Readings Essays

User Generated

qncvnbyvnat

Writing

Description

Refer to the sections on Social Contract theory and the Social Order in the book, Watch the video about whether the United States is a Democracy or Not; and read pages 97 to 101 in the text.America is not a Democracy!!! with Robert Brem (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.America is not a Democracy!!! with Robert Brem

Consider the discussion in the video, and the descriptions in the reader as to what it is that we might call a democratic social order and democratic republican governance. Answer the question:

  1. How do the descriptive factors in the reader and the points made in the video about democracy compare to the brief description of democracy by Aristotle, and other classical philosophers’ influence on the Constitution, as “mob rule” (page 90 – 92 in the text)?
  2. Relating to the video,
    • How do you think the definition of democracy changed (since Aristotle's time) and over the decades (since the 1980s Regan conservative revolt)?
    • Has it change for the better (and for whom) or for the worse (and for whom)?
    • How?
  3. In his speech (page 101), Benjamin Franklin mentions the “errors” he sees in the Constitution. In your opinion, what might one of these “errors” be. Explain why you think it is so. Give detailed argument why it is an error.
  4. Explain your answer and remember to reference the material in the course reader, video, and text book. Answer all questions utilizing “in-text citation” style (e.g. author, year, page).

Unformatted Attachment Preview

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
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Running Head: READING ESSAY

1

Reading Essay
Institution Affiliation
Date:

READING ESSAY

2

The issue of democracy is one that has entrenched across the different scholars and
philosophers minds. People have tried to define democracy in different ways. The video has
demonstrated different definitions of democracy that exists across different regions in the world.
Some of the democracies have been mixed and it’s hard to understand exactly which democracy
a country is operating on. However one of the most evident kinds of democracy is the one that
involves the rule of poor and rule of the majority. It corresponds with the Aristotle viewpoint on
democracy while defining the different classes of government that might govern the citizens o...


Anonymous
Great content here. Definitely a returning customer.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags