General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPrinceton Study: U.S. No Longer An Actual Democracy
Hardly a shock. You could see this miles away.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/princeton-experts-say-us-no-longer-democracy
A new study from Princeton spells bad news for American democracynamely, that it no longer exists.
Asking "[w]ho really rules?" researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page argue that over the past few decades America's political system has slowly transformed from a democracy into an oligarchy, where wealthy elites wield most power.
Using data drawn from over 1,800 different policy initiatives from 1981 to 2002, the two conclude that rich, well-connected individuals on the political scene now steer the direction of the country, regardless of or even against the will of the majority of voters.
"The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy," they write, "while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence."
As one illustration, Gilens and Page compare the political preferences of Americans at the 50th income percentile to preferences of Americans at the 90th percentile as well as major lobbying or business groups. They find that the governmentwhether Republican or Democraticmore often follows the preferences of the latter group rather than the first.
Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)The Irony of Democracy (first published 1970) is a book that explores the American government in a light that not many people see it in. In this book, Thomas Dye sights many examples while proving the point that our government is not one that is run by the people. Dye states that the United States of America is a nation that is run by a handful of elite individuals. These people generally gain power not by influencing the masses with popular ideas, but by using their money. This is evident even in the earliest years of the country in that the founders were upper-class, white males. They did not represent the majority of people in the new country. Dye also makes the point that every branch of our government is controlled by the elite. He is especially skeptical of the judicial branch because the nine judges are not elected, yet they have the power to overrule the elected officials of congress and the house. I see these issues in the same way that Dye sees them and I agree with most of his points.
http://ironyofdemocracy.blogspot.com/
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)His "Power Elite" was rejected by the University Of Texas Press, only to be picked up by Oxford University. It was a best-seller, resurrected in the late 60s.
AnotherDreamWeaver
(2,850 posts)He was a Congressman who fought the Trusts back in the day...
From Ohio.
Jack for Sanders
(46 posts)As originally constituted the right to vote, thus to have a voice and be represented, was reserved to white, male land owners.
This country was never a democracy, was never even intended to be.
It has always been a representative republic.
Someone from Princeton should know this basic bit of history.
How sad from an institute of higher learning.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)The point in the OP is that it is NOT representative of the public.
Jack for Sanders
(46 posts)"No longer An Actual Democracy" implies that the U.S. was at some point "An Actual Democracy".
It never was, not even close.
It's grade school/Jr.High Civics not worthy of a so-called elite university like Princeton.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)And I pointed out that it is not representative.
avebury
(10,952 posts)The point of the American Revolution was to fight against tyranny which is evolving in today's society as a small number of wealthy individuals/corporations obtain more and more control over how country is run.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Democracies fall into two categories- direct democracies, where every one has a say, and representative democracies, where representatives are elected to represent those who elected them. "Representative democracy" and "republic" have been used interchangeably since well before I was born. In fact, politicians of both sides of the aisle love to go on about how we are the world's longest lived democracy. "We were never a democracy" is a right wing meme that has been going around since Bush the dumber made it into office. We can that Limpballs for that, and the absurd notion that the Nazi party was a left wing phenomenon because they had the word "socialist" in their name.
WatermelonRat
(340 posts)Was it the days of plantation slavocracy, political machines, or of Reaganomics?
If the US isn't a Democracy now, it probably never was. But people who are frustrated right now often have positive feelings about the "good old days" so it wouldn't be rhetorically useful to say that this sort of problem was always there in some form.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)We can go read it, however the 3rd paragraph in the abstract pretty much sums it up.
"Abstract
Each of four theoretical traditions in the study of American politics which can be characterized
as theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy, Economic Elite Domination, and two types of
interest group pluralism, Majoritarian Pluralism and Biased Pluralism offers different
predictions about which sets of actors have how much influence over public policy: average
citizens; economic elites; and organized interest groups, mass-based or business-oriented.
A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors,
but until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against
each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a
unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues.
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business
interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens
and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide
substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased
Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism...."
http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf
Argue over any meaning of "democracy" you want, it's all pooched.