The Argument Against Participatory Democracy

553 Words3 Pages

Although the United States is not a direct democracy the Constitution established popular sovereignty to insure that the people hold the most political power; and today, participatory democracy is exercised. When citizens elect representatives, their job is to represent the views of the people. Fair representation is in the best interest of these officials because they want to get reelected. Today participatory democracy allows Americans to vote for representatives who will make decisions they agree with. In the House of Representatives, elected members represent their districts, speaking for their people as a voice on the House floor. In contemporary American democracy, indivials elect representatives who will maintain popular sovereignty …show more content…

The ideal form of democracy would be pluralist, because groups that belong to minorities would gain a stronger voice and their opinions would be put into action. Pluralism can be achieved if citizens get better at forming unions. For example, labor unions provided refuge for many Americans during and after the Great Depression. Since 1985, America has been experiencing a decrease in Labor Unions President Barack Obama even stated that “unions have been back on their heels over the last several decades,” and agrees that the United States “should do everything we can to strengthen unions in this country. While current politicians are able to admit that the modern lack of unions is holding America back, they understand that there is a great need for unions, since they would strengthen the country. A slogan for democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, is “When unions are strong, America is strong,” this is because labor unions provide hope for the working class Although the United States does not currently have a pluralist democracy, politicians believe that pluralism would better promote the general welfare and provide the best future for the