Paradox Of Democracy

585 Words2 Pages

In chapter one, section four, it talks about the meaning of a democracy, and its principles. A democracy is a “governing system in which the people govern themselves; from the Greek term meaning ‘rule by the many’…A meaningful definition of a democracy must include the following democratic principles: [1] recognition of the dignity of very individual; [2] equal protection under the law for every individual; [3] opportunity for everyone to participate in public decisions; and [4] decision making by majority rule, with one person having one vote” (Dye and Gaddie, p. 10-20). With these principles, the American people are able to be free to live their lives with minimum government interference; there is not [supposed to be] discrimination based on the many different backgrounds and nationalities throughout the United States; the American people make their own decisions, and every individual in the United States gets to vote, if …show more content…

This paradox of democracy – “potential for conflict between individual freedom and majority rule” (Dye and Gaddie, p. 10-20) – is the main explanation of how liberty, welfare and defense results in conflict in governing a country. There are many ways to govern a country. Korea goes for the totalitarianism way to govern, which is complete government control of the people. The ruler, who is a dictator, decides who does what, when, where, why and how, as well as run the government as he pleases. England, on the other hand, goes for more of an authoritarianism approach. This is where a ruler [the queen] has control of only the government, and the people get to live their lives privately – with no government interference at all. And then, you have the United States, a county that has limited government and limited individual freedom, or a democracy as spoken about above (Dye and Gaddie, p.

Open Document