The Role of the grown-up population in ensuring that children have democratic environment

I.                   Introduction

 

Nowadays, the acceptable characteristic of a “good” state is fundamentally one that resembles a democratic state. Democracy is the political command that, to some extent, listen to the demands of everyone within the state. By means of democracy the other key political purposes are best acquired. (Tessler, p231) Given that democracy presents people a legitimate decision principle. Democracy is an enduring shared decision-making procedure. In this process the citizens entrusts some essential choices to their representatives, and representatives hand over other judgments to officials in the executive and in the judicial branches of the government. What is seen in the previous centuries is the individuals conquering gradually political power and making democracy an actuality, even though what is present is essentially imperfect. The work of Marian Wright Edelman (2004), a clear and present inclination to what is considered participatory democracy is espoused. This study intends to look into the discussions of Edelman (2004) regarding the role of the “grown-up” population in ensuring that the children have democratic environment. Moreover, the study will also be taking into consideration the arguments in favor of the participatory models of democracy. Along with the work of Edelman (2004), the discussions on this paper will also include other academic articles regarding democracy and the democratic system.

 

II.                Marian Wright Edelman’s View on Democracy

 

The work of Edelman (2004) entitled “Standing Up For Children” is a testament to what the populations should engage in such that people in general may have the luxury of experiencing the benefits of democracy. As Edelman (2004) indicated in her work, “we have the responsibility to ensure all children what we now provide to some children.” This shows the contention of her work indicating that the benefits acquired from a democratic state is not limited to a privileged few.

 

Essentially, the work Edelman (2004) calls for all sectors of society to deal with the problems in which the younger part of society endures. Through the implementation democratic principles and procedures, Edelman (2004) indicated that this could be done. In essence, the view of Edelman strongly suggests an implementation of a participatory democracy. A means of implementing democratic principles in a general sense, where every part of society does their part such that everyone takes pleasure with the liberties and freedoms advanced by the democratic state.     

 

III.              Participatory Model as an Ideal Model of Democracy

 

Drawing from the traditional definition of democracy, the participatory model does fit flawlessly. However, early politicians and political scholars like James Madison indicated that the implementation of a participatory democracy is the same as implementing a mob rule. (Lobel, 1987) Though it did came from a person who drafted the US constriction that view on participatory democracy is over a century old. Times have changes and ideologies regarding the democratic state have changed significantly through the years. At this point, what Madison have perceived over a century ago may not essentially equate with the arguments to which proponents of participatory democracy present.

 

In the modern sense, the context participatory democracy provides is more related to the decentralization of power of the state. In essence, the proponents of participatory democracy still hold true to the traditional definition of direct involvement of the people to the state. (Hauptmann, 2001, 397) Nonetheless, in this sense the state still holds the power and authority, an additional variable of input from the public may be present. In the long run, the implementation of such a model of democracy would resolve any estrangement of the state from the public. In addition, the state and the public could thus work hand in hand to deal with the existing problems that they encounter.      

 

The issues on what model of democracy to implement falls into countries that is in transition from one political system to another. An example is the study of Lobel (1987) where the Nicaraguan government adopted the participative model of democracy. However, in states like this one the social structure has to be considerably compatible with the change of system.

 

IV.            Participatory vs. Pluralist Democracy

 

The participatory model of democracy is one of the numerous models of democracy that has emerged thought the years. The closest model that could dispel the claims of participatory democracy is the pluralist form of democracy. Unlike participatory democracy, the pluralist model rest in the assumption that human beings are essentially selfish and greedy. This rests in contract with the claim of the participatory model of people being not capable of being apathetic. It also takes into consideration the context of power as an entity that is basically transferred to the clutches of a group of privileged few. An example of this view is represented in the study of Moore (1966) in the transition of India to a democratic state. Moore (1966) indicated the role of the bourgeois in the process. In states in which the ruling class is sufficiently strong to considerably abate the economic arrangements of feudalism, democracy is able to materialize. Nevertheless, it is not the direct accomplishments of the ruling class that is important in Moore’s (1966) claims in his work. The power of the ruling class has a definitive impact upon the manner in which upper classes from the countryside and the peasantry deal with politics with the ascent of modernity.

 

 

 

V.               Conclusion

 

Looking at the discussions above, one could surmise that the basic thrust to which participatory model is to provide the public with the voice to the public. The discussions regarding participatory democracy entail that the concept has changed throughout the years, dispelling the traditional claim of it being equivalent to a mob rule. On the contrary, the emergence of the pluralist model clearly tries to chase away the principles of the participatory model.

 

In consulting the work of Edelman (2004), one sees the possibility of these two models to complement each other. With the pluralistic view of power, the ruling class could always assist the state in the delivery of services and the needs the public. Moreover, the bourgeois could similarly be among the individuals in the forefront of direct participation of the people. In the long run, the determination on fulfilling the “responsibilities to ensure all children” will be ultimately carried out.

Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com