The Fate of American Democracy

            THE FATE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY  
Your Name here   Class: Topic Professor Date Here
The Fate of American Democracy Democracy proponents are happy to argue that is the best system of government given the failure of communism and socialism in different parts of the world. In simple terms, democracy is a system of government by the people through elected representatives through control by a majority. According to Ray and Stoyanova (Ray and Stoyanova 2020), the collapse of socialism and communism in the 19^th and 20^th centuries left democracy as the only functioning and effective system of government in the world based on its prevalence particularly in Western society. In recent years, however, questions have been posted on whether democracy remains the best system of government or whether drastic changes are needed. In the United States, for instance, the rise of socialism (Birch 2020) is an indication that the basic tenets of democracy are being questioned. The current paper looks at arguments for and against the fate of democracy to determine its survivability in the long run based on the current global concerns. American Democracy Will Not Survive According to Bright-Line-Watch (2021), Americans have reasons to worry about the state of their democracy. This is due to the prevalence of polarized partisan perceptions of right and wrong within the basic tenets of American democracy. Two fundamental principles of democracy continue to have adverse outcomes on the sustainability of American democracy. These include the pursuit of compromise with political opponents and political competition without criticizing the opponent’s patriotism or loyalty to the country. These two principles may not often be discussed in the public domain because they do not carry flashy headlines, and the public does not perceive them as significant (Bright-Line-Watch 2021). In essence, when compared to the principles of voting rights and fraud-free elections, the two principles appear to be intangible and diffuse. However, erosion of the two principles poses a significant threat to the sustainability of democracy. Attack on Loyalty and Patriotism of Opponents Democracy recognizes political competition with diverse and sometimes sharply contrasting values, beliefs, agendas, and interests. As a result, there is no democracy if the vast diversity in viewpoints is not captured, recognized, respected. Thus, a robust political opposition is not an illegitimate entity in any democratic system. Instead, it is a critical pillar that makes the system democratic in the first place; by providing diverse viewpoints and perceptions. Despite the differences in viewpoints in democracy, none of the opponents wants to ruin the country unless they have other ulterior motives. Thus, the criticism and question of the loyalty or patriotism of opponents dilute opposition views and threaten to make the country a single-party political system since being in opposition, mainly when you are on the side of the minority, you are considered unpatriotic in one’s own country.  The trashing of political opponents based on their loyalty and patriotism is an inherent problem in modern American elections and governance. In his article, Most Republicans See Democrats not as Political Opponents but as Enemies, in the Washington Post, Bump (2021) argues that central to democracy is the idea that even if a citizen's preferred candidate loses in polls, the winner will still advocate for the rights and wellbeing of the citizen. However, since winners of polls are the ones who manage to clamber over their primary opponents appear not to be obligated to serve the needs of the citizens who voted for the losing candidate. This highlights the extent to which Republicans and Democrats view each other as enemies as if one party should cease to exist at all for the betterment of the other and the country. In a definite sense, however, when this happens, democracy stops existing. However, a worrying trend shows that this principle of democracy is being violated at both ends of the political divide, bringing into focus the question of whether democracy will survive. Bump's (2021) assertions are supported by a recent (2018) public survey by the YouGovAmerican Organization, which established that republicans and democrats view each other as unpatriotic. Such perceptions are shared across both leadership and following. In 2019, for instance, President Donald Trump called the push for his impeachment unpatriotic and immoral for the country (Associated_Press 2019). In an actual sense, however, those pushing for his impeachment were doing so based on the provisions provided by democracy; that a president can be impeached. When people who are carrying out their democratic rights are considered unpatriotic, it suggests that the only way to be patriotic is to agree with your opponent all the time. Such an outcome is not healthy for democracy.   Pursuit of Compromise with Political Opponents             The same way democracy encourages diverse views and perceptions is how it encourages collaboration and participation (Kemmis and Mckinney 2011, 6). The very fact that democracy distributes power to a different level of government as a means to checks and balances means a new institution or individual can act alone in a democratic society or organization. There must be a high level of collaboration for the realization of government and public interests. Therefore, the willingness to compromise is not a peripheral concern but rather a core aspect of democracy. However, recent survey results (Bright-Line-Watch 2021) indicate that the American democracy is failing on this principle. Once the need for compromise is eliminated from the equation, one might find the need to defeat the enemy at all costs because they want to distribute this power into the hands of the people they like or supporters, which is the creation of a one-party state. President Biden had recently evoked the perceived lack of compromise between red- and blue states when he called for the parties to come together to build the country. In a 2020 news article on Washington Post, Anderson, Butler, and Harbridge-Yong (2020) argue that Biden's first term will be marred with a slim majority in both houses, limiting the houses' ability to pass legislation. When such compromise is not achieved, legislation on pressing issues like climate change, immigration, fiscal policies in the current economic turmoil, and racial justice will not be addressed urgently. Interestingly, the lack of compromise is not a phenomenon exclusive to the leadership level of American politics and governance. It is also prevalent within the public discourse. A 2010 public survey by PEW revealed that while partisans say respect and compromise are vital in (democratic) politics, especially from opponents, American political parties do not treat each other with respect and compromise. Instead, they appear to be antagonists who may enter a physical confrontation were it not for the current democratic and government structures. Thus, this principle provides the second argument that the American democracy will not survive. American Democracy Will Survive             The perception and trend of the two principles in the previous section suggest that the American democracy is on its deathbed. However, this is not necessarily the case because other aspects or principles of democracy are performing excellently in the United States. These include the principles of free speech and toleration of protests. Like the two principles discussed in the previous section, these principles are core characteristics of democracy without which democracy ceases to exist. The Principle of Free Speech             Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo declared more than 80 years ago that free speech "is the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other form of freedom" (Wermiel n.d.). As already established, what gives life to democracy is the diversity of views, perceptions, attitudes, and approaches to government and political leadership. Without free speech, the necessity of diversity and differences becomes null and avoided (Ma...