The relationship between unequal democracy and uneasy alliances - Essay Example

The Relationship between Unequal Democracy and Uneasy Alliances Introduction Science enables researchers and political scientists to explain a series of events in a given democracy. The economic difference between various households in the United States traces its roots to political inequality within the society. The purpose of the paper is to establish the relationship between Frymer’s theories and Bartels’s analysis on the causes of the large income gap in the United States. Frymer’s Theory Frymer’s theory explains why African Americans have trouble achieving their policy objectives. Paul Frymer challenges the American view on the relationship between democracy, political parties and race. Scholars argue that politicians respond to the needs of all voters because of their desire to win elections. Paul contradicts this view by expounding on the economic gap that politicians create among Americans based on racial and political affiliation. He further explains that American politicians spend a great deal of resources and time on the majority who are white voters, at the expense of the minority black voters. The theory intimates that the two-party system in United States is responsible for the current state of affairs. Frymer argues that the establishment of the current party system distances the American minorities’ concerns from political agendas (Frymer 26). The system continues to limit opportunities for black Americans politically. Several American presidents facilitate this political isolation by distancing themselves from the needs of the African Americans. In addition, the Republican Party, which dominates most of the white populace, concentrates on the needs of the white voters. Frymer compares the black voters’ position in the American politics with that of minority social groups such as lesbians, gays and Christian right. According to Frymer, uneasy alliances are powerful challenges on how Americans view the relationship between democracy, black voters and political parties. The theory compares the impact of various political parties on the livelihoods of the black voters. It reveals that the Democratic Party establishes a close relationship with the African-American voters while the Republican Party relates well with the white voters. The theory however relates the economic differences to the two party systems that tend to limit minority Americans from political involvement (Frymer 42). Bartels’s analysis Bartels’s analysis indicates that there was an equitable distribution of wealth among the poor and the rich during World War 3. There is, however, a wider income gap between the rich and the poor Americans presently. Bartels explains that various factors such as globalization, demography, technology and changes in the structure of the American culture contribute to the large income difference among Americans. Bartels explains that politics can also be a contributing factor in the huge income and welfare gap. He asserts that political affiliations facilitate economic differences in the United States. He further argues that poor families perform better economically when compared to their rich counterparts under democratic presidents. On the other hand, white families do better than the poor families within republican reigns (Bartels 41). According to Bartels, the Democratic Party Presidents pursue a wider economic goal than the republicans do, which enables fair distribution of wealth under a democrat’s leadership. Democrats focus on creating employment and growth in output and these benefit the middle-class and poor families. The republicans on the other hand emphasize on containing inflation through tax reductions, which has minimal effects on the income growth. This policy benefits the rich and disadvantages the poor hence a wide income gap. Bartels uses the Bush administration to illustrate the effects of presidential leaderships on income distribution in the United States. According to Bartels, during this period, the rich’s income grew by 2% while that of the poor and middle-class declined by 3% and 1% respectively. Bartels argues that the black voters put more emphasis on the social and cultural issues and focused less on economic interests. He explains that the republicans find their political strength in economic growth and political timing. The republicans are able to establish an income growth that coincides with the presidential elections (Bartels 32). Bartels’s Analysis Agreement with Frymer’s Theory The two political party systems form the main characteristic of the American presidential elections. The republicans focus mainly on reducing the high inflation levels while the democrats insist on espousing higher income levels. According to Frymer’s theory, the economic fate of majority of Americans lies on their political decisions and policies. The white voters are also the main beneficiaries of political leadership due to their numbers. On the other hand, the black voters experience economic and political discrimination because of their small numbers. The American political scene relies on numbers and racial affiliations ascribed to Frymer’s theory (Frymer67). Bartels’s analysis evaluates the effects of presidential elections on income growth among Americans. Bartels’ argument agrees with Frymer’s theory on the facet that political inclinations affect the economic policies under different leaderships. For example, income growth tends to increase under democratic presidents and reduces adversely under republican leadership. Bartels also observes that, the decline in income growth does not affect a particular group within the community but the entire populace. Bartels classifies Americans into two categories, the poor and the rich. Bartels’s analysis is concordant with the Frymer’s theory in the sense that most middle-class and poor Americans are African Americans. In addition, these two agree on the effect of political affiliations on the income of Americans (Frymer 55). Bartels also agrees with Frymer’s perception on the fact that the republican leaders focus on policies that benefit the white populace such as tax reduction (Bartels 91). On the other hand, the democrats implement policies that facilitate income growth among the poor and the middle-class. According to Frymer, the middle-class and the poor are mainly minority black voters. Bartels’s analysis disagrees with Frymer’s theory on various aspects such as the main causes of a large income gap and the political interests of black voters. According to the theory, the black voters do not dictate political policies due to the small political representation. Contrarily, Bartels argue that the black voters focus mainly on the social and cultural issues when electing leaders rather than economic factors. Bartels further explains that the republicans win most presidential elections during economically favorable times. Bartels argues that policies are not the main drivers of republicans’ success in presidential elections; rather, political luck is (Bartels 93). Frymer’s theory however indicates that most of the presidential candidates focus on the needs of white voters with the aim of soliciting their votes (Frymer61). Bartels’s analysis agrees with the Frymer’s theory on aspects such as the effects of presidential elections on income. The analysis however contrasts with the theory on the issue of political and economic neglect of black voters by presidential candidates. Both scholars use similar examples such the Bush and Clinton administrations to illustrate the effects of political affiliations on the growth of income levels (Bartels 57). Frymer’s theory argues from a political front while Bartels’s analysis focuses on other factors such as globalization, technology and demographic shifts to explain the cause of the huge income gap (Frymer 25). Bartels’s analysis concurs with the Frymer’s theory regarding the plight of the poor and middle-class in America. The theory establishes politics and race as the major causes of poverty and neglect among black voters. Bartels’s analysis also blames politics, more so the presidential elections, for the economic status of poor Americans. The two agree in that black voters make a large percentage of the poor and middle-class in America (Bartels 60). American policies focus mainly on the number of voters and their political affiliations. Most scholars agree with Frymer’s theory, which holds that the plight of the minority in the American society is attributed to their political affiliation. Similarly, Bartels’s analysis reveals that the poor and middle-class Americans influences the success of the democrats in presidential elections while the republicans rely on white voters. Bartels further indicates that the working class tends to vote in favor of republicans because of the tax reduction policy. Researchers agree with the analysis carried out by Bartels on several occasions such the relationship of politics with the levels of income in society. The American society is diverse and leaders tend to implement policies that favor the majority. For example, tax reduction is a policy that favors the working class and majority of Americans since it leads to low inflation rates. The policy also enables the poor and middle class to access goods and services at affordable rates (Bartels 70). Bartels argues that most black voters focus on cultural and social needs when voting, hence their economic misfortune. Economically, a system tends to deliver more on economic policies in order to enhance the welfare of society (Bartels 27). Generally, Bartels’s analysis agrees with the economic and political reality and other researches in economics and politics supports this argument. Economic and political factors are useful in explaining Bartels’s analysis in a clearer way than other aspects such as globalization and technology. The social composition of the American population is also useful in explaining the plight of the black voters relative to their political and racial affiliations. The economy of a country depends mainly on the overall government policies hence there is no economic or political luck in winning presidential elections in the United States (Bartels 60). Works cited Bartels, Larry M. Unequal Democracy. 1st ed. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2008. Print. Frymer, Paul. Uneasy Alliances. 1st ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2010. Print. Read More