For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222
Call 1-800-351-0222
PURE DEMOCRACY.
Term Paper ID:28747
Essay Subject:
Analysis of the concept of pure majority rule. Benefits & detriments incl. Tyranny of majority. Emphasis on ideas & writings of framers of American Constitution, Aristotle, Plato.... More...
12 Pages / 2700 Words
10 sources, 22 Citations,
APA Format
$48.00
More Papers on This Topic
Paper Abstract:
Analysis of the concept of pure majority rule. Benefits & detriments incl. Tyranny of majority. Emphasis on ideas & writings of framers of American Constitution, Aristotle, Plato.
Paper Introduction:
"It has been observed by an honorable gentleman that a pure democracy, if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government” (Bailyn, Part Two, 1993, p. 768). Alexander Hamilton made that statement on June 21, 1788, while unfavorably comparing pure democracy to the republic proposed by the Constitutional Convention. The statement holds true, though: Many people, honorable or otherwise, still consider pure democracy to be the most perfect form of government—and the most impossible form, at least on a national scale. As the new millennium dawns, however, new technology such as the Internet could place pure democracy within reach. “[P]articipation in government by all persons, regardless of condition or residence, could be rendered possible in the very near future” (Cohen, 1971, p. 278). While pure democracy may become practical, is it desirable? This paper will exami
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
A pure democracy sounds like a utopian, noble existence. Democracy. Which brings us back to the original question: As pure democracybecomes feasible, is it desirable? If that makes the individual happy, they are achieving theirpotential in some sense as described by Plato. Taking Plato at his word, though, would mean that all people(including slaves) would be free to pursue their dreams. Plato's world seems more like a cafeteria than a functioning society,as individuals pick and choose which responsibilities (if any) they willundertake. "Demagogues arise in stateswhere the laws are not sovereign. And perhaps anyone who intends to found a state, aswe have been doing, ought first to visit this emporium of constitutions andchoose the model he likes best" (Cornford, 1945, p. Everyonewill be happier doing what he or she wants and society will be better offbecause of its variety. (1972). "The sole and undivided responsibility of one man willnaturally beget a livelier sense of duty and a more exact regard toreputation. .of the republican model of government." ChiefJustice John Marshall, writing in Marbury v. This system and philosophy resounds throughout the planningof the founding fathers: No one man, or branch shall be granted excessquantity of power. 39 ). The framers recognized the inherent flaws of democracy. Since Citizen A has plentyof water from a mountain stream he does not care. . New York: The Library of America. Every man will arrange his own manner of life to suit his pleasure. "The effect [of thedelegation of the government] is . It soonwastes, exhausts and murders itself! "First of all, they are free. "It has been observed by an honorable gentleman that a pure democracy,if it were practicable, would be the most perfect government" (Bailyn, PartTwo, 1993, p. No matter its exclusivity, the notion of Greek democracy hasresonated throughout the Western world for more than two millennia. (1976). Plato envisions a world where societymakes its choices based on the will of the majority. 446). The philosophy behindthis is an assumption that individuals are prone to go along with thedecision of the majority. wrote "in free government the majority must necessarily govern; andthat, therefore, it becomes the indispensable duty of good citizens toacquiesce; to attempt an opposition by means of force and violence, wouldbe to commit a crime of the blackest dye" (Bailyn, Part One, 1993, p.459). 1258). 39 ). Self-denial may sound a bit undemocratic, but the nation could onlythrive-indeed, survive at all-with Aristotle's rule of law rather thanPlato's rule of people. . Indeed, George Washington, in his inaugural address, pledged himselfto "the preservation . The words ofAristotle, spoken long ago, remain true to this day: "The conclusion whichemerges is clear. TheAthenians, as part of the majority, would not be concerned about fallingdisfavor. . Everybody gets together and votes, and majority rules. The Civil War is an example of the fact that no matter what kind ofgovernment, sometimes the majority cannot rule. (1958). Then again, joining that group may be a formof freedom. .A democracy is so free that it contains asample of every kind. Democracy and the Individual. The Cadillac Modern Encyclopedia. Because there is no inherent constitutionallaw in this form of democracy, they in essence have seceded from their"union." Simplistic, perhaps, but the U.S. They may not have found theperfect answer, but they crafted a workable compromise that featuresoverwhelming support for the rule of law. By 1864, after the Emancipation Proclamation,Union victories at Gettysburg and Vicksburg, and Sherman's march acrossGeorgia, Lincoln enjoyed solid support. The politics of Aristotle. The tug of war between democracy andrepublicanism finally ended-in favor of the latter. "[Y]ou are not obliged to be inauthority, however competent you may be, or to submit to authority, if youdo not like it; you need not fight when your fellow citizens are at war,nor remain at peace when they do, unless you want peace; and though you mayhave no legal right to hold office or sit on juries, you will do so all thesame if the fancy takes you." (Cornford, 1945, pp. Theminority of the South did not like the direction of the majority (the restof the country), so they created a new majority-by seceding. faced this scenario in 186 . Democracy does exist inthe U.S.-in small-town Vermont, where all of the village's adult residentsgather for twice-yearly meetings to decide all of the town's business.Indeed, this is more pure democracy than even the Greeks could manage, andthey invented the concept. -- are discussedand voted upon. The scenario of war is an intractable dilemma for proponents of puredemocracy. "[P]articipationin government by all persons, regardless of condition or residence, couldbe rendered possible in the very near future" (Cohen, 1971, p. Lincoln's "government of the people" could be traced back to Plato'sRepublic, where the author described an ideal state that continues tocapture the imagination of many. However, his neighborsby the river are getting slaughtered, and the rest of the populace isaffected. What if nobody is interested inproviding basic services, and everybody just wants to drink wine all day?How can society flourish and go forth if every man is for himself and onlythat? Aristotle recognized this dilemma, declaring that societies that dieby their own hand are "a variety of democracy that for the good doesrecognize every status of citizen as equal. . The debate on the Constitution, part one.New York: The Library of America. (The word "republic" is derivedfrom Latin and is defined as "a state in which the functions of governmentare carried on through elected officials or representatives." A republiccan also be a democracy if the right to vote extends to "nearly all of itsinhabitants and if the representatives chosen actually respond to thedesires of the people who elect them" (Shapiro, 1973, p. Knopf. (1993). is a republic(representatives of the people run government) rather than a democracy (thepeople themselves run government). But the ability toenact laws did not necessarily mean the ability to carry out the laws.Only through a republic could the nation survive because the populace atlarge could not be trusted to put self-interest aside for the betterment ofall. 52) claims itis because "Our Common Man tends very easily to become the Man of theCrowd, to whom there is no greater bugbear than to be heterodox. Freeport, NewYork: Books for Libraries Press. The tyrannyof that majority involved slavery. . Madison, declared that the"government of the United States has been emphatically termed a governmentof laws, and not of men" (Gunther, 1991, p. The "tyranny of themajority" could only be held at bay by the election of a few good men. Fehrenbacher, D.E. Moreover, representative government is asuperior manner in which to stave off the inevitable anarchy of puredemocracy. From a practical standpoint, the majority eventually will have to jointhat policy, or the government will fall. Cornford, F.M. . Life is good; everyone has his or her say. .Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the publicvoice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be moreconsonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves,convened for the purpose" (Cohen, 1971, pp. Democracy may be a form of constitution; but thisparticular system [where the people decide all matters], under whicheverything is managed merely by decrees, is not even a democracy, in anyreal sense of the word" (Barker, pg. Representatives can be influenced by lobbyists,and public opinion can be influenced by Aristotle's "flatterers" andpressure groups. Yet what if the majority is of a certain group (sayAthenians), and they decide to enslave the small community of Piraeus? AsMarshall also wrote, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, thedifference is like that between order and chaos." Those statements came after the issue was settled. 247) noted, "in the United States, everyone is personally interested inenforcing the obedience of the whole community to the law; for as theminority may shortly rally the majority to its principles, it is interestedin professing that respect for the decrees of the legislator which it maysoon have occasion to claim for its own." For those issues that do not involve rights per se, majority rule inthe U.S. So maybea republic is what we choose if taking a vote in a purely democraticsystem. Libertyand free speech are rife everywhere; anyone is allowed to do what he likes. Constitutional Law. Yet the very lack of obligation to society makes this scenario veryunpredictable. Allthe citizenry is allowed to vote, cite opinions and do as they please. This isthe 'valour of ignorance' against which all democracies need to be on theirguard." Apparently the founding fathers were very much on their guard againstthese travails. The underlyingassumption seems to be that each individual would recognize the danger totheir way of life, and each would fight in their self-interest. . agovernment of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perishfrom the earth" (Fehrenbacher, 1989, p. Nonetheless, Americans often describetheir country as a democracy, though the word never appears in either theConstitution or the Declaration of Independence. New York: AlfredA. References Allen, C.K. Ignoring for a moment the individual's lack of obligationto society, let us assume that the majority's decisions are binding. Gunther, G. Theresult will be a greater variety of individuals than under any otherconstitution. Are human beings just a bunch of followers with a need to "geton the bus?" It would seem that these were legitimate concerns in times ofantiquities to the present, as Carleton Allen (pp. Plato's utopian world, though, prompts more questions than it answers. The republic of Plato. 169). . For example,government could be for the masses but it could not be governed by themasses, at least not directly. The federalgovernment used its full coercive power to raise an army and bring theSouth back into the fold. (1991). While democracy regretfully admits them, recognizing, if it is wise,that they are weaknesses to be watched and corrected." So are individuals ever truly free? .. (Ed.). So who wouldprovide needed items such as food and water? If the government has legitimacy, then themajority will go along, even with a policy they reject. Survival aside, critics of pure democracy find an even greater flaw inPlato's concept of majority rule. Madison is making the point that having an elected representative,dedicated to studying the issues of government, will be better able toserve a community than the aggregate of its citizens, most of whom have notime to study such issues. The classic dilemma for Plato's world is war. 53) writes, "The 'pressure group'is a constant and a formidable element in American politics, and it can doremarkable things." How, then, do we overcome that inherent problem in society, the needto belong? Plato might respond that individuals would never vote for thatbecause they, too, could fall into disfavor and face the same sentence fromthe majority. .was it not for the patriotism and self-denial of individuals, the publicinterest would be neglected or betrayed" (Bailyn, Part One, 1993, pp. Let us say Citizen A wishesto lives in the hills and Citizen B down by a river on the country'sborder. That is comes out of democracy is fairly clear"(Cornford, 1945, p. Cohen, C. Thus, even though puredemocracy affords individuals the greatest possibility to realize theirpotential, if pure democracy cannot perpetuate itself, it will afford nosuch opportunities. As John Stevens,Jr. As the new millennium dawns, however, new technology suchas the Internet could place pure democracy within reach. According to Plato, each individual must decidewhether to fight. (Ed.). The writers of the Constitution did not take theview, as Mussolini did, that "all is in the State, and nothing that ishuman or spiritual exists, far less has value apart from the State" (Allen,1972, p. So it may be the finest of all, with its variegated patternof all sorts of characters. As Plato noted. As Carleton Allen (p. Thatsociety will be so free that each individual (men only in Plato's world)will be allowed to flourish in the pursuit of their interests. Bailyn, B. wrote in Americanus IV, "That a Republic shouldbe confined to a small territory, heroic virtues, self-denial, and thesacrifice of our dearest interests are essentially necessary, and areconsequences flowing immediately from the nature of this fundamental law. 76-77). Madison's wisdom still resonates. The leaders, acting in thebest interests of society, must reject majority rule. can be tainted by the American system of government. Athens, Georgia: The University ofGeorgia Press. This was theframers' attempt to solve Plato's dilemma. Weighing the risk of death versus the risk of beingconquered, some will come to the conclusion that surrender is preferred.Society, without any coercive power, would crumble. 536). but here the people, andnot the law, is the final sovereign; and that is a result which is broughtabout by leaders of the demagogue type." Pure democracy, Aristotle warned,can be just as bad as a lone despotic ruler. A single well directed man by a single understanding,cannot be distracted and warped by that diversity of views, feelings andinterests, which frequently distract and warp the resolutions of acollective body" (Bailyn, Part Two, 1993, p. However, a town meeting is called because a neighboring country isdeclaring war to obtain the river water after a long drought. (1993). Whatif the majority's decisions go beyond simple matters? During theratification process, however, the Federalists went to great lengths toconvince the masses. Plato envisions one man, onevote. (Ed.). America's founders, schooled in the Greek tradition, heededAristotle's call for the rule of law rather than the rule of the people.The framers of the Constitution consciously and deliberately strove tocreate a republic in the truest sense. As John Stevens, Jr. Nor does Plato account for necessary services. This paper willexamine pure democracy, analyzing the benefits and detriments of puremajority rule with an emphasis on the writings and ideas of the framers ofthe American constitution. Tyranny of the majority remains a concern. In the U.S., majority rules upuntil those rules infringe on the rights of the minority. First, what if one person's pursuit of happiness tramples on another's?Second, how will this society be governed? 768). This sentiment is averred over and over again bymen such as James Madison, Jefferson and beyond. "How doesdespotism arise? Forexample, Abraham Lincoln, in the Gettysburg Address, exhorted the Americanpeople to continue the fight in the Civil War to ensure that " . . Alexander Hamilton made that statement on June 21,1788, while unfavorably comparing pure democracy to the republic proposedby the Constitutional Convention. (Ed.). In that dispute, the unresolved issuesof the ratification of the Constitution were revealed. This individual and others like him opt to disengage themselvesfrom the country as a whole. There never was a democracy that didnot commit suicide" (Bailyn, Part One, 1993, p. The Americanrepublic is not perfect. Bailyn, B. Itis one of the simplest ways to exist, right? The people then become an autocrat-asingle composite autocrat made up of many members, with the many playingthe sovereign, not as individuals, but collectively. 457-458). (1971). Plato might reply that thosepeople whose interests lead them there. Plato probably assumed thatslaves would. London:Oxford University Press. The statement holds true, though: Manypeople, honorable or otherwise, still consider pure democracy to be themost perfect form of government-and the most impossible form, at least on anational scale. The considerations of the foundersstill dominate the discussion, and the answer remains no. The word democracy comes from the Greek demos, for "people," andkratos, for "rule." Greek democracy involved only a handful of the people;slaves and women, for example, were excluded from the decision-makingprocess. (Ed.). NewYork: Cadillac Publishing Company. Having been governed underthe yoke of English monarchy for so many years, would not "true liberty"have been denoted by a "true democracy?" Yet the fledgling nation'sstrident libertarianism was tempered by the realism of its leaders. (1973). The debate on the Constitution, part two.New York: The Library of America. 287). On the other hand, arepublic places limitations on the individual. . Another power comes totake over Plato's world. 53-54): "Thesemischiefs are not confined to democratic societies, but are universal amongmen. Indeed, as Alexis de Tocqueville(p. Shapiro, M.S. But he went no further towards despotism, andhis steps proved crucial. Collectiveaction would result from all those individual decisions, and society as awhole would benefit. Who will deliver thebasics, such as food, water, sanitation, etc.? .to refine and enlarge the publicviews . That is why the Constitution is so hard to amend, and therights guaranteed therein are immutable. Lincoln also crossed the lineto despotism on several occasions, suspending Constitutional rights to keepborder states in the union. London:Oxford University Press. Westbury, New York: TheFoundation Press. (1945). 3). Yetaccording to Plato, nobody is bound by the decision, nor is anybody boundto serve the society as a whole. .It growsdespotic; flatterers come to be held in honour; it becomes analogous to thetyrannical form of single-person government" (Barker, 1958, p. Whilepure democracy may become practical, is it desirable? How will this pure democracy survive? . Thus, according to Plato, democracy is not only the best form ofgovernment, but it also will produce the best kind of society. Democracy in America. America, they argued, would not survive without arepresentational form of government was necessary. 76). Carleton Allen (p. 282-283). A good example came during theCivil War, when support for Lincoln tottered on several occasions,especially after Union setbacks in combat. In a purely democratic society,their perceived freedom may give way to their need to belong to a group andblindly follow the majority. 278). The founders exalted the individual, but they realized thatdespite appearances, pure democracy actually did not afford the greatestopportunity for individuals to flourish. Hamilton and his allies won the battle-the U.S. Moreover, this maxim applies to more than just war.America's founders recognized this seemingly fatal flaw in pure democracy.Samuel Adams stated, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. Therefore, the majority could decide that certain groups do notdeserve the right to pursue their dreams, and pure democracy would die byits own hand. 282). There is nowa call to war to defend their country's water. Why is this? Limitations are the byword for thetype of government that exists in this country; it is a system of checksand balances. . Essayists such as Montesquieu wrote, "it isa fundamental law in Democracies, that the people should have the solepower to enact laws" (Bailyn, Part One, 1993, p.457). For example, what if the majority decides that a certain family beenslaved. Should we build a school? 168). In Plato's world, "every man for himself" produces the bestsociety where everybody realizes their potential doing what they want.This theory is premised on the belief that all men are basically good.Even so, conflict is inevitable, yet Plato envisions no collisions betweenindividual pursuits. . de Tocqueville, A. AsMadison argued in The Federalist LXXVI, "I proceed to lay it down as arule, that one man of discernment is better fitted to analise and estimatethe peculiar qualities adapted to peculiar offices, than a body of men ofequal, or perhaps even of superior discernment" (Bailyn, Part Two, 1993,p. (Ed.). (1989). Barker, E. Over time, the individualmay come to view those limitations as necessary if not desirable. Abraham Lincoln: Speeches andwritings, 1859-1865. Of course, thisinvolves a fine line between freedom and despotism, for rulers often takeactions counter to the majority's wishes while claiming to be acting insociety's best interests. This system, chosen for us by the nation's founders and its elite(since the franchise extended to only 1 percent of the population), is theone we would have chosen for ourselves. Simple matters --should we build an aqueduct?
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
We can write a Custom Essay just for you.
Browse Essays by Subject