Pros And Cons Of Participatory Democracy

Since the founding of America in 1776 countless people have either become disenfranchised by the federal government or backed the government. From laws being passed to decisions being made there will always be a division amongst the American people. Whether arguing over gun laws or citizenship rights, the debate is always there and met with some form of counter argument from either side. What makes America so great is the fact that you have the right to have a voice and speak out for your opinions. One of the greatest ways for a citizen to be heard is voting. Whether for local, state, or federal every vote counts and every citizen heard. In the creation of our constitution our nation has evolved from only white, male property owners being allowed to vote, to the passing of the 15th amendment in 1869 allowing every race or color to vote, up to the 1920’s allowing women to have equal rights in the voting process. Being a democracy is what sets us apart from many other nations in this country. Although Americans have the freedom to vote, there are still rules and regulations set forth to make the process a more smooth flowing affair. From filling out the application to meeting the qualifications, one American can find their voice as the determining factor for a sheriff, mayor or even president.

The political debate for and against felon disenfranchisement has compelling arguments on both sides. In the US, over 6 million felons are barred from voting due to laws that prevent felons with a sentence to vote (Chung). The number of imprisoned has been growing over the past 40 years, as the increasing number of imprisoned felons is directly correlated with an increasing number of disenfranchised felons. However, a more jarring statistic reveals that most disenfranchised felons in the United States are of a racial or ethnic minority. Based on information from the 2010 US Census Bureau, about 36 percent of disenfranchised felons are African American. The large percentage also puts a different scope on felon disenfranchisement laws as these

Should the law be a higher priority than one’s own morals? Henry David Thoreau, a well-known American Transcendentalist, once wrote that “the government itself, which is the only mode which people have chosen to execute their will is equally liable to be abused and perverted before people can act through it” (A1). After witnessing many unjust and immoral activities, such as slavery and the Mexican-American war (something he viewed as unnecessary violence fueled by avarice for land), Thoreau lost faith in the government. In order for people to avoid becoming “agents of injustice” themselves, he encouraged them to act according to their conscience rather than blindly following the law. Although I believe that in an ideal world people should

Like Martin Luther King Jr once said “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” With these words in mind, I affirm the resolution resolved: Civil disobedience in a democracy is morally justified. I offer the following definitions to help clarify the round: Civil disobedience is nonviolent refusal to follow the laws or demands of government to prove a point and the person participating in civil disobedience has to accept the consequences. A democracy is a government by the people, where the people elect representatives or the leader. Not everyone has to vote in a democracy but, the leaders or representatives have to be decided by the majority of eligible voters. Morally is doing the right thing based on the morals of the people

Over time our Constitution of the United States has given us more voting privileges. We’ve allowed most of our population to be able to vote now in 2017. The only people who can’t are people under the age of 18, aren’t registered, or not a citizen.

Over the course of time Americans have been  fighting for the right of freedom. There was a once a time when only white males who owned land were able to vote. However, now some individuals are requesting that America has a mandatory voting law. Mandatory voting is the creation of a law to obligate every American citizen vote. If any citizen does not vote, he or she may face consequences such as a fine. Mandatory voting can have many disadvantages and advantages, that can result in either creating problems or solving them.

Today’s society civic and political participation is so important. The more people that participate, the greater insurance of freedom there is. If people ignore their civic responsibilities and don’t help make important decisions, then only a few people are deciding on who deserves government positions. It’s our duty as citizens to protect our rights and participate politically. And it is up to the people at large to protect and maintain the rights and freedoms we hold dear.

Now, there are a lot of people was worried about the system, because there are too many problems of their government. And also huge people complain about the racism and the guns. So there are some representatives want to use the direct democracy like some old country such as ancient Greek. On the other hand, direct democracy is not a good chose for America. Now I will tell you that why direct democracy is not work in America.

Today, we still see Tocqueville’s practices being relevant through the new technologies available and it’s interaction with the political and social spheres of America. As the mainstream usage of the internet and social media has steadily increased, it has become easier for people to revolutionize the concepts found in Democracy in America. Where before associations were only made locally or through newspapers, there is now the possibility for American citizen to make fast, instant associations across the world. With social spheres widening, the minority is capable of garnering influence and has the ability speak out against the majority more than ever before through. Although older generations have critiqued social media by saying that it is isolating younger people, individualism as Tocqueville perceived it is extremely limited since there is the exchange of new thoughts and people can common goals to fight for such as the recent DAPL protest which gained traction and success through social media. Since there are so few regulations for the internet, the freedom it allows one to see Tocqueville 's concepts for democracy in a purer form in not just America, but throughout the world.

There were both democratic and undemocratic features in colonial America, as democracy was a work in progress. Virginia’s House of Burgesses, Plan on a Slave ship, and The Lady’s Law are 3 examples of the documents I used. I also explained my reasoning in my paragraphs. Below are my reasonings, and my Documents.

The word democracy is used today to describe governments that derive power from citizens and are held accountable to those citizens when using that power. Utilizing modern usage of the term, the United States can be described as a democracy and even though there are examples of "pure democracy" to be found, for example, state ballots containing policy questions that are directly decided by popular vote, the U.S. Constitution does not allow national ballot referendums or initiatives because those that framed it were opposed to the idea and were not comfortable with common

Democracy is a system of government in which the power to govern is vested on the citizens. This power is exercised either directly wherein citizens reach a consensus to implement policies, or indirectly through the election of representatives who will act on behalf of the citizen's interest (Janda, Berry, Goldman, and Hula, 2012). In such states that have adapted democratic government, political participation is the hallmark of citizens' right and ability to exercise their power. The definition of political participation, as with all concepts of social sciences, is subject to debate since most social science concepts are subject to the changing norms of society and government. Thus, this paper defines political participation as a social phenomenon that takes on different forms which is used by citizens to influence government policies and politics.

fundamental principle stated by the bill of rights. The Bill of rights were put into place to protect

As citizens of The United States of America, voting is arguably one of the most important political rights we hold. Progressively throughout history more and more people were allotted this right, until it became a freedom of every legal citizen. Although, looking at the statistics we see that non-voting in America hits drastic percentages with the numbers of participants declining each time. This historic issue is neglected to be seen as a problem, and is still over looked by some political scientists. In E.E Schattschneiders book, The Semi Sovereign People, he explains why this is in fact an issue.

The internet supports a global ecosystem of social interaction. Modern life revolves around the network, with its status updates, news feeds, comment chains, political advocacy, omnipresent reviews, rankings and ratings. For its first few decades, this connected world was idealized as an unfettered civic forum: a space where disparate views, ideas and conversations could constructively converge. Ring (2013) stated that the Internet is changing the face of our communication and culture. It has drastically altered the way we get our news and information, talk to our friends through social media platforms, find places, make a payment, register for institution, apply for job, and generally live our lives. Internet certainly has