The philosopher Thomas Hobbes argued, “nothing could be worse than life without the protection of the state, and therefore strong government is essential to ensure that we do not lapse into the war of all against all.” This concept is very similar to Abraham Lincoln’s ideals expressed in his Gettysburg Address and second inaugural speech: that the country is better united than it is divided; that a unified government would prevent the continuation of the Civil War and internal conflict. Hobbes also emphasized the Laws of Nature; basically the Golden Rule of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” The opposite of this, what he refers to as the natural state where there is no unified government, there is no law to protect citizens from crime, and so everyone is violently defensive and relies on their instincts to survive at all costs, even when it puts others in harm. He writes that the best advantage of a unified government is that it creates conditions under which people can live safely without a constant guard up and follow the Laws of Nature.
This ideology is relevant even today, as shown in President Obama’s State of the Union Address: “We are part of the American family. We believe that in a country where every race and faith and point of view can be found, we are still bound together as one people; that we share common hopes and a common creed…. What comes of this moment will be determined not by whether we can sit together tonight, but whether we can work together tomorrow. I believe we can. And I believe we must. That's what the people who sent us here expect of us. With their votes, they've determined that governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans. We will move forward together, or not at all -- for the challenges we face are bigger than party, and bigger than politics.” He emphasizes that there should be no disparity between political parties, race, or any other cultural divider; that the dissension between fellow American citizens makes the country weak. He also speaks of the voters as being the reason for improvement, the reason for an expectation of unity, strength, and harmony within the nation – the epitome of democracy to a contemporary American voter.
To me, pure democracy is the practice of giving citizens the importance of expressing their opinions and the guarantee that their voice makes an impact in their society. It is the promise of security and comfort of knowing that their hopes and needs will be heard and that they will make a difference. The perfect illustration of democracy has yet to be found, though. There are always faults within the establishment, whether it is not representative enough that one political leader gets too much power over his or her constituents, or it is too representative that uneducated persons can have too much influence, such as with a referendum system.
However, the idea of democracy shapes the everyday actions of those who believe in its worth. Those who support its ideals may go as far to implement the same values in other countries, such as the case in Egypt today. It may cause some cultural differences between citizens of democratic nations and citizens of countries with dictatorships, as if the democratic citizens cannot even comprehend the restrictions of living with a dictator while those under dictatorships appreciate the easiness of never having to choose. It is quite effortless for the citizens of a democratic nation to proudly hold up their flag in other nations, waving their influence and freedom seemingly in their faces, as they have that sort of power in their own country and believe in the right to social equality for everyone.
Jessica, Hurray! You got past the weirdness that happened when St. Olaf up-graded the gmail system. LDL
ReplyDelete