The Future of Democracy in America and the World
A Few Possibilities
by
Book Cover & Preview Text
INTRODUCTION
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
—Amendment I, Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution (final wording accepted by the House of Representatives on September 24, 1789; accepted by the Senate on September 25, 1789; and ratified by the States in 1791).
The writing and accepting of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights by the House of Representatives and the Senate and its ratification by the States illustrates that differences in beliefs threatening the general welfare was a concern foremost in the minds of the people living in early America. To prevent groups that share different religious beliefs from destroying one another, the European people living in early America, who had diverse religious beliefs and were fleeing England because of religious persecution, were forced to adopt freedom of religion.
Differences in beliefs have perennially been a source of conflict. This necessitates rules to provide procedures for settling differences. It is also necessary that these rules be changeable so they can be improved upon, but constant enough to provide fairness in application due to consistency.
Yet rules have a limited domain for practical reasons as, even after discussion, differences can exist, and the resources of the law are limited in its ability to compel the minority to comply with the will of the majority. Further, it is doubtful whether it is best that the minority should at all times be compelled to comply with the will of the majority, or that the minority complying with the will of the majority is at all times even desirable. Therefore, a degree of tolerance in the differences of our beliefs must be sanctioned by law.
But to what degree should differences in beliefs be sanctioned by law and society? Due to the nature of differences in viewpoint, the answer to this question may always have some measure of uncertainty. We shall forever be communicating our different viewpoints to one another. In this book I will develop my viewpoint regarding the possibilities for the future of democracy, both the institution and the culture associated with this institution, in America and the world as influenced by law and society.
TheFutureofDemocracy.org
Formats
Book Details
About the Book
The Future of Democracy in America and the World: A Few Possibilities makes the vast fields of modern American political philosophy and politics more accessible to both those engaged and those not engaged in these professions.
Based in part on an exhaustive reading of American political philosophy and writers who have influenced American political philosophy, James Schacht explores what democracy has been in the past, what it is now, and what it can be in the future.
Going as far back as the Englishman John Locke, whose writings strongly influenced Thomas Jefferson in his writing of the Declaration of Independence, he provides a comprehensive view of American political philosophy and its origins up to today, describes the institution of democracy, describes the culture associated with this institution, makes some predictions, and describes a framework for pursuing our best hope for the future.
See also TheFutureofDemocracy.org.
About the Author
JAMES SCHACHT worked in the physics profession at 3M Company after graduating from the University of Minnesota with a BS in Physics in 1987.
He has worked on a number of campaigns local to Minnesota and also on the campaigns of U.S. Senator Al Franken from Minnesota and President Barack Obama.
During 14 years of study of American and world political philosophy, politics, history, and culture, he developed and wrote The Future of Democracy in America and the World: A Few Possibilities.