Blog Discussion Group Five
Blog post due at 11:55pm on February 20 and comment due at 11:55pm on February 23.
Democracy and Democratization
- Discuss evidence for and against the proposition that “democracy promotes peace.”
- Would you favor national referendums to settle such issues as abortion, gun ownership, tax rates, or other controversies, or should we leave it to our elected representatives and the courts to make authoritative decisions on these issues?
- Would you define democracy primarily in political or economical terms, or both about equally?
I would favor national referendums to settle issues rather than elected representatives and courts to make authoritative decisions about issues such as abortion, gun ownership, tax rates, and other controversies. Reasoning behind my preference for national referendums stems from my belief that everyone in a society should have a voice in government. Not everyone can agree on everything, especially on such controversial issues like the ones listed above. This inability is because of the difference in people's cultural, socioeconomic, racial, and other backgrounds. So for one person to have complete control over a larger population with their specific opinions in mind, there is no way for them to think completely objective. This could be considered an authoritarian type of government.
ReplyDeleteIn a direct (participatory) democracy, "citizens themselves debate and reach decisions on matters of common interest" (Hague and Harrop 43). In other words, everyone in a society would vote on certain controversies and the majority would decide what they do about it. With everyone in a society voting, it allows for equal participation and equal say in what they want to happen in government.
I think democracy should be described primarily in political terms. Although democracy does involve it self in the economy quite a bit i feel as if the prime thing it represents is politics. The focus of democracy is giving the power to the people in a society and the power of the government is limited which I feel is more of a political description than economical. Democracy does involve itself in the economic playing field through allowing countries to trade and conduct business freely and it also proposes to transfer decision making power from corporate officials and corporate shareholders to larger groups of public stakeholders
ReplyDeleteI agree with the idea that democracy should be described in political terms. I like how you stated, "democracy does involve itself in the economy quite a bit" because I feel like it does hold a strong stance in the "economical playing field," as you said. The main idea behind a democratic government is allowing the people to have the power to build and create a society that they can survive in and I believe that is more of a political point of view than an economical.
DeleteI would be in favor of voting for a national referendum when it comes to laws that would affect the whole country. Allowing the population to have a say even if the state where they reside is of a different party. I believe this will get more people out to vote and to pay attention to the issues in the country. After this last election I heard many people say that it didn't matter if they voted because their state has always been red or blue. That type of feeling is what has always kept people away from the booths. Giving that feeling of control to the population could represent more what the majority of the country want. I believe the representatives have their agenda from the moment they are elected, it is not an event or a protest that will change it.
ReplyDeleteI think national referendums would be the best way to create laws and settle issues that affect the country. This is a great way to get the country as a whole involved in the lawmaking. Everyone would be allowed to voice their opinion and cast a vote for whatever they support. This would also allow for the people of all different backgrounds to support their interests instead of allowing one party to support their interests alone. A national referendum would allow for everyone's voice to be heard and it means that multiple viewpoints are involved with the lawmaking process.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your thoughts on the lawmaking being about the people. To me, it would make most sense if the people affected by these laws being the ones making the decisions on new laws. I feel the same way about getting everyone involved rather than trying to put someone up on a pedestal to do our thinking for us. It just seems like a more beneficial way of going about introducing new laws if they are coming from the people who have to live with them and follow them.
DeleteI agree with Bryce also because everyone would get to voice their own opinion and how they feel on certain topics in society. The votes would be more clear and precise about laws and decisions. Everyone in the country would be more involved and more likely to vote. The people of the country would have more interests to vote and like the laws a lot more. It would be better for the people because they know the laws and how they came about.
DeleteI agree I think that it would make it so that laws that needed to be passed would get passed. I also think that this would make it so people who have not been politically active will become more active. I also agree it would help people move away from the party system
DeleteI think democracy should be defined in purely political terms. Although there are some scholars who see correlation if not a casual relationship between democracies and modernization, the actual evidence is limited. Some scholars like Apter believe in "'premature democratization'" entrusting that modernization would eventually create the environment and conditions necessary for a democracy. Lipset and Vanhanen highlight the correlative relationship between democracies, industrialization, economic development and distribution of resources. However while this may the case in some liberal democracies many more countries act as counters to these claims. For example the wealthy gulf coast countries have shown little sign of developing into democracies. They still lay at the opposite end of the spectrum as dictatorial and authoritarian regimes with some liberalizing countries. And there are example of poorer countries which have still incorporated democratic practices and regimes such as India, some Latin American and sub-saharan African countries (although sometimes these "democracies" are in name only). (Hague and Harrop 49 - 53). While there may be some connections between democracies and their economies, by and large liberal democracies and illiberal democracies practice a spectrum of economic policies (for example Nordic countries practicing socialist policies) and are at different stages of economic development (sub-saharan African countries which have the second fastest growing economies). This fact makes the argument of democracy defined by political and/or economic terms insufficient. It would be much more fruitful to define democracies for their political characteristics as that is where the notion originally emerged out of. If and when the majority of the international community shifts towards democratic regimes then and only then could the field of comparative politics seriously begin having conversations around democracies as it relates to the economy.
ReplyDeletebelieve that democracy could be defined as both political and economical because on the political side of things they use representatives to stand for what the citizens rights. Democracy gives the citizens rights to vote and to have freedom of speech. They get a voice for their country, and helps make the issues heard by the citizens. Even though one person represents the party he is representing for every citizen that voted for him to be in office. So they get to decide what issues are being heard. Now for the economical side of democracy it allows other countries to side with each other and make trades. People could argue that one side outweighs the other and that democracy would be defined as either one but in my case I believe that all aspects of democracy play a role, I think that there is a political side to it and an economical side to it.
ReplyDeleteI agree that democracy could be looked at from this viewpoint, both political and economical. While we ultimately view it as politics, I believe that it can also be viewed as economical because the decisions that the democratic governments make directly influence the economy.
DeleteI am in favor of using national referendums to settle issues like abortion, gun ownership, tax rates, or other controversies. I think that if those controversial decisions were left to elected officials many people would be unhappy because their views are not being represented fairly. A successful democracy is one where all citizens can have their say in something and see that become represented. Giving citizens the opportunity to vote on topics like abortion, tax rates, and gun ownership puts responsibility on people, so if they do or do not want to see a change they have to actively be involved in that process.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that people should have a say on such important topics. I feel this last election left a sour taste in the mouth of many when it came to the people feeling like they were heard. With that said if we were to give so much power to the people do you think mandatory voting would be unreasonable? Give people a longer period lets say 3 days and have that give a stronger idea of what the people really want. There is always the option to opt out of the vote of course.
DeleteIn my opinion, I think that national referendums would benefit our nation more so than letting elected officials do it. I believe these issues stem down and affect the people of our nation more than the higher class elected representatives and would reflect a more well represented opinion. We have plenty more "common" people in this nation and I believe that should come into consideration when making these decisions. The voice of the nation should be heard on the people's level and not from some elected representative who might not be so affected by the laws one way or the other. Such controversial issues will always bring about debate and I feel as if it should come down to the people most affected by these laws who should be making the ultimate decisions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your thoughts on the use of national referendums. It is important that the people who are going to be effected by laws, vote on them. Not everyone can agree on every issue because of different socioeconomic, cultural, and other backgrounds. Through voting, everyone has a say and can participate in law-making.
DeleteI agree with the use of national referendums because it would allow the common people's opinions to be recognized. Having elected representatives from higher classes prevents the opinion of common people to be recognized. I think with the use of this it gives the common people to express their rights because they are the ones that are being affected by the laws.
DeleteI would define democracy as primarily in both political and economical terms equally because they are such a big part in people's lives and our politics. Every person that supports the Democratic Party in politics usually votes for the person representing that party. That shows a huge amount of support in politics for democracy. In an economic term democracy can be shown by interactions with other countries, how the democracy party helps the economy and supports our funding. Democracy has an enormous affect on economic growth and the biggest impact on other countries as well. When they see another country's economy growing they'll more likely go to a democratic party in their next presidency or go to a democracy for their country to become more stable.
ReplyDeleteI would say that democracy falls under both a political and economical category. However I would argue that it is more political than economic. this is because democracy includes rights and voting and a constitution. there are also certain rights that come with a democracy. I think that these things ultimately play into effecting the economy however I feel it is more a political subject
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that democracy is both a political system and economic. I definitely agree that is more political than economic as well. I’d also like to add that democratic rights include free speech and the relationship of people with their government which I feel is a very important factor in politics. I also think that democracy is one of the main foundations of creating a fair and effective political system which furthers the relationship between democracy and politics.The political aspects of democracy outweigh the economics.
Delete