How Democratic Is America ? by Howard Zinn (1971)

How Democratic Is America? by Howard Zinn (1971)
A. The four-part “standard” definition of democracy –
Many political scientists will look for FOUR basic characteristics when considering whether or not a country is a democracy. These can be posed as four questions, each with a required answer:
1) Who makes decisions in the country?
Answer required: The elected representatives of the people.
2) Who can vote?
Answer required: All adult citizens (a.k.a., universal suffrage).
3) Are individual rights guaranteed?
Answer required: Yes, the fundamental rights of the people are not only

written down on paper, but they are also respected and protected by the government.

4) Who can run for office?
Answer required: There must be open competition for elected office with no

arbitrary restrictions on who can run (such as gender, race,

religion, etc.).

From these questions and answers we can build a four-part definition of democracy that is somewhat “standard” (meaning that it is widely used):

A democracy is a country which has: 1) a representative system of government; 2) universal suffrage; 3) guaranteed individual rights; and 4) open competition for office.

Even though this four-part definition is commonly used, the author of our article, Howard Zinn, rejects it for TWO reasons:

1. 
   Not enough information –
   

Zinn doesn’t think the “standard” definition tells you nearly enough about a country. He wants to take a much more in-depth at a society before deciding how democratic it is. He wants to look at not only the political system, but also the economic system, the education system, the health care system, the legal system, etc.. He especially wants to know what its like to live in a country if you are someone traditionally on the fringes of society, such as poor people, women, or members of minority races or religions. Zinn would consider the four things included in the standard definition to be merely pre-requisites. Certainly a country must have those four things, but Zinn would argue that it must have much more as well.

2. 
   Over-simplifies the question –
   

Zinn also doesn’t like how using the “standard” definition tries to turn the discussion of democracy into a simple-minded YES/NO question. If we succumb to using this approach, then any country that has each of the four pre-requisites IS a democracy, and any country that lacks any of the four is NOT – end of story. Zinn thinks that the whole question of democracy is much more complicated than that. Every country in the world (even the U.S.) has some democratic features and some non-democratic features. The proper task is not to simply try and label countries as “democracies” and “non-democracies,” but instead to dig in and find out exactly HOW democratic each country is. The YES/NO approach created by using the “standard” definition deters this type of critical analysis and thus over-simplifies what is in Zinn’s mind a very complex question. Notice that the title of his essay does not ask: “Is America a Democracy?”, but instead, “How Democratic Is America?.” The latter is a question that begs a much more detailed and descriptive answer than the standard definition can provide.

B. Methods of comparison –
So if we are NOT going to use the “standard” definition of democracy (as Howard Zinn would urge), then what should we compare our country to in order to find out HOW democratic it is?
In his essay, Zinn discusses THREE possible methods of comparison. He rejects the first two, while encouraging the third:

1. 
   Compare to other countries –
   

To find out how democratic America is, we could compare what happens in our country to what happens in other countries around the world. Of course Americans like doing this, because when we do, the United States tends to look pretty good. However, Zinn feels that since we have been doing democracy longer than almost everyone else, and because we arguably do it better than everyone else, that this is a useless method of comparison. If we use this method of comparing ourselves to countries worse than us, we can quickly identify the flaws in other systems of government, but we don't necessarily find out what we’re not doing well. Looking good when comparing to a lesser standard doesn’t necessarily tell you that you are good at something, it might just be telling you that you are better than bad!

2. 
   Compare to our own past history –
   

Another method of trying to discover how democratic we are would be by comparing American democracy today to how it was 150, or 100, or 50 years ago. While Americans also like using this method of comparison, Zinn rejects it, too. There are many glaring things in our past that were very undemocratic (the treatment of Native Americans, slavery, the status of women, Japanese internment, segregation, etc.). In comparison to our past history, we undeniably look pretty good – we’ve definitely cleaned up our act in some very impressive ways. But again, this type of comparison simply puts us up against a lesser standard. Although we can easily find out what progress we have made, there’s no guarantee that we’ll find out what flaws we still have. All we will know for sure is that we are better than we were when we weren’t very good. And as alluded to above, being better than bad does not necessarily mean that you are good!

3. 
   Compare to perfection, or the ideal democracy –
   

This last method of comparison is the method that Zinn encourages us to use. Instead of comparing to lesser standards, he urges us to have the courage to compare to a higher one. Since our democratic system is better than most (if not all) other countries, and since we are much more democratic than we used to be, Zinn would argue that comparing to perfection is the only useful thing left for us to do. While he readily admits that our system will never be perfect, he feels that only by using perfection as our method of comparison, can we find out the one thing that we need to know if we want to get better: namely, what are we doing wrong? It is only by comparing to perfection and identifying the flaws and weaknesses of our democratic system that we may start trying to figure out how to fix them.

C. Zinn’s 10 criticisms of American democracy (in other words, in what specific ways does he find our system to be less than perfect?)–

1. 
   Who makes decisions? –
   

Zinn feels that our system of representation is an “undemocratic” form of government in which the representatives tend to become part of a “special elite” class that represents the interests of the wealthy over those of the common man.

2. 
   Who controls information? –
   

Zinn believes that decisions made by the government are often confusing due to the lack of information made available to the general public. He feels this is especially true in foreign policy where our government has at times misinformed the public about its reasons for going to war.

3. 
   Who fights our wars? –
   

Zinn holds that the military draft has always discriminated against young, poor, uneducated men. Historically, during times of war, people who were better off have usually found ways to avoid military service, or with their connections, they have gotten jobs in the military that put them out of harm’s way. Even today with an all-volunteer army, most of the fighting in our recent wars has been done by lower-middle and lower class young men who signed up for military service because it represents a steady job and a chance to get money for college.

4. 
   Is there equality before the law? –
   

Zinn reveals that when facing the police and the courts, the poor very often get treated worse than the rich, and the black worse than the white. In addition, the non-conformist often gets singled out for harsh treatment by both the police, and by judges and juries in the courtroom.

5. 
   Are basic resources equitably distributed? –
   

Zinn feels that in a rich country like the United States that anyone willing to work an honest 40-hour week should have access to decent FOOD, CLOTHING, SHELTER, HEALTH CARE and EDUCATION for himself and his family. However, with a low minimum wage in the United States and a poverty rate that hovers around 20%, this isn’t always the case for the working poor.

6. 
   Does everyone have access to a good education? –
   

Zinn argues that getting a good K-12 education is much more likely for those in the wealthy suburbs than it is for poor kids in the inner-city. This provides students in the wealthier neighborhoods with a much better chance of going to college and getting ahead in life.

7. 
   Who gets heard? –
   

Zinn contends that although we all have freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution, that it is only the wealthy and those with celebrity status who have a chance to get heard by the masses. The poor can protest on the street, but risk getting arrested for “disturbing the peace.”

8. 
   Are individuals really free to live the way they choose? –
   

Zinn believes that in a free society, that adults should be allowed to make whatever lifestyle choices they want as long as they are not hurting anyone else. However, there are laws against some lifestyle choices like same-sex marriage, simply because they offend the traditional values of others.

9. 
   Does profit have priority over human life? –
   

Zinn feels that unnecessary sickness and unnecessary death result from a culture that puts as much emphasis on corporate profit as ours does. He argues that corporations often ruin the environment and take advantage of their workers and consumers in the name of protecting the bottom line.

10. 
    Do people have the opportunity to protest? –
    

Zinn strongly feels that “dramatic expressions of protest” are necessary in order to facilitate change in the United States. As a veteran of the civil rights movement and the anti-Vietnam War movement, he argues that protest is often needed to change ways of thinking in a society. However, protestors in our country are often beaten and arrested instead of being listened to by those in power.