Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analyze the theory of pluralism
Pluralist theory democracy
Pluralist theory democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analyze the theory of pluralism
An interest group is any organization that seeks to influence public policy. Interest groups are found in many societies, America being no exception. Theodore Lowi, Political Science Professor at Cornell University, explores the effects interest groups, or liberal pluralism, has had and will continue to have on politics in the United States. Lowi authored the work in the late 20th century but his arguments are still plausible today. The work is split into four parts, beginning with the origins and background on liberalism in the Unites States, then moving into issues with liberal governments, and lastly the book deals with other government systems beyond liberalism. Lowi himself describes his work as a textbook inquiry into the character of …show more content…
191-283), Lowi goes on to assert that interest group liberalism demoralizes government because liberal government is unable to achieve justice. Liberal governments are unable to achieve justice because the definition of justice under liberalism is unclear, and difficult to put to use. In fact, the whole idea of this justice is absurd. Lowi determines that liberal government lacks effective rules for government actions to be regulated by, running rampant without constraint like a bull in a china shop. In his final point, Lowi concludes that interest group liberalism in the United States destroys the systems of democracy. Interest groups encourage informal bargaining and a country ruled by interest groups need informal bargaining to succeed. Although this environment is necessary to all political climates, a nation cannot survive on this environment alone or often because it often evolves into a climate of distrust and an unhealthy level of political cynicism (p. 292). Lowi comes to the conclusion that even though interest group liberalism was created to combat absolutist nature of the majority/minority rule in democracy, it instead negates democratic power and leaves public policy …show more content…
xiii). Since the 1960s, when Lowi authored this text because he believed we were in a state of political crisis, interest groups have grown exponentially. This is due to growth in broad economic developments and growth and specific interests of citizens willing to take an active role in political processes. Interest group ideology has thrived on inadequate planning and overextension. Effective government requires formalities and moral legitimacy. Lowi argues that as long as well-moneyed interests do not grow to exercise an unjustly disproportionate amount of political capitol, interest groups should be welcomed in American politics as a means by which the average citizen can enjoy a greater amount of political efficacy. Lowi points out that nearly every area of government activity currently bears little relevance to the actual conditions they were designed for, and he calls for a return to older government that had consequences and held us responsible for consequences of political decisions because the current system does nothing to aid those who need government support the most, those one welfare and involved in those programs. Instead it is a power-grabbing money pool open for interest groups to take a hold of it,
Characterized by constitutionally-limited government, an emphasis on (and a wide-spread popular ideological enshrinement of) individual civil rights and liberties, and economic policy exhibiting strong laissez-faire overtones, the American political system certainly warrants the designation liberal democracy. This designation distinguishes the United States from similar advanced industrial democracies whose political systems lend themselves to preserving the public welfare rather than individual rights. With their government bound to precepts established in a constitution drafted and revised by a group of tyranny-fearing individuals, the American populace enjoys one of the most liberal, unrestrictive governments
Lani Guinier, in her essay titled “Tyranny of the Majority” (1944), justifies her political ideas and explains that as a result of these ideas, she has explored decisionmaking rules that prevent The Majority from “exercise[ing] power unfairly or tyrannically.” She supports her justification by incorporating childlike anecdotal stories, quoting loved American patriots, and creating conceptual analogies. Guinier’s purpose is to convince her opponents, as well as Americans with moderate political orientations, that her views and ideas aren’t too radical, in order to convince them that in order to make America a “true democracy,” they must consider her methods and strategies for desegregating The Majority. She adopts a patriotic, idealistic tone
Purdy again cites Franklin Roosevelt as an example of socialist ideas that have infiltrated United States policy. There has been a decrease in the distrust in markets, and there has been an increase in the belief that markets are safeguarded. Purdy goes on to call markets “enemies to democracy and personal freedom.” Although democracy and markets seem to coincide with each other, markets singularly can cause incredible concentrations of wealth and he states that, “wealth is power.” He goes on to say that this contributes to the inequality aforementioned and it is hurtful to democracy. He argues that this concentration of wealth will “undermine” the idea that everyone vote and voice are equally important; only the voice of the wealthy is taken into consideration. Continuing his argument that income inequality and markets are interconnected, Purdy further demonizes markets by asserting that the inequality is a cause of the loss of personal freedom. This unfairness narrows the economic options of the general
Essentially, interest groups use many different tactics to accomplish their central goals but this paper will detail 2 of them. The first being lobbying, which is the act of persuading businesses as well as government leaders to help a specific organization by changing laws or creating events in favor of that group. Interest groups use this technique by hiring someone to represent them and advocate their cause to on the behalf of the entire group. These hired representatives usually have more than enough experience within the political field and are able to persuade connections within the government for help with their concerns. This method gets a lot of criticism because although lobbyist offer their input to government officials on pending laws, they only look at what is favorable for their cause. When trying to make a difference you have to not only reflect on your argument but on the side affects of that argument as
... democracies, minority groups interest are not just dismissed but are actually compromised. They are compromised by legislature placing regulations on certain interest.
In discussing the problems surrounding the issue of factionalism in American society, James Madison concluded in Federalist #10, "The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of cannot be removed and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects." (Federalist Papers 1999, 75) In many ways, the nature of American politics has revolved around this question since our country's birth. What is the relationship between parties and government? Should the party serve as an intermediary between the populace and government, and how should a government respond to disparate ideas espoused by the factions inherent to a free society. This paper will discuss the political evolution that has revolved around this question, examining different "regimes" and how they attempted to reconcile the relationship between power and the corresponding role of the people. Beginning with the Federalists themselves, we will trace this evolution until we reach the contemporary period, where we find a political climate described as "interest-group liberalism." Eventually this paper will seek to determine which has been the most beneficial, and which is ultimately preferable.
We elect politicians on the basis on the issues by which they stand, and these issues are either held up or weakened by the numerous interest groups that exist today. Interest groups target both major and minor issues, using all of their resources to sponsor or overpower the groups’ concern. Interest groups are composed of a limited range of the body of voters who have a great stake in the issues their group support. They make evident the issues their group supports. Their resources are used in an attempt to make their issue public policy. Interest groups are persistent; they do not give up until they succeed. They lobby congress, take legal action, and attempt to influence election results in order to benefit their cause. ”The AARP monitors local and national legislation of interest to its members.”1 The AARP, an example of a non-PAC interest group, focus their efforts to electioneering and media. They influence the elections through their voter guides, election forums and the large senior voting population. Through television, radio, and periodicals the AARP is able to achieve many of their goals to aid retired persons.
The pluralistic scholar David Truman notes that “the proliferation of political interest groups [is] a natural and largely benign consequence of economic development” (Kernell 2000, 429). That is, as American economic development increases, in the form of industry, trade, and technology, factions are produced in order to protect special interests. Factions have a large platform on which to find support from various political parties, committees, subcommittees, and the courts, as well as federal, state, and local governments (Kernell 2000, 429).
South University Online. (2013). POL2076: American Government: Week 4: People and Politics—Interest Groups. Retrieved from http://myeclassonline.com
Democracy is rule by the people; the people elect governing officials based off of their personal values and beliefs. Different political parties rule the political scene and are serving to represent the people’s opinions in the best ways possible. Previously, I had a belief that my political view was essentially the only one possible and therefore it was the best. These views changed quickly once I learned the different political parties, their views, how they represent the people’s views, and how public opinion shapes politics. The government is formed around differentiating opinions on which policies should be in place and which social aspects need to be considered first. Not only is the government guided by opinion, but the people’s lives are guided by opinion as well. Each individual holds a different view, and each view can have an influence on society. Fortunately, after roughly eight weeks of studying American Government, I now have a better sense of complexity and the value of
The political incentives that spawned parties are transparent. In any system where collective choices are made by voting, organization pays. When action requires winning majorities on a continuing basis in multiple settings, organization is absolutely essential. The Constitution’s provisions for enacting laws and electing leaders therefore put a huge premium on building majority alliances across institutions and electoral units. Parties grew out of the efforts of political entrepreneurs to build such alliances and to coordinate the collective activity necessary to gain control of and use machinery of government. One of the incentives for building political parties is to build stable legislative and electoral alliances. To control policy consistently, then,
Since the genesis of the United States of America, political scientists and figures have recounted tales of war between the ideologies of political groups. In his farewell address, even George Washington, first president of the United States, warned against “the danger of parties in the State” as well as “the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally” (Washington). Since human beings are reluctant to heed good advice, the “mischiefs of factions” (Madison), since then, have come about and been growing and changing, and political alliances have been strengthening and evolving, so much so that they have progressed into a form of hierarchical organizations that foster environments in which everyday Americans can come together and celebrate their concurring political beliefs. At present day, political polarization is stronger than it has ever been before, proven by the decline of centrist members in Congress, the increasingly partisan voting behaviors of the American public, and the widening social gap between Republicans and Democrats. This intense partisanship has several implications on the functioning of the American government, delineated by the increased time it takes to confirm presidential nominations in a divided branch government, 30 percent legislation decrease in a divided legislative government, and the overall decline of honest discussion in the American political atmosphere.
Do they play an important role in our democracy since they claim that they represent many people? There has been a continuing debate over the proper role of interest groups in the United States democracy. Interest groups are organized group of individuals who share the same ideas and their main goal is to influence media, lawmakers, and people with their ideas. On one hand, interest groups members and their leaders assert that they offer crucial information and services to the lawmakers and that lawmakers aren’t experts regarding every bill proposed
The government in the United States supposedly revolves around American ideals such as equality and diversity; however, this is simply not the case. The meaning of democracy has been skewed in the United States to represent something entirely different than it did in 1776 when the country was founded. Today, our democracy behaves more like an aristocracy, where the upper class exercises power within the government and state, influencing discourse and therefore the laws and resources in our country, purportedly “for the people”. Democracy is presumed to provide everyone with equal political power, but the government in today’s America, although seemingly following this ideal model, does not. Instead, the elite upper-class have a monopoly over
Interest Groups are formed by individuals who want to influence the government and American politics. The different types of interest groups in America include business/agriculture, labor/union, professional, public, ideological, and public sector. Regardless of the type of interest group, all interest groups have the common goal of wanting to influence the government and shape America into a better country.