Democracy in
21st Century
America:
Government and Politics
in the United States
Robert J. Brem
College of Alameda
Politics & Psychology
CSU East Bay
Public Affairs & Political Science
Megan M. Sweeney
City College of San Francisco
Political Science
Fall 2018 (V3)
With Assistance from: Sherry
Luong, Tatiana Da Silva, and Rouel
Dichoso
The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all human kind. Many
circumstances hath, and will arise, which are not local, but universal, and through
which the principles of all Lovers of human kind are affected, and in the Event of
which, their Affections are interested. The laying a Country desolate with Fire and
Sword, declaring War against the natural rights of all human kind, and extirpating
the Defenders thereof from the Face of the Earth, is the Concern of every person to
whom Nature hath given the Power of feeling; of which Class, regardless of Party
Censure, is the Author. …Who the Author of this Production is, is wholly …is the
doctrine itself (and) the influence of reason and principle. The sun never shined on a
cause of greater worth: 'Tis not the affair of a city, a country, a province, or a
kingdom, but of a continent; of at least one eighth part of the habitable globe. 'Tis not
the concern of a day, a year, or an age; posterity are virtually involved in the contest,
and will be more or less affected, even to the end of time.
~ Thomas Paine (Common Sense, 1776)
1 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Contents: Democracy in 21st Century America: Government and Politics in the United States
Focus Topic
By Way of Introduction
FOCUS ESSAY:
John Quincy Adams on Human Nature and Freedom
1.
Foundations of Studying Government Past, Present, and Future
Critical political thinking
Words Matter: Defining our Terms
Asymptotical Socio-Political Questions & Phenomenon
Democratic social order
FOCUS ESSAY:
Tocqueville: Individualism
_______________ * _______________
13
15
22
42
45
51
Figure 1,0
Figure 1.1
Model 1.0
Image 1.1
Model 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.4
Figure 1.5
Figure 1.6
Figure 1.7
Figure 1.8
Figure 1.9
2.
Classical World Views & Political Ideologies: The Driving Force Behind all Politics!
How World Views come together as Political Ideologies
65
The Idea of America
81
Figure 2.1
Table 2.1
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
3.
Constitutional Foundations
The Declaration of Independence
Key influences on the thoughts of the framers on governance
The Preamble & Final Document
Notable Components of the Constitution
FOCUS ESSAY:
Franklin on the Constitution and doubting certainties
Federalism
Iron Triangles, Interest Articulation, Picket Fence Federalism
Civil Liberties and the Bill of Rights
_______________ * _______________
Model 3.0
Chart 3.1
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
Figure 3.6
Figure 3.7
Figure 3.8
Figure 3.9
Figure 3.10
Interacting World Views
Classical World Views:
Answers & Responses to key questions & concepts
3D - Political Ideologies and world views
Community Types -- The Patchwork Nation
World views, modern and right/left evolution
PEW – where do you fit? (2007 version)
_______________ * _______________
Hamiltonian order - Jeffersonian liberty
Compromises in the Constitution
Separation of Powers & Checks & Balances
The Constitution as THE Revolution
Broader conception of Checks & Balances
Who/What the Branches Represent
Comparing Government Types
How is Power Divided
Iron Triangles and Interest Articulation
Picket Fence Federalism
Iron Triangles and Demands
Picket Fence Federalism, Demands, and Federal Funding
_______________ * _______________
2 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
5
9
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Montgomery Van Wart: Forms of Rationality
Space-Time Sphere of Social Action
Inquiry from the Transdisciplinary perspective
Disciplines of Socio-Political studies
Maslow & Dahrendorf and the Good Society
What is a nation state
The Social Contract out of which the Social Order Emerges
Social Structures of the Social contract
Three sectors of governance & social order
Asymptotical psycho-social order curve
Interacting Social Structures and Social Order
Citizen vs Administration balance
Demands & Supports & Legitimacy
_______________ * _______________
Page
19
21
22
25
29
32
34
35
42
43
44
48
49
55
58
60
70
77
78
79
85
90
84
86
101
103
113
117
92
93
98
99
100
101
105
107
113
114
115
116
82
“Equal Protection Under the Law…”
.
4.
Civil Rights, Participation, and Voting
Public Opinion & Why It SHOULD matter
Political Socialization
_______________ * _______________
133
136
Figure 4.1
135
5.
Political Parties, Interest Groups, & Social Movements
Political Parties
Interest Groups
Social Movements
Comparing political Movements, Interest Groups, Political Parties
FOCUS ESSAY:
Frederick Douglass ~ 'What To The Slave Is The Fourth Of July?'
_______________ * _______________
Professional opinion on anthropogenic climate change
_______________ * _______________
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.2
Chart 5.1
Figure 5.3
Figure 5.4
6.
Congress, the Presidency, Public Administration, and The Court
The Congress
State legislatures & Municipal Government
The Presidency
The Public Administration
The Federal Court System and The Supreme Court
_______________ * _______________
168
191
193
204
209
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.2
Chart 6.1
Chart 6.2
Figure 6.3
Figure 6.4
Image 6.1
Figure 6.5
Figure 6.6.
Figure 6.7
Figure 6.8
Figure 6.9
173
174
175
176
179
192
193
207
209
212
214
216
7.
Domestic Policy and Foreign Policy
Criteria of Effective Policy Evaluation & Implementation
Domestic Policy
Foreign Policy
_______________ * _______________
222
224
230
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
221
226
229
233
233
234
235
Congressional leadership structure
The structure of Congress
Standing committees: House of Representatives and Senate.
Differences between House and Senate
The legislative process
For comparison: How a Bill Becomes a Law in California
Municipal Local government by comparison
The Praxis Cycle
Critical infrastructure
Comparative Justice - three classical world views
Types of Justice
The American Dual Judicial System
_______________ * _______________
The Public Policy Spectrum
Hayek & Keynes Comparison
The Policy Making Cycle
Matric of Foreign Policy Attitudes
Realism, Liberalism, and Idealism
Realist & Moralist Approaches – IR Praxis
The Foreign Policy Team
_______________ * _______________
By Way of Conclusion ~ The Future and The Will to Peace
Statecraft as Soulcraft
3 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
142
165
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
Relationship between Government, groups, people
The Party Platform
The 2012 Democrat & Republican Party Platforms Compared
Pluralist model of interest groups
Comparing Parties, groups, movements
_______________ * _______________
142
152
159
160
128
144
147
148
159
160
168
220
238
246
Words
Robert J. Brem
Words matter!
If you cannot clearly say what you mean;
Then you cannot mean what you say.
If you cannot mean what you say;
Then you cannot take an effective stand.
If you cannot take an effective stand;
Then your actions will be rendered meaningless.
There are no languages to speak without words to comprise them…
There are no thoughts to think without language to form them…
There are no actions to act without thoughts to guide them…
There are no realities to emerge without actions to create them…
Reality is spoken into existence…
Guided by what you believe to be true!
What you believe to be true
Will be true for in its consequences for you and
Your actions have consequences upon the people around you and
By such actions you have an effect upon the world and
What has an effect upon the world changes the universe…
The universe as it is requires you to exist for if you did not exist
The universe as it is would be different.
So understanding this:
It is a conversational universe and
Your words create the cosmos…
So…
Say the word!
Do you think about the things you think about?
~ Clarence Darrow
4 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
By Way of Introduction
The study of Government, Politics, and Governance in the United States is a subdiscipline within the discipline of “political science” which itself is a sub-discipline with the
larger social & behavioral sciences. A discipline is defined by adherence to certain rules and
patterns of inquiry following standards of professional practice in ascertaining what we know
and do not know and what we accept as verified truth and what we do not. This is also
explicitly, the sub-discipline of “American Politics.” As citizens of this republic, one engages in
this study (e.g. takes a course) explicitly to empower persons in their civic education as citizens
of a larger world and life in The United States explicitly. It can be argued these are perilous
times within which we must seek to thrive (rather than merely survive).
From different points of view both the political Right and the political Left see the very
nature of what this government and social contract may be as being at stake. Is the republic at
risk? If so, how? Whose vision of America is more valid? And, how will you negotiate and
thrive in this legitimacy crisis?
This is by way of saying, the reason
why one takes a course in American
governance (or for that matter, any course
one takes, I mean… hello!) is to empower
you in becoming more effective in life as
persons, workers, and as citizens of the
world. We can assume you do not want to
be victims of events nor do you want to
define yourself as “survivors” of crisis. You
want to be able to thrive! Or more simply,
you want the means by which to live a
happy life. That’s why we are here.
The reason to study politics is So our children may have the liberty to engage in
commerce; in order to give their children a right to pursue painting, poetry, and music.
~ John Adams
The starting point of studies in political science is to define the parameters of this time in
“the human story” (i.e. history). One ongoing struggle in American governance is the
importance of the issues involved in the struggle for power between ideas in conflict. A complex
set of ideas or “narrative” which guides all social, private, and public behavior in a society is
called an “ideograph.” One major struggle between ideographs in America today is between the
notion of “The Purposive State” ideograph (the ethos that the state has a purpose in building,
maintaining, and supporting a vibrant public sphere & social contract wherein the pursuit of
happiness is through a preferential option for human rights and appeals to reality based truth as
interpreted differently by liberals, conservatives, and radicals) and “The Wilding State”
ideograph (deferring to a more “right libertarian” or Ayn Rand conservative individualistic ethos
of a concentration of individuals who purse happiness through self-interested acquisition of
5 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
property in an “ownership society” de-emphasizing a public sphere built upon prosperity gospel
dogma and alternative to “reality based truths” or “alternative facts”).
Ayn Rand and The Wilding Ideograph
Who is Ayn Rand and why does she matter? Robert Reich (2018) argues the political
movement represented by Donald Trump can be seen as rooted in the ideas of Ayn Rand.1 Many
of the Trump power and the Republican Party of today in leadership; see themselves as followers
of Rand’s ideas (e.g. Rex Tillerson – former Secretary of State, CIA chief Mike Pompeo, a
nominee for Secretary of Labor - Andrew Posner, Republican leader of the House of
Representatives Paul Ryan – who required his staff and all interns to read her, Uber's former
CEO Travis Kalanick described himself as a Rand follower before he was fired for behavior
rooted in the her ideas to Uber’s code of values, Grover Norquist – who has led the zero
tolerance of taxes revolt in the GOP, and Rand Paul{named after Rand} a libertarian Republican
member of the House and son and former Libertarian-Republican presidential candidate Ron
Paul). They are all attracted to Rand’s heroic ideal of rich industrialist men who make it in the
world with a disdain for any idea of community rules and or a common good driven by pure
egocentrism and selfishness.
In two popular novels: The Fountainhead (1943) and Atlas Shrugged (1957); Rand
argued there is no common good, that selfishness is a highest virtue, and altruism is an evil that
destroys nations. When Rand offered these ideas in the 1950s they seemed quaint if not farfetched.
Reich notes that anyone who had lived through the first half of the 20th century witnessed
first-hand how only our interdependence saw us all through the great depression with
Roosevelt’s “New Deal” social programs and the Second World War together. After the war and
through the 1960s with Johnson’s “Great Society” programs; we used an idea of a “purposive
state” driven by a notion of a common good to harness seeming boundless prosperity; to finance
all sorts of “public goods:” including: schools & universities, electrification, a national highway
system, addressing poverty, and health care for the Aged and poor (Medicare). We rebuilt wartorn Europe, and sought to guarantee civil rights and voting rights for African Americans and
other oppressed minorities, and open doors of opportunity to women. We reached for the stars in
the NASA space programs. It was self-evident that of course there was a common good. We
were living it!
However, Reich and others have observed, that starting in the late 1970s, Rand's views
gained ground with the birth of the Right wing anti-government and strictly pro-business
movement (some of it funded by billionaires (e.g. the Koch brothers – one of whom ran for vicepresident as a Libertarian Party candidate and who funded think tanks and grade school and
college curriculum materials advocating Ayn Rand’s ideas). Rand’s ideas came to animate what
could be described as “Right Libertarian ideology,” and the newly emergent ideas driving the
Republican “Freedom Caucus” Tea Party factions. With organized promotion and well-funded
1
Rich Kacmar (March 5, 2018). Trump’s Brand is Ayn Rand, San Diego Fee Press,
https://sandiegofreepress.org/2018/03/trumps-brand-is-ayn-rand-video-worth-watching/
6 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
backing from key billionaires, Rand became the intellectual godmother of modern-day American
conservatism.
Reich argues the ideology of this movement is one of pure selfishness, contempt for the
public, a win at any cost mindset, and an intentional goal of defunding government (as Norquist
argues to be able to make it so small so as to be able to drown it in a bathtub), deconstructing the
administrative state, and privatizing the public sphere - setting it wild with private sector
corporate values and property rights focus replacing public sector values rooted in human rights
focus and a notion of the public good. This is called by Gregg Cawley “The Wilding
Ideograph.” As such, as it gains power in the political culture and is enacted as policy by 21st
century Republican conservatives (who reject the ideology of “Gerald Ford conservative
Republicans” of the 1970s who believed in community responsibility); this mentality is eroding
American life by degrading the public sphere and undermining any notion of an adherence to a
set of common values about what is right and wrong – replacing these with pure greed driven
selfishness and magnified by a toxic form of evangelist “prosperity gospel” religion” that argues
Jesus wants people to be rich and has ordained this world view of selfishness.
The result is we are living in a jungle where only the strongest cleverest and most
unscrupulous get ahead. Similar to Thomas Hobbes’ notion of a war of all against all where life
is nasty, short, and brutish; we are creating a political culture wherein everyone must be wary in
order to survive. This is not a society. It's not even a civilization; because there's no civility at its
core. It's a disaster to the very notion of civil society.
We have to understand who Ayn Rand is so we can reject her philosophy and dedicate
ourselves to rebuilding the idea of the common good that was once widely understood and
accepted in American political culture. After all, Reich argues, the U.S. Constitution was
designed for “We the People” seeking to promote the general welfare in the public sphere not for
“me the selfish” seeking as much wealth and power as possible at the expense of “the commons”
in the name of only private & elite concerns.
Yet here we are today with evidence growing every day of the loss of civil society and
civic virtue. We see this evidence when we hear of CEOs who loot their corporations and
defraud their customers & investors. We see it when we hear of lawyers & accountants who
“look the other way” when corporate clients play fast and loose with the law and personal
integrity & ethics, and who even collude with them to skirt the law. We see it when Wall Street
bankers defraud customers and investors, and when film producers & publicists choose not to see
a powerful movie mogul (whom they depend upon financially) who sexually harasses and abuses
young women. We see politicians who take donations - really bribes - from wealthy donors and
corporations to enact laws their patrons want. And then these politicians shutdown the
government when they don't get the partisan results they seek; completely undermining even the
illusion of a government system designed to be built upon compromise between people with
opposing world views.
And in leadership, we support a president of the United States who repeatedly lies about
important issues and uses easily identified falsehoods to support inhumane policies; all while he
refuses to put his financial holdings into a blind trust and then personally profits off his office.
7 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
All of this is magnified by his leadership towards the promotion of racial and ethnic conflict;
with the full support of his movement and party leaders.
Reich reminds us that “the common good” consists of our shared values about what we
owe one another as citizens who are bound together in the same society with a concern for one
another in community together. As such, keeping the common good in mind is a moral attitude
and it recognizes that we're all in it together. And Reich reminds us that if there is no common
good there is no society.
The Battle of Ideas
This struggle of ideas is occurring in the
context of globalization, destabilization of the
world economy, identity confusions, vast growing
inequality between rich & powerful and poor &
more powerless, and all this in the context of
global climate change. These can be seen as
perhaps “exciting” issues; certainly the stakes are
bigger than at any other time in the story of the
human species. Hannah Arendt notes that when
the “public sphere” is at risk, we live in “dark
times” with the undermining of public life of the
community of “polis” (Greek for “city” - a body
of citizens – dwellers in the city – as a community
wherein we live bound together by customs, laws,
and cooperation).
Looking at American governance as social scientists then, we need ask “What is
politics?” from the perspectives of both the discipline of political science and classical political
philosophy. Through exploration of these distinctions, the concepts of science, theory, and
philosophy will be explored, as well as the notion of "critical political thinking." In this
endeavor, we explore public law (the rule of law which holds the polis together) and the realities
8 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
and roles of being citizen in day-to-day life (all politics is personal) and what the concept of
“politics” mean to ordinary people. We need to look at the justifications for government as a
social contract conceptualized as not just government (the public sector) but as “governance”
(how the public, private, and social sectors work together to create the social order). We look at
social order (from more totalitarian to more authoritarian to more democratic) and world views
(liberal / liberty, conservative / order, and radical / equality) in “the context of democratic
values” and democratic community building.
Camilla Stivers asks how can we have healthy
democratic values driven governance in dark times? This
where we begin our inquiry into American governance; by
remembering one of the foundational principles in democracy
is that people as citizens have a civic duty to be responsible to
the polis. In this we find The Constitution is a search for a
way to a “More Perfect Union.”
In this, Barack Obama noted
“There is not a liberal America and a conservative America - there is the United States of
America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and
Asian America - there's ‘the United States of America.’ This union may never be perfect,
but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. We are the
ones we have been waiting for.”
FOCUS ESSAY: John Quincy Adams on Human Nature and Freedom
Freedom, the nature of humanity, and
Who we might become with respects to who we have been
Selected and edited text from the representation of John Quincy Adams arguing the Case of the Amistad Defendants
before the Supreme Court in the film: Amistad.
Barbara Chase-Riboud, David Franzoni, and Robert Brem2
On February 24th 1841, John Quincy Adams argued before the Supreme Court of the
United States in defense of a group of “slaves” who killed their captors on the slave ship
Amistad. The technical arguments of the case were themselves significant; addressing issues
between the Executive Branch and the Judicial Branch, and upon constitutional law as to
whether these people were in fact slaves under the laws or free. However, in Adams’ summary
argument, he explores the notion of freedom in particular. In his summary, Adams argument
was focused upon the question whether there was ever the Constitutional right to liberty in the
2
This text was taken and edited for reasons of message, style, and flow from the website:
American Rhetoric: Movie Speech "Amistad" (1997). Speech delivered by Anthony Hopkins;
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechamistadjqadams.html; Accessed: 7-16-2009.
Note: there is controversy over the issue of whether the ideas of Barbara Chase-Riboud in her novel "Echo of Lions" were “stolen” by David Franzoni, credited
author of the screenplay for the film. Both are named here for purposes of reference.
9 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
face of the darker side – or baser demons – of our human nature. From this dark side, humans
are capable of doing great “evil” to one another precisely because we surrender the better angels
of our human nature to it. In this, we forget to remember that our better angels can guide us in
remembering we also have the power to change ourselves and our society if we to commit to
being “good humans.” The question is about the degree to which we in fact actually believe in
the principles in which we say we believe. It is in this sense that Clarence Darrow asked: do we
think about the things we think about?
Do we?
Thus: Adams asks:
Why are we here? Is it to find truth? The truth, in truth, has been driven from this case
like a slave, flogged from court to court, wretched and destitute. But we must find truth
and what in fact concerns us here is the very nature of man. The very nature of human
freedom is at stake. That is the truth we seek to get at. Adams recalled John Calhoun’s
assertion about slavery:
There has never existed a civilized society in which one segment did not thrive
upon the labor of another. As far back as one chooses to look -- to ancient times,
to biblical times -- history bears this out. In Eden, where only two were created,
even there one was pronounced subordinate to the other. Slavery has always
been with us and is neither sinful nor immoral. Rather, as war and antagonism are
the natural states of man, so, too, slavery, as natural as it is inevitable."
Adams counter Calhoun’s assertion; arguing that:
…the natural state of mankind is instead -- and I know this is a controversial idea -is freedom. Is freedom. And the proof is the length to which a man, woman, or
child will go to regain it, once taken. He will break loose his chains, He will
decimate his enemies. He will try and try and try against all odds, against all
prejudices, to get home.
Adams then calls out the inherent Racism in American political and social culture, noting:
If such a man is black, we would deny the truth he is a true hero. Now, if he were white,
he wouldn't be able to stand; so heavy the weight of the medals and honors we would
bestow upon him. Songs would be written about him. The great authors of our times
would fill books about him. His story would be told and retold in our classrooms. Our
children -- because we would make sure of it -- would know his name, as well as they
know that of Patrick Henry.
Yet, if Calhoun and those who agree with him is right, what are we to do with that
embarrassing, annoying document: "The Declaration of Independence?"
10 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
What of its conceits? "All men...created equal," "inalienable rights," "life," "liberty," and
so on and so forth? What on earth are we to do with this? I have a modest suggestion.
We can tear apart and discard it… for all the meaning it has in the society Calhoun
describes and his followers prefer.
Today, we must ask: Is this “who we are” today still? Or is this only a part of our past?
Yes, Calhoun is in our past. Yet, he too and those like him are part of the body politic and
their ideas are a part of our heritage – even though they be part of the baser demons of
our nature. Calhoun is not evil. No. He was a great man and his ideas – though in part
surrendering to darkness – were also in part of our greater story of who are and who we
are becoming. Calhoun is also the man who wrote:
Stripped of all its covering, the naked question is, whether ours is a federal or
consolidated government; a constitutional or absolute one; a government resting
solidly on the basis of the sovereignty of the States, or on the unrestrained will of a
majority; a form of government, as in all other unlimited ones, in which injustice,
violence, and force must ultimately prevail.
The truth is not found in denying the past for its darker side. For so too in the past do we
find the founding authors of our greater heritage in the Declaration of Independence and
the Constitution. We find the foundations of a democratic republic in which all men are
in fact treated with dignity.
No, the path of denying our past or rejecting it all because some of it was dark could very
well lead us to recreate the evils of the past we seek to transcend. Rather, actually seeking
to live the lofty language in which we say we believe; of liberty, independence, the rule of
law… that is what we must do; call upon other parts of our past.
And even in recognition of our own deep imperfections and darker side, we do not
surrender to the dark side… rather; we call upon what Lincoln would call the better
angels of our nature. The parts we seem to too easily to forget in the rush of our silent
and not so silent assent to Calhoun in living our lives; unconscious of what the
consequences of our actions make us to be. We do this when we crave the ease of
convenience rather than the responsibility of liberty. Liberty demands more of us!
Joseph Cinque of the Mende people of Africa tells us that when a member of his the
people encounters a situation where there appears no hope at all, they invoke their
ancestors. It's a tradition. See, the Mende believe that if one can summon the spirits of
one's ancestors, then they have never left, and the wisdom and strength they fathered
and inspired will come to his aid. For today, if we call, they must come for we are here
today the whole reason for their existence in the past. From the past we honor our
forebears and they support us here and now as we move into a future where our lofty
words mean something. Freedom! That is what Freedom or “liberty” is for. And in our
11 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
actions we find out whether liberty is substance or merely shadow. Who do we want to
be?
In this; what of we: “Americans?” We look to our own founders: James Madison,
Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington… John
Adams… We've long resisted asking them for guidance. How did they – despite their
own dark demons – become the ones we seek to remember and honor and name schools
after and make sure it is their names our children remember?
Perhaps we haven’t asked fearing in doing so we might acknowledge that our
individuality which we so, so revere, is not entirely our own. Perhaps we've feared an
appeal to them might be taken for weakness. But, we've come to understand, finally, that
this is not so. We understand now, we've been made to understand, and to embrace the
understanding that who we are, is who we were. We desperately need their strength
and wisdom and – even as we acknowledge their own baser demons of their natures –
we might learn to triumph over our fears, our prejudices, and ourselves and make their
and our highest aspirations; real.
Peter Ustinov once said: “It is our responsibilities, not ourselves that we should take
seriously”
Being good and being responsible http://m.dmc.tv/dhamma/index.php?action=page&id=10105
…So, let us study Politics!
12 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Foundations of Studying Government Past, Present, and Future
Politics in your life
There are many definitions of “politics!” Politics is always about power in relationships
and how it is used. Pericles (430 B.C.E.) noted:
"Just because you do not take an interest in politics, does not
mean politics does not take an interest in you."
Therefore, to think about the things you think about (as asked by Clarence Darrow) here: take a
moment and reflect on how government and politics affects your life. Can you identify all the
ways in which politics impacts your life?
Just as Pericles noted, politics is all around us. Whether we are aware of it or not, politics
and government structures and influences much of our lives. Some examples include:
politics dictates what side of the road you drive on
who and how you marry
how much of your income is taken by local, state and federal government in the form of taxes
how many police officers patrol your streets and thus how safe your neighborhood is
who can go to school and the quality of the education you will receive
how much is funded to education versus prisons (i.e. how much it cost to attend school)
who goes to war and what type of benefits veteran's receive
who gets health care and what quality
what type of language is permissible on television and the radio
what types of substances you may put into your body
...and the list goes on and on! And these political decisions will affect you, your entire life, for
decades to come.
13 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
NOTE! As a general principle, in a democratic society; private affairs only become
public issues (of compelling public interest for government of intervene) when private behavior
has public consequences.
Yet, we see that Americans are increasingly cynical about politics. Rather than use
politics to create their desired society, many Americans instead decide to opt out (i.e. not vote,
remain ignorant on political issues, and not be involved in politics). However, just because one
may be disillusioned with politics does not simply make politics disappear. Instead, decisions are
then being made without that individual's input!
Here it may be interesting to note that in Athenian democracy in ancient Greece; an
“idiot” was someone concerned only with private, as opposed to public, affairs. And this is the
opposite of being a citizen exercising the civic or republican virtue of duty to the polis. The
Greeks of Athens believed idiots were born and citizens were made, through education.
However, anyone refusing to be a citizen - avoiding politics and debate - was seen as
dishonorable and selfish. They were thus: idiotes!
On Being an Idiot
In Classical Greek philosophy, an “idiotes” or ”idion” is a person who does not
participate in public life – or the political affairs - of the polis (the City-state). Pericles argues
that someone who lives life with only a focus upon an individual life - unconcerned with larger
affairs – is an idiotes. Pericles argued the ideal of participation in the body politic was
characterized in Greek thought by people involved as engaged citizens (dwellers of the city) in
the civic or civil affairs of their polis.
To the Greeks, ones development as an individual is decadent, lacking, developmentally
delayed (modern term that), if it has no civic engagement (i.e. in the public and civil sectors of
society wherein the public interest and the social good are of importance). Life solely focused
upon the private sector (i.e. the economic arena of only self-interest) then is in effect,
psychologically, well, retarded. That is to say, such a person is in fact, an idiot! This is whence
from which that term was derived!
This is also related to the Greek classical philosophical understanding that individual
development is rooted in active participation in the “story of social development” as a member of
an audience in drama via literature and theatre. With each audience, the drama, dramatic work,
and society as drama are changed; how these evolve. This is how society develops as well; in
agonistic tensions of dramatic interplay. It is the task of the arts and humanities then to move
people emotionally to see points of concern in society and evoke their passions to move them to
action. The Arts move people to revolutionary (radical – drama of agon) or evolutionary (liberal
- drama of comedy) action challenging the social order; whereas religions (as a form of drama as
well) tend to encourage people to maintain piety being in conformity with and in an equilibrium
(conservative – drama of tragedy) with the social order.
So! Aristotle argued that human beings are social & political animals. We cannot escape
politics because it is part of our nature; it is innate within us – we are born with it and live with it
14 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
- whether we acknowledge it or not. If this is true, that we are all political animals and politics
is a fact of our lives, then we need to understand it and we need to know how to make it
work. Whether your future is taking you into business, law, public administration, education,
health care, the arts, the sciences, or even unemployment (!); politics will touch your life in
many ways. The point is that the study of politics is not just an abstract idea! It is crucial to your
survival in the 21st century modern world system.
On this note, Ralph Dahrendorf noted that the world only offers uncertainty with no
guarantees. There is only a balance between ligatures (which hold you back) and what options
for action you have at your command; knowledge is power (as noted by Michel Foucault) and all
you are left with in the end is probabilities. There are three kinds of future: possible, probable,
and preferable. Your life tasks include doing whatever it takes to make your preferred future
“story of self” more probable than only and merely “possible.” Whatever you can do to increase
your odds increases your “life chances.” And as noted in “The Hunger Games” stories: “May
the odds ever be in your favor!”
Critical political thinking
The science of politics: beginning with definitions
People often ask: 'Is political science really a science? Isn't politics just opinion?' Well, it
is one of the social & behavioral sciences and that is a matter of “disciplined inquiry” seeking
conclusions based upon being “informed” by evidence. This is what we call having a
“disciplined informed opinion” (as opposed to having a less than informed opinion… such as an
“undisciplined uniformed opinion” or: ignorance!).
Our purpose is to open minds and to make the agony of
decision making so intense you can only escape it by thinking.
~ Fred Friendly (constitutional scholar)
The central importance of critical thinking to the democratic prospect: We must
first note, not every argument for a given position is valid… Edward R. Murrow suggested we
need to be aware there is no logical reason to say there is always more than one “reasonable”
side to an issue. While there is more than one side to most issues -- on some issues there is in
fact only one logical or valid position; and when that is the case it is not partisanship to report it
as such. As in the case of the Holocaust having occurred in World War II at the hands of the
NAZIs (which is denied by some anti-Semitic people), when among professional historians
trained in the social science of historical analysis agree that overall facts are not in dispute (even
if some details are still being worked out), then that story is the case. As Daniel Patrick
Moynihan argued:
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion; no one is entitled to their own facts."
It is prudent to recall as William James observed that “a great many people think they are
thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.”
15 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
One must note that only the discipline of math can use the notion of a proof. All other
sciences must use the idea of a “theory” or “hypothesis” for which we have so much evidence
supporting the “theory” or “hypothesis” and so little evidence “falsifying” the “theory” or
“hypothesis” that we are compelled to accept the “theory” or “hypothesis” as a “working fact.”
And as such, these “working facts” are a special kind of educated, informed, and disciplined
opinion. These are the basis for all social scientific thinking and analysis.
Types of Opinions: We can argue there are different kinds of opinion. But the only
opinions of merit in a democratic discussion are those which are both informed by supporting
knowledge and facts constituting valid and reliable evidence that is presented in a disciplined -critically thought out and presented -- fashion. Only a disciplined and informed opinion, offered
in an authentic voice in search of truth, privileges one with a “warrant for discourse ” in
democratic deliberations. Appeals to emotion or beliefs for which there is no evidence are not
sufficient in forming the foundations of democratic values driven decision making. To make
competent decisions about public policy and the future of society, we need a fundamental
commitment to truth . Note, in this regard, there is a continuum of opinion types ranging from
more idea (evolving ideas and living knowledge) systems to belief structures (static beliefs and
dead knowledge):
Disciplined Informed (Idea Systems or I.S. deal better with reality – “what is” verifiable
truth) – conclusions arrived at through inquiry which follows a discipline and is based
upon evidence – e.g. social scientific rigorous inquiry and/ or critical thinking generally.
Undisciplined Informed – conclusions based upon unstructured inquiry that is the result
of much reading often driven by the pursuit of pleasure or interest – e.g. being a dilettante
or other general interest pursuit modalities.
Undisciplined Uninformed – conclusions based upon little or no inquiry at all other than
just a gut reaction – e.g. emotional reaction (often fear) or ignorance or both.
o It is prudent to recall that “going with one’s feelings” is not always an invitation
to being happy the next morning… and
o As the pursuit of happiness is a goal of politics, we might wish to ponder this.
o It is also prudent to recall the founding fathers of the American Republic
explicitly built a system of laws rather than of men to encourage us to manage our
passions such that our passions would not manage us….
o This is disciplined thought tempering passionate exuberance?
Disciplined Uninformed (Belief Structures – B.S. deal with beliefs about what is
presented as “revealed truth”) – conclusions based upon a system of dogma – e.g.
religions.
o There is the special case of conclusions based upon faith.
o Faith is a belief in things for which there is no evidence. This is not necessarily a
dysfunctional ground upon which to base a belief, however, it may not be a good
ground to formulate policy upon).
o Faith may also be seen as “the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of
things not yet seen" (Hebrews 11:1); it is a substance, it's something tangible to
hold onto in the absence of evidence.
16 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Relative to Dogma, we often run into the problematique of mysticism based beliefs (i.e.
Religions). It is not that there is no truth to be discovered in religious thought, rather, it is the
case that religious belief structur3es are in fact ideologies that in implemented policy terms has
consequences that are the result of these not being “reality based” belief structures (as opposed to
the idea systems as basis for evidence based policy decisions. In this regard however, there are
emotional attachments to beliefs that have been around for so long we cannot let them go easily
even if on the face of it the beliefs are absurd. We have a great capacity for believing others’
beliefs are absurd but not seeing it in our own mystical beliefs of the universe. Carl Sagan
argued that:
One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we
tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out
the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It's simply too painful to acknowledge, even to
ourselves, that we've been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost
never get it back. (The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark ).
This dynamic Sagan describes explains much of human history. Faith is belief in things
for which there is no evidence. Therefore, it is not an optimal basis for policy making which has
real world consequences wherein evidence based recommendations are more practical.
However, used as metaphorical guides to thinking about how to live one’s personal life? In this,
most religions are minimally functional.
Each of these types of opinion is sufficient grounds upon which to make conclusions
and/or base a decision to act for given particular situations. However, in a situation wherein
precision, and validity and reliability are issues of survival – e.g. when we are engaged in the
analysis of policies which may have real impact in the world of lived and shared reality -- we
ought to aspire to the highest standards of ascertaining certainty that what we are saying is so is
actually in some consequential sense actually so. Public intellectual Marilyn Vos Savant notes
there is a profound crisis involving a lack of critical thinking skills, or at least a failure to apply
them, in the world today with profound consequences upon all our lives!
I . . . don't know quite when I began to pay attention to all the misinformation,
disinformation, and flagrant abuse of the general public's lack of education in logic and
elementary mathematical skills, but I do know that I found it everywhere. I didn't just
find a misleading statistic or pronouncement here and there, now and then. I found it (and
still do) every day, in every way, throughout the most respected information sources in
the country, but most especially from—no surprise—our government. This phenomenon
isn't the exception. It's the rule.
Again, there be profound consequences in the world resulting of “less than well thought
out actions” of people in the world today and, in governance, sloppy decisions often result in
great tragedy… sometimes mass death! Certainly, failures in effective governance have resulted
in profound human misery resulting of inefficient, inequitable, and insufficient public service
delivery. Perhaps then, we might want, therefore, always to aspire following the standards of
critical thinking (thinking about the things we think about – as opposed to clinical stupidity:
making conclusions without thinking about what we are doing….) in making important
17 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
decisions… especially about public policy. These standards are in at least one formulation:
“expressed most generally, as “a way of taking up the problems of life.”
Social scientific inquiry is inquiry driven by a set of rules and methods for investigating
reality logically and systematically; what we may call “disciplined informed inquiry.” We may
study any phenomenon (e.g. society, your family, or you!) using the rules of a discipline in
inquiry (e.g. social science) and make conclusions about what we observe only based upon
evidence (being informed by facts - as defined by the discipline). Michael Sodaro notes:
Political science is a science to the extent that it observes the rules of scientific logic and
engages in the following operations: definition, description, explanation, prediction, and
prescription.
As we look at American Government through the disciplined lens of a political scientist or of a
policy analyst, we will begin with the first task that political scientists need to perform:
definition.
Leo Strauss argued that in modern society and with modern liberalism, we are merely
focused upon “universal freedom.” This is inferior to "classical liberalism" and its focus around
striving towards human excellence. Thus, modern liberalism has a tendency towards relativism
and a loss of moral focus resulting in a descent into nihilism. Either, on the one hand, it is
towards a "brutal nihilism” whereby an attempt is made, in the name of some kind of
enlightenment, to reject traditions, history, ethics, and moral standards; replacing these (by force
if necessary) with some new regime of human nature engineering whether from the left or from
the right. On the other hand there is a "gentle nihilism” evident in Western liberal democracy
towards aimless and hedonistic value-free permissiveness in the name of some kind of
egalitarianism.
Strauss argued we needed to return to and recover classical political philosophy as a
renewed point of departure for making assessments of political actions as to whether they are
worthy or “good” …or not. Thus, we must start all inquiry with first principles and return to
classical meanings of words and move forward from there. Words matter! If you cannot say
what you mean, you cannot mean what you say! All words are alive but must be considered in
their evolutionary flow in context from original meaning and interpreted in the context of here
and now: hermeneutic sand exegesis. Thus: any science must define its terms as precisely as
possible. Carl Sagan argued:
“What counts is not what sounds plausible, not what we would like to believe, not what
one or two witnesses claim, but only what is supported by hard evidence rigorously and
skeptically examined. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”
Reason – just as all concepts – takes
on many different forms, and all of these
describe what members of any given group call
“reasonable discourse” but what members of
other groups consider to be “unreasonable…”
Thus: political tension or “agon.”
18 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Montgomery Van Wart presents the forms of rationality in public discourse in three major
groupings. These are “forms of reasoning” offered by different groups as grounds upon which they
justify political demands or claims they make upon other groups in society. These forms of reasoning are
the medium through which one and one’s shared attitude group “argues” points of contention over issues
which are, to them, of concern.
The rationality and decision making processes are as follows:
Figure 1.0
Category
Montgomery Van Wart: Forms of Rationality
Form of Rationality
Market Rationality
(Rational Choice;
e.g. competitive capitalism)
Cognitive
Rationality
Extra-Logical
Rationality
Reasoned Choice Rationality
(Solution Focused)
Non-Linear Systems
Rationality
(Systems/Learning)
Ends
Knowledge
Competition
Efficiency
Market Action
Expertise
Effectiveness
Varied Experience and
Study
Variation (Both
patterned and random)
Dynamic Evolution
Disequilibrium and Chaos
Human Needs
Rationality
(“Power With” ~
communitarian)
Coercive Rationality
(“Power Over”)
Perceived needs
Satisfaction
Instinct/ Advanced Drive
Physical Confrontation
Domination or Resistance
Coercion
Traditional Rationality
(e.g. patriarchy)
Customs
Consistency
Socialization
Divine Guidance
“God’s Will”
Divine Teaching &
Scripture
Perceptions of other’s
needs
Helping others
Compassion & Empathy
Aristocratic
Key Group Support
Special Endowments
Popular
Electoral Agreement
Consensus
Rules
Procedural Consistency
Mastery of Rules
Lack of Rules or Social
Structure
Complete Freedom
Being Unencumbered
Religious Rationality
(e.g. Christianity, Islam)
Altruistic Rationality
Elite Rationality
Political
Rationality
Means
Democratic Rationality
Legal Rationality
Anarchic Rationality
19 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Definitional clarity is especially necessary in politics because terms like democracy,
socialism, and conservatism often have more than one meaning and are commonly misused or
misunderstood. Before we can engage in fully competent analysis of socio-political action
however, we need to first truly identify the “stage” upon which actions take place.
Action in Space and Time
To analyze any social and behavioral phenomenon (remember, this is the social and
behavioral sciences!); we need to note and “see” that humans exist in the context of what I am
calling a Space-Time Sphere of Social Action. That is, there is a psycho-narrative social
interactional sphere within which one lives day-to-day and acts here and now (action space)
which surrounds our conscious experience of ourselves in the world. Our story of self
(everything we believe we are and what we do and what we experience) and our story of us
(how we experience our relationships with other and are experienced by others); happens in the
context of our story of here and now. Thus, this is a space-time sphere of social action.
Within this Space-Time Sphere of Social Action, that which we believe to be true, will
be true for us in our experience regardless of whether it is true in fact or not (the Thomas
Theorem). The degree to which our beliefs about reality (belief structures or B.S.) are not in
concurrence with actual reality (idea systems or reality as it I.S.) is the degree to which our
psychological way of being is neurotic or dysfunctional versus being healthy and functional.
Our world view or frame of perceptual reference is manifested always within the sphere of
relationship with others (social interaction in dynamic action space here and now).
What is proposed here is that when one comes from the world view of the life ethic
(seeking to understand and heal {together} rather than to morally judge and exclude {or
“wound” others}); they come to see and understand people as “merely” behaving in a SpaceTime Sphere of Social Action; wherein they enact their lives through interwoven narratives: a
story of self in the context of a story of us (our relations) in the context of a story of now (only
“now” exists driven by the past and pulled by the future).
We craft our story and our lives in unique moments of decision; (here and now is the
20 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
only time an individual has any power) the cumulative consequences of which results in the story
of our lives: who we become. That is we exist here (space) and now (time); and we are at once
persons (psychologically at the micro-narrative level of analysis) and workers and local citizens
(at the macro-level of analysis) and global citizens and spiritual beings (at the Grande-narrative
level of analysis).
Humans actually think in continuums (from more to less) in classical liberal, classical
conservative, and classical radical ways of seeing, thinking, and expressing. We do this
unconsciously (rendering us functionally blind to the multiple dimensions of the world in which
we live). When we discipline our thinking to do think “transdimensionally” consciously;
increase our personal psycho-social and political efficacy. That is we become more capable of
making a difference in our lives as persons, workers, and as citizens; in each and every moment
of decision; which together weave the future in which we all shall live… one decision and its
consequences at a time. Think about that.
And each of these moments of decision is impacted upon by myriad psychological,
familial, social, political, cultural, geographic, environmental, and even cosmological dynamics
revolving at once around us and within us as enculturated stories and reactions and drives. It is
this narrative contextual systems phenomenon which we seek to understand and come to know as
the human condition of people becoming themselves in the lived and shared world of reality.
Figure 1.1
Space-Time Sphere of Social Action
21 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
However, for us to understand anything, we must come to see it through a
multidimensional frame of inquiry. This frame can be termed as being a Transdisciplinary
Perspective on Life in the World3
Humans exist and act in inter-relationships in a world of lived and shared reality.
We do this as persons, workers, and citizens. To comprehend any question of the human
experience in this world, we need to look at it from a transdisciplinary perspective. Through this
framework, the challenges and issues humans face in the 21st century modern world system of
global significance to all life on Planet Earth become more comprehensible to us in inquiry. This
framework enables us to transcend beyond the confines of overly focused inquiry (e.g. just as
Political science”) and empowers people as workers and citizens as whole persons engaged in
inquiry in the larger world.
Words Matter: Defining our Terms
The meaning of words matters! If you cannot say what you mean, you cannot mean
what you say. This said then, we will begin with examining commonly accepted definitions of
key concepts in American government.
3
Adapted from the McKinnon Primary Curriculum Programme model: http://mckinnon-primary.vic.edu.au/pypnews/transdisciplinary-themes/
22 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
What is politics?
"Politics is a hard & slow boring of
hard boards.
It takes both passion and
perspective."
~Max Weber
The values you live, in your
actions in each moment,
creates the future in which
you’ll live.
There are several widely used definitions to describe politics. Political
psychologist Harold Laswell defines politics as who gets what, when, how, why, and
where. This is the most basic question of politics and the main task of any political
system. This definition emphasizes politics as a process and implies that it is a process of
allocating scarce values and resources. This definition of politics understands it as a
process of determining:
How power and resources are distributed in a society?
Which members of society get certain benefits or privileges (because resources are
always scarce) and
Which members of society are excluded from benefits or privilege (i.e. who wins and
who loses)
Laswell offers us then a pragmatic definition that emphasizes distribution, resources,
timing, techniques and power. Political economist David Easton argues politics is the
authoritative assignment of value. Some system of authority (social or cultural or structural)
defines what is and what is not valuable in society. And that assignment determines the
23 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
outcomes for one in life as a person, a worker, or as a citizen; in groups or in society. The
classical liberal philosopher Aristotle offers a more profound and all-encompassing
philosophical definition of politics:
“Politics is the pursuit of the good society.”'
If philosophy is the search for the “Good Life” (what Thomas Jefferson later in history
refers to as the “pursuit of happiness” and Epictetus referred to as “the search for virtuous life”);
then the good society is that social order (or social contract) which enables it’s citizens to have
meaningful access to the “blessings of liberty” to define for themselves what is a good life and
then creates action space for people to have meaningful opportunities to pursue it.
Aristotle’s definition raises a
series of questions:
What is the good society?
What is political about
pursuing the good society?
What assumptions are built
into Aristotle’s definition?
Aristotle is implying that, while
everyone seeks a “good life”
and therefore wants a ”good
society;” people disagree as to
what a good life and what a
good society “should” look
like.
What is “Good” is a
foundational issue that is
interpreted in many whys by
people in every context of life.
We can all think of examples
of this fight taking place in our
communities.
Plato (left) and Aristotle (right), a detail of The School of Athens, a fresco by
Raphael.
Aristotle argued politics is an ethical activity concerned with creating a just society -The Good Society – which has as its aim all of these dynamics which we just discussed. To
achieve all these aims, politics necessarily entails all of the realms of inquiry and derivative
practice explored in the social & behavioral sciences, the arts & humanities, and in fact a good
deal of the natural sciences as well (e.g. environmental sciences, biology, geography, physics,
24 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
and chemistry). Thus; for Aristotle then, the study of politics is the master science. The entire
Discipline of Socio-Political Studies can be envisioned (Image 1.0) as follows:
Politics rules all that we do. Pericles argued in 430 B.C.E. that “Just because you do not
take an interest in politics does not mean politics will not take an interest in you! Politics in the
Grande Narrative sense is fundamentally about forging and maintaining community bonds. It is
about how we manage and craft a common destiny guided by shared values. It is also about how
we choose those values and what the power implications for people in and between people in
relationships. It is about how a society determines its vision of justice and the good society.
Politics is anything that has to do with beliefs about and the dynamics of power within
and between people in relationships; and it is the search for the good society. Philosophy is about
the search for meaning and defining that "good" and what values guide us in creating that
aforementioned good society.
Politics in the sense of governance is also the rules and means by which communities
reconcile conflicts of interest among their members; determine their group interest; how they
allocate power; and determine its just uses. Power may be used wisely or foolishly, rightly or
cruelly, but it is always there; it cannot be wished away. That is why humans have been seen by
many philosophers starting with Aristotle as political beings.
25 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
https://councilcommunity.com/2016/07/14/alchemy-for-the-common-good-visionand-purpose-in-leadership/
Political inquiry as a social
science is an exploration and
illumination of the ways that social
power is grasped, maintained,
challenged, or justified. When we see
life as drama as the Greeks viewed it
(conservative “tragedy” and liberal
“comedy” and radical;
“tragicomedy”); we see that struggles
-- agonistic dialectical tensions -- over
power and the values that power
should promote give politics its drama
and pathos. In this sense the discipline
of political science is an effort to
understand politics and not only to
describe and explain, but also to
improve political life. It is an attempt
to inform and guide the efforts of
people in their actions -- as
individuals, in groups, and as society -to make the emergence of an
envisioned good society more probable
than merely possible.
Three key ideas for sense making in politics: William Bianco (Indiana University)
argues that there are three key ideas that help us to make sense of and demystify politics.
Politics is everywhere. It is fundamentally a part of life – governing:
o What people can and cannot do, their quality of life, and how they think about
events, other people, and situations.
o It effects everything does as a person, a worker, and as citizen
Political processes matter. Governmental actions are the result of conscious choices
made by voters, elected officials, bureaucrats, and citizens who
o In order to be “engaged” must know about the institutions, rules, and procedures
that have a decisive influence on the lives of all citizens of a country.
Politics is conflictual. The questions debated in elections, and the policy options
considered by people in government, are generally marked by disagreement at all
levels.
o The conflict is rooted in the fact that human nature that liberals, conservatives,
and radicals actually see and experience the challenges in life in the world
differently.
o So: listening, compromising, bargaining, civil engagement, and tough choices
about trade-offs are central parts of the process.
26 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
What is good?
So how might we decide on the morality – or that which is “good” – which we might
prefer and an ethical frame (what is “good behavior”) from which we might act? To explore this
question, we must begin with the one fact of human existence that is undeniable: that which
exists is both real and natural. Therefore it follows that reason is the natural medium through
which humans interact and make choices in the universe; and, it also follows that we might look
to nature for guidance in this reasoning for evidence of the grounds upon which we might base
conclusions to our questions as to how to respond to challenges and problems in living in the day
to day world of lived and shared reality (“the space-time social action sphere”). This is
disciplined and informed inquiry.
Disciplined and informed inquiry is rigorous critical thinking; the foundations of the
scientific world view; and as such it is the most effective means available to humans for
ascertaining what is and is not real with a high degree of confidence in validity, reliability, and
probability as to degrees of trust we may place in our choices at any specific contextual moment
in space and time: here and now.
Therefore, we are able to explore the question as to “what is moral and ethical?” or
“what is “good”? through a series of propositions that of necessity must begin with the
proposition that it is preferable to exist and be alive than not exist and to not be alive. Of
course, if one does not accept this proposition, all else in this discussion is probably irrelevant.
And, if we accept this proposition then it follows that psychologically and biologically
speaking, it is preferable to have a healthy life than to have an unhealthy life. Again, if one
does not accept this second proposition, all else in this discussion is probably irrelevant.
If we do accept these propositions, then, from these we are able to construct a series of
logical propositions leading to a conclusion as to how we may arrive at moral decisions using
disciplined and informed inquiry without regard to mysticism, dogma, or mere opinion.
The Argument proceeds as follows:
Proposition: what may be defined as “good” is that which enhances the prospect of living organisms-and, in this context: humans–to live in a healthy (i.e. nourishing and thriving life beyond
mere survivability) fashion physiologically and psychologically.
Proposition: if what enhances life in this fashion is good, then what diminishes life in these terms is
morally unacceptable (but only in the context that we claim to believe in that which
promotes the capacity of life to survive and to thrive).
Proposition: any self-reflective organism that wishes to live beyond merely surviving unto thriving,
would grant these first two propositions.
Proposition: what enhances the capacity of life to survive and thrive – biologically and psychologically –
is determinable to the highest degree of confidence and trust as to its “truth set” value (“it
is a reliable working fact”) though the inquiry of the various health sciences.
We can call this “The Life Ethic”
27 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Proposition: there are certain ways of ordering society in a manner that enhances the capacity of life to
survive and thrive in a physiologically and psychologically healthy fashion (that can be
determined by health science inquiry) that are differentiated from those ways of social
order that diminish life or enhance life prospects to a lesser degree (also verifiable by
health science).
Proposition: said social ordering modality would be the optimum or “good” and best social order in the
context of this life enhancement perspective.
Proposition: a social order in which interactions (behavior) within the system are defined by the
boundaries of democratic values (not necessarily procedures) can be said to be that social
order which enhances the life prospect to the highest degree of success.
Proposition: any social order that is not democratic is not an optimum social order in that it diminishes
the life prospect of the people within its system.
Proposition: on this basis, it is possible to determine the morality of a given course of action.
Quod erat demonstrandum
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From here on out, in this piece; when we use the word “good” or support or critique
any person, system, group, or policy; we mean it is either congruent with or incongruent with
the life ethic. On this basis then, we propose that the good society is a society ordered on
democratic values wherein public law constitutes a purposive state structured to use power in
building, maintaining, and supporting a vibrant public sphere & social contract wherein the
pursuit of happiness is through a preferential option for civil rights and appeals to reality based
truth as interpreted differently by people coming variably from different world views: classical
liberal, classical conservative, and classical radical.
Actualization, Life Chances, and Justice
Whatever our philosophical proclivities, the Capacity to choose (a function of
liberation from “life ligatures”) to be virtuous is a matter of the degree to which one is
psychologically capable to do so (having the life skills to function and “life options”).
This is a function of ones capacity to be “Self-Actualized” (psychological health) or not
and this has much to do with the degree to which one has negotiated the requisites of
survival (needs versus wants). To have this capacity is one’s ability to access “life
chances.”
People who have no faith they’ll survive live in primal fear and are more likely to
surrender their liberty to tyranny. Tyrants promise people basic needs (order!) in
exchange for unquestioned obedience. The struggle for democracy is rooted in this
dynamic. So, for democracy to be substance and not shadow, it must provide meaningful
access to the means of survival – access to the blessings of liberty - to its citizens more
often than not over time.
28 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Substantive “Liberty” has to do with one’s substantive “options” in life liberated
from the oppression of unnecessary “ligatures” to -define one’s own identity, to selfdetermine what “happiness” is in that context, and has the right (by law) to express that
“happiness” even if it differs from the social norms of society (and does none harm in
doing so) in order for one to be able to live life in the “pursuit of happiness “or taking
their shot at meaningful access to their “life chances.” This is “self-actualization.”
Therefore, in order for a socially just social order to be said to exist; that “good society”
must be structured such that people may have a fair chance at meeting their basic survival
needs more often than not and that then frees them to “self-actualize” and that is what it
means to be free in a society wherein liberty is substance and not merely shadow. This
can be presented using the theories of Abraham Maslow and Ralf Dahrendorf as follows:
Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs; Self-Actualization & Access to “Life Chances”4
Growth Needs are
Non-Hierarchical
Growth Needs
Being Values & MetaNeeds.
Foundational
Emotional Needs
Deficiency Needs
“Just Social Order”
structurally manifest the
means by which the
“needs” of the “most
vulnerable” people in
society are met…
Truth
Goodness
Beauty
Aliveness
Individuality
Perfection
Necessity
Completion
Justice
Order
Simplicity
Richness
Playfulness
Effortlessness
Self-Sufficiency
Meaningfulness
Self esteem
Esteem by Others
Love and belongingness
Basic Needs
Safety and Security
Physiological
Air, Food, Shelter, Sleep, Sex
The External Environment
Precondition for need satisfaction
Freedom, Justice, Orderliness,
Challenge or Stimulation
A matter of Existential or Spiritual Survival ~
The grounds of “Basic Fear” or Existential
Angst (that one’s life is meaningless or has no
purpose – undermining will to live).
To some degree; this is the area of
“wants”…necessary for actualizing one’s
dreams – as in “the pursuit of happiness…” –the
prime concern of democratic social order.
In many cases, this is a matter of freeing people
from “life ligatures” often framed as “traditions”
to enable them access to “life options” – all of
which pre-suppose basic survival needs have
been met – which enables one’s “Life
Chances.”.
These are basic “Needs” relative to Identity;
wherein a threat against these is also perceived
an issue of “primal fear” to an individual
A Matter of Embodied Survival ~ The grounds
of “Primal Fear” (that one may not survive).
Until these are met, actualization is impeded.
“Civilized Societies” meet these needs as a
matter of course; To make that society
“Structurally Just” (Johan Galtung and John
Rawls).
4
(Goble F. (1970). The Third Force: The Psychology of Abraham Maslow, P. 52.; merging the work of Ralf
Dahrendorf, John Rawls and Johan Galtung relative to an overall view of the meaning of “justice”)
29 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Thus, any social order that meets these requisites meets the terms of the Life Ethic
and as such is what we may call a “good society” as defined by Aristotle and Abraham
Maslow; also called Eudaimonia. And as politics is about power and how it is used in
relationships and is the search for the good society; and that is one wherein its citizens
have meaningful access to meeting their basic needs more often than not over time, then
power in society is aimed at providing these blessings of liberty if we want to claim
democracy and liberty is society are substance end not shadow! So what is power then?
What is power?
Politics and power are entwined and inter-related because politics always involves the
exercise of power. Power can be an elusive term and there are many definitions of power.
Michael Sodaro offered this neutral, all-encompassing definition: "Power is the capacity to
affect outcomes." This definition of power may be seen in various components:
Capacity means the potential or ability that someone possesses.
o Capacity could be held by individuals, groups, institutions or social structures.
o It is important to note that power is a capability or potential (comes from Latin
root ‘potere’ which means “to be able”).
o Power may exist but not be exercised.
Affect means to cause or bring about.
o There are countless ways in which power may be employed.
o The two main methods are domination and influence.
Dominance is hard power and it is the ability to completely control or
determine political outcomes (the maximum degree of power).
Influence is soft power and it is the form of power most often utilized.
It is the capacity to influence outcomes indirectly or partially.
This is less all-encompassing than domination and implies that
individuals have access to political decision makers. We will discuss
this in more detail below.
Outcomes means actions of result.
o Huey Newton argued “power is the ability to define phenomena and make
them act in a desired manner.”5 The outcomes of your actions are
consequences which may change the world; your world: as a person, as a
worker, and as a citizen.
There are many ways in which individuals, groups and institutions exercise power. For
instance, totalitarian societies (e.g. North Korea) totally dominate the citizen population who are:
”totally subjugated under the power structure” of society in all realms of their lives (private &
personal and public & social). This is done through both coercive power (force or the threat of
force) and ideology (controlling the thoughts of a population by limiting access to information
and using propaganda). Such dominant power is not the ideal way in which to exercise power as
it “expensive” in terms of the amount of human effort and resources needed to bring about the
desired outcomes.
5
Huey Newton, “Black Capitalism Re-Analyzed I: June 5, 1971,” The Huey P. Newton Reader, 227.
30 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
In more democratic nation states and communities, most power is exercised as a form of
influence in the context of “power shared with” everyone in some meaningful fashion; such that:
people are more free to express themselves in all realms of their lives (private & personal and
public & social) as they see fit in the pursuit of a good life. When individuals or groups
exercise “influence power,” they are affecting outcomes indirectly or partially. At the more
“political” or government level, a President tries to influence Congress to pass desired
legislation. At the more social or society level, interest groups – which are shared attitude
groups - seek to influence the social order by making “political claims” on other groups in
society. At the more personal level, one’s significant other may seek to influence a partner to
watch a scary movie that “you” prefer not to see.
An individual or group may influence another person or group due to many factors, such
as: money, knowledge, status, fear, charisma, and or persuasion. Some key points:
Power is a potential or ability that someone possesses.
o Just because someone has money, charisma, or expertise does not mean that the
individual will be powerful.
o An individual may have the potential for power because that person possesses
money or charisma, but choose not to use his/her money or charisma to influence
others.
Power always involves a degree of inequality.
o Individuals/groups/institutions have different amounts of the attributes/resources
needed to influence outcomes and
o thus they have different amounts of power.
It is an important exercise to reflect upon the ways that you have power (the capacity to
affect outcomes) in your life and where and when you do not. This helps one to conceptualize
where and under what condition one may find their leverage point in the world to affect change
or to “define phenomena and make them act in a desired manner” as a person or as a worker or
as a citizen. This finding one’s personal social-political efficacy: where one can be effective in
making a difference. You have to ask:
In what ways do you have power in your life?
What type of power do you possess?
In what ways do you exercise this power (or not)?
What is government?
The term government is often used interchangeably with politics but it does in fact have a
distinct meaning. Politics is a process or an activity through which power and resources are
gained or lost. Government is a system or organization for exercising authority over a body of
people. There are different forms of government (see figure 1.4 below); and all them
represent the formal mechanisms, structures, and systemic rules of decision making defining
value and concluding who gets what, when, where, how, and why.
Government is shaped by rules (laws) and institutions. Politics is the process by which
those rules or decisions are made. The rules can be thought of as the how in the definition 'who
gets what, when and how.' The rules are directives that specify how resources will be distributed
31 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
and how collective action takes place. They determine how we try to get the things we want. We
can do it violently or we can do it politically according to the rules: “the rule of law.” Those rules
could provide for a single dictator, a king, for rule by God’s representatives on earth, for rule by
the rich, for rule by the majority of the people or any other arrangement. The point of the rules is
to provide some framework for us to solve – without violence – the problems that are generated
in our collective lives.
The institutions can be thought of as the 'where' of political struggle. Institutions are
organizations in which governmental power is exercised. In the US, our rules (Constitution)
provide for the institutions of a representative democracy (legislative, executive and judicial
branches). Other systems might call for other institutions, like a parliament, a monarch or a
committee of rulers.
What is a state?
A state is the term political scientist use for a 'country'. German sociologist Max Weber
defined the state as 'a human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the
legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.' Key to the definition of a state is the
concept of national sovereignty. Sovereignty is the exercise of the exclusive legal authority of a
government over its population and territory independent of external actors.
Thus, a state is only considered a state if other states recognize the right of its
government to exercise absolute legal authority within a given territory and over a given
people. For example, Taiwan claims that it is a state, but The People’s Republic of China
does not recognize the sovereignty of this entity. So is Taiwan a state? This definition also
implies that states that cannot control violence within its territory are perhaps not states.
They may be in fact: failed states. Many factors go into the bonds which create a
nation state (Figure 1.2) as follows:
These come together as the social
structures – the overall social contract - of
the world in which we live. The Social
Order is variably more democratic to more
authoritarian to more totalitarian over time
as the “rules of the games” play out over
time in the interaction of multiple variations
of forms of government, economic systems,
and cultural systems.
What is a Social Order?
*If* the goal of politics is to arrive at
the creation of a “good society” or a social
contract which enables its citizens as people
(seeking happiness) & workers (seeking to
“make a living”) to pursue “a good life”;
32 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
*Then* we need to note that there are three general ways people might believe we should order
that social contract – or make rules (i.e. “the rule of law”) – to be more effective at doing that!
Depending upon the values (see Brem, pages 20 to 23) by which people actually
choose to live or work or make political decisions, in private life, or in the market place, or in
the areas of government; these three social orders are: 1) more totalitarian social orders or 2)
more authoritarian social orders, or 3) more democratic social orders (see Brem, page 18 and 19).
Even most people in the United States claim our social contract is a “democratic
republic” (i.e. a republican form of government {how we make decisions} which claims to
follow democratic values (pages 21 to 24), many people do not actually know what that means or
really do not believe in these values. Rather, all over the world and even here in this country,
many people do not believe in democratic values. We won’t go into a lot of detail here – you
can get more details in the reader on pages 20 to 27 (Brem reader); overall or essentially, these
social orders are as follows:
In a more Totalitarian Social Order, people tend to believe there should be only one
singular truth
o a single religion to rule your private life, a single economic system (pages 28 to
32) to rule your work life– with the aim of the system serving the wants of the
few ruling elites at the top (and anyone they favor who support them), with
significant less regard for how the survival needs of the masses of people are
achieved, and a single political ideology to rule your public life – under which
everyone is totally subjugated (or absolutely ruled)
o and wherein there is no dissent at any level allowed:
Your private life and thoughts and all public speech and behavior must
conform to the social order or there is punishment for divergence.
In a more Authoritarian Social Order, people tend to believe there should be a limited
range of proper truths
o approved religions to rule your private life, a dominating economic system (pages
28 to 32) with some variations to rule your work life – with the aim of the system
serving the wants of the ruling class over meeting the needs of the people to
achieve sufficient survival needs being met, and generally one or a limited
number of approved political ideologies to rule your public life – under which
people are strictly ruled,
o wherein there are limited or approved ways of dissent allowed:
your private life and thoughts are yours without restriction,
BUT, all public speech and behavior must not directly challenge the power
structure of the social order or there may be various degrees of harshness
of consequences.
In a more Democratic Social Order, people tend to believe there should be a wide
range of diversity of truths
o very open freedom of religions by which one may choose to live and express your
private life-style, freedom to experiment with and challenge and even change the
economic system (pages 28 to 32) to guide your work life in your work place –
with the aim it enables all the people have equitable (just) access to the means to
33 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
meet their survival needs, and a wide array of political ideologies and free speech
to engage in your public life
o under which people are free to dissent:
your private life and thoughts are yours without restriction,
and so too is your public speech and behavior free from restriction,
Provided you do not hurt one another, logical and just consequences for
causing harm to others.
What type of social order a given society is; is itself a matter of degrees of which set of social
ordering values and laws shape the behavior of the social contract over time in the public sector
(government), the social sector (the market place), and the social sector (private life) together
over time more often than not. This can be demonstrated in figure 1.3 and 1.4
Figure 1.3
The Social Contract out of which the Social Order Emerges
34 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Figure 1.4
35 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
What is a representative democracy?
A republic is a government in which the people (who meet certain qualifications such as
citizenship and age) elect officials (who meet certain constitutionally mandated qualifications) to
represent the interests of their constituents and make decisions, policy, or laws in governing
society. Democracy, as a form of government, is a system in which the people (the masses)
make decisions for themselves (i.e. rule by the demos {people} – the many). In a republic, the
few rule through a framework of public law in the interests of the many.
In the United States, the claim is made that our system a representative democracy or a
democratic republic. Our form of government – it is claimed - is a republic that is underlined
with democratic values found explicitly in the Bill of Rights and throughout the Constitution.
There are many values which are democratic and many which are not. Every value (and every
word or concept) can be interpreted differently by people coming variably from different world
views: classical liberal, classical conservative and classical radical. However, three fundamental
values of democracy in terms of governance are popular sovereignty, political liberty, and
political equality.
Popular Sovereignty
Under the aegis of the rule of law (the constitution as the supreme law of the land);
popular sovereignty means that the ultimate source of public authority is the people and that
government does the bidding of the people. As noted by Abraham Lincoln, this is: “government
of the people, by the people, and for the people.”
Jeff Parker, Florida Today, 11.03.08
Popular sovereignty implies that:
o Government policies reflect the wishes of the people. There is a close correspondence
between what the government does and what the people want. This ideal does not require
that government officials ALWAYS follow popular demands, but elected officials should
conform to the people’s wishes over time as they act as a deliberative (cooling) body.
36 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
o Government leaders are elected. They are accountable to the people because their
authority is granted by the people.
o Elections are free and fair. Free means there is no coercion of voters or election
officials and voter and virtually everyone is able to run for office and voter. Fair means
that election rules do not favor some over others and ballots are accurately counted
o People participate in the political process. Elections can be useful in conveying the will
of the people only if the people participate. If elections and other forms of political
participation only attract a minority of the eligible population, they cannot serve as a way
to understand what the broad public wants or as an instrument in forcing leaders to pay
attention to it. Widespread participation is necessary to ensure that responsive officials
are chosen and that they will have an incentive to pay attention to it.
o High quality information is available. Citizens need to have high quality information in
order to make informed opinions about public policies and political leaders. They must
have access to accurate political information, insightful interpretations and vigorous
debate. If false or biases information is provided, if policies are not debated and
challenged, or if misleading interpretations of the political world are offered, the people
cannot form opinions in accordance with their values and interests – threatening popular
sovereignty and democracy.
o Majority Rules. Government adopts policies that the most people want.
It is a fundamental reality based principle of democracy that all six of these conditions must be
met for popular sovereignty to truly exist.
Political Equality
Political equality is
the idea that each person
carries equal weight in the
conduct of public business.
In terms of voting
and political democratic
decision making, this is the
principles of “one person one vote.” This concept
also means that everyone is
equal in under the law; we
are all treated the same
by the government.
Suffrage parade, New York City, May 6, 1912.
Government programs should not favor one group over another or deny benefits or protections to
identifiable groups, such as racial and religious minorities.
One question which arises in political philosophy relative to the consequences of
democratic “governance” (how power is used in society emerging out of all three sectors of the
social order: public sector - government, social sector - culture, and private sector - market); it is
37 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
crucial to note that *if* “we” as a society are consistent with the notion of democratic values,
*then* we cannot deny any person services in the private sector (e.g. businesses offering service
in the public sphere) simply because we do not like them based in prejudices (e.g. race, sexuality,
or religion). This is so because to do so is not democratic. Rather it is authoritarian in that we
are imposing our values by which we seek to live our lives on the lives of others. In a
democracy, freedom is always the right to be different, if one is not free to be different in the
public sphere; one is not free (period).
Another question to consider is does democratic governance require inequalities in the
distribution of income and wealth not be too extreme? Robert Dahl addressed this question and
argues that: “If citizens are unequal in economic
resources, so are they likely to be
unequal in political resources; and
political equality will be impossible to
achieve. In the extreme case, a minority
of rich will possess so much greater
political resources than other citizens
that they will control the state, dominate
the majority of citizens, and empty the
democratic process of content.”
John Adams
"1964-65—The Free Speech Movement Thousands of UC-Berkeley students unite to protest campus regulations restricting political
activities." (hri.ugis.berkeley.edu)
Pluralism, freedom, limited government, and a legally ordered political system rest on a complex
set of institutions. And democratic states, from classical Athens to our day, require careful
allocation of powers and regulations of relations between entities. But even with detailed
provisions, the existence of many autonomous and partly autonomous units of the polity implies
countless potential misunderstandings and conflicts. Hence, the democratic apparatus will be
paralyzed or will tear itself apart in a crisis unless there is a substantial agreement on its principles
and a general desire that it should be made to work...
~ Robert Wesson (1968) Politics, Individual, and State; Praeger, (p.161)
38 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Political Liberty
Political liberty is the third
fundamental value of democracy. Political
liberty is the principle that citizens in a
democracy are protected from government
interference in the exercise of a range of
basic civil liberties including: freedom of
speech, freedom of association, and freedom
of conscience. Without these liberties the
other fundamental principles of democracy
could not exist. Self-government in a
representative democracy is impossible
without political liberty.
Popular sovereignty could not be guaranteed if people are prevented from participating
in politics or if opposition to the government is crushed by the authorities. Popular sovereignty
cannot prevail is the voice of the people is silenced and if citizens are not free to argue and
debate, based on their own values, ideas and personal beliefs. Political equality is violated if
some people can speak out and others cannot.
All of these fundamental principles of democracy and the whole range of democratic
values in manifesting a social order as a democratic society in practice; requires all people – as
persons, workers, and citizens - understand “action philosophy” and “action ethics.” In these
“action ethics” terms and in actually thinking carefully (full of care) about the things we say we
think about: one must be willing to live the consequences for they say they believe or they do
not in fact believe what they say. Words matter and if you cannot say what you mean you
cannot mean what you say and if you will not live the consequences of what you say you mean;
then you cannot be an honorable person. Now people with different world views (classical
conservative, classical liberal and classical radical) who are people of good will in good faith can
disagree over meanings of values. In this vein, Benjamin Rush noted that “Controversy is only
dreaded by the advocates of error.” People dedicated to truth will engage in civil discourse with
people from differing world views on points of contention to arrive at democratic consensus as to
what we as a society shall do. This is what Charles Lindblom calls the “potential intelligence of
democracy.”
No word or value has only one meaning. However, using either the Oxford or Webster’s
(full) English dictionary, one understands that words do have established meanings (which
enables us to have shared language) and we cannot simply make up meanings to fit our
prejudices. If we use undisciplined uninformed (ignorant) opinions about the nature of words
(e.g. those who might be said to use “alternative facts”), then we cannot have meaningful
discussions about policy, life, society, or anything; and democracy is at risk because for an
informed citizenry to deliberate and effectively decide our common fate, facts and the truth
matter. So, this said, *IF* one claims to believe in democratic values; *THEN* one must be
willing to live the consequences of democratic values in the day to day governance of society in
the public, private, and social spheres of public life in the polis.
39 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
The American polity as a purposive state defined by the public law of the constitution in
the preamble is primarily aimed at: “securing the blessing so liberty for ourselves and our
posterity.” Doing so has the consequences of making “political demands” upon all groups in
society to honor the central classical democratic values (defined first in ancient Athens – the
birthplace of democracy – and articulated by Pericles). These classical democratic values are:
respect for diversity (freedom is always the right to be different), having civility in political
discourse (deliberation cannot happen without working through disagreement respectfully), and
taking on the civic duty in republican virtue of a responsibility to the polis (citizen engagement is
needed to make democracy work).
How democratic are we?
To recap, when we refer to the United States as a 'democracy', we are referring to the
values – found in the Bill of Rights and elsewhere in the Constitution - that underlie our
representative form of government. We are then a “democratic republic.” However, the extent
to which these democratic values are upheld has varied and depends on our collective (as
persons: individuals, in groups, and as a citizenry) commitment to upholding these democratic
values. As we move closer to or further from upholding the values of popular sovereignty,
political equality and political liberty, we also become more or less fully 'democratic.'
Thus, we can use democracy as an evaluative standard by which to assess American
politics and government. Popular sovereignty, political equality, & political liberty, and
diversity, civility, & responsibility to the polis, are not attainable in perfect forms. These are
ideals to which we can aspire and standards against which we can measure the reality of whether
in fact we are living the consequences of what we as a society say we believe.
In securing the blessings of liberty, we need be guided by what our scholarship over the
centuries has taught us about democratic values, as Benjamin rush noted: “Freedom can exist
only in the society of knowledge. Without learning, men are incapable of knowing their rights.”
As to the notion of “Liberty” itself, in 1786, Rush wondered if liberty under our new laws would
be more substance or mere shadow. He noted the myth that The American Revolution was the
war for independence. No he said!
The American war is over; but this far from being the case with the American Revolution. On the
contrary, nothing but the first act of the drama is closed. It remains yet to establish and perfect our
new forms of government and to prepare the principles, morals, and manners of our citizens for
these forms of government after they are established and brought to perfection.
Therefore, as we engage in an inquiry into the American experiment in government
seeking “to form a more perfect union;” we need to keep these questions in mind - and the
questions in The Democracy Index explored a in a few pages below - as we consider if the
democratic nature of American government and politics is more substance or more shadow.
Does government do what the citizens want it to do?
Do citizens participate in politics?
Can citizens be involved when they chose to be and are political leaders responsive?
Do political linkage institutions, such as political parties, interest groups, elections, and social
movements, effectively transmit what citizens want to elected officials?
What is the quality of political deliberation on the major public policy issues of our day?
40 | Brem & Sweeney ~ 2018 ~ Government and Politics in the United States
Do the media and political leaders provide accurate and complete information?
Do some individuals and groups have persistent and substantial advantages over other individuals
and groups in the political process?
Is the political game open to all equally?
Do government decisions and policies benefit some individuals and groups more than o...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment