The belief that the United States of America is a democratic country automatically create the assumption that it is a government by the people, for the people, and of the people as laid down by Abraham Lincoln (Brien, 71). Nevertheless, it is a grave mistake to believe that this happens automatically after conducting free and honest elections. It will be revealed later that even if the majority has voted this does not mean that democracy has prevailed. The ideal form of democracy according to Brien is one where deliberative democracy is at work, a form of democracy where citizens engage in public deliberations so that only laws that can benefit the community will be ratified and not the self-interest of a particular group. The only problem is that America does not really practice deliberative democracy and it can even be argued that a small number of people are pulling the strings that in turn control the minds of the public. The best way to counter this is to promote deliberative democracy but the challenge is how to encourage people to participate in this manner and not rely on what spin-doctors and pressure groups tell them what to do.
Deliberative Democracy
One of the theorists who contributed much to the construction of deliberative democracy is Adam Smith who coined the phrase “invisible hand” – it is the belief that individuals acting on their own self-interest and acts rationally at the same will create a spontaneous ordering of society, the result of which is better than those engineered by laws, policies, regulations, decisions of individuals or governments (Brien, 78). Adam Smith’s idea provided a contrast allowing for a clear understanding of what deliberative democracy should be. In other words deliberative democracy must run counter to what Smith proposed, that people simply make judgments based on their self-interest alone and that is the locomotive that drives a democracy forward.
In order to encourage people’s participation in political decision, the government has to educate the people and make them realise that they are important in the democratic process. The most important goal of the whole process is to contribute in the creation of a solution such as a bill or law that can help protect their self-interest. This can be achieved by making it convenient for them to communicate their needs and aspirations. They have to access to the mechanisms that comprise the process of deliberative democracy. In the short term the government can help provide “e-political continuum” and in the long term the general public must be educated to be able to think independently. It would also be helpful to establish moral institutions that will help create limits on the power of political leaders, especially those who are abusive and prone to be a dictator.
In the social rationality theory, Brien suggested that one of the advantages of the deliberative approach is to attract citizens to participate in political events and provide them the opportunity to make rational decisions through social discussion. In this way, the deliberative process, marked by true discussion involving everyone, would make more opportunities for people to express their thoughts regarding a political issue. Rationality would be helpful to negotiate the reality and relevance of each issue. Rationality would also help the participants to weigh each idea in order to come up with the most reasonable solution to the problems in their community and society.
It must also be pointed out that it is not enough to stage a public deliberation of issues, those who will go up on stage to make their views known must make sure that they are “embedded in a web of social relationships” in other words those who will participate must genuinely love their community, known by the members of the said group (Brien, 79). The author made an emphatic statement regarding the qualifications of those who will engage in deliberations and he wrote, “Embeddedness underlies rational action; and the rationality of each citizen is then a product of that citizen’s embeddedness in the civic culture” (Brien, 80). This leads to the idea that if the individual is embedded in a particular culture then he can counter human nature which easily gravitates towards self-interest. In other words the author is saying that this is the only way that a citizen can make self-sacrifice in order to make deliberative democracy effective.
Problems with the Ideal
In order for deliberative democracy to work it must have sound fundamentals. It must first rest on ideal democracy and one of the major requirements is that the citizens alone can shape or establish a government that they desire to govern them. This is in response to an elitist form of government wherein the process of selection is limited to a “people drawn from a restricted group” (Brien, 73). But in a real-life situation, this principle is difficult to apply. It can also be argued that although there is universal suffrage in highly-industrialized countries like the U.S. the ability of the average citizen to occupy high places in government is easier said than done. It can even be said that an ordinary American may find it impossible to be elected as a senator or President of the United States unless he or she has some certain qualification, of which the average citizen could not achieve in this lifetime. For instance, membership to the dominant party, the Democratic or Republican Party entails certain requirements. This is only the beginning if a citizen would like to engage others in the highest levels of government, he or she cannot easily earn a seat in the Senate or the U.S. Congress.
It will not require an astute political analyst to realize that those who are included in the roster of Senators and those who are nominated as the standard-bearer in the next presidential elections is someone who is either rich or a graduate of some prestigious university. Is this not elitism or another variation of elitism? It is hard to refute the claim that as a democratic country progresses, then so too is the electoral process. Looking at the qualifications needed to be considered as the next presidential candidate makes one realize that many are barred from entry. Thus, inadvertently the system has taken life of its own and has created a sub-system that allows the elite members of society to rule. This is a problematic aspect of American democracy that an adherent of deliberative democracy has to address first in order to move to the next level.
This leads to another pathway in this discussion, which is the idea that universal suffrage could be limited by distance. In other words, the ideal of democracy can work in the confines of a community where the members know each other and knows the candidates so well that they can have an informed consent. However, if the distance covered is so great, e.g. U.S. presidential elections universal suffrage is not enough, there is a need to trust a dominant political party to help the people make the decision. The Republican and Democratic Party of the U.S. can now be considered as the backbone of a new form of elitism. This new form of elitism is strengthened by the fact that the U.S. Congress, if controlled by a major political party can also ensure that the directives of the incumbent president – who also happens to be from the same party – can push through unimpeded.
The examples given are the establishment of congress that will check on the power of the president and an independent legal and court system that can settle disputes in a fair manner. Aside from that there is also the need for programs that help educate people as well as engender in them civic pride. All of these will helpfully produce citizens that will defend and honor the ideals of deliberative democracy (Brien, 88). It is easy to understand the ideals of democracy, especially those that can help establish a higher form of democracy. The only problem is that the author forgot to address two issues related to his thesis. First of all the creation of a parliament or congress does not automatically create a system where impartiality is observed. Secondly, the author failed to address the impact of having two dominant political parties that can easily control the destiny of America. Their size and influence is not the major concern here but the realization that the ability to rise to the upper echelons of power within these two parties is reserved only to a few. Finally, the author failed to focus on the impact of power hungry politicians who will prevent deliberative democracy from taking place in this country. They can be a powerful force that could easily frustrate ideal democracy from operating.
In my view, deliberate democracy is such a good idea because it provides an impartial environment where people are free to vote. They can share their views and each opinion is of equal value to others. Deliberative democracy can prevent the elitists from abusing their power by allowing the people to scrutinise their actions. Moreover, a careful study of deliberative democracy will allow us to see the necessity and close connection between democracy and rationality. It is understood as a “coherent pattern of life that is appropriate to a person, as a person, in specific circumstances” (Brien, 92). Social rationality confirms the effects of deliberative approach by providing more information, knowledge, and understanding based mainly on public participation. Finally, yet importantly, deliberate democracy creates the correct standard for decision-making based on social rationality. In this way, the public is well informed about the different facets of a particular political issue or government policy. The author, Brien himself, asserted that the relationship between two of the key elements: democracy and rationality is valid and crucially tenable because it would develop a non-corporatist and non-elitist society.
Conclusion
The belief that the United States is a democratic country, automatically generate the assumption that it is indeed a nation created by the governed. If citizens of this country will remain ignorant to the flaws of democracy then pressure groups and unscrupulous individuals will continue to manipulate the masses. The solutions listed by the author are only good on paper. Something has to be done to make it applicable to real-life settings. A close inspection of the discussion will reveal that one of the best ways to solve the specter of elitism in this country is to provide decent education to all citizens and train them to think independently. This does not guarantee success but it is a good starting point.
References
Brien, A. (n.d.). Rationality and Democracy. From Philosophy in a Democratic Society.