Democracy and Civil Disobedience in the
United States
Civil disobedience is the professed, active refusal to observe
certain commands, demands, and laws of the either the government or any other
international power. Forms of exercising civil disobedience are often nonviolent
or passive means. One of the notable incidences that civil obedience was
witnessed is when the United States’ reputable figure Mahatma Gandhi organized
a defiant march to protest against the British government’s rule in United
States that saw the monopolization of salt (Thoreau 1). Thoreau's Civil Disobedience ideas regarding
civil disobedience insist on the need for the prioritization of
humanity over the dictates of the government and the law. In particular, Thoreau criticizes the
American policies, social institutions, the Mexican versus American war, and
slavery (Thoreau 1). It is worth noting that the main purpose of civil disobedience is to
influence different government policies and legislation by employing nonviolent
mechanisms such nonpayment of taxes, picketing, and boycotting, among other
practices.
Henry Thoreau put it forth so succinctly that the American Civil Rights
movement that was formed by Americans 1960s is a notable example of a course
that employed civil disobedience (Thoreau 1). Through this, Thoreau becomes an
icon to be remembered for his art in protesting. Through the acts of people
like Gandhi, we openly see the true definition of being a triumphant civil
disobedience activist. However, Banksy’s importance in civil disobedience has
been robustly disputed; since he does very little in trying to become an
activist through street artistry. Such
prosecuted treatment gave a footstool for the rise of graffiti artists like
Banksy whose desire was to see to it that the commoners attain salvation from
the government’s mistreatment. The only thing he lacks is an unwavering
conscience to sustain him through the robust phase of civil disobedience.
Despite being pessimistic about the whole idea, Banksy’s works can be seen
throughout walls where he criticizes government actions in both images and
text. For some substantial time to come, Banksy’s works are expected to rival
political overtones across the nation.
As an underground artist, Banksy is
renown globally for his protesting arts which he utilizes less effectively in
changing a state he considers to be a contentious social climate. The art he
projects on walls across numerous streets can only amuse masses in the form of
social awareness with no other tangible benefits being felt. Due to his ironic
fame, the ethical messages that are left anonymously become overshadowed and
this affects his support over particular potency within the nation. So far,
Banksy has done very little to try and alter the state of things; he only
projects the obvious in his art. He ought to emulate the likes of Gandhi and
Martin Luther King Jr. in their struggle of championing civil disobedience in
acts if triumphant activism.
In recent years,
civil disobedience against the republican candidate in Kansas capitol,
Brownback has been one of the longest acts of civil disobedience. His agenda
sought to spend on education and social services, privatization of the entire
Medicaid system, abolition of art funding, scrapping teachers unions, a move
that was expected to engender significant draconian cuts and torpedo the entire
budget. These move evokes the question regarding the state of democracy in the
United States with regard to campaign promises and other agendas that have
often been employed by politicians. The purpose of this paper is to explore
United States’ democracy in the United States and civil obedience.
Discussion
The state of
democracy in the United States
Even as the
United States celebrates the achievements in the separation of powers to
exercise checks and balances, this system has created allowance for some
powerful groups to influence the government; hence, safeguarding their
interests. Here, the participation of interest groups has been
dominant. Interest groups are the organization of people having policy goals
and work in the political process in promoting such goal. Examples of such
groups are powerful financial institutions and individualistic groups such as
N.K.A and the A.A.R.P (Curray 2).
The interest groups work in lobbying the government by hiring representatives
that advocate on behalf of the interest of the groups. Whereas the interest
groups were traditionally considered pivotal in separating powers, this does
not hold any longer. Interest
groups now
influence policies in leadership, in many ways, especially ensuring that their
self-vested interests are achieved at the expense of the powerless majority (Curray 2).
The
House has been considered as a mere approver to the regulations by the
executives, instead of exercising checks and balances. A Substantial amount of
power has been delegated to the executive. Indeed, the eventuality has been the
creation of the unlimited prerogatives that are exercised in the name of people
when the real situation is that most decisions are made to protect the
self-vested interests of those in power. Yet, even as United States celebrates
achievements in democracy, it is still undisputable that the president
continues to wield a lot executive powers. In particular, this has been
depicted by Obama administration
(Curray 3). For instance, Obama has often been argued to
interrupt the white house meeting by introducing an issues that have never been
on the agenda, citing that the administration required the aggressive
utilization of executive powers to overcome the opponents (Curray 4).
The president has been criticized for
striving to implement decisions without the approval from the congress. Some of
the policies that Obama has adopted include creation of jobs for the veterans,
preventing the shortage of drugs, raising the standards of fuel economy and
preventing domestic violence. Obama has often emphasized that he bypasses the
law makers, asserting that he would continue implementations by himself even
when the congress declines to approve. Obama has stated that executive actions
would limit the possibilities for his election for the second term. One of the
decisions that elicited sharp reaction was to use his recess appointment powers
to install officials that had been objected by the congress (Curray 5).
Obama has been widely criticized over his approaches of concentrating many
powers in his presidential office. Others have contended that the move by Obama
to exercise presidential powers in passing decision is not new in history. It
had been used by his predecessors on various occasions, yet it is legally bound
by the constitution. Regardless of these, such a situation negates the reason
for democracy.
Crown it all, United States law and its foreign policies have
found itself in conflict with the international law. For instance, in
2003, in the in the invasion of Iraq, United States was labeled as a country
that was above the international law. The question is whether democracy has to
do with the violation for the international law. The answer is simple, a
desirable democracy is that which is bound by the external and internal laws,
creating allowance of the perpetuation of power not only within its boundaries,
but also across within the global contexts, and that includes leading by
example.
In conclusion, the American
exceptionalism thesis, as far as democracy is concerned, is disapproved. Occupy
Wall Street reveals that the US and the countries it criticizes for lagging in
democracy, such as protest prone Egypt and Syria are not any different.
Secondly, even as the United States celebrates
the achievements in the separation of powers to exercise checks and balances,
this system has created allowance for some powerful groups to influence the
government to safeguard self-vested interests at the expense of the powerless
majority. House of Representatives no long exercises the separation-of-power
responsibility because it often supports the executive. Even worse, the
president wields a lot power in the executive processes. Lastly, what is the
position of liberal, democratic America if its foreign policies do not reflect
democracy? Undoubtedly, it is a fading democracy (Curray 7).
Factors Contributing to Civil
Disobedience
Several authors have supported this
finding. For instance, the United States’ elections are always never fair. They
are marred with incidences of political corruption involving suppression of
civil right activists to support and protect the interest of the government and
other elite members in government. The author notes that elections have been
unable to address issues of civil disobedience through elections as powerful
politicians would recruit a few individuals to bribe voters to lure them to
support them. The operations are always networked operations that involve the
use of the police officers (Ross 12).
The elite groups successfully achieve
their political goals by muting the opponents. Ideally, this group of people
owns the media and it is able to gate-keep, and censor the voices of the
opponents so that the audience does not hear them. In doing so, they are able
to use the same media to their advantage by popularizing their ambitions to the
public (Ross 12). The manifestos the parties provide rarely represents the will
of the people — instead, it results from concessions of the elite groups in
United States and beyond the borders, the special interest groups. Therefore,
by virtue of this position, they are able to influence the developments in
governance by using their resource and influence (Ross 12).
The account of limited mentality is
borne on lack of awareness on political participation. It also happens that the
powerful employee different tactics to whitewash the voters to support them in
protecting their vested interested. The powerful elite groups who have access to
resources are able to manipulate the media and spread negative propaganda
against certain, less powerful politicians, rendering them less popular (Ross
12).
Conclusion
In conclusion, this research paper
sought to inquire why it is still difficult to get rid of the caste system in
democratic republics such as United States. Many elections, however
transparent, have often served to fortify and serve the interests of a few,
powerful classes of people — at the expense of the majority. While the
literature relevant to the subject existed, it did not adequately answer the
subject question. Nevertheless, it brought into light various themes that are
crucial in extending the discussions and helping conceptualize the challenge of
democratic systems. The relevant literature notably touched on the areas such as
the nature democracy and challenges, and the accounts of the challenge. In the
end, literature presented some significant theoretical and empirical
discussions that happen to be critical in unearthing the gap in knowledge and
providing a foundation to approach the subject.
Works
Cited
Thoreau David,
Civil Disobedience. 2017. Retrieved on December 1, 2017 from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/civildisobedience/section2.rhtml
Curray,
Marin. How
Can Power Be Limited By The Constitution? 2012.
Web. December 1, 2017. <http:// www.ourcivilisation.com/cooray/btof/chap174.htm>
Ross, Dorothy. The Origin of American Social Sciences and Exceptionalism.
Cambridge University Press. 1991. Print.
