Student Essay on Republicanism and Direct Democracy

Republicanism and Direct Democracy

Summary:   Compares democracy and republicanism. Lists pros and cons of each system of government. Evaluates viewpoints of famous Americans W.E.B. Du Bois and Manning Marable.

Republicanism and direct democracy, these are two ways that a people can be governed. There is a major difference between these two systems. In a republican system the government represents the people. The representatives are chosen by popular vote and are given the power to make decisions on behalf of the people. The people do not get to voice their own opinions, the best they can do is vote for their representative and hope he wins. This can also be referred to as indirect democracy. Direct democracy which was exemplified in the ancient Athenian city-state, or the New England town meeting in modern times, is a government based solely on the people. The governmental decisions are passed only if the majority of the people vote for it. "People", that is the key word, the people themselves are included in making political decisions.

Race: the descendants of a common ancestor; distinct variety of human beings; lineage. These are the definitions the dictionary gives for race. However, what really is race? And what causes human beings to dislike a specific race? There are many who disagree as to what the answers to these questions are. I would like to discuss two specific writers that argue about this issue, W.E.B. Du Bois and Manning Marable.

According to Du Bois there are two aspects that differentiates one race from another. Firstly, all humans differ in regard to their physical attributes (hair color, skin color), plus language also differs widely among humans. These differences, says Du Bois, plays a great part in diminishing one's ability to better himself in society; " Any striving, no matter how intense and earnest, which is against the constitution of the world is in vain." The constitution of the world is that if you are different, physically, then your chances in making it are slim to none. The second factor that differentiates races and binds certain groups together are different histories, laws and religions, habits of thought, and striving for certain ideals of life. This factor really stems from the first difference, its just going a little deeper into discovering the answers to the two questions. To sum it all up, in the words of Du Bois, "The whole process which has brought about these race differences has been a growth... the differentiation of spiritual and mental differences between great races of mankind and the integration of physical differences."

Manning Marable raises an interesting point, in the world today, blacks have become more actively involved in politics, education, and are financially better off. However, in direct proportion to this, harassment and violence towards the blacks have increased tremendously. "Despite their gains, many blacks felt that the goal of racial harmony, and integration into the American mainstream was more distant than ever before", as Marable puts it. The reason behind the problems that are affecting the blacks is "race." This means according to Marable that, since, five centuries ago the blacks served the white man, today they are looked down upon. "Race is not an abstraction but an unequal relationship between social aggregates, which is also historically specific." Basically, the oppressed racial group's power in regard to labor, capital, and ownership of property is systematically exploited. The opposite is also true; if you are white then your chances improve dramatically in regard to labor, capital, and ownership of property. A good example of all this is how whites listen and copy the African-American's style of music, however they won't vote for a black candidate, only because he is black. Marable calls this "interaction without understanding." Desegregation, Marable says, gave the blacks a chance to intergrade with the culture of the world, and also created the road to racial progress. It did not, however, give them power as a racial group or destroy the vulgar racist ideology (208).

So what is the solution to the major problems raised by Du Bois and Marable? Can we fix up these problems with, maybe, a republic government, or maybe a direct democracy? Well, I feel, that in Dubois's case the best form of government for the problem-facing black nation, is a republic. Du Bois really says it himself, "as a race we must strive by race organization, by race solidarity, and by race unity." In a republic the black race would be together as a minority race, working to better themselves in society. As opposed to a direct democracy in which people are seen as individuals and not as a group. An individual may better himself but the point is to make it better for the entire black population. In Marable's situation and the problem that he poses, I would have to say that neither a direct democracy nor a republic would help solve this problem. Marable says that the system is "fixed" and if you are black you're the loser, and if you're white then you rule. As a result of this problem, no matter what type of government you have running your country the blacks will lose. We have a republic today and yet this problem is rampant, in direct democracy the blacks are a minority so their individual votes counted together won't add up to the majority white vote, which of course, would be voting against the blacks.

James Madison, called by many "the father of the constitution", would agree with a republic government as opposed to a direct democracy. According to Madison, our world, no matter where you go will be split up into factions. A faction is, " a number of citizens, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." These factions are harmful towards our government in that political decisions are decided not in a just manner, or according to the rights of a minor party, but by the more dominant majority power. A direct democracy cannot be the solution to this problem, Madison says. The reason is because if you have a government that is run by a number of citizens in person then inevitably you will have a faction that agrees on a certain goal. As a result of this there will be contention and hatred between the two groups. The only way to deal with this issue, continues Madison, is to have a republic. The republic will control and stabilize the effects of a faction. By having political decisions passed through a chosen body of people, whose true interests are only to benefit the country, the decisions will be more consonant to the public good. Madison agrees that certain things have to be worked out in a republic; however, this type of government is the ideal.

In conclusion, I, myself agree with Madison's view, as to what type of government is ideal. Secondly, I feel, that Madison and Du Bois go " hand in hand" with one another, they both agree that a republic is the only way that the minority will be protected from the majority. Manning Marable stands alone, that no matter what type of government you have, you will never win. The minority will always be on the bottom and the majority on top.