Archive for the ‘Democracy’ Category

Do We Really Have A Democracy in America? – In Homeland Security

Note: The opinions and comments stated in the following article, and views expressed by any contributor to In Homeland Security, do not represent the views of American Military University, American Public University System, its management or employees.

By Dr. Stephen SchwalbeFaculty Member, Public Administration at American Public University

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God.

We have all recited this oath numerous times. But why does the Pledge of Allegiance characterize the United States as a republic and not as a democracy?

When it comes to government systems (such as a monarchy, a parliamentary democracy or a theocracy), democracy refers to the direct participation of all eligible citizens in making policy decisions throughout the country.

There have been only a few true democracies in history. There was a form of direct democracy in the ancient city-state of Athens, where all wealthy men were eligible to vote. In a republic, on the other hand, eligible voters elect officials to represent them at various levels of government, from local to national.

Direct democracies can quickly become unwieldy when the population of communities, cities or countries grows too large. Conversely, republics are a much more efficient and effective form of government because there are significantly fewer people eligible to vote on policies.

For example, in the U.S. today, each of the 435 members of the House of Representatives represents approximately 743,000 citizens. In the 100-member upper chamber, each Senator represents approximately 3.23 million citizens.

The notion that the United States of America is a democracy stems from how some parents explain the country to their children. This concept is then often reinforced in elementary and middle schools.

What most people have in mind when they speak of democracy is the freedom to vote in private for our elected officials. Secret balloting has been around since the ancient Greeks and was practiced during the Roman Empire.

Also, when speaking of democracy, most people have in mind the liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. These rights include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press and the freedom to peacefully assemble and protest. In essence, democracy means to live freely as opposed to living under a dictatorship with limited or no freedoms.

Does direct democracy exist anywhere in the United States today? Yes, it exists at the local levels of governance, such as at town meetings, at parent-teacher conferences and in homeowner associations.

Homeowner associations, for example, might meet quarterly, semi-annually or even annually with every homeowner invited to participate. During these meetings, issues of importance to the community are discussed and voted on as required. Members who cannot attend the meeting can still participate in the decisions by using proxy votes.

Town meetings have been common in the six New England states since colonial times. The people of a small town (usually fewer than 6,000 residents) gather once a year as a legislative body to decide local policy issues, such as the towns annual budget. For example, the communities of Freetown and Lakeville, Massachusetts, conduct town meetings every year to vote on the budget for their combined school districts.

Direct democracy will not threaten our republican form of government. However, as the country continues to grow in population, we can expect to see more direct democracy in action at the local levels of society.

About the Author

Dr. Stephen Schwalbe is an associate professor at American Public University. He is also an adjunct professor at Columbia College and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. Stephen received a Ph.D. in Public Administration and Public Policy from Auburn University in 2006. His book about military base closures was published in 2009.

comments

Sign up now to receive the InHomelandSecurity eNewsletter.

Read the rest here:
Do We Really Have A Democracy in America? - In Homeland Security

Democracy and the Arab axis of tyranny – Middle East Eye


Middle East Eye
Democracy and the Arab axis of tyranny
Middle East Eye
The UAE has been actively involved in seeking to destabilise and discredit the country's nascent democracy, which is the only functional Arab spring nation that remains. Again, all this is calculated. For the Gulf-led counter-revolution, the message to ...

and more »

See more here:
Democracy and the Arab axis of tyranny - Middle East Eye

A boon to democracy in eliminating straight-ticket voting | The Daily … – UT The Daily Texan

In a time of historically low voter turnout and a seemingly unbreachable partisan divide, civic engagement recently got a boost from the unlikeliest of sources: the Texas Republican Party. Eliminating straight-ticket voting has received unequivocal support from Republican leadership in the Texas Legislature at a time when they find themselves disagreeing more often than not.

Straight-ticket voting is an option that allows a voter to click a button and choose all candidates of a specific party. Its elimination is brought on by Texas House Bill 25, signed by Gov. Abbott on June 1. The Republican leadership supported this issue due to shifting partisanship in Texas largest cities. Harris County, which contains Houston, shifted majorly Democratic in the 2016 election. This concerned Republican politicians who were afraid they were losing their grasp on one of the last big city GOP strongholds in the state.

What makes this move particularly surprising is how much Republicans have gained from straight-ticket voting over the last 20 years. Without straight-ticket voting, it would have been "extremely unlikely" that Republicans would have won 121 consecutive statewide elections dating back to 1996, said Mark P. Jones, a Rice University political scientist. Seemingly confirming this, straight-ticket ballots made up more than half of the Republican vote in four of Texas five biggest counties in 2014.

There is no better example of rank partisanship taken to its natural end than the current composition of the Texas Legislature. One of the highlights of the 85th Legislature was the Mothers Day Massacre, which was essentially a temper tantrum designed to kill other peoples bills by far-right Freedom Caucus members. On the Senate side, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a former radio host, kept supposedly vital issues like the bathroom bill which discriminates against transgender schoolkids front and center.

The unfortunate caveat to this argument is that Texas Republicans have shown little interest in addressing the underlying problem. Given their recent track record a number of lawsuits and efforts to suppress minority votes at every turn its hard to take the argument that theyre just trying to show that every race matters seriously at all.

What Texas needs is less partisanship and more nuance. Texas already has an example of the type of downballot moderates that could be crafted by this bill, State Rep. Sarah Davis. As the legislatures only pro-choice Republican, Rep. Davis is a unicorn among Texas politicians. She is so removed from her party that when ideological scores were assigned to each representative from the 85th Legislative Session, her score didnt overlap with a single other legislators. This may be why she continues to get re-elected in her Houston-area seat, a district that voted for Hillary Clinton by 15 points.

Though not every elected official can (or should) emulate Rep. Davis. Shes a fascinating case study of what can happen if voters place qualifications over party. Ending straight-ticket voting wont suddenly convince every voter to completely abandon party loyalty, but it provides an opportunity to educate voters about important down ballot races that most directly affect their day-to-day lives. If they know there isnt an easy way out, perhaps they might just listen.

Price is a government sophomore from Austin. Follow him on Twitter @price_zach.

Originally posted here:
A boon to democracy in eliminating straight-ticket voting | The Daily ... - UT The Daily Texan

Letter: Hacked elections threaten democracy – The Columbus Dispatch

The electoral systems in four out of five states were hacked during the 2016 election ("Breach of 39 state systems seen as threat," Bloomberg News article, Wednesday's Dispatch). The former FBI director has "no doubt" those attacks came from the highest levels of Russian government. And today, the hottest topic in Congress and the media seems to be whether Donald Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice.

The election process is the foundation of our democracy; an attack to manipulate our elections is an attack on our nation. Russia is employing 21st century warfare to destroy this and other nations from within. Yet, our president shows outrage only at the Paul Reveres shouting out the alarm.

Would Franklin D. Roosevelt have claimed that Pearl Harbor was "fake news"? Would George W. Bush have discounted 9/11 as "fake news"? But our commander-in-chief sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States is disregarding hundreds of attacks on American democracy. President Donald Trump vainly cares more for his sense of legitimacy than he does for the security of America. This isn't just obstruction of justice. This is obstruction of democracy.

Will Kopp

Westerville

Continued here:
Letter: Hacked elections threaten democracy - The Columbus Dispatch

What does it take to move from pseudo-democracy to real participation? – Redress Information & Analysis

By Graham Peebles

Imagine a country run along truly democratic lines. In such a mythical land, what would be the role of the politician, and the nature of his or her relationship with that amorphous group paraded under the banner of the people?

We in pseudo-democratic countries hear a lot about politicians serving and honouring the will of the people in Britain this nauseating slogan of appeasement has been repeated ad infinitum since the disastrous European referendum vote but from where does the supposed conviction of the masses arise? Does it evolve from independent minds tussling with questions of justice and freedom, debating and discussing pertinent issues over tea and cake, or is it the politicians who construct this perceived will, manipulating the people they claim to serve into believing what they, the politicians, want them to believe. And while on occasions there may be some degree of uncertainty in the success of the project of persuasion the people can sometimes be an annoyingly unpredictable bunch every avenue of propaganda and control is employed to ensure that the ideological intentions of the political class are reflected in the will of the people as and when they place their sacred X on the ballot paper, and exercise their long-fought-for democratic right, which (particularly in first-past-the-post systems) carries little authority and even less autonomy.

The principle tool of inducement is of course the mainstream media: television and radio stations, newspapers and magazines are used to flood the minds of the populous with a certain view of life, particular ideas, values and carefully edited facts. Political and economic slogans are repeated like mantras over the airwaves, until they infect the populous and are repeated parrot-like by apathetic, ill-informed voters. Education systems are designed to support the message, enabling the most malleable minds to be conditioned into, for example, competition and conformity. Organised religion reinforces the pervasive values and imposes its own, often cripplingly repressive doctrine on the faithful. Creative independent thinking the principle quality of enquiry, analysis and response is for the most part lost within the fogs of dogma and stereotype that are wrapped around the minds of the unsuspecting virtually from birth. The world is presented as hostile, competitive, full of pain and difficulties. Material satisfaction and pleasure is sold as happiness, desire constantly fed creating agitated noisy minds, discontent and anxiety, all of which deny or greatly inhibit the possibility of that most democratic quality, free thinking.

Political and economic slogans are repeated like mantras over the airwaves, until they infect the populous and are repeated parrot-like by apathetic, ill-informed voters.

Individuality has been perverted, championed and denied. Within a conformist society where the pressure to think, act, and be a certain way is all-pervasive. True individuality the natural flowering of innate potential within an environment of cooperation, understanding and tolerance, free from fear is restricted and only realised through strength and often brings exclusion. And so the will of individuals, their ability to think beyond the rhetoric, to see the false as the false and the true as the true, becomes constrained at best, easily manipulated and/or non-existent.

Many are awake to this; young and old see the injustices, the pretence and invasion for what they are. They are angry, and long for an alternative way of living. Huge numbers have been marching in cities throughout the world, demanding change and to be listened to. The response of the ruling elite has been fierce resistance, often violent. Ever more repressive policies, austerity and the like have been imposed, wages effectively lowered, costs increased, life made even more difficult, physically exhausting and emotionally draining, insecurity intensified, hope denied. Despite this assault, there is a global movement of solidarity evolving, and with the energy of the time flowing with increasing strength, the citadel of resistance cannot be sustained indefinitely. True democracy, a social construct that we have idealised but not lived, will win the day, greatly changing the role of the politician and the type of people who become public representatives.

without a well educated, engaged population, democracy remains a fantastical construct of the elite, its principles periodically displayed for public appeasement and sustained self-deceit.

Democracy is participation, as are social responsibility, freedom of expression and social justice, tolerance and mutual understanding. All these are inherent in the democratic ideal and constitute its primary colours. Where these are absent, so too is democracy. Likewise, without a well educated, engaged population, democracy remains a fantastical construct of the elite, its principles periodically displayed for public appeasement and sustained self-deceit. In the absence of democracy, politicians, living in a suited bubble of complacency and privilege two interwoven vices of self-deception become ideological enforcers and persuaders. Divorced from the public at large, aligned with corporate interests and consistently duplicitous, trust in governments and politicians is at an all-time low. These men, and women, of power are rightly seen as cynical and ambitious, prepared to say anything to achieve positions of power and to hold on to them.

If complacency is the poison of the political class, then apathy and ignorance are the Achilles heel of the people. Social responsibility and participation sit at the very heart of the matter participation by well-informed people who recognise that we are all individually responsible for society, for the well-being of our neighbours at home and abroad, and the integrity of the natural environment, participation in how the place in which we live and work functions, participation founded on a sense of responsibility leading to and demanding, by dint of commitment and creative participation, influence.

Within such an environment the role of the politician changes dramatically. It becomes one of listening, facilitating, informing and enacting, of representing making known the will of the people to the business community and parliament which is of course what they should do now but on the whole, dont. In this democratic paradigm, self-interest and corporate power begin to weaken and the will of the people to evolve. Democratic decisions about policies and methods, the clarifying of aims, the nature of systems and structures in such a world would be reached through overwhelming consensus not the paltry 51 per cent of perhaps a mere 45 per cent of the population, as is the case now.

When the nature of the will of the people is based on the recognition of humankinds essential unity, together with the acknowledgment that we are responsible for the world and all life within it, then all becomes possible.

Under the existing democratic paradigm the talk is of power and control, duplicitous politicians and leaders and disenfranchised citizens. The rhetoric of political debate is combative and dishonest, ideologies and ideals clash, the economy dominates and business largely dictates government policy. Socio-economic systems have been designed and developed to deny the manifestation of real democracy and to facilitate the perpetuation of the status quo: a state of affairs in which piece by piece the natural environment is being destroyed, half the worlds population is living on less than $5 a day, economic inequality is at unprecedented levels and 65 million people are displaced. That is to name but the most pressing issues facing humanity.

True democracy is an expression of human solidarity. For this to develop and reflect the proclaimed ideal, systemic change and a fundamental shift in attitudes is required, both by politicians and the people who they are supposed to represent. This will not come from the political class they are quite happy with things the way they are and will fight to the last. It will, and must, come from the people. The worldwide protest movement contains within it the evolutionary seeds of lasting change, but as the reactionary forces resist with increasing force, the need for sustained engagement and collective participation grows stronger. As Maitreya has made clear, nothing happens by itself, man must act and implement his will. When the nature of that will the will of the people is based on the recognition of humankinds essential unity, together with the acknowledgment that we are responsible for the world and all life within it, then all becomes possible.

Read more from the original source:
What does it take to move from pseudo-democracy to real participation? - Redress Information & Analysis