Pluralist Model Of Democracy

Democracy is a key term that citizens live by in the United States. Everyone always discusses how in America we live in a democracy and that it is amazing. However, our country is solely based off of the Constitution. So that raises the point of does the Constitution stay consistent with democracy. There are many different ways to look at this considering that there are four models of democracy according to Hudson. A big principle in the Constitution is that it limits the powers of the federal government. In a way that lines up directly with the generic definition of a democracy. If you take a look deeper, however you will see that there is much more to democracy and much more to the Constitution. Throughout this paper, we will take a more

in depth look to see if the Constitution is consistent with democracy. If the Constitution is consistent with all four models of democracy, then it is indeed a democratic document.
The first model of democracy we will take a look at is protective democracy. “Protective Democracy is a model of democracy that advocates popular control of government as a means of protecting individual liberty” (Hudson, 8). That basically means that the government is around to protect the rights of individual citizens. Also a big part of the protective model of democracy would be the idea of checks and balances. Checks and balances are what separates powers from the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Therefore, if there are three different types of governments that have equal power they can all keep one another in check. This way, if one part of government were to go out of line, then another branch could get them under control. The U.S. Constitution is what set up the separation of powers. Without the Constitution, there would be no checks and balances. So in that sense the Constitution does align up with the protective model of democracy. However, the protective model also acknowledges the imbalance of wealth and how the rich will always stay there. Although some may argue that this topic is touched upon, it is not. The Constitution in no way says that there are some people that will always be ahead and stay that way. Actually it states quite that opposite. It is discussed in different sections how as American citizens, we all have the right to life, liberty, and property. All in all, even though there are some differences I believe that the Constitution is consistent with the protective model of democracy.
The second model of democracy that will be discussed is developmental democracy. The developmental model is quite different then the protective model. The developmental model basically assumes the best about this society. As Hudson describes it “Good citizens are knowledgeable about, interested in, and active in government and civic affairs” (Hudson, 11). It almost in a sense implies that citizens are the most important form of government. This model recognizes that we need government officials, but that it relies solely on us to responsibly elect those officials. Although the Constitution does not directly touch upon civic duties, it presumes them. For example, since within the Constitution it gives you the right to vote it presumes that (if eligible) you will go and vote. It also says how there are direct punishments for treason. So the Constitution expects that you will be loyal to the United States. The Constitution in many ways does shed some light on the developmental model, but since it does not directly touch upon it than the Constitution is not consistent with the developmental model.
The third model of democracy that will be discussed is pluralist democracy.

The pluralist model of democracy is almost the exact opposite of the developmental model. Hudson points out how “Moreover, average citizens were far from equal in their ability to influence public officials” (Hudson, 12). That shows exactly what the pluralist model means. The governmental duties should be left in the hands of those who are in power and better. They almost believe that citizens do not want to be involved in politics. Now the constitution does talk about the responsibilities of the government directly. For example, it says how it is the government’s job to establish justice. That is not the responsibility of the people. Although the Constitution discusses the responsibilities of the government it does not directly state how citizens are disinterested in politics and that politics should be left only for those who are in high authority. So it is a little more difficult to directly say whether or not this is consistent. In my opinion overall I believe the constitution is consistent with the pluralist model because it discusses how specific duties should be left to only the

government.
The final model of democracy that will be discussed is participatory democracy. A statement that helps define participatory democracy is “Included a call for a democracy of individual participation” (Hudson, 15). The participatory model calls for more individual participation and also control over the federal government. In a sense this model is a combination of protective democracy and developmental democracy. Similar to the protective model, participatory democracy wants to make sure the federal government is under control. As for the developmental model, it encourages citizens to go and vote and assume that role in society as does the participatory model. Now how the Constitution supports this model is tricky since there is a lot of depth to it. The Constitution does directly address how there has to be a control of the federal government. It discusses how all power not given to the federal government is given to the states. That way the states have some control over the federal government. However, it does not directly state that the citizens have to be involved in the voting process. If you are to take a look at this whole model of democracy, I would say it is consistent with the constitution only because the model encourages citizen involvement instead of demanding it.
If the Constitution were consistent with all four models of democracy, then it would be a democratic document.

Throughout this entire paper all four models of democracy were broken down and analyzed. I took into account what exactly each model expresses and how the constitution is consistent or not with its points. The protective, pluralist, and participatory model all were consistent with what the Constitution stated. However, the developmental model was not consistent with the Constitution. Since the Constitution only presumes civic duties and does not directly shed light on them, then it is inconsistent with developmental democracy. As stated in my thesis all four models of democracy had to be consistent with the Constitution in order for it to be a democratic document. Since developmental democracy was not consistent with the Constitution, then it is not a democratic

document.