US Not a Democracy Due to Inconsistency of Factors and Structure

In order for one to accurately answer the question “is America a democracy?” one must know the answer to three other questions: What is democracy? What is the true structure of America’s system of government? After comparing democracy to this structure, are they consistent with one another? If one accurately answers these three questions then he or she will come to the conclusion that, due to the inconsistency between the necessary factors that make up democracy and the structure of American government, America is not a democracy, Unfortunately, due to the inconsistency of language, there are multiple definitions of democracy.

Since this is the case, three definitions will be presented. These definitions are, in their respective entirety, contrary to the structure of America’s government.

After much observation, these three definitions seem to be the broadest of definitions, containing most factors from any other definition I have come across. The first and, if the concept of language is at all reliable, the most reliable of the three definitions of democracy is derived from the etymology of the term It can be broken down into two stems, demos, and kratos.

Demos is translated as “common people,” while krutas is translated as “rule or strength” (Harper). Based on this etymology, a first definition for democracy could be the strength of common people or the rule of common people. A second definition of democracy could be presented as a form of government in which every citizen has equal power to determine the decisions made by their government through representation (“Democracy“).

Get quality help now

Marrie pro writer

Verified

Proficient in: America

5 (204)

“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The third definition to be presented is a means for the people to choose leaders that accurately represent the opinions of the people. It is now appropriate to explain the overall structure ofAmerican government. In its broadest sense, American government functions as a tool that conditions the citizens contained in it to feel the need to place faith in it’s rule over all other things one might place faith in. This structure can be explained by a document that primarily inspired the creation of America’s constitution, James Madison‘s Federalist Paper 10. Madison, a federalist, believed that the biggest cause for failure in government is the “violence of faction” (Madison), This worry expresses the fear of the power that lies within people under a government who, according to Madison, “are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.”

America’s past and current solution to this threat is also found in Federalist Paper 10 Madison provides the only two options for resisting the violence of faction, those being either to remove its causes, or the control its effects Since removing its causes is impossible if free will of humans is taken into account, and immoral if done by force- the very idea that inspired the rebellion of the colonies from Britain- controlling the effects of the violence of faction is the only option left to take. The method for controlling factions that America has been using, in short, is to pit ambition against ambition (Madison) In other words, in order to maintain a stable power structure, the government supports certain factions so as to give them the opportunity to compete with other factions that are becoming too threatening What this really means is that our government provides a loosely fixed range of representation for each significant faction respectively.

By doing this, the government is conditioning the atmospheres new generations are born into and conditioning the rise and fall of power between factions.  While this is certainly controlling the effects of faction, it is also subversively allocating power to the government and to the government only This is why it is reasonable to claim that American government functions as a tool that conditions the citizens contained in it to feel the need to place faith in it’s rule over all other things one might place faith in If one compares this structure to the first definition presented, the strength of common people or the rule of common people, it would then be clear to him or her that there is no such rule or strength within the confines of said structure. America is made up of many different factions. This is something that we all like to point to about this country, its cultural diversity.

However, America’s government is set up to nullify such diversity as soon as it threatens to gain power. In short, the law rules over any religious or cultural principle, over any ideal. Since all factions exist as competition for each other, the only certainty that most individual citizens dare to hold onto lies in the law of the land. This only allows for the common people to be fuel for the fire, diminishing their strength and dissipating their rule, handing it over to the government. If one considers the second definition presented, a form of government in which every citizen has equal power to determine the decisions made by their government through representation, when comparing democracy to the structure of American government, they will certainly notice a lack of equal opportunity among individual citizens. Unfair advantages are in the forefront of American governmental structure.

First and foremost, capitalism mixed with a market economy promotes a winner takes all attitude for any businessman who wants to succeed as an upper class citizen. Since America holds to a market economy, the government’s only option to maintain power is to turn towards big businesses. Combining this sole option with capitalism creates the side effect of weeding out the lower income businesses because they are of little to no significance to the overall power of the government. One might say that it is each individual’s choice whether or not they want to join a big business or run a small business, However, citizens‘ options are decreased due to the fixed range of representation that American government requires for each faction. This structure creates new walls for smaller businesses, causing an already uphill battle to become the struggle of a lifetime.

Such a structure promotes straying away from small business, which leads one to question the ‘pursuit of happiness’ ideal that is so often associated with America. It seems fairly clear that the structure of America‘s government does not allow equal say for each individual on the decisions that affect their lives, When considering the third definition of democracy presented- a means for the people to choose leaders that accurately represent the opinions of the people- one might have trouble seeing the distinction between American governmental structure and democracy. However, there are factors that clear up any suspicion of compatibility between America and democracy that need to be mentioned, America’s structure presents the idea that voting, as available to all citizens past the age of 17, is the means for people to choose their leaders In reality, however, through the lens of the cornerstone of America’s governmental structure, a fixed range of representation, such means for people to choose their leaders suddenly lose their value.

Since it is true that all citizens within this government have a fixed range of representation the means do exist. However, the outcome of the right to vote has, by the very nature of this government’s structure, been predetermined, so that no faction can take power away from the government, After comparing these three broad definitions for democracy to the structure of American government, one can understand that the common people lose their strength and do not rule, that clear advantages are set for bigger businesses, and that citizens’ means to choose their leaders is predetermined, and therefore lacking in powerr All of this understanding leads adds up to the idea that, regardless of one‘s definition for democracy, a fixed range of representation is distinct from democratic principle.