Direct Democracy
This news article examines the features of the American constitution. The author’s position is that this document has many political and legislative restrictions for making the necessary changes. This is also connected with the topic of direct democracy since the existing system of elections in the United States is not such. The author argues that the introduction of such changes is practically impossible; changing the current situation of elections is a difficult task (Bouie). In addition, the article pays special attention to the features of a democratic society in general. The main problem mentioned is that the space for expanding the powers of the population remains quite broad in many countries of the world.
This problem also takes place in the United States, whose constitution has a number of restrictions on the introduction of direct democracy directly. However, on the other hand, the author also partially criticizes this theory. The fact is that the article compares direct democracy with Athenian society, which, according to the author, is not a modern vision of the situation (Bouie). This also applies to the fact that the political structure of the United States is a republic. This form of state structure is based on the opposite idea of direct democracy.
It is based on the fact that the population should delegate powers to a certain circle of politicians. In general, the article examines the opinions of various political philosophers and figures who reflect their views on the democracy of the existing constitution (Bouie). The article’s topic is connected with direct democracy, as it considers it an opportunity for American society to reconsider its attitude toward the current sitcom. However, there is also a skeptical attitude towards this type of democracy since it can have a reputation as a rather outdated and inefficient form of government in modern society.
Work Cited
Bouie, Jamelle. “The Constitution Was Made for Us, Not the Other Way Around.” The New York Times. Web.