Multi-Cultural and Political Society - Essay Example

Multi-cultural and Political Society 1. In a multi-cultural society like what is obtainable in the United States of America, issue of political representation has attracted stringent arguments from various stakeholders in the American political system. Political representation is one of the founding principles of federalism, with several federating units having a representative in political offices in order to protect their interest. The main crux in a democratic system is represented with the citizen having the liberty to choose whomever they feel will best represent their interest through a democratically organized electoral procedure. In a political society like America, several interest groups are present, which are based on religious, racial, economical, political, or occupational (Ogene 24). Each of these groups always tries to place their self-interest ahead of their national interest which has been a major issue addressed by various scholars in the American society. Madison’s dilemma is the conception with the American political system, a system where people are at liberty to express their opinions and are given the privilege to petition the government on certain issues (Rosenanu 46). In such system, pursuance of self-interest ahead of national interest is visible. The pursuance of self-interest ahead of national interest has been the concern of major stakeholder in the American polity. With the major actors stuck in the middle of whether to subvert self interest group. A situation that would likely undermine the freedom of speech and rights of the citizens which portends the rise of an autocratic government that will degenerate into the oppression of the masses, or either maintains the political freedom operating in the system as being recognized in the democratic tenets. Nevertheless, granting political freedom to American populace would expose the system to circumstances that could hinder the growth of the political system (Rosenanu 39). Interest groups in a democratic society are the various groups that seek to influence governmental decisions in a way to favour their interest (Ogene 12). They also help in the articulation and aggregation of interest in a way to make the decision-making process less cumbersome for political office holders. In the United States of America, there are different ethnic groups that are present due to their multi-ethnic and interracial background. Freedom of expression as a fundamental principle in a democratic system, allows the public to voice their opinion on various governmental policies affecting them. They protest against the policies that conflict with their interests. Citizens’ exercise of freedom of expression indiscriminately opens the system to various ideas based on their personal interest, but with the grouping of people into various interest groups, articulation of people’s interest had made less stringent and lawmakers face less difficulty in the process of policy formulation. In the American society, prior to the post confederation era, interest groups had been one of the ways through which citizens were able to express their views in numbers. The origin of pressure politics in the American society could be traced back to the emergence of the interest group that was based on religious fundamentalism of the Christian faith. With the emergence of other interest group, their members were able to lobby for positions in the congress and pursue the interest of such group. The rise of industrialization, which led to the wide gap between the proletariat and the bourgeois, led to the formation of other interest group such as the Progressive movement that aimed at reforming the existing status quo in the society. Their idea led to the proliferation of interest groups. The proliferation of interest groups led to the formation of labor unions, which comprised of all skilled workers in the society. The labor unions kicked against all federal laws militating against business. In Federalist 10, Madison “mischief of faction” originated from the fear of a breakdown in the United States’ political system after the revolutionary war that was fought by the thirteen confederating unit of the nation. The thirteen confederating unit of the United States was bound by an article of Confederation which was mainly based on an agreement of the military alliance. The alliance made up for a legislative arm that was weak, which vested power of the kings and which made sovereignty lay in the state. The Federalist paper is an article arguing for the adoption of a unified constitution for the whole country. The federalist 10 is one of the articles written by James Madison and could be regarded as one of the most influential writings in the history of the American polity. The article seeks to proffer solutions on how to prevent factions or group interest or interest of some citizens to override the interest of the whole community. Madison opined that a strong federation would better safeguard the nation from aggression than a confederation of small confederating units (Write 132). Madison was of the opinion that the American Revolution had not provided a solution to the social problem and unequal representation in the congress and feared the possibility of a secession of the confederating unit. He believed the kings had been ascribed too much power that could be inimical to the sustainability of the republic. The idea behind Madison’s argument was mainly to draft a federating constitution for the whole nation. Part of his argument was whether to allow for a sovereign state or to transfer the sovereignty to the central government. He believed if the few constitute a faction, then the majority could defeat them by consenting to a republican system where they have the power to disrupt their agenda in a periodic voting process hereby introducing representative government and the formation of political party. A government that would be formed based on the decision of the majority to choose those that represent them in the congress as opposed to the tyrannical system that gave the few monarch's powers to rule without fair consideration of the majority (Write121). It could then be insinuated from Madison’s argument that proliferation of groups seem to be the solution to group violence and interest groups. In Harry Truman’s opinion, elimination of groups would not solve the problem of conflicting interest amongst various groups. Every group has its own agenda, there is no group without an agenda it tries to push forward in order to protect the interest of its members. Due to the interracial and multi-ethnic configuration of the American system, it would be difficult for lawmakers to articulate the interest of various groups in the society, rather a comprehensive inquiry into the nature of these groups would be required in order to solve the problem of group violence. In Robert Dahl’s view, the only solution to group violence is the representation of various groups in the nation’s assembly, which is in line with Madison’s conception of a republic (Berry & Wilcox 24). Dahl modified his idea by introducing a system of political administration that will allow for freedom of expression of the citizen even welcome criticism and allows for a widespread political formation based on ideology. John Mills believes the ideal form of government is representative government in which the citizens would be at liberty to choose their representatives and occasionally participate in the decision-making process. To him, he believes that vesting absolute power in the hands of an eminent personality would ensure good laws and guarantee efficiency in the public service. That is the more reason why he would support a monarchical form of government but the fear of oppression and the emergence of a tyrant would place the form of government under scrutiny. Therefore, he opted for a form of government where the community would decide on their representative and on periodic basis participate in the decision-making process. In the book the good society written by Bellah et al, he believed in the institutionalization of democratic ideas in the society. He believed that the American institutions are weak to affect good democratic governance. He identified various institutions as the vital institutions that needed to be revamped in order for the society to regain its consciousness. He proposed that, it is only the revamping of the democratic institutions that would guarantee the sustenance of a viable democratic structure. He reflected in the pre-industrial revolution era, where the ownership of property led to the displacement of citizens from the social care and led to the stratification of the society. However, in the modern world, the feudal lords of the capitalist society had erased such system from the society with the emergence of various groups that protest against the oppression of the majority. Putnam’s conception of representation was highlighted when he was examining the relationship between the civil society and democratic governance. He believes that the ideal democratic society encourages citizens’ participation and observes the various tenets of democratic principles, which are social equality, trust, tolerance, accountability, unity, and political equality. He went ahead to explain that citizens’ participation in the democratization process is a sure prerequisite that can guarantee the sustenance of the polity. Putnam completes his work by linking civility to successful democracy by maintaining that high levels of civic engagement create social capital or moral resources, such as trust and cooperation (Pace 123). What Putnam calls “networks of civic engagement” (Pace 173) foster norms of reciprocity, increase communication and facilitate collaboration. Both moral and legal bonds (Pace 165) link people. The more horizontal civic connections are the more social capital develops. Interest groups instill in people the ability to act collectively to achieve common goals and high expectations of government (Pace 123). Furthermore, “the performance of representative government is facilitated by the social infrastructure of civic communities and by the democratic values of both officials and citizens” (Pace 182). The difference between the Athenian conception of representative government and that of the modern day is the difference in the size of the country. In a large setting like the American polity, if everyone is allowed to participate in the lawmaking process, it would lead into mob rule and the system will be destroyed. However, opting for the Robert Dahl’s view of representative government would be the best. The citizens are allowed to participate by electing their representatives and strengthening public opinion by allowing them to express their views on certain policies. By so doing the different groups in the society would have a sense of belonging hereby solving the problem of factions in the society caused by the fear of oppression by the minority. 2. Freedom of expression as a fundamental prerequisite in a democratic setting involves citizens’ liberty to express their opinion on various policies. Freedom of expression in a democratic system has to do mainly with the role of public opinion and pressure group in fostering the democratic process in a nation. In a democratic rule, there are limitations to various freedoms being entrenched in the constitution, freedom of expression being one of the freedoms is limited based on the form. Balancing freedom of expression and the right of the citizens to express their self-interest depends on the disposition of the government towards public opinion. Public opinion constitutes one of the major avenue government of nations acquire information on the needs and aspiration of the citizenry. In a system where public opinion is not guaranteed, there will be various factions trying to topple the administration, which may later lead to a mob rule if not properly checked. Prior to the emergence of interest groups in the United States, governmental powers had been in the hands of the monarch who rule arbitrarily since the powers of the state are fused together. However, in order to prevent the concentration of powers, democratic institutions had to be developed in such a way that will allow for the separation of governmental powers amongst the three arms of government as explained in the Montesquieu spirit of the law. According to him, he believes if the liberty of the people is to be ensured then the three organs of government must work independently and there must be an organ to checkmate the excesses of the organs of government. This is in line with what James Madison was trying to illustrate with the new constitution of a federating unit that has governmental powers spread across the various arms and tiers of government. Analysts had argued that the founding fathers of the American society built a system that concentrate power in the hands of the monarch, but with the industrial revolution in Europe, Americans were enlightened on the need for reforms that will seize power from the minority and ensure wealth redistribution cum re-adjustment in the social strata. Thus, various interests/advocacy groups emerged. They were based on occupancy, religious, trade or racial ideology. The emergence of the interest groups which was based on religious fundamentalism of the Christian faith. With the emergence of other interest group, their members were able to lobby for positions in the congress and pursue the interest of such group. The rise of industrialization, which led to the wide gap between the proletariat and the bourgeois, led the formation of other interest group such as the Progressive movement who aimed at reforming the existing status quo in the society. Their idea led to the proliferation of interest groups. The proliferation of interest groups led to the formation of labor unions, which comprised of all skilled workers in the society. Interest groups in the United States had helped in the political development of the nation as several groups had transformed into political parties which had well protected the interest of the nation by formulating and implementing policies that are of national interest. With the explosion of interest groups in the American state, several institutions of the state had been strengthened and the majority now have their opinions heard in various governmental positions (Berry & Wilcox 152). The emergence and subsequent expansion of various interest groups had helped awaken the consciousness of the American populace as regards their duties and rights as citizens. In the same vein, it helped checkmate the activities of the focus minority that seem to impose their will on the vast majority. The implication of this expansion is that the majority is in control of the decision making process in the country indirectly as they participate in such decision making process through the electioneering process which allow them choose their representatives and can also recall such representatives if they feel their interest is not being protected by their representative. Protecting the majority from the minority could be achieved, if only if the institutions of government are strengthened and the constitution is strictly adhered to. The constitution in any democratic society represents the symbol of authority, which contains the ways by which the people should be ruled irrespective of their social status or class. Every political system has certain institution that serves as an arbitrator in times of dispute. In a democratic society, the judiciary plays the role of an arbiter when conflict arises. With the independence of the judiciary as an arm of government, the majority could be protected and their freedom is guaranteed. However, when the majority in the society is vested with much power they tend to abuse the powers. In order to prevent the abuse of the political rights of the majority there should be a channel of communication where the views of the masses are articulated in order to make it easier for the demand to be met in a more concise manner. Then protest could be used as a tool of public opinion when the minority is using state power to oppress the majority. As parts of tools pressure and labor groups used in checkmating the excesses of the government and this is achieved either through rallies, public enlightenment, propaganda, and protest. Nevertheless, such rights could be destructive in nature. The nature of protest embarked on by interest groups determines the level of its success in influencing governmental decisions. A radical approach towards checkmating the activities and policies of government would see interest group lose their freedom. I strongly do not believe there will be a problem of the majority overriding the focused minority; if proper state machineries are put in place and the structures were allowed to function, the majority would not have the cause to question the efficacy of the system. It is only if the minority in the position of state power is not given a detailed account of the masses expectations, then the majority might have to question the loyalty of their representative. In a pluralist society like the United States, issues of political representation have attracted stringent arguments from various stakeholders in the American politics. Political representation is one of the founding principles of federalism, with several federating units having a representative in political offices in order to protect their interest. With several theorists emphasizing on the need for a federation, institutionalization of democratic principles is the prerequisite that could guarantee the sustenance of the political system. Works cited Berry, Jeffery & Wilcox, Clyde. The Interest Group Society. New York: Pearson Longman. 2009. Print. Ogene, Chidozie. Interest Group and The Shaping of Foreign Policy; A Case Study of United State African Policy. Lagos: Macmillian Publishers. 1983. Print Pace, Kate. Making Democracy Work; An Essay on Putnam’s Analysis of the Italian Government, Leece, 2005. Print. Rosenanu, James. Interest Groups and Foreign Policy; Domestic Sources of Foreign Policy. New York: The Free Press. 1966. Print. Write, John. Interests Groups and the Congress; Lobbying, Contributions and Influence. New York: Pearson Longman. 2003. Print. Read More