Liberalism in America
Different nations in the world have varying political-economic systems. Countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom have a liberal economic system, where the State has limited control over the economy. The other characteristics of a liberal economy are that the market plays a huge role in the economy, and there is little importance to equality (Dudovskiy, 2012). Creation of policies in a liberal economy is through pluralism, where groups of people, rather than the whole population make decisions. Different scholars have explained inequality to be the greatest flaw of a liberal political-economic system. As a liberal economy, the United States exhibits some of these characteristics including little interference of the state in the economy and a paramount role of the market in the economy.
In the American economy, the government has little influence on the economy. The US government plays a limited role in the regulation of several activities in the economy including telecommunications and transportation. In the mid-twentieth century, the government regulated the majority of the services in the transport and telecommunications industry. Most of these industries were highly monopolized, which resulted in poor services. The deregulation of these services in the 1970s saw a reduction in government intervention, which allowed room for competition (Hoekman & Mattoo, 2011). The increased competition allowed cheaper and improved services to consumers. However, the deregulation of these industries saw the introduction of federal bodies to act as “night watchmen.” The federal bodies are however shielded from the government, and presidential powers; therefore, minimal involvement of the government in regulatory purposes.
The American economy also faces several instances of government involvement in the market. The president appoints the federal regulatory body commissioners, which may show a sort of involvement. Members of Congress may also influence regulatory bodies to make decisions for their constituents; therefore, illustrating government involvement in the economy. The government is also directly involved in the banking industry. Due to the various economic problems faced in the US during the 20th Century, the government took an active role in the banking industry. The government involvement in the banking industry involves offering funds to save failing banks (Lohr, 2008).
Liberalism in the United States, however, differs from other economies as it emphasizes on equality. Unlike the Laissez-Faire system, where instances of both economic and political inequalities exist, the American liberalism involves instances in economic equality, which is achieved through taxation. Introduced in 2013 after the reelection of President Obama, the taxation policy involves raising taxes on the wealthy, while keeping taxation to the middle and low-income citizens at a minimum (Sahadi, 2015). Other than the taxation policy, the United States government attempts to end economic inequality by improving the rates of employment. The classical liberalism advocates for high unemployment rates as a part of market flexibility. The high rates of unemployment often result in high inequality rates. Reducing the rates of unemployment promotes more instances of equality.
The French style Laissez-faire explains a form of liberalism. The Laissez-faire system explains high instances of inequality and little government involvement. Instances of unemployment and low taxation result in an increased gap between the rich and the poor, which translates to inequality. The government only involves itself in matters involving defense and education. The various characteristics of a Laissez-faire system reflect the same characteristics as a perfect liberal economy.
Goals of Democracy
The United Nations considers democracy as one of its core principles and values. Countries may employ democracy to achieve several goals including ensuring equality as well as a protection of human rights (Broadbent, 2010). The achievement of equality is the most significant goal of democracy. Democratic countries employ several methods to ensure achievement of the equality goal. The United States is an example of a democratic country as the citizens have the power to make decisions on matters affecting them. The United States constitution allows all citizens to take part in elections regardless of gender, or race (Kahne & Middaugh, 2008). The involvement of all citizens in deciding the types of leaders shows equality. Other than the United States, the majority of the democratic nations globally allow all legal citizens to participate elections to elect representatives. Most democratic governments also promote equality by ensuring equal representation of all citizens. Democratic governments may reserve several leadership seats for the disabled and other disadvantaged groups.
A common characteristic of democracy is the dependence on the decision of the majority. Reliance on the majority decision may result in instances of inequality and inefficiency. Most of the nations practicing democracy employ the majority rule as a way of ensuring equality. Studies have however reported that the views and decisions of the majority are at time wrong and result in more harm than good. However, Nordic countries such as Norway have a different democratic system, where the views of the majority are not always right. This process ensures maximum equality as every individuals opinion is considered, which results in choosing of the best option, not through the majority, but through consideration of the best option (Donavan & Karp, 2006). Even after citizens make the decision, there are bodies that examine the decision to assess its impact. This process allows equality as even the minorities can make decisions.
Non-Democratic Rule
Although democratic governments have become common among numerous nations around the world, there are still several instances of non-democratic rule in different countries. Some of these may be due to failed democracy and some due to the constitutional law. The various non-democratic leadership tends to have negative effects in a country including an increase in corruption as well as gross violations of human rights. However, there may exist situations when non-democratic law is inevitable. An example of a non-democratic rule that may work for several countries in the year 2016 is Military rule.
Military rule involves a top ranking army officer, or officers taking the leadership position of a country, mainly through a coup d’état. Military rule involves the institution of martial law in a country as well as the quelling of all instances of rebellion in a country. A country that would benefit from military rule is one that is faced by high instances of rebellion, which often results in mass destructions. Countries where citizens often take up violent demonstration may benefit from military rule as all forms of resistance would end. Military rule has assisted countries like Thailand to end all instances of resistance and violence, which were common during democratic and monarchical rule (Seiff, 2015). Another example of a country that would benefit from military rule is countries that are constantly threatened by external forces including terrorists and other nations. Such threats may require a military leader to take a leadership position. The use of a military leader would result in the development of better strategies to face the external threats Countries such as the Ukraine would benefit from a military rule as the government is faced with the problem of defending its borders from internal threats and external threats posed by the Russians.
References
Broadbent, E. (2010). Equality is the Core Value of Democracy. Retrieved from Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives: https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/equality-core-value-democracy
Donavan, T., & Karp, J. A. (2006). Popular Support for Direct Democracy. Party Politics, 12(5), 671-688.
Dudovskiy, J. (2012). Liberal and Coordinated Market Economies. Retrieved from Research Methodology: http://research-methodology.net/liberal-and-coordinated-market-economies/
Hoekman, B., & Mattoo, A. (2011). Services Trade Liberalization and Regulatory Reform. The World Bank, 1-25.
Kahne, J., & Middaugh, E. (2008). Democracy for Some: The Civic Opportunity Gap in High School. The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement, 1-30. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED503646.pdf
Lohr, S. (2008). Government’s Leap Into Banking Has Its Perils. Retrieved from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/18/business/18system.html?_r=0
Sahadi, J. (2015, January 30). Taxing the rich: The record under Obama. Retrieved from CNN Money: http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/30/pf/taxes/obama-taxes-rich/
Seiff, A. (2015, May 22). One year of Thai military rule passes with a whisper. Retrieved from Al Jazeera: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2015/05/year-thai-military-rule-passes-whisper-150520042259114.html
