American Politics

American Politics

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of the Institution]

American Politics

Madisonian Democracy

The Madisonian model or Madisonian democracy is considered to be a structure of government in which the governmental powers are characterized into judicial, legislative, and execution. The reason behind the implementation of the Madisonian model was to structure the government in a way that could result in prevention of imposing dictatorship either by minority or majority. The aim of proposing this scheme of government by James Madison was to balance the influence and power of all branches (Schultz, 2016). The matter of fact is that the separation of power has been resulted due to the courts interpreting laws, president enforcing laws, and Congress passing laws. One thing that must be considered here is that all three governmental branches do not depend on each other, still, they tend to cooperate by necessity.

As per Madison, there is an increase in the number of individuals both in minority and majority who are actuated and united because of some common interest. Madison identified only two possible ways to resolve the issue; one is to control the effects as it will limit their impact. The other possible way suggested by Madison is that the government should limit liberty. The argue of Madison is that under the proposed Constitution, the minority fiction would not be able to assert itself. The reason for that is due to the republican nature of the constitution. There is no doubt that a faction that tends to encompass a majority of people undoubtedly possess a sum of great problems. However, the issues were tackled by Madison as he first contended a pure democracy which results in providing no cure for fiction. The reason for that lies in the fact that the majority can always tyrannize the minority. Still, when it comes to the republican system created by the Constitution, it tends to offer the solution. The possible distinctions as per Madison that result in mitigating the faction in a proposed system are; the population and size of the union, and representative government.

Outcomes of Madisonian Democratic Institutions and Civil Rights Movement

The period between the 1950s and '60s was considered to be the height of civil right movement. During this time, there was seen a continual struggle for racial and social justice of African American in the U.S. The greatest achievement from the Civil War was the abolishment of slavery, however, it still could not eradicate the discrimination. There are a series of important events that brought social change during the civil rights movement. In the year 1955, the Montogomery Bus Boycott was seen to take place after Rosa Parks was arrested because she refused to give up her bus seat (Shi & Tindall, 2016). The boycott resulted in African Americans uniting themselves together and they stopped using the bus system. The 1961 Albany Movement is remarkable for a large number of groups joining it. The movement was disbanded after almost 12 months of protecting, and it could not accomplish its goals as well. The Birmingham Campaign of 1963 came to a successful end as it ended the discriminatory economic policies against the resident of African Americans in the Alabama city. A number of rallies, boycotts, and marches took place in the Chicago Open Housing Movement. The king along with 30 other individuals was injured. The Movement continued through 1967. Poor People's Campaign, in 1968, resulted in gaining the more human and economic rights for the poor Americans.

There is no uncertainty that Madison was a critic of democracy. However, the overall view tends to mislead a large number of individuals. In the current scenario, the work of Madison should be read as an invitation to redefine, and not a rejection of democracy (Sloss, 2017). The Madisonian democracy reflects itself as an arrangement for holding one another accountable in enacting policy. Check and balance is definitely not the core of a civic ethic that results in extending beyond federalist arrangement and inter-branch relations. When it comes to popular political participation, they are quite necessary, however, not a good approach at the voluntarist grounds. For Madison, it has been observed that the participation is put into accountability service for the ancient Athenians (Schultz, 2016). Studies and research show that in perfectly understood democracy, the citizens enhance and reinforce the efforts of each other in order to comply with justice.

Conclusion

Considering the Civil Rights policy in the United States and the Civil Rights Movement, it is concluded that the democracy of the U.S. is somehow reached at a breaking point. Although the U.S. democracy is strong, but it tends to show some cracks. Due to less engagement of voters and other factors, the economy has become a great challenge for the U.S in the 21st century. Studies and research show that the majority of Americans do not trust the federal government. The matter of fact is that democracy should be determinant to have as many individuals as possible to vote. The voters must be provided with the objective and quality information as it may serve them to elect the best possible candidates. In the current scenario, there is a high need for the U.S. democratic system to overhaul as it may strengthen the U.S. politics. An important point to consider is that the U.S. still has performed well in certain measures of democracy such as freedom of speech, free and fair elections, and judicial limits on executive power. When it comes to the civil rights policy in the U.S. it provides the right to equal protection, due process, free speech, and protects from discrimination. Therefore, the other side of the coin stands in the support of U.S. democracy as it serves in providing the basic human rights to each citizen.

References

Schultz, D. (2016). The Case for a Democratic Theory of American Election Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online, 164(2), 8.

Shi, D. E., & Tindall, G. B. (2016). America: A narrative history. WW Norton & Company.

Sloss, D. (2017). Human Rights and Constitutional Democracy. Human Rights Quarterly, 39(4), 971-986.