Perhaps democracy is not the problem, it’s the lack of protection on the common ones. they have been accompanied by widening inequalities of income and wealth, heightened job insecurity, and environmental hazards such as global warming. Capitalism goes best with plutocracy, as peasants have the ability to rise and take power if succeeded. Power can be lost as if investment failures occur. In the course of human historyIn this century, most believe that we, the people, have the ability to decide what is right or wrong, and its simple not the fact. Most people have not received enough education to make these
People don’t desire democracy, most just want to live a life and connect. It was decided and placed by the founders, rich white men, who think they know best, which at that period they do. What we need is for us to think that we are in control of our own lives, with the right to appeal and suggest. We do not rule, but we are in control of the country because countries are made out of people. We call ourselves American when most serve merely for themselves. This capitalist system is corrupted by the elite, who is silently shifting our society into a deformed system which its shape appears more of a Plutocracy than is of its current form. A selfish country with no direct goals or unity, and keeping the majority uninformed of the real society as we continue to call ourselves American. Praising the ultimate freedom that comes with unpredictable consequences, which all shall ultimately shatter into pieces that cannot be reformed. It was meant to be a match made in heaven, Democracy and capitalism, the system that makes us superior than others. It made us the chosen ones, ones to liberate others as it is the white men’s burden.
The concept that had been put in our brains as if we were the brainwashed communists, what holds the difference? Propaganda in a different form, we have been told that this system we live in is what brought us greatness; since we were toddlers, we were only exposed to the information that the system wanted to expose. The system chooses what to put in the youngling’s process of thought, often neglecting the information needed to generate rational and critical thinking on curtain subjects, and replacing it for what is considered “better” for the absorbers. The core of our culture is based on no other than education. When information such as parts of history, negative effects of curtain economic systems and or government systems etc. is being held back, it causes people to not be able to think critically and often judging issues wrongly due to the fact that they were not given the opportunity to understand the full scale of a picture. “Of the four views of how political power has been the pluralist view does the most to reassure one that America has been a democracy in more than name only. ” Slightly mentioned in the Houghton Mifflin American government textbook, they simply summarized the Marxist view, power elite view, bureaucratic view, and pluralist view in a couple of paragraphs categorizing the views as theories, and concluded with extremely weak evidence and backup.
On top of that, the school material left out important information in this section such as the lack of explanation on the process and steps of the Marxist view theory, or how a bureaucratic government is structured and operates. How would the learners differentiate the structure and effect of the given theories if the educators decide to simplify the content for covert reasons? Not fully educating the public can be one of the most effective ways of propaganda. They cannot speak their mind if they do not know how to express their thoughts correctly; as most are not properly educated to the level of understanding the different political and economical structures, when a crisis occurs, the population would desperately search for possible unrelated causes and accuse the unrelated cause as a result of not knowing the roots of the issue. Later in the given textbook, the material suggests that Americans are “more willing to tolerate economic inequality than political inequality, as they believe in maintaining the equality of opportunity but not the equality of results. ”; this widely popular idea can be the result of mass propaganda or simply the patriotic mentality, as those who disagree to the mainstream idea, capitalism enhances democracy, would be seen as an uncooperative and supportive act towards our “great nation”. Presumably, the ones in position of power and riches would embrace and promote the idea, protecting it at all cost, as all of their power and wealth relies on the current structure of capitalism and democracy, which its core foundation streams from the support and recognition of the working class.
Our high school textbooks label ourselves as a democratic society, living in a structure where we, the people, are in charge of the country and the government’s very existence is to serve the people. Ironically, the material itself mentions and indicates that “there are certainly plenty of self-interest among high elites, but the problem does not contagiously spread into the system itself. ” Interestingly, the high elites are those who hold and control the system; how is it possible that the system remains pristine when the cores are corrupted? Very briefly did it mention the downsides of capitalism, the idea of “wealth brings power” did appear as the material discusses that “wealth can be used to buy influence, politicians and business leaders have similar class backgrounds, and elected officials must defer to the preference of business so as to induce corporations to keep the economy healthy and growing. ” Unsurprisingly, the material fails to discuss the effect of the mentioned situations as it barely scratched the surface of the issue; then what possible effect can there be? “There are two things that are important in politics,” Mark Hanna, the great Republican kingmaker of the late 19th century, once said. “The first thing is money, and I can’t remember what the second one is. ” This astonishing statement stated centuries ago cannot be any more accurate, as time passes, modern officials, often holding heavy duties, repeatedly proves that politicians are subjected to rely on corporation or individual funds; they then are not forcibly, but semi-willingly loyal to their under-table funders as the funders continuously support the campaign for favorable reasons. “There are many other examples.
On issue after issue, public opinion is nearly irrelevant in the realm of serious politics and policy, controlled by the nation’s “unelected dictatorship of money”. ” Written by social critic Paul Street, who deeply questions our current system and critically analyzes modern issues; he identifies parts of the ongoing issue, and explains the current state from his perspective. “You don’t have to be a Marxist, left-anarchist, or other kind of “dangerous radical” to note that popular governance or democracy has been trumped by oligarchy and plutocracy in the contemporary United States. ” Street further explains the seriousness of the situation, and suggests that we should not continue to blind ourselves with patriotism planted by no other than the system itself; individuals should not be judged nor labeled by others when simply stating out a state of though with reasonable backups. Furthermore, Street Examined data from more than 1,800 different policy initiatives from 1981 to 2002, and they found that wealthy and well-connected elites consistently steer the direction of the country, regardless of or even against the will of the U. S. majority. Can democracy work anywhere, when the economic system, which allows for inequality, exists? I believe the answer to this question is yes. In an ideal situation, only when the government regulates itself to disable the entire body to accept any funding from cooperation or individuals, function only with a fixed amount of tax income, and raise the level of general education to a state where most who receive an education can critically evaluate and understand the status-quo and the entire system.
According to Milton Friedman, “If economic power is joined to political power, concentration seems almost inevitable. On the other hand, if economic power is kept in separate hands from political power, it can serve as a check and a counter to political power. ” He believes that a well-structured capitalist system can balance the power of a democratic system, as the government can only have a limited regulation over the economic system; respectively, it can also over-influence the government, as candidates and campaigns often require the support of individuals or groups in powerful positions, mostly associated with great wealth. “The role of government. . . is to do something that the market cannot do for itself, namely, to determine, arbitrate, and enforce the rules of the game. ” But with pressure behind the referees, game rules are often changed to bring advantage to the ones applying the pressure. To what end? Predicting the outcome of our current structure, capitalism and democracy, could lead us into a clearer view of what is currently happening, as the combination of capitalism and democracy had been accompanied by widening inequalities of income and wealth, heightened job insecurity, and environmental hazards such as global warming. Most Corporations thrive for profit, as they would push the boundaries of tolerance from mother nature to old home-less women on welfare. They would spend loads of cash, such as when Donald Trump receive an estimate worth of 5 billion dollars of free media attention for his 2016 presidential election, to interfere with politics, and hopefully affect the candidate’s decisions on passing curtain regulations. In the past year, a series of Trump donors or their close relatives have also been appointed U. S. ambassadors. Notable among them is Robert Wood Johnson, the owner of the New York Jets. Johnson donated $1 million to the inauguration. In August, he was sworn in as the U. S. ambassador to the United Kingdom. These large corporations or powerful individuals made politicians’ heads turn as they get ready to shove their money into gaining more power or access to continue rolling the already massive snowball.
According to the Marxist theory, we are currently on the fourth stage out of the six in total in terms of Marx’s theory of history. The next stage carries on to be socialism, then finally communism. Its explanation leads to that capitalism always leads to monopolies and brings the people to poverty; yet the fewer the restrictions on the free market the sooner it finds itself in crisis. Capitalism cannot exist forever, due to its major flaws mentioned in previous paragraphs. Extremes can happen, the inequality between the rich and the poor and the destruction of nature, ultimately showing signs of paths towards human extinction, which can lead to two major results: either the capitalist class wins or the working class takes over.
Leading to very different outcomes, if the capitalists successfully take control of the entire system, corrupting the government and resetting the frame, causing none or few regulations to be passed, we might retract ourselves into oligarchy, possibly plutocracy; on the other hand, if the working class succeeds, a new form of government can replace the current system, presumably socialism, according to Marx’s theory of history, or even form a new structure containing a new political and economical system. Boycotts may happen, as well as revolutions, but the two outcomes concluded above can only happen when the government cannot forcefully contain the revolts, which the government still holds most of the armed forces; as the military can effortlessly contain hazardous situations. If the government ultimately continues to control the nation, it would most likely apply some changes into the structure then. History ha
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here.