Thursday, October 16, 2008

The Land of the Free...?


The United States of America is a democracy. This democracy, however, does not always equate to freedom. The definition of democracy provided by Philippe Schmitter and Terry Karl in their article "What Democracy is.... and is not", is that democracy need not necessarily entitle complete freedom, as longs as its citizens have the freedom to choose representation. In America however, we consistently deem democracy as freedom - and push this ideal on other countries. But how free are Americans themselves? As we discussed in lecture, liberty in America is defined in negative terms - the freedom from certain factors. With freedom from we are in a way restricting our freedom to. Schmitter and Karl describe two forms of democracy - liberal and socialist. Roughly, the liberal form strives to place the fewest possible restrictions on a society, where as the socialist form aims to regulate society for the benefit of all. America's two major parties, Democrats and Republicans, tend to embody these two forms. As seen in the recent presidential debates, the Republican candidate John McCain strived to label democrats as socialist by restricting freedom and equalizing wealth. Yet both parties and the government itself, in fact restricts freedom - or diminishes positive liberty, in the sense that personal choice is restricted. Many of the choices of American citizens are restricted by government, choices that are not restricted by other "more socialist" democracies. Denmark, for example, has an extremely high level of government redistribution. Wealth is redistributed to the poor, education is available to all who desire it, and health care is provided for all citizens. These benefits are a consequence of restricting "freedom" in terms of a liberal democracy. Yet citizens of Denmark have more personal freedoms than many Americans, such as the freedom to attend a university - regardless of personal wealth. The question becomes; what freedoms are we restricting in America - for the sake of a liberal "free" democracy? 




No comments: