Democracy/Iraq

“If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost.” – Aristotle (Aristotle 85)

Democracy depends, in working form, entirely on the will of the people. Aristotle, in this quote, tells us that a government of democracy is one where the people are working as the government, for the sake of their country, its liberties, and its peoples’ equality. That is what a democracy, in working form, is.

“Democracy is itself, a religious faith. For some it comes close to being the only formal religion they have.” – E.B. White (White 108)

Iraq is plagued by disunity stemming from deep prejudices caused by fundamentalist Islam and thousands of years under the rule of tyrants. Some within Iraq are willing to compromise these beliefs they have built up in order to allow unadulterated liberty and democracy to prosper, but many see this as unacceptable and are willing to send the country into civil war to have their ideas reign. Democracy is much like a religion, and the absolute laws of the religious must often be put aside in order for it to work. Christians in American history were willing to restrain their doctrine in order to allow for the voices of other worldviews to be heard in law making and all politics; the founding fathers could have pressed for Christianity to be the only permitted religion, as had been done in many cases before them (Europe for hundreds of years). The religious of Iraq must do the same if they wish for their country to be unified under democracy:

“As long as the differences and diversities of mankind exist, democracy must allow for compromise, for accommodation, and for the recognition of differences.” – Eugene Mccarthy (Democracy Quotes)

The people must embrace the spirit of democracy, if democracy is to be successful:

“The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed from without. It has to come from within.” – Gandhi (Democracy Quotes)

In Iraq, we are attempting to forcefully impose democracy on the Iraqi people. The people must decide for themselves what government they are to have; we cannot make the choice for them. The spirit of democracy is something that is of the will and the heart. The only way democratic revolution is going to take place in Iraq is from leaders of Iraq promoting it. The leaders who have power over the will of the people, I mean, not those who have power over government. As I have written, democracy is about the people.

“The spirit of democracy cannot be established in the midst of terrorism, whether governmental or popular.” – Gandhi (Democracy Quotes)

Terrorism is meant to destroy the good will of the people and their leaders. The spirit of democracy cannot flourish within a State of fear. The Iraqi people have been terrorized by dictators in the past, and now by Islamic extremists. Many Iraqis are, understandably, terrified. The spirit of democracy, the will of the people, the spirit of the people, has an enemy that manifests itself in terrifying images. The people cannot make good choices, or any choice at all, if they are living in fear of the consequences of making the right choice. Many Islamic leaders are, themselves, terrified of the people standing up to their oppressors and refusing to be afraid of murder and torture and accepting the spirit of democracy and unifying behind it.

“The price of the democratic way of life is a growing appreciation of people's differences, not merely as tolerable, but as the essence of a rich and rewarding human experience”. – Jerome Nathanson (Democracy Quotes)

Democracy does come at a price, as Nathanson writes. People must throw off prejudice and fears in order to accept what is good for the nation as a whole. Nothing worth having comes without a price, and to have that thing fully comes at the highest of prices.

Aristotle. Politics. Kessinger Publishing, 2004.

“Democracy Quotes.” Wisdom Quotes. 28 September, 2007.

White, Elwyn. Essays of E.B. White. HarperCollins, 1999.

American Democracy and Russian Communism

“Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have so much.'” – Unknown (Braude 89)

The U.S. democracy, which functions under the political philosophy of Capitalism, and the U.S.S.R., which was a communist “republic”, are two almost completely opposite systems of government. The two were in constant contention with each other for their differences, and their differences are so great that each system demands that they contest each other in one way or another at all times. Their differences stem from one basic concept: as the quote above demonstrates, American democracy, at its heart, is based on the welfare and promotion of its people, while communism is based on complete conformity, which in essence is tyranny.

“Communism is the death of the soul. It is the organization of total conformity - in short, of tyranny - and it is committed to making tyranny universal.” – Adlai E. Stevenson (Communism Quotes)

Communist Russia was founded by a very ambitious and power – hungry revolution leader, Vladimir Lenin. He expanded on Marxist theories to create a state of ultra conformism and tyranny. No matter what he preached to the poor sect of Russia, the proletariat, Lenin, like all dictators, was primarily concerned with the consolidation of his own power, as evidenced by his lack of actions of concern toward the constantly suffering proletariat under his rule. The communist leaders that followed him were little different. Conformism promotes tyranny in all cases, as the people gather under one law – maker in order to stifle their own disagreements with the law – maker. Communism, therefore, is ultimately completely centered around a power – hungry tyrant who basic wish is to expand his own domain of power and cares little to none for his peasants.

American democracy was founded on the idea that the government serves its citizens. The constitution, along with the declaration of independence and many other founding documents, stresses the importance of a government for the people, which promotes the people’s welfare. American democracy is about the will of the people, and the general consensus toward what will work. It is as much an opposite to Communism as has ever been formulated.

“Capitalism is what people do if you leave them alone” – Kenneth Minogue (Boehm 157)

Part of promoting the welfare of the people is in accepting a philosophy of economics that best allows the people to obtain riches and all comforts they desires. Capitalism, by nature, is an unrestricting philosophy. At its core, it preaches limited government that does not interfere so much in the business of private citizens. It says that if you leave people alone and not restrict their abilities, they will obviously achieve more.

It is difficult to compare American democracy and communism of the U.S.S.R. They almost always stand in contrast. The only similarities they ever had came in form, not practice, as the communist leaders, in the later part of the existence of the U.S.S.R. attempted to form a congress and broaden the responsibilities of the formerly limited judicial system (Politics of the Soviet Union). The two were, in practice, opposites of one another, one promoting the good of the people, and the other the interests of the tyrant.

Boehm, Jim. The Handbook for Exploding the Economic Myths of the Political Sound Bite. Infinity Publishing, 2006.

Braude, Jacob. Lifetime Speaker’s Encyclopedia. Prentice Hall, 1962.

“Communism Quotes.” ThinkExist. 22 September, 2007.

< http://thinkexist.com/quotations/communism/>

“Politics of the Soviet Union.” Wikipedia. 22 September, 2007.

< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_the_Soviet_Union>

Thomas Jefferson

"The happiness and prosperity of our citizens... is the only legitimate object of government and the first duty of governors." – Thomas Jefferson (Jefferson 684)

"The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government." - Thomas Jefferson (Platt 151)

"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it." – Thomas Jefferson (Beigbeder 23)

The idea in these quotes underlies every endeavor our government has ever rightly taken, and was an idea propagated by Jefferson more than any other founding father. He included it prominently in the Declaration of Independence, any letter he ever wrote on good government, and in countless speeches to remind the American people why their government was in place and why it was formed in the way it was. I think that, because of this continuous utterance of the idea, perhaps no one had a clearer idea of the purpose of our government, and therefore no one worked so hard to form a government in the form that would accomplish this idea of happiness and prosperity for any citizen that would choose to pursue it.

The Declaration of Independence was our government’s first article, and remains today one of the most important articles ever written in government history. It stated the intent of the American government, a government that survives today and rules over the most powerful and prosperous country in world history. It was of course written by Thomas Jefferson and included the earliest statement of what he believed to be the most important duty of any good government: to create an environment where the rights of people were protected so that they could pursue happiness and the good life. The process of creating our government, from that point on, would revolve around this idea.

"It astonishes me to find... [that so many] of our countrymen... should be contented to live under a system which leaves to their governors the power of taking from them the trial by jury in civil cases, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of commerce, the habeas corpus laws, and of yoking them with a standing army. This is a degeneracy in the principles of liberty... which I [would not have expected for at least] four centuries." – Thomas Jefferson (Melton 123)

Jefferson urged the writing of the Bill of Rights more than any founding father. Jefferson knew that, when the constitution was written, it simply stated what the government could and could not do, and that many founding fathers expected the government to infer from that what rights the people had. He knew this would create a loose form of government where interpretation could easily come into play, and then rights of the citizen could be trampled on due to false interpretations. He supported the authoring of a Bill of Rights to state specifically what rights the people had, ones that the government could not interpret around or take away (Thomas Jefferson on Politics and Government).

The most important statement in distinguishing Thomas Jefferson as the person who should be credited most with our form of government is that it is a near fact that he was the most prominent promoter of Republicanism in early American government history. Republicanism is the predominant underlying system to our government. It stresses rights, the rejection of ideas of aristocracy and inherited political power, the sovereignty of the people as a whole, and the resistance to corruption in government and policy making (Republicanism). Jefferson repeatedly reminded and lectured every founding father and original congressman on the importance of Republicanism and its values. Every founding father continually debated the meaning of Republicanism, but it is Jefferson’s definition that stands out most today, and that most founding fathers agreed with:

"a government by its citizens in mass, acting directly and personally, according to rules established by the majority; and that every other government is more or less republican, in proportion as it has in its composition more or less of this ingredient of the direct action of the citizens. Such a government is evidently restrained to very narrow limits of space and population. I doubt if it would be practicable beyond the extent of a New England township. The first shade from this pure element, which, like that of pure vital air, cannot sustain life of itself, would be where the powers of the government, being divided, should be exercised each by representatives chosen...for such short terms as should render secure the duty of expressing the will of their constituents. This I should consider as the nearest approach to a pure republic, which is practicable on a large scale of country or population ... we may say with truth and meaning, that governments are more or less republican as they have more or less of the element of popular election and control in their composition; and believing, as I do, that the mass of the citizens is the safest depository of their own rights, and especially, that the evils flowing from the duperies of the people, are less injurious than those from the egoism of their agents, I am a friend to that composition of government which has in it the most of this ingredient." (Republicanism)

There are only a few men that could fall into the debate for the most influential in regards to forming our government. Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton could all easily be included into the debate. Probably none, however, would come to mind as quickly as Thomas Jefferson, the author of the declaration of independence, widely regarded by historians as our most ingenious president, probably the most influential founder of ideas of republicanism, and the forerunner in the promotion of human rights within the American government.

Beigbeder, Yves. International Monitoring of Plebiscites, Referenda and National

Elections. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1994.

Jefferson, Thomas. The Jeffersonian Cyclopedia. Funk & Wagnalls company, 1900.

Melton, Buckner. The Quotable Founding Fathers. Brassey’s, 2004.

Platt, Suzy. Respectfully Quoted. Barnes and Noble Publishing, 1993.

“Republicanism.” Wikipedia. 15 September, 2007

<>

“Bill of Rights.” Thomas Jefferson on Politics and Government. 15 September, 2007

<>

Democracy

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of government." – Constitution of the United States

Our founding fathers certainly made their opinions clear on what form of government our country should take on. Today, we are a strong representative government, for several important reasons. In the beginning of the formation of our American government, the question was should it be a pure form of democracy like that seen in ancient Greece, or a representative democracy, more resembling the republic of the early Roman empire. I will examine our government’s founders’ writings and words that eventually led to our present, representative form of democracy, and prove why pure democracy not only is a poor form of government, but could actually become dangerous very quickly.

"Remember, Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a Democracy yet that did not commit suicide." - John Quincy Adams (Platt 413)

John Adams no doubt studied one of the first direct (pure) democracies in history – that of ancient Athens. Athens was one of the largest and most powerful city states in early ancient Greece, and under calm conditions, was fairly successful. However, when its most testing period of war, the Peloponnesian war, hit, citizens predictably became weary of conditions and attempted, themselves, to alter the form of government in Athens into a dictatorship because of the promises of leaders who desired power. This set Athenian government far behind Sparta and resulted in a deep slope that the Athenians had to climb back up. Almost all pure democracies in Ancient Greece suffered similar times of weariness in citizens that led to dictatorship at one point or another (Athenian Democracy).

"Pure Democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state, it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage", John Witherspoon, signer of the Declaration of Independence. (Howse 26)

Our founding fathers realized (politically correct or not) that the majority can often hold a very emotional and uneducated view on matters, especially in difficult times. The majority particularly can fail in the subject of history, and they can have very short memories. It is of critical importance that, when faced with great decisions, history be examined to see how similar situations were dealt with and what the consequences of the choices made were. Most people would not do that. What is even more dangerous than short memory or an ‘F’ in history is, as Witherspoon puts it, the popular rage and madness of the majority. People tend to have very emotional and angry responses to hardship. If every mind in our country was more busy attempting to solve the problem of Iraq instead of voicing anger at the mistakes of our leaders, someone may have come up with a brilliant solution. The majority’s first, and often only, response to difficult situations is anger. They would sooner change leadership and reformat government than solve problems. This not only leads to backwardness, but can be much more dangerous in that it eventually leads to dictatorship, when one charismatic person takes advantage of changing moods – this was the chief concern of the founding fathers when considering pure democracy.

The country’s founders knew that representatives, elected by the majority, would still represent a majority consensus, but at the same time (again, politically correct or not) would be wiser and more educated than the average person. They would be well versed in history, and would have leadership skills that included prudence. Because of constant scrutiny, they would also be forced to be fairly consistent with their original views. Thomas Jefferson knew, when he wrote “a government for the people”, that it is best when the people are not for themselves, or serving themselves, but when an elected official (the government) is serving them.

A pure democracy, like other poor forms of government, sounds great to anyone. The founding fathers realized, however, that it just does not work in an imperfect world, where people, and the majority population in particular, can make very bad decisions based on impulse and emotions, especially anger. Prudence is key for a leader, and educated representatives, bound by law and observed constantly by the people (and the media, in the modern day), will exercise the trait much more than a mob of angry citizens who answer to no one and no law.

“Athenian Democracy.” Wikipedia. 8 September, 2007

Howse, Brannon. One Nation Under Man? Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2005.

Platt, Suzy. Respectfully Quoted. Barnes and Noble Publishing, 1993.

Note: I didn’t state anything about the fact that pure democracy is almost impossible considering the size of our country. I considered this to be completely obvious, and instead went for more substance by explaining the intellectual flaws of the system.