I am really glad this semester has a focus on the idea of democracy. The idea is difficult to comprehend and I feel like there will never be a clear and easy definition fully describing democracy. Just like our class’s concept of “dense fact”, democracy will always be “played with” changing and updating its definition.
In America we find ourselves understanding Democracy in terms of the governing style we have. Since we have a representative Democracy style government that is typically our mindset of how all democratic governments should be. Democracy mostly is known to mean that the government’s power is derived from the people as a whole. A democracy would mean that all people vote for every issue in the country, which is not possible or performed in America. Many times in America it is assumed that this style of government is the greatest and that all others types are inferior. Whether or not that is true, I feel like it is a type of government in which most people feel like they do get some say in how the country is run. Since people feel like they participate, I feel like nationalism is sparked off of this governing style.
One point I found interesting from yesterday’s class conversation was how automatically we assume the best way to make a decision is to take a vote. This is common in the culture I have grown up with. Even on a daily basis I vote on what time we eat dinner, or where a group meets after class. The common person and their say are very prided through democracy. I feel like “say” is the backbone of this governing form.
Democracy is not clear cut though. There are no particular guidelines or rules as to how a democratic government is ran. That is what changes democracy through time. Whitman stated in his Democratic Vistas that he assumed “Democracy to be at present in its embryo condition, and that the only large and satisfactory justification of it resides in the future…” I believe the future and hope for that future is also a large part to democracy. Without hope for change in the future, I think democracy would be much less successful. Instead of finding flaws in the governing style, democracy would stay consistent but problematic. Since pure democracy is hard to obtain I feel that America as a whole is constantly attempting to reach a more pure form of that governing style. As a country “fair” or “equal” power in the way the government is run is a common goal of this nation. We are a nation that historically has constantly been fighting for equal rights and representation. The ultimate equality and say would be the goal of democracy, but this will constantly be a struggle for years to come. The future of democracy is what makes it even more unique as a form of government.
An example with the struggles of redefining democracy was the Civil War which Whitman lived through. Whitman says that after this war he hoped progressive changes could be made. The American idea of democracy could be altered again, and be redefined. Could America change from this war? Would it become more of the democracy Whitman believed in? Whitman even quotes Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address on the more ideal concept of Democracy, “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth”.
I believe this is the ultimate goal of democracy, although it is a struggle for humankind. Democracy is a difficult form of government to run, and will constantly need alterations. As Walt Whitman suggests, the future is the key to democracy. Although I have not created a solid definition for myself of democracy yet, these are the important pieces so far that I believe should be included in that definition.
No comments:
Post a Comment