flaws of US democracy
Although Democracy in the United States serves as a model for many other nations, it has many flaws that choke its true potential. Some authors, like Carl Schmitt would argue that from its outset, democracy in America is inherently flawed, while others like Thomas Jefferson believe that simple adjustments should be made for a more efficient democracy. It is important for the flaws and challenges that plague democracy in American democracy to be addressed, as there are many. It is particularly important to address those challenges if they are some of the essential components of a true democracy. Open discussion, for example, is an important part of democracy, yet here in the United States we have fallen short of the standard. Another challenge U.S democracy faces is the fact that the government is not as representative of the people as it should be.
One of the central components of democracy is supposed to be open discussion and deliberation. In fact, Habermas argued that this is the foundation that a democracy should be built upon. In his writings, he goes in depth about the theory of communicative action, which explores the role of communication. It is used to achieve mutual understanding and he explains that in communicating with others we hope to reach a consensus. Carl Schmitt had the same idea and felt that discussion is a fundamental principle of democracy. Schmitt suggest that the essence of parliament is “public deliberation of argument and counterargument, public debate and public discussion (Schmitt 34)”. When members of parliament come together they should have open minds and be prepared to exchange rational arguments.
Democracy in America is does not meet the reasonable standard that both Habermas and Schmitt have set. To Schmitt the reality of democracy in America involves talk but no real discussion. Members of parliament are not in any real pursuit of truth and justice, and discussion has just become “merely a façade” with no real meaning
One of the central components of democracy is supposed to be open discussion and deliberation. In fact, Habermas argued that this is the foundation that a democracy should be built upon. In his writings, he goes in depth about the theory of communicative action, which explores the role of communication. It is used to achieve mutual understanding and he explains that in communicating with others we hope to reach a consensus. Carl Schmitt had the same idea and felt that discussion is a fundamental principle of democracy. Schmitt suggest that the essence of parliament is “public deliberation of argument and counterargument, public debate and public discussion (Schmitt 34)”. When members of parliament come together they should have open minds and be prepared to exchange rational arguments.
Democracy in America is does not meet the reasonable standard that both Habermas and Schmitt have set. To Schmitt the reality of democracy in America involves talk but no real discussion. Members of parliament are not in any real pursuit of truth and justice, and discussion has just become “merely a façade” with no real meaning