .Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism
28. Glickman, Harvey. Ethnicity, Elections, and Constitutional Democracy in Africa. In Timothy Sisk and Andrew Reynold
29. Tilly, Charles. National Self-Determination as a Problem for All of Us,Daedalus
30. Marx, Anthony. Faith in Nation: Exclusionary Origins of Nationalism

Introduction

Representative democracy is based on the principle of electing an individual or official to represent a group of people.¹ The concept is often referred to as indirect democracy. The elected officials are charged with the responsibility of safeguarding the welfare of the electorate. They should be answerable to those who elected them. Examples of officials elected through representative democracy include members of the senate and the presidents of democratic nations.² The powers of these officials are curtailed by the constitution. The constitution plays an important regulatory role by ensuring that the individuals work for the benefit of their electorate, rather than for their own selfish gains.

However, rampant cases of crises associated with representative democracy are evident. The most prevalent of these include dictatorship, oligarchy, officials pursuing their own ambitions, and bribing of representatives. For this reason, most people today hate politics.³ They feel that leaders are working towards their own interests instead of addressing the wellbeing of the electorate.

Critical Bibliography

In the presentation, a variety of sources are used. The presenter seeks to address the question of whether or not there is a crisis of representative democracy. A lot of material evidence is needed to address this question. The sources used in the presentation include books and journals obtained from online databases. To obtain the sources, the Google scholar search engine was used. Key words, such as representative democracy, oligarchy and dictatorship, were used in the search. The sources that were relevant to the topic were selected.

The sources provide information about representative democracy. They highlight instances where the terms and conditions of this form of democracy, as stipulated in the constitution, have been violated. The sources compare the status of representative democracy today with what it used to be in the past. It is clear that the principles of this form of governance are slowly getting eroded.⁴ Qualitative data is provided. In addition, the current state of affairs in most representative democracies is analysed. Instances of crises are highlighted in the sources. Oligarchy and dictatorship are identified as the major forms of crises in representative democracy today.

The sources also provide conceptual frameworks. An example is the model used in democracy. Case studies are also highlighted. The cases are important since they help to practically examine the evidence available. Useful examples are provided in the case studies. The issue of dictatorship is clearly highlighted, where democratically elected leaders fail to adhere to the will of the people. For example, democratic governments have outlawed peaceful demonstrations and used excessive force against demonstrators.⁵

However, most of the sources are not peer reviewed. As such, they may provide information that is not properly researched on. In addition, majority of them involve studies conducted by a single author, which increases chances of biasness.

Presentation Structure

The presenter argues that there is a crisis in representative democracy. The major causes of these problems involve oligarchy and dictatorship. The presentation begins by first posing the question is there a crisis of representative democracy?. Features of this form of governance are then introduced. They include respect of human rights and the rule of law. The introduction makes the subject more accessible to the audience. The audience will get a clear picture of the matters discussed in the presentation. It will be easier to prove to them that representative democracy is in turmoil.⁶

The image below shows how dictatorship has led to problems in representative democracy. The citizens are no longer allowed to freely express themselves:

The presentation proceeds to state that the question of representative crisis has elicited debate across the world. At this juncture, the presenter engages the audience. The question will help the audience critically analyse the evidence provided and make their own judgments over the issue. The presentation concludes by providing a general overview of representative democratic crisis. The crisis is defined as the gaps that exist between democratic organisations and the public.⁷ The conclusion makes the subject more accessible to the audience, leading to better understanding of the topic.

Presentation Performance

The presentation uses a number of visual aids. Font, colour, and images are of great importance. The font used is Calibri size 22. The size is larger than the one used in the text that follows the questions. The difference in font size is used to distinguish the questions from the rest of the text. The questions stand out as sub-topics. The text following the presentation questions uses Calibri font size 20. The size makes it legible to the audience. The conclusion uses Cambria font 26. The font colour used is dark blue. The hue draws the attention of the audience to the presentation, making the message more appealing to read.

Images used in the presentation are relevant to the question posed. They clearly put across the message that representative democracy is in a crisis.⁸ The message is also self explanatory, which helps the audience to follow with a lot of ease. Two of the images used are coloured, making the presentation more interesting to the audience. Coloured images are more appealing compared to those that are not. The third image is not coloured. However, it is equally captivating to the audience. The image is an interesting drawing. It helps the presenter to put across their views on oligarchy.⁹

The drawing below shows how oligarchy has led to crises in representative democracy. Power is concentrated in the hands of few people:

It is important to appear confident when making the presentation. The presenters should be bold and maintain eye contact with the audience to show that they believe in what they are saying. Their body language should also portray contempt to put across the crisis message. The body language and voice should make it evident to the audience that the presenter disapproves oligarchy, dictatorship, and other ills affecting representative.¹⁰

Teamwork

The success of the presentation is attributed to the input of the team members. The members are expected to participate right from the selection of sources, analysis of data, to the presentation. The contribution of each member is taken into consideration to encourage participation. Information that is not clear is carefully analysed to ensure that all members are in agreement. All participants have equal opportunities to contribute to the presentation question. However, coordination is of great importance. There is a group leader to regulate the activities of the team. However, the leader is not superior to the others. They only help to restore order in the group.

The group leader is charged with the responsibility of ensuring that the presentation is consistent. During the presentation, members are assigned specific tasks to ensure that they do not provide conflicting information to the audience. However, a number of problems are associated with team work. For example, there are cases of conflicting views. Some members may feel that their views are overlooked. The group leader can also overstep their mandate and impose their views on the others.

Lessons from the Practice Presentation

The practice presentation was of great importance to all members of the group. It helped the members to acquire good presentation skills. It enabled the students to learn how to gather and select sources more effectively. The members also learnt how to analyse information from diverse sources and present it in a systematic and logical manner. The practice presentation also helped the team members to learn how to work as a group. Members appreciated the importance of accommodation. Working as a group required all the members to accommodate the others. For example, this value enabled the team members to come into a consensus that there is a crisis in representative democracy.¹¹

The image below proves that there is a crisis in representative democracy. Democracy is shifting to dictatorship.

The presentation skills of the team members have greatly improved. They are in a better position than they were at the beginning of the module. For example, the members have learnt how to appropriately use visual aids in their presentations. The practice has made presentations more interesting. The members have also learnt how to exude confidence during presentations. At the beginning of the module, most individuals were shy and would not maintain eye contact with the audience.

However, there is still room for improvement. For example, in future, members should cite the sources of their information. The images used in the presentation are not cited, which makes it hard for the audience to determine the authenticity of the groups response to the question. Furthermore, when images are used, they should be introduced.

Conclusion

The presentation has proved without doubt that there is a crisis in representative democracy. To answer the presentation question, the group members have made a number of arguments, supported by case studies and images obtained from books and journals. Oligarchy and dictatorship have been identified as the leading causes of this crisis. However, there are other minor factors that lead to the crisis. They include scenarios where officials pursue their own ambitions and bribing of representatives. Drastic measures must be taken to restore democracy if the wishes of the electorate are to be honoured.

Bibliography

Alonso, S, J Keane, M Wolfgang & M Fotou, The future of representative democracy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. Web.

Bailey, D, Dictatorship, Mason Crest, Broomall, 2013. Web.

Budge, I, Direct and representative democracy: are they necessarily opposed?, Representation. vol. 42, no. 1, 2006, pp. 1-12. Web.

Chambers, C, Consistent representative democracy, Games and Economic Behavior. vol. 62, no. 2, 2008, pp. 348-363. Web.

Chipkin, I, Democracy and dictatorship, Social Dynamics. vol. 35, no. 2, 2009, pp. 375-393. Web.

Gauja, A, Political parties and elections legislating for representative democracy, Ashgate Publishing Company, Farnham, 2010. Web.

Gelletly, L, Oligarchy, Mason Crest, Broomall, 2013. Web.

Premat, C, Castoriadis and the modern political imaginary: oligarchy, representation, democracy, Critical Horizons. vol. 7, no. 1, 2006, pp. 251-275. Web.

Urbinati, N, Representative democracy principles and genealogy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2006. Web.

Zielonka, J, The future of representative democracy, West European Politics. vol. 35, no. 3, 2012, pp. 694-696. Web.

Footnotes

1. N Urbinati, Representative democracy principles and genealogy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2006, p. 54.

2. A Gauja, Political parties and elections legislating for representative democracy, Ashgate Publishing Company, Farnham, 2010, p. 98.

3. S Alonso, J Keane, M Wolfgang & M Fotou, The future of representative democracy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011.

4. J Zielonka, The future of representative democracy, West European Politics, vol. 35, no. 3, 2012, pp. 694-696.

5. I Chipkin, Democracy and dictatorship, Social Dynamics, vol. 35, no. 2, 2009, pp. 375-393.

6. D Bailey, Dictatorship, Mason Crest, Broomall, 2013, p. 55.

7. I Budge, Direct and representative democracy: are they necessarily opposed?, Representation, vol. 42, no. 1, 2006, pp. 1-12.

8. C Premat, Castoriadis and the modern political imaginary: oligarchy, representation, democracy, Critical Horizons, vol. 7, no. 1, 2006, pp. 251-275.

9. C Chambers, Consistent representative democracy, Games and Economic Behaviour, vol. 62, no. 2, 2008, pp. 348-363.

10. L Gelletly, Oligarchy, Mason Crest, Broomall, 2013, p. 87.

11. Budge, p. 7.

Introduction

Since ancient times, democracy has been considered a favorable way of ruling which permits freedom and participation in state of affairs by all citizens. Still, within it conflicts of interest are neither eliminated nor stilled. They are rather transferred to a different battleground and the contenders are supplied with different weapons. Where, in some states, the arena is restricted to a select group that commands the instruments of coercion in sufficient degree to forestall effective opposition to the promotion of its interests, in democratic states that arena is thrown open to all men and to all interests, and the instruments of persuasion are, or ought to be, sufficiently undisturbed as to permit that interest or coalition of interests which can marshal the support of a majority of the people to prevail. Thus, while all men are equal and the interests of all are, in principle, given an equal opportunity to be heard, not all can expect equal satisfaction. In spite of benefits and opportunities proposed by democracy for modern states, democracy leads to abuses of power and unequal distribution of resources.

Main body

In their writings, Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli and Hobbes underline that there is a conflict of interests in democracyand some interests, though not all, inevitably are in conflict. The populace can do no more than strive to protect the interests of some and not of all men. Unlike oligarchy, however, the democratic state makes it possible to secure the interests of the many, or at least of the majority, rather than the interests of a privileged few (Burns 43). Democracy makes such conflicts of interest possible, what sustains the state under whose aegis they occur, is clearly a broad and underlying consensus on the fundamentals of the social order. No state least of all a democratic statecan hope to survive where the masses of the people are not united on and attached to those essential principles, and in this respect there is a common interest at the heart of, and that is furthered by, democratic governments (Carstairs and McLaren 12). There are many thingse.g., the preservation of the peace, the maintenance of the vital liberties, the advancement of learning, the cultivation of the arts, and the likewhich are advantageous and (avowedly at least) of concern to all; and the commitment to such Nevertheless, those dividing interests remain, and their proponents struggle for power. Majoritieseven if but temporary and shifting majoritiesare formed over against minorities. And in the pursuit of their own interests, aggravated at times by the heat of political passion, majoritiesand, where they can, minorities tooresort now and again to arbitrary and oppressive measures. It is not surprising, therefore, that governments representative of and responsible to those majorities should common values overrides and makes tolerable the lesser conflicts of separate and dividing interests serve as instruments through which such oppressive actions can be effectively imposed. It would seem unnecessary to catalogue here the ways in which democratic governmentsboth directly through the laws (or through the bidding of legal authorities) and indirectly through the sanctioned imposition of non-legal penaltieshave behaved despotically toward certain racial, national, and religious minorities. The record is all too clear, whether political leaders look at the Negro, at the American Indian, or at other oppressed minority groups (Farrar 87). Thus, while the political worth of the American Indian is no longer computed as but three-fifths of that of the white man, the latter continues (by fraud and by superior force of arms, sanctified by law) to divest the Indian of his lands, to abrogate his political and religious freedoms, and to subject him to various forms of discriminationranging from laws forbidding the sale of intoxicating liquors to Indians to laws outlawing their intermarriage with white citizens (Etzioni 54). Following Plato the rule of the people remains a partial rule. Plato might fear the views of minority he was far more impressed by the dangers to a government that is too dependent on them. When laying out his concept of an ideal state, Plato emphasized that this state should be ruled by a philosopher. He saw the philosopher as an ideal person encompassing virtue and wisdom and thus able to lead people in the right direction. Ad he says in his fundamental work The Republic, because people have many wants political leaders are needed to provide them. Plato defined a philosopher first of all as a kind of occupation wisdom-lover (this is the literal translation of the term philosopher from Ancient Greek). After putting ahead this concept, Plato stresses on a difference between one who loves true knowledge as opposed to simple sights or education. In this case, the excesses of the minority, he thought, would easily be curbed by the power of the majority, exercised through regular vote (Downs 71).

Even where the political system approximates a full realization of the principle of responsibility, it may still be used to uphold rather than to remove an oppressive government. Where it is employed, its application in a particular situation may be such as to serve as a restraint on political oppressors only, neglecting thereby the oppressive acts of otherbut not necessarily lessermen who exercise power in other fields. Finally, the facts of political life may make it all too clear that, whatever the stipulated lines of political and administrative responsibility may be, in practice only those political despots who occupy the highest rather than the intermediary places of power are likely to be seriously affected by the interventions of the popular will (Plattner 87). The principle of responsibility is limited, secondly, by the fact that in practice democratic governments are not and cannot be held accountable to the will of all of the people. Researches admit that not all of the people can express themselves; nor, even if they could and were to do so, would they display any unanimity of sentiment. Where conflicts of interest abound, there differences of doctrine and of loyalty follow. Clearly, responsibility cannot be lodged in a literal majority of the people, or even in a majority of those who are interested, for in every modern democratic state a considerable portion of the population (interested and otherwise) is excluded from the suffrage on what are alleged to be reasonable groundse.g., immaturity as measured by chronological age, mental deficiency, lack of citizenship or of a prescribed period of residence in a particular locality, illiteracy, conviction for certain heinous crimes, and so on. A very large proportion of the eligible voters (in local elections it is commonly more than a majority of them) fails through negligence or indifference to exercise its right of suffrage. The majority in a democratic state, consequently, is a shifting rather than a fixed and permanent majority, and its rule is limited to the expression of a yea or nay with respect to the general rather than the specific policies of a government. This being so, the idea of majority rule in a democratic state must be understood to mean not rule by the majority in any literal sense, but rule by a government accountable to the majority, which is a quite different thing, especially since the majority is one that is formed only for that particular function, only at that particular time, and only out of that part of the people that then happens to express itself at the polls. In contrast, the American political system seems almost chaotically to blur the lines of responsibility. Elections are regularly held to discover the will of the people, which is then to be translated into the law of the land. For instance, Americans have shown themselves to be marvelously adept at manipulating voting districts in such a way as to give disproportionate representation to minorities and thereby to distort what is still (if euphemistically) called the will of the people (Hague et al 71).

Abuses of power were clearly defined and explained by Machiavelli. Machiavelli claims that a political leaders should act in his own interests and: should therefore have no other aim or thought, nor take up any other thing for his study, but war and its organization structure (Machiavelli, 87). The problem of power is reduced, in the real world, to the control of specific acts of particular powers. It is not one problem but many problems; for there is no one abuse of power, there are only abuses, various in form and often markedly different in degree. Our quest, then, is the quest for solutions to the problems generated by the multiple abuses of power. Now of such abuses a necessary distinction must be drawn between those abuses associated with the acquisition of power and those resulting from the way in which that power, once acquired, is exercised. In the first instance, the fundamental abuse is the usurpation of the legal authority itself, the acquisition of power by unconstitutional or wrongful means (Crozier 53).

Similar considerations are raised by the American application of the separation of powers doctrine, by which I mean not the division of powers between governments but the distribution of powers among the various branches of a particular government, most commonly among the legislative, executive, judicial, and (some would contend) the administrative branches. It would be a grave error to infer from this that if only the majority did rule, or if only the majority were in fact able to hold accountable the government that rules, abuses of power would be unknown in the democratic state. For one thing, it does not follow from the circumstance that the majority is not assured that it will always have its way, that the American system does in fact always prevent it from having its way. Franklin Roosevelt did not have his way in all things in the early years of the New Deal, but he did secure some things; and with the collapse of the Supreme Court as a resisting force in his second term, he was able to achieve a number of additional purposes. And surely it cannot be denied that his was a government selected and supported by a majority of the people. It is true that a strong sense of tradition, an abiding respect for the common ways, will frequently serve to deter such oppressive action (Coleman 87).

Conclusion

In sum, democracy implies that the way in which men adjust or resolve their differences is of crucial importance, that conflicts of opinion as to what constitutes the right moral and political ends are not to be resolved arbitrarilyi.e., by fiat of a stronger or allegedly superior groupbut are to be mediated and temporarily adjusted through a political process that builds on the free exchange of opposing ideas and on the periodic resort to the ballot box; accordingly, those who accept democracy must respect the principle that men are not to be penalized merely for holding or for expressing nonconformist views (Cronin 98). Thus, the appeal to democracy is no more than the quite legitimate demand that men practice what they preach, that they not merely seek to understand what democracy is but that they observe its values in their day-to-day relationships. From this standpoint, abuses of power can only be controlled by mans submission to divine truth, to Gods will. From this standpoint, it is the tragic failure of secular democraciesand the explanation of their oppressive actsthat they have reversed this elementary principle and have confounded Gods will with mans will. They have forgotten that the will of God is a rational will, and that it is, consequently, not what men will but what they rationally will that can alone claim legitimacy. This, in political view, is but the vain and empty freedom to do what one wants, even if what one wants to do is wrong. Just as men pick from among the gods such as may please them, so men pick from among the multiplicity of traditions those traditions that are most congenial to their interests and pleasures.

Works Cited

Burns, J. H., ed. The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Carstairs, Andrew McLaren. A Short History of Electoral Systems in Western Europe. London: Allen & Unwin, 1980.

Coleman, Jules L. Markets, Morals and the Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Cronin, Thomas E. Direct Democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1989.

Crozier, M. The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.

Hague, R., Harrop, M., Breslin, S. Comparative Government and Politics- An Introduction. Palgrave Macmillan; 4th Revised edition edition, 1998.

Plattner, M. F. Democracy Without Borders?: Global Challenges to Liberal Democracy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2007.

Downs, A. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row, 1957.

Etzioni, Amitai. The Moral Dimension. New York: Free Press, 1988.

Farrar, Cynthia. The Origins of Democratic Thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Machiavelli, N. The Prince. Bantam Classics, 1984.

Introduction

Nowadays it becomes clear that the modernization of public life, which began in Europe a few centuries ago and subsequently covered the other countries that do not lose their national identity. Human activity in any era is included in the socio-cultural basis of ethnic group, nation, and civilization. Even if socio-economic and political circumstances were the same for different communities, people would react to this in different ways. This paper studies how Australias Liberal Democratic system that is a keystone of social policy in the country enhances and or limits the well-being of its citizens.

Liberal Democracy

Liberal Democracy is a form of a social and political system when a legal state based on representative democracy, in which the will of the majority and the ability of elected representatives to exercise limited in order to protect minority rights and freedom of individuals, state Wolterstorff & Cuneo (2012, p. 11). The term Liberal in this case means the same as in the era of the bourgeois revolutions of the XVIII century: to provide everyone with protection against the arbitrariness of authorities and law enforcement agencies.

Liberal Democracy is aimed at ensuring equal rights every citizen, private property, privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, prohibition of discrimination, and freedom of religion according to law. These liberal rights are enshrined in the supreme law (the Constitution of Australia and Acts), which, in turn, gives various state and public bodies authority to ensure these rights (Ward & Stewart, 2010, p. 86). In other words, Liberal Democracy is a socio-political doctrine and social movement, the main idea of which is a self-sufficient value of freedom of the individual in the economic, political and other spheres of society.

A typical element of Liberal Democracy is a so-called open society characterized by pluralism, tolerance, coexistence, and competition of a wide range of socio-political views (Heywood, 2007, p. 81). Through periodic elections, each of the groups that hold different views has a chance to gain power. The existence of two major political parties such as Labor (supports the interests of employees) and Liberal, and several minor parties (supports the interests of employers and others) also proves the fact that Australia has a Liberal Democratic system.

Australian political system

According to the Australian Constitution, the country is a federal state with a constitutional-monarchical form of government. Politics in the country is carried out in the framework of parliamentary democracy. Australian parliament is the sixth-oldest continuous democratic legislature in the world and consists of three parts: the Monarch, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. A British Monarch is a Monarch of Australia as well; his power is represented by Governor-General (currently, General Sir Peter John Cosgrove).

According to Singleton, Aitkin, Jinks, & Warhurst (2009), the House of Representatives comprises 150 members, each of which elected for a flexible period of performance not exceeding three years and represents one constituency, commonly referred to as the electorate (p. 147). Voting within each electorate happens according to the rating system of preferential voting, which is the first time occurred in Australia. In the Australian Senate, there are 76 deputies (Parkin, 2002, p. 24). Six states sent twelve senators each, and two territories  two senators elected by a unified system of intransitive voice for a flexible period not exceeding six years (Singleton et al., 2009, p. 147).

One of the main features of Liberal Democracy is universal suffrage that gives every adult citizen of the country an equal right to vote, regardless of race, gender, wealth or education. This right is usually associated with a certain procedure of registration of residence. Solely those citizens who are actually participating in the vote determine the election results, but often turnout must exceed a certain threshold so that vote is considered valid. Therefore, Australia has a system of representative democracy, where citizens elect a member of parliament (MP) to represent their interests (Singleton et al., 2009, p. 136). Free elections dominated by two major parties whose philosophies, particularly thinking about social policy matters has some clear differences. It means that the government has to take at least the perceived wishes of the electorate into account.

Attempts to enhance the well-being of its citizens

As mentioned above, the Australian operates as a two-party, due to the constant coalition between the Liberal Party and the National Party and Labor Party. Unlike some other countries, for instance, the United States political system Australian bipartisanship was historically strong. However, the policy of the Australian Coalition (Liberal and National Parties) is considered center-right and the Labour Party is regarded as center-left (Maddox, 2005, p. 260). Along with the Australian liberalism, Australian conservatism is mainly represented by the Coalition, by which an economic free market of neo-liberal doctrine and emphasis on markets is meant while in both the United States and Britain they consider it as a center-left social liberalism (Ward & Stewart, 2010, p. 85).

Providing its policy the Coalition believes that free-market should be permitted to lead because it would enhance wealth, efficiency and hence benefit all citizens. So, the idea of free competition advocated by liberals, and its implementation has led to the concentration and centralization of capital. Besides, Labour Party classifies itself as a social-democratic one and supposes the democratic socialization of industry, production, distribution, and exchange, but without nationalization and socialist transformation (Maddox, 2005, p. 260).

To sum things up, discussed political Parties have plenty of similar features. Based on official documents (Constitution, Acts, programs of the Parties) and activities of the government, one can conclude that primarily it is a social sphere that unites them procuring equality, the policy of multiculturalism, the fight against discrimination in education, health, national, and social areas, as well as in the production and social welfare.

Due to the fact that a minority can influence the decision-making process, Liberal Democracy provides people with protection for private property. This issue is about individual responsibility versus societys responsibility to the individual. The best possibility for bringing individuals to a realization of their involvement in the collective aspects of the political system is through activity within political parties, claims Maddox (2005, p. 259). According to some scholars such as Singleton, Hirst, or Maddox, Liberal Democracy manages existing resources in the case of their limitations more effectively than authoritarian regimes. As per this view, Australian Liberal Democracy has a longer life duration, lower infant and maternal mortality regardless of the level of GDP, income inequality, or the size of the public sector.

One more benefit of Australian Liberal Democracy is a multicultural citizenship. The essence of the concept of multicultural citizenship is that the membership in the policy is not determined by a certain well-defined cultural loyalty. A citizen of a State may have a cultural identity different from the officially encouraged one, and yet belong to the national political community, be a member of a society he or she lives in (Stokes, Boreham, & Hall, 2004, p. 10). For example, one can be a Muslim and at the same time Algerian or African. Moreover, several television channels operate in Australia, making programs for minorities in their languages (Chinese, Vietnamese, Malay, and others).

Influence of Australian politics upon the design and implementation of social policy

A social policy affects all spheres of human life. Liberal Democracy proclaims freedom of conscience, of individualism, of, love, of non-interference of the state in the persons life. Among the last years achievements of The Abbott Government during 2013  2015 one can note more choice for working parents, reducing red tape, tackling union corruption, etc.

However, in some cases liberalism might provoke unpredictable consequences: liberal response to the drug problem, which essentially advocates the decriminalization of the industry (softer drugs like marijuana) and its re-regulation in ways more akin to a normal industry (Parkin, 2002, p. 313). This response illustrates both the negative and positive sides of Liberal Democracy.

In the positive side, it reaffirms the rights of citizens to engage in activities without state interference at least before any harm done to others while the negative side states that must combat the drug trade (Parkin, 2002, p. 313). Besides, changes in the public sector might include the following elements: commercialization and privatization of policy delivery, a reduction in staff and budget allocation, contrast-based oversight of policy delivery, and results-focused (or output-focused) approach to policy management (Hirst, 2002, p. 131).

Comparison of Australia with other countries with Liberal Democracy

In order to compare Australia with other Liberal Democracies among which the United States, New Zealand, Japan, and others could be found it is necessary to mention some similarities as well as differences between them. So, likewise the United States, for instance, the Australian political system is also federal and has a parliament (called a Congress in the US) consisted of two houses  a House of Representatives and a Senate. Additionally, both have written constitutions that delineate the powers of the Federal Government.

While the United States is a Republic, Australia is a constitutional monarchy. People directly elect the president the United States who becomes both head of state and head of government whereas the British monarch is Australias head of state and is represented by a Governor-General chosen by the Prime Minister. Party discipline is not as tight in the United States as it is in Australia, leading to a situation where members of both parties will often form changing voting alliances on legislation (Wolterstorff, & Cuneo, 2012, p. 12).

Conclusion

In conclusion, it should be stressed that the properly organized political system of Australia is relatively young by historical standards and at the moment does not seem well-established taking into account the existence of two parties with a completely different vision of the well-being of citizens. This combination of archaic (for instance, the presence of an emissary of the British Queen in Parliament) and reaction to the processes happening due to the globalization makes Australia one of the most interesting countries for people around the world.

References

Heywood, A. (2007). Democracy. In Politics (3rd ed.) (pp. 71-88). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hirst, J. B. (2002). Policy delivery. In Australias democracy: a short history (pp. 119-147). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Maddox, G. (2005). Australian parties and the party system. In Australian democracy in theory and practice (5th ed.) (pp. 246-325). Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia.

Parkin, A. (2002). Liberal democracy. In J. Summers, D. Woodward & A. Parkin (Eds.), Government, politics, power and policy in Australia (7th ed.) (pp. 297-321). Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia.

Singleton, G., Aitkin, D., Jinks, B., & Warhurst, J. (2009). The Australian parliament. In Australian political institutions (9th ed.) (pp. 135-178). Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia.

Stokes, G., Boreham, P., & Hall, R. (2004). Political ideas, institutions and policies : a critical overview. In G. Stokes, P. Boreham & R. Hall (Eds.), The politics of Australian society: political issues for the new century (2nd ed.) (pp. 1-15). Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia.

Ward, I., & Stewart, R. G. (2010). The Constitution and the rules governing governments. In Politics one (4th ed.) (pp. 85-104). South Yarra, Vic.: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wolterstorff, N., & Cuneo, T. (2012). Understanding Liberal Democracy: Essays in Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

All in: The Fight for Democracy is the 2020 documentary film. The film revolves around voter suppression in the United States. The central theme of the film is disenfranchisement. The directors, Liz Garbus and Lisa Cortés, used the 2018 election experience to show that the right to vote has always been problematic for lower or black Americans.

The directors bring up Stacey Abrams story, who could have become the first African American woman elected as a governor but lost by a minor margin to the Republican Secretary of the state of Georgia. By showing her educational background and experience in politics, the creators demonstrate empathy, integrity, and insistence (Chen, 2020). Although the film criticizes the events that happened in 2018, it introduces several lawyers and experts to trace the right to vote back to the beginning of the USAs political history.

At the beginning of the United States history, only white men were allowed to vote. Although the 15^th Amendment passed, which allowed black men to vote, in 2013, the Supreme Court canceled the Voting Rights Act (Henderson, 2020).

This decision affected all the minor groups of the community, as many states banned African Americans, Asian Americans, and Indigenous people from voting until the Voting Rights Act was passed. Moreover, this policy impacted women as well because, despite the protests and marches, they had to wait for the 19^th Amendment to be declared (Henderson, 2020).

The disenfranchisement restricted African Americans from voting. Even though legal discrimination against minority groups in politics is gone, Abrams story demonstrates the opposite scene. The new voting preconditions have come instead.

The new voting requirements officially are additional identification so the democracy can work correctly. However, the Republicans, who drafted these requirements, failed to consider the impacts of new regulations on lower-class Americans and people of color.

The main characteristic of advocates and policymakers is the ability to understand others experiences and perspectives. Therefore, Abrams story clearly shows the lack of empathy in the modern political system.

Ideally, democracy informs the citizens about the actual social issues and what actions the candidates take to solve these issues. Furthermore, the candidates position on a certain problem would be the crucial point of the election process, and the citizens would consider if the candidates were truly responsible for a certain issue. However, the election process itself was problematic for Americans for years, and this issue is covered in detail in the film.

Advocacy means support from another person who helps stand up for their rights. Even though the citizens are not obliged to vote, those who vote to play a role in democratic processes in the country. By voting, citizens choose the candidate to represent their ideas and interests.

The film is a reminder of voter suppression in United States history. In Abrams story, it is seen that her opponent declined more than 50 thousand voters registrations, the majority of whom were black Americans (Henderson, 2020). This is another example of disenfranchisement in the modern history of the USA.

The directors have used actual evidence that proves the fact of disenfranchisement. They focus on historians and experts thoughts to demonstrate the truth about the modern election system. The reality of the existing policy and idealized democracy cannot leave the audience indifferent to the current issue.

Moreover, the film makes the audience question democracy in the American election system. While the truth is that African Americans historically were restricted from voting, there are bright examples, such as Abrams election story, that demonstrate the positive change in the American community.

The film is topical, considering the changes in the political stage that happened in recent years in the USA. The election system faced different changes until it became legal for minorities to vote and the requirement of modern democracy. The directors could portray the positive changes in the system and community.

References

Chen, S. A. (2020). [Review of the movie All in: the Fight for Democracy]. Common Sense Media. 

Henderson, O. (2020) [Review of the movie All in: the Fight for Democracy].

Introduction

Democracy refers to a system of governance whereby the citizens are allowed to participate in the policymaking process. In a democratic state, the people elect their leaders in a general election. The elected leaders usually represent the public in the process of policy formulation. According to Monten (2005), the decisions made by the leaders represent the voice of the public since the people elect them. Democracy evolves with time by giving the people more rights and powers over governance. However, such evolution may also produce negative effects as it may curtail the rights of the citizens.

In the US, democracy entails the right of the people to elect leaders of their choice including the President and the members of the Congress. Mitchell (2009) asserts that democracy works better in developed countries as compared to the developing countries. Apparently, democracy in the developing countries is growing to replace authoritarianism, which has dogged such nations for years. Countries with a high Gross Domestic Product (GDP) have higher democracy compared to those with low GDP.

In the US, democracy is at its maturity with the freedom of expression guaranteed by the constitution. On the contrary, the developing countries have weak democracy with the citizens having low power to influence the policies of their respective nations. In most third world countries, bureaucracy characterizes the system of governance whereby the elected leaders exercise dictatorship. In such countries, the media is highly regulated by the government and the peoples freedom of speech is denied.

Goldberg, Wibbels, and Mvukiyehe (2008) identify two forms of democracy namely, the direct and the indirect democracies as the major forms of democracies. In a direct democracy, the citizens personally participate in the formulation of the policies. The indirect democracy, on the other hand, involves the formulation of policies by the representatives elected by the people. In a direct democracy, the citizens are selected from a lottery and empowered to make certain strategic decisions.

The citizens directly exercise their rights regarding the formulation of policies. Under the representative democracy, the electorates elect representatives who are charged with the responsibility of formulating the policies. The members of Congress are the representatives of the public regarding policymaking. In that regard, any decisions made by Congress is representative of the citizens views. The election of representatives in a democratic nation is informed by the view that the electorates are sparsely distributed, and thus they cannot run the countrys affairs.

Democracy is characterized by the freedom of the media. Therefore, in the countries where the media is controlled by the government, democracy is compromised. The media heavily contributes to the evolution of democracy since it educates the citizens of their rights and freedoms on the elections and the freedom of speech. Additionally, the media acts as a venue through which the politicians communicate with the citizens. Through such interactions, the citizens are enabled to propose policy changes facilitating their participation in decision-making.

Some of the Medias such as the social networks heavily contribute to democracy since it provides a venue through which the citizens can interact with each other and leaders to deliberate on certain issues affecting the countrys governance. In other words, it brings together the citizens and their leaders, and through such meetings, the citizens are enabled to make policy suggestions to the leaders. Such suggestions are incorporated during the policy formulation process giving the citizens the power to participate in policy formulation.

Carothers (2007) states that in a democratic country, the freedom of the media must be guaranteed to give the citizens the freedom to express their views. He emphasizes the need for a free media in the advancement of democracy. The media facilitates the interaction between the voters and the leaders and enables the citizens to air their concerns regarding the policies. Some of the notable Media that are influential regarding democracy include the radio, TV, social media, and newspapers.

The listed types of media are influential since they offer a platform on which citizens get to learn about their rights and freedoms regarding elections and their freedom of speech. In countries where the government regulates the media, democracy is compromised since the citizens remain in the dark on the various issues revolving around governance. In most developed countries, the government does not regulate the media, and thus the citizens have the right to participate in policy formulation. Voter education is an important aspect of democracy, and it may only be accomplished through the media. The view is illustrative of the importance of the media in the advancement of democracy.

The free nature of the media in the developed states facilitates the advancement of democracy in the respective countries (Wolf, 2014). This paper seeks to unravel the relationship between the media and democracy. In the achievement of the stated purpose, the paper shall explore the nature of democracy in the US as depicted from news articles and the literature. This essay shall include the opinions of different politicians and political analysts regarding the topic of democracy. The paper shall explore the contrasting views on the topic to express the various strengths and weaknesses of American democracy as expressed by various politicians through the newspapers.

Democracy in the US

The US is one of the most democratic countries around the globe with the country having a representative form of democracy. The country has a representative form of democracy whereby the citizens elect the leaders in a general election. One of the important rights according to the Americans by the Constitution is the freedom of speech whereby every citizen has the right to air his/her opinions regarding the various issues affecting the country (Hazan & Rahat, 2010). In that regard, personal opinions characterize the media with columnists criticizing the government freely through the media.

As stated earlier in this paper, democracy is characterized by the freedom of speech coupled with free media. Every citizen is allowed to express his/her opinion irrespective of whether s/he is in the government or the opposition. The minority are free to disagree with a decision by the majority and to give the reasons for such disagreements. The mentioned right allows the citizens to air their concerns to the leaders without fear of intimidation.

The freedom of the media is guaranteed by the American constitution, and the government plays no role in its regulation. In that regard, the country may be termed as one of the most democratic countries in the world. American democracy commenced on July 4, 1776, when the Declaration of Independence was signed (Gore, 2008). Under the declaration, the people would elect the president of the US through a secret ballot. The Obama administration has made efforts to advance the democracy with the officials in the regime defining democracy as a government-run by the people of the country.

During the 2012 presidential campaigns, the candidates emphasized they would do what is best for the country (Goldman, 2012). From their slogans, democracy may be defined as having officials that will do what is best for the citizens of the country. The slogans aired on the local and the international media was significant in the advancement of democracy in the country as they promoted a sense of involvement in the policy formulation process among the citizens. The local televisions aired the debates live to the citizens as each leader defined their strategies for the country to persuade the electorates to vote in their favor.

The American leaders portray the US as being a democratic nation owing to the process involved in the passage of a Bill into law (McClam, 2014). The process commences with the drafting of the proposed bill whereby the concerned member documents every proposal in one document. The bill is then presented to the Congress for deliberations. During the debating, the members of Congress make the necessary amendments to the bill before it is subjected to the voting. Voting takes place through the secret ballot, and if a majority of members support the Bill, it is presented to the President for assent.

The president has the authority to approve the bill into law or reject it. In case the president rejects the bill, it is returned to the parliament with the necessary amendments proposals. Once the proposals are deliberated, the members vote for or against the bill. The president cannot reject on any grounds a bill that is voted by a two-thirds majority. The requirement that the President assents to the Bill before it becomes a statute ensures that there are checks and balances. The president, for example, may reverse a bill passed by the Congress after consulting with the various stakeholders including the lobby groups. The power to reverse the undesired bills eliminates dictatorship among the Congress, which is the sole policymaker. On the other hand, Congress is in a position to check the extremes of the executive by enacting the law to elevate or trim the presidents powers.

Besides, Congress may force the president to assent a bill into law through a two-thirds majority vote (Magen & McFaul, 2009). The ability of the two offices to check on the extremes of each other ensures that the policymaking process is streamlined and that none of the mentioned authorities can exercise dictatorship. The role of the media is to mobilize the public and to educate them regarding the prospective bills. The media acts as a venue through which the pressure groups air their concerns regarding the proposed bills. The concerns raised by the lobby groups may influence the decision of the president on whether to assent to a bill or to reject it altogether.

The executive and the legislature are also subject to checks by the judiciary with the Supreme Court having the power to overturn a bill passed by the Congress on the grounds of inconsistency with the Constitution. The Supreme Court may declare such a Bill null and void irrespective of whether or not the president assents it into law (Carothers, 2007). The existence of a strong judiciary is a clear indicator of the strong checks and balances that characterize the American governance systems.

Every American citizen has the right to challenge a Bill in a court of law to have some of its parts amended or rejected in totality. The three arms of government must thus work together to formulate policies that are in the best interest of the citizens. The power of each of the three arms to limit the extremes of the other ensures that democracy is upheld since none of the arms may enact legislation that goes beyond the confines of the constitution. The ability of every citizen to challenge the enactment of a Bill illuminates the democratic rights of the citizens and enhances democracy.

ODonnell (2007) disputes the view that America is one of the most democratic nations in the world. The article cites as a source of bureaucracy since other arms of the government cannot dispute the judicial system court decisions. The American Constitution establishes the Supreme Court, which is the highest court in the judicial system. The verdicts delivered by the court are not subject to appeals hence creating some form of bureaucracy. The Supreme Court judges are elected by the president and approved by Congress. If the Congress has more of the presidents party members, the head of state shall tend to appoint those judges who will favor his/her decisions.

Congress will have no role to play in scrutinizing the appointed judges since the tyranny of numbers will prevail in the approval of the judges. In that regard, the president may introduce dictatorship through the enactment of policies that undermines democracy without such decisions being challenged in a court of law. The judicial system is one of the areas where reforms are needed to advance the democracy of the US. Additionally, the appointment of the judges by the president as opposed to their election by the public denies the citizens their rights to elect their leaders (Finkel, Pérez-Liñán, & Seligson, 2007).

As stated earlier in this paper, democracy refers to a system of governance whereby the citizens are allowed to elect their leaders in a general election. The leader who gunners the majority of votes finds their way into leadership positions. The appointment of judges by the president is contrary to the provisions of direct democracy that require that the citizens exercise their rights to elect their preferred leaders.

Another area where bureaucracy presents itself is in the election of both the President and the members of the Congress. The election of both the President and the members of the Congress are done by the citizens through the secret ballot. The leaders who manage to acquire the majority votes occupy the respective seats. Given that the American population is comprised of both the natives and the non-natives, the elections may favor the majority population. The non-natives may not get a chance to elect their leaders in any way (Newman & Lake, 2006). The view is informed by the fact that in America, racism is a common phenomenon. The black American population is often discriminated against thus their ability to elect their leaders is compromised. Democracy may thus be compromised in light of the stated fact.

Next, bureaucracy may emanate from the absence of a strong opposition to criticize the government policies. Apparently, the work of the opposition is to put the government under check. In case the presidents party gets the majority of the seats in Congress, bureaucracy will be a common phenomenon (Wejnert, 2010). The opposition helps check the governments extremes. A weak opposition promotes dictatorship owing to its reduced ability to criticize the government. In a situation where the presidents party dominates the Congress, government policies will pass unopposed in Congress giving the government the power to introduce dictatorship. For the government to advance democracy in the country, it has to devise ways to deal with bureaucracies emanating from the tyranny of numbers in Congress.

One way of achieving this is to strengthen the opposition by setting a higher threshold for the passage of legislation. The law could be changed to provide for a two-thirds majority when passing major bills, for example, those that revolve around human rights and democracy. As it stands now, policies are passed by a majority vote, which weakens the opposition especially in cases where the government has a majority of members of Congress. The original constitution was meant to empower the citizens to make major decisions regarding the countrys governance. However, the politicians and scholars portray the amendments so far made by the Congress and other policymakers in the country as being divulsive from the original objective.

The other factor that promotes bureaucracy in the US is the executive power to enforce the policies made by Congress. There have been claims that the executive at times uses extreme force during the enforcement of the policies. The use of extreme force in the enforcement of the law is evident among the police. In the recent past, the police have been accused of brutality directed at the citizens. Racial differences play a great role in the advancement of such brutalities. Police also tend to use extreme force when dealing with protesters. According to the American constitution, citizens have the right to hold peaceful demonstrations to protest against certain policies (McClam, 2014). Since the police are the agents of the government, their use of force a threat to the countrys democracy. The government needs to enact laws barring the police officers from using excessive force when dealing with suspects.

Lastly, American democracy has evolved over time since the passage of the constitution in 1972. The changes have marked great changes in the countrys policies. One of the significant amendments made to the original constitution centers on the presidential election. Just like in the current system, the electoral colleges appointed the president. However, the electoral colleges were responsible for the election of many candidates vying for the seat (Monten, 2005). The current system only allows two candidates to vie for the position of the presidency. The lack of independent candidates is viewed as undemocratic since voters cannot choose from a variety.

The current electoral system of electing the president by the electoral colleges as opposed to the electorates denies the people the right to elect their leader thus promoting undemocratic practices. The election of the president involves the casting of ballots by the citizens and the electoral colleges. A presidential candidate who gathers a majority of votes from the electorates may still lose the seat if s/he fails to mobilize enough votes from the electoral colleges. The electoral colleges are therefore the determinants of the winner of the presidency. The election of the president by the electoral colleges, as opposed to the electorates, denies the people their right to exercise direct democracy.

Conclusion

The US is one of the most democratic nations in the world with its democracy being marked by the free media and the right to free speech. The American constitution grants every citizen the right to free speech illustrating the countrys commitment to democracy. The media contributes heavily to the advancement of the countrys democracy as illustrated by this research paper. In the US, all three arms of the government work together in the process of formulating the policies. In that regard, enough checks and balances mitigate the formulation of policies that are not in favor of democracy.

Congress enacts laws that are then forwarded to the President for their approval to be law. The Supreme Court may still reverse the assented Bill in case they conflict with the constitution. Any citizen may move to the court to challenge the adoption of the Bill into law. However, much as the country leads regarding democracy, it faces criticisms in different areas. Firstly, it denies the citizens the right to direct democracy in the presidential election. Secondly, the lack of strong opposition may lead to bureaucracy by the government. The mentioned aspects of ten American democracy have been explored in detail in this paper.

References

Carothers, T. (2007). US Democracy promotion during and after Bush. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Finkel, E., Pérez-Liñán, A., & Seligson, M. (2007). The effects of US foreign assistance on democracy building, 19902003. World Politics, 59(03), 404-439.

Goldberg, E., Wibbels, E., & Mvukiyehe, E. (2008). Lessons from strange cases democracy, development, and the resource curse in the US States. Comparative Political Studies, 41(5), 477-514.

Goldman, R. (2012). Obama Wins Re-election With Romney Defeated in the Key States. ABC News. Web.

Gore, D. (2008). President Winning without Popular Vote. Web.

Hazan, Y., & Rahat, G. (2010). Democracy within Parties: candidate selection methods and their political consequences. Oxford, UK: OUP Oxford.

Magen, A., & McFaul, M. (2009). Promoting democracy and the rule of law: American and European strategies. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

McClam, E. (2014). Obama Speaks on Big Republican Wins in Midterm Election. NBC News. Web.

Mitchell, L. (2009). Uncertain democracy: US foreign policy and Georgias Rose Revolution. University Park, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Monten, J. (2005). The roots of the Bush doctrine: Power, nationalism, and democracy promotion in US strategy. International Security, 29(4), 112-156.

Newman, K., & Lake, R. (2006). Democracy, bureaucracy, and difference in US community development politics since 1968. Progress in Human Geography, 30(1), 44-61.

ODonnell, G. A. (2007). The perpetual crises of democracy. Journal of Democracy, 18(1), 5-11.

Wejnert, B. (2010). Democratic paths and trends. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.

Wolf, S. (2014). The generic Congressional ballot, the US House popular vote, and democratic legitimacy. Web.