Cianci Melo-Carrillo American Political Science Mr.

Spagnuolo The Rise of Private Democracy The recent past centuries have marked milestones in human interactions; therefore, drastic changes in the function of society and government have occurred. Human interactions have allowed for capitalism values to spread throughout the entire world. This has increased trade between nations. Democracy has henceforth become the accepted desirable form of government since it is the model that allows the most private investment in the world economy. This shift in democracy from serving as a model for the involvement of all citizens in political decisions to democracy for the sole purpose of private rights has caused discontent among the majority who do not benefit ludicrously from a free market. Howard Zinn describes that the drive for corporate profit and the overwhelming influence of money in every aspect of our daily lives causes an uncontrolled libido [for money] of our society which is followed by the raping of democratic values1 . Democracy focusing solely on the monetary desires of a minority of private individuals is not true to its definition and causes a democracy gap2. This has been especially true in the history of the United States. During periods of large corporate expansion, the lower classes would suffer such as in the Glided Age. Studying the United States current government, the only way to cause the level of acceptance for democracy as the preferred form of government to meet the satisfaction rating of citizens with their government is

1 2

Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 12. Ralph Nader, A Crisis of Democracy (New York: St. Martins Books, 2002), 661.

to close the democracy gap by focusing the government on its public purpose rather than its private one. The current government and society of the United States has made the private desires of a minority of individuals of such importance that inequalities in society and disapprovals for the government have increased. This is evidence that Dahls Criterion of Personal Choice has unbalanced the original function of democracy to serve the people and not just some of the people. Dahl warns that if individuals in society purely make decisions based on their personal choice, it leads to Hobbess state of nature in which isolation, anarchy, subjections or despotism prevail3. While the United States has not yet reached this level of governmental failure, the mass of conflicts that the United States has internally and externally can all be traced back to one of the private desires of individuals, money. As Zinn describes it, whether you are poor or rich determines the most fundamental facts about your life4. These facts can even include negative rights which are supposed to be inherently available in the Constitution and which a private person cannot interfere with. It is, however, evident through corporate control of media that a rich person simply has much more freedom of speech than a poor person since they can access the media and government officials with ease5. They have the capability of using the government and media to manipulate the thoughts and limit the expression of the citizens. All the power in government goes to corporations since they have control of the economy, they control of the lives of the citizens. They are the ones the control how taxes are administered to their advantage

Robert Dahl, After Revolution? Authority in a Good Society (New Haven: Yale University Press,1990), 48. 4 Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 10. 5 Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 11
3

and cause the powerlessness of the American to participate in economic decision making, which affects his life at every moment6. This causes further disapproval due to increases in journalism and technology which have allowed for the public to see that they have become a victim of governmental deception 7. Citizens are further unsettled by the fact that representatives tend to be part of the elitist minority that owns these corporations, and therefore, tends to have a weakened sense of concern at others grievances8. With these governmental deceptions, citizens are highly discontent with their government, and according to Zinn, are less likely to participate in the praxis of voting for officials such as representatives9. 45 percent of the potential voters in nation elections do not vote since they believe that their vote is of no importance; they view it as not economical of their time and energy. This lack of outcome is often attributed to complacency with current situations, but as Zinn points out, it can be a result of the voters feeling hopelessness rather than approval10. In order to yield higher voting rates and higher approval rates for the government, policies must change and the purpose of government must reverse. Currently, the purpose of government is similar to Habermass liberal model of government pushing private interests against a government apparatus specializing in the administrative employment of political power for collective goal11. Governments aim must be closer to republicanism which is concerned with solidarity and the orientation to the common

6 7

Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 7. Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 11. 8 Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 4. 9 Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 34-35. 10 Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 6. 11 Jurgen Habermas, Three Normative Models of Democracy (Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers,1994), 1.

good12. This does not mean that the rich will have to provide monetary funding for the lower classes private desires to make them acquiesce, but rather, that they provide funding for the equal betterment of every citizen through education. Education, if equal, can provide anyone with the necessary components to achieve as much as an individual from that select minority. This would provide the necessary information to make the majority as competent as the minority in specific political discussions. If money were plainly given to the lower classes, there would be abuse. By assuring equal protection by laws, mutual guarantees and equal education for all, government would be more invested in the entire public sphere rather than to benefit individuals. This would lead to a version of democracy in which minorities that represents all the citizens would be competent enough to represent them in government. The government of the United States, although democratic, is plagued with deficiencies that cause disapproval of the governments actions. Consensus has become a new stereotype for how the lack of political movement among the discontent majority13. In the proposed solution to this problem, the representation system continues since in certain decision, it is not necessarily rationalto insist upon participating in these decisions14. Through the solution of providing equal education for everyone, minorities could have representatives in government that are competent. Government approval rates would increase since even though the Criterion of Personal Choice and not all bureaucracies are democratized, these are not rational in a society

12

Jurgen Habermas, Three Normative Models of Democracy (Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers,1994), 1. 13 Howard Zinn, How Democratic is America? (1971), 6. 14 Robert Dahl, After Revolution? Authority in a Good Society (New Haven: Yale University Press,1990), 29.

of unique individuals. Without these compromises, human-kind could not continue its instinctual and cultural tradition of living in an organized human society15.

Robert Dahl, After Revolution? Authority in a Good Society (New Haven: Yale University Press,1990), 16.
15

Bibliography Dahl, Robert A. "Three Criteria for Authority." In After Revolution? Authority in a Good Society, by Robert Dahl, 1-44. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990. Habermas, Jurgen. Three Normative Models of Democracy. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1994. Nader, Ralph. "A Crisis of Democracy." In Crashing the Party: How to Tell the Truth and Still Run for President, by Ralph Nader, 662-665. New York: St. Martin's Books, 2002. Zinn, Howard. How Democratic is America? 1971.