Democracy

It's appropriate that the first topic we tackle this week is Democracy since only last Friday I submitted my ballot for the Chicago municipal elections. This election brought up some disputes about Democracy when the widely favored candidate for mayor, Rahm Emmanuel, was briefly ruled in violation of the election's residency requirement. Many people questioned whether it was just for an appellate court to rule out such a popular candidate. At the same time, others questioned whether mere popularity was enough to override the law. Ultimately, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that Emmanuel's case was not in violation of the residency requirement, but this decision was at least to some extent a cop out to avoid the ages' old question of the people versus the legislation. In class Monday, it was pointed out that our government is not a true democracy because numerous laws and processes stand between the people and the application of their desires. A true democracy would ebb and flow according to every popular trend and whim of the mob. Whitman points out that looking at the people as a whole, in one large mass, can be a disturbing experience, and Western culture has for millennia drawn a line between haute-culture and that which satisfies the vulgar multitude. The check on popular power has proven to be a necessary, if sometimes detrimental, impediment to progress, as the easily swayed masses draw more political energy from fiery speeches and appeals to the heart rather than thought-out logic and appeals to the mind.

Democracy is a dangerous animal then, fickle by its very nature and capable of impulsively turning against friends, policies, and institutions without valid cause. But democracy's weaknesses are paradoxically at the same its strengths. A democracy can adapt more readily to the world and more authentically reflects the needs of its citizens.

One weakness of democracy all too apparent in our society today is the threat of factionalizing. Earlier I spoke of the "mob" of the masses, but in practice the mob is never as monolithic as it might seem to outsiders. To some extent it is really just a collection of individuals. However, the individual learns quickly that pooling his/her energies with another of like mind founds a stronger platform and more readily precipitates progress. But as the parties come together the individuals begin to identify less with the democracy and more with the party and more willing to accept the grievances he/she holds against the party and at the same time less willing to accept the common ground he/she holds with the other parties. That is basically where we sit today with two factions arrayed against each other corrupting the pureness of individuals deciding on their own what they desire.