Author: julialotterer

The Democratic Experiment

In the modern context, it is almost impossible to achieve a perfect direct democracy. Unlike in the age of the Athenians, the general population of the United States is not limited to a concentrated geographic region, and the economic system is not a simplistic as it was then. Because of these factors, the representative model is the only viable form of democracy possible for a modern global power such as the US. Furthermore, instances of direct democracy present in the current US political system, the primary example being referendums and initiatives, have proven to be failed experiments of the directly democratic legislative process.

Referendums and initiatives have become increasingly utilized in the past decade to shape policy across the US. Referendums and initiatives differ slightly, with a referendum being a vote from the general public on recently passed legislation, and an initiative being where a new bill is put on the ballot for the general public to vote. Referendums function to use the popular vote to either confirm or veto the ruling of the state legislator whereas an initiative bypasses the legislator completely.

Proponents assert that initiatives and referendums cede power of the political elites back to the people. This ensures the state constitution and any legislation passed is reflective of the constituents’ opinions, regardless of the balance between parties in the legislator or any external influence from lobbyists on the district representatives.  Originally developed in the Progressive Era, the goal was to prevent the states from being “in the pockets of wealthy interests” (NCSL).

Referendums and initiative are often criticized as undermining the intentions of the representative political system. It promotes the rule of uneducated constituents on nuanced legislation they have neither the time nor willingness to understand the implications of. Getting signatures for referendums or initiatives to appear on the ballot is most often be a money game, as campaigns to promote the issue at hand are central to a successful initiative. The power is not, as it turns out, going to the people—the power is going to private corporations.

Large corporations with a vested interest in a given piece of legislation can easily fund a campaign to have legislation overturned in states where this is permitted. In 2016 alone, corporations across the US poured over a billion dollars of funding into ballot initiatives advantageous to their industry. Food regulations were repealed, gas taxes slashed, and wildlife habitats violated as a result of this. With “policy stakes in the billions” for these companies, initiatives are used to bypass the entire legislative process (NCSL).

 It is important to note, however, that referendums and initiatives are not part of the federal legislative process. If this were to be applied in the national context, the results could be disastrous. We’ve already seen the impact of Congressional lobbyists in skewing the public opinion on federal legislation. If the direct democracy seen in the referendum and initiative process were extended to the federal level, the careful dynamic of checks and balances would be disrupted and the formerly separated powers concentrated in the hands of the collective hands of citizens and corporations.

It’s easy to idealize the direct democracy from the golden age of Greece, but seen even in the constrained, state level context of initiatives and referendums, direct democracy has proven detrimental to the representation of US citizens. Despite idealistic theories of direct democracy as egalitarian representation, the referendum and initiative experiment has shown that this would only amplify the current corruption of the politics by corporations. Direct democracy would not be a rule of the people as one would hope, but rather a rule by corporation, where public good is secondary to profit margins.

— Julia Lotterer

Word Count: 600

Sources: http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/chart-of-the-initiative-states.aspxh

Tyranny in the Islamic State

In ancient Greece, political institutions were seen as a means of ensuring a society based in a religious and ethical code [2]. In this context, a tyrant was simply an individual who assumed political power through a means other than hereditary claim. Many of these individuals, solved the strasis, or civil strife, that plagued the city-state they took charge of. It was often this state of strasis itself that formed the crucible for tyranny and the eventual foundation of democracy to be built. A democracy was deemed “good” if the system ensured the advantage of all citizens— a standard of political success coined by Aristotle [2].

Today, tyranny is a term with a definitively negative connotation to it, synonymous with oppression, militancy, and cruelty. Tyranny in the modern context as the antithesis of democracy is a far cry from its beginnings over two millennia ago with Peisistratus as the first Greek tyrant in 546 BCE. In the modern context, the rise of political Islam can be seen as a potent example of the perversion of democracy. Through his article “The Crisis of Political Islam,” Chief Foreign-Affairs Correspondent of The Wall Street Journal, Yarislav Trofimov, provides a comprehensive synthesis of the conflict between democracy and the “theocratic tyranny” characteristic of political Islam. This conflict is prevalent not only in the Middle East but also in other predominantly Muslim regions, such as Indonesia and West Africa [1].

Trofimov traces the usage of democracy as a “vehicle” for the instillation of an Islamic state and explores instances of religiously motivated violence when democracy fails as a successful means of furthering political Islam. He describes the corruption of democracy by political Islam as “tyranny,” citing instanced such as the Assad regime, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the dictatorial regime of Syria. In regards to the modern definition of “tyranny,” one rooted in the all too frequent instances of militarisitic and “religiously motivated” seizures of government described by Trofimov, this article uses the term “tyranny” correctly. However, this does not fall in line with the description of tyranny as a means of solving strasis as it was interpreted in ancient Greece.

Despite great differences in the outcomes of political tyranny between ancient Greece and modern Islamic states, both have commonalities in their philosophical approach to governing. Interestingly, both Muslim and ancient Greek governments are rooted deeply in religious doctrine, as opposed to the secular approach of many modern democracies. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, religion was a major component of the civic identity of Greeks in the ancient world, particularly in relation to the individual deities as the patron of each polis.

This usage of philosophical beliefs as a foundation for political beliefs is mirrored by the integration of the Quran into national law, with extremist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood going so far as to say “The Quran is our constitution” [1]. This ideology extends past the death of Hassan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb, the founding fathers of the Muslim Brootherhood nearly fifty years ago; the Islamic Republic of Iran established in the wake of the 1979 revolution directly states in its constitution that all laws “must be based on Islamic criteria,” the determination of which is left up to the religious authorities of the state to decide [1]. Through this, the differences in the outcomes of the illegitimate seizure of power through tyranny between Greece and the Islamic political machine can be seen despite their common thread of religiously motivated law.

  • Julia Lotterer

Word Count: 568

Sources:

[1] Trofimov, Yaroslav. “The Crisis of Political Islam,” The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-crisis-of-political-islam-1469223880

[2] Lane, Melissa. “Ancient Political Philosophy,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/ancient-political.