Introduction
The United States is considered as one of the essential democracies in the world considering that the constitution adopted and enacted in the country seeks to support the overall position of justice. However, the election of President Donald J. Trump in 2016 raised serious questions on whether the constitution indeed facilitates or frustrates authoritarians and the extent to which this is possible. In their argument, Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018) indicate that the most significant threat facing the democracy of the United States is in the acceptance of authoritarian behavior among the leaders elected, which, in turn, undermines the democratic norms. To help determine the value of this statement, this report will seek to engage in an in-depth analysis of explanation with the sole focus being on understanding whether the constitution in the United States supports or frustrates authoritarian leadership.
The extent to Which the Constitution Facilitates or Frustrates Authoritarian
An in-depth analysis of the principles set out within the constitution, one of the key aspects to note is that the United States facilitates the existence of authoritarian leadership from where such leaders tend to undermine the systems in the country to make it less democratic. The view can be seen from the fact that the constitution in the United States does not create any safeguards that seek to ensure that authoritarian leaders do not make it into leadership. Instead, the constitution establishes a situation where an individual can ascend to leadership especially in the position of the president. Ultimately, this seeks to expose the country to a significant challenge regarding authoritarian administration, as it becomes hard for the state to discern the quality of leadership from the individual leaders.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018) highlight this position when highlighting the pronouncement by a businessperson, real estate developer, and reality television celebrity, Donald J. Trump, on June 15, 2015, that he intended to run for the position of presidency. Most of the political analysts viewed Trump as an individual, who had sought to use the opportunity to boost his celebrity stature taking into account the fact that he was considered as an authoritarian leader. However, Trump moved up with his campaign towards becoming the president of the United States, which, in turn, resulted in his subsequent election to the highest office of leadership in the country. From this particular reflection, it is clear that the United States constitution seeks to create an avenue from which to facilitate the general expectations regarding providing that legal framework from which authoritarians can ascend to leadership.
How the Constitution Facilitates Authoritarian Rule
From the analysis in the previous section, it is clear that the constitution in the United States creates a situation where authoritarians can ascend to positions of leadership considering it projects several vital flaws that tend to enhance this position. Understanding some of these flaws may help towards adopting practical approaches that will seek to ensure that policymakers in the country work towards ensuring that the constitution protects democracy. Additionally, this will be of value towards ensuring that political leaders in the country understand their respective roles in protecting and upholding values projected through the constitution especially in their bid towards building and promoting the democratic benefits created by the founding fathers.
Some of the unusual ways that the constitution facilitates authoritarian rule in the United States include:
Electoral Process
The election of the president in the United States occurs through a process referred to as the Electoral College, which seeks to limit the role of the citizens in the election of the president in the country. Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018) describe the electoral college process of voting arguing that this creates a platform from which prominent people in each of the states are given the authority or capacity from which to elect the president. In this process, voters registered in the 50 countries do not engage in the direct election of the president, instead, participating in a process considered as an indirect election of the president. The voters cast their votes to elect members of the U.S. Electoral College, who are referred to as electors, who are then given the authority to elect the president and vice president.
From that perspective, it is clear that the position of the voter is somewhat limited in the election process taking into account the fact that the voters may find it hard when intending to elect people that represent their ideas and expectations. Instead, transferring of electoral rights to the electors creates a platform from which the electors will also seek to make decisions based on their understanding. Ultimately, this means that the quality of leaders elected may not match the set-out expectations regarding ensuring that the leaders work towards protecting democracy. That can be seen from the election of President Trump, who showed vital signs of being an authoritarian leader but was elected as the President of the United States through this flawed process.
Checks and Balances
The United States Constitution also creates some form of flaw regarding establishing safeguards that would help ensure that political leaders remain accountable not only to their respective parties but also remain responsible to the average citizens. Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018) indicate that the situation in which political leaders in the country, precisely the position of the president, arises from lack of a clear-cut overview on what would be expected in promoting or building a platform for checks and balances. The long-term effect is that this results in a situation where it becomes somewhat hard or challenging for the citizens to hold their leaders to account for their actions. In the current case of President Trump, his administration has been marred by a wide array of allegations that include tampering with the electoral process among others. However, lack of a framework for accountability of such leaders has created a situation where it becomes challenging for leaders to hold him to account for his actions that go against the principles of democracy.
Remedies to Protect Democratic Ideals
Protecting democracy is a significant aspect that helps in dealing with the fundamental aspects regarding the problems facing the Americans considering the extreme partisan divisions that are present within the United States. Coping with democratic ideals provides an avenue to overcome issues relating to resentment, racial and religious differences experienced with the US due to lack of proper democracies.
Cooperation and Compromise
The first remedy that would be relevant in protecting democratic ideals entails taking the society’s divisions and make necessary efforts that help in counteract through enhancing elite cooperation and compromise (Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2018). This remedy plays an integral role in the efforts to resist the abuses that are presented within Trump's administration, which creates a fundamental problem in the society. The political leaders in this central government protect the democratic ideals using the mentioned remedy as an essential measure to deal with the societal conflicts that arise in the absence of proper administration of democracy.
Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018) mention that the intense conflict between the socialists and the democrats destroys democracy in any given region thus the need to capitalize on enhancing cooperation among the conflicting parties through improving compromise and positive interaction. The primary element in strengthening this remedy to protect the democratic ideals entails having the politicians to talk and exchange the key ideas that provide insights on the need for democracy as part of engaging all the relevant stakeholders. Communication is a crucial element that helps in creating a capable platform for individuals in any government administration to cooperate and discuss the compromise measure that could be implemented to ensure adequate leadership. Although it is easy for the politicians to lament the absence of cooperation and civility, communication helps in making necessary amendments in the constitutions, which helps in safeguarding the democratic ideals of a given nation.
Overcoming Polarization
The second remedy that would help in protecting the democratic ideals entails the implementation of fundamental strategies to overcome polarization. According to Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018), the political scientist in the United States proposed some electoral reforms as primary factors that would help in overcoming polarization and mitigate partisan enmity in the US. Some of the improvements recommended in this case include creating an end to gerrymandering, enhancing open primaries and obligatory voting, which may help in dealing with increased societal conflicts experienced in the administration of Trump in the United States. Additionally, creating alternative rules that define the process of electing members of the Congress is a significant aspect that helps in overcoming polarization in the US. Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018) maintain that the implementation of the reforms within the constitution of the United States may help in dealing with issues relating to the growing economic inequality, which is a primary factor that results in significant divisions.
According to Levitsky & Ziblatt (2018), one of the critical measures that would help in reducing polarization in the United States requires the Republican Party to undergo essential reforms to ensure it is re-founded out rightly. Considering that administration government in the United States operates under the Republican concepts and principles, it is necessary to undertake significant reforms on the given party in a bid to reduce polarization, which is brought about due to the implementation of leadership controls that do not capitalize on democracy. Another critical factor that may help in lowering polarization as part of protecting democratic ideals entails promoting the formation of democratic unions, which act as a voice to critic the negative aspects portrayed by the Republican governor.
How the Constitution Facilitates the Remedies
Based on the remedies, presented in the previous section, one can take note of the fact that indeed the United States may be able to adopt practical approaches that would be of value towards promoting efficiency in supporting democracy. Thus, this creates the need for having to evaluate how the United States Constitution would be able to help these remedies as part of enhancing that platform from which to improve or project positive outcomes as part of protecting democracy.
Giving Authority to Policymakers
The United States Constitution provides authority to policymakers in the country, which include Congressmen, which means that the leaders may use this authority with the overall possibility of ensuring that they seek to promote cooperation and compromise. The political leaders may use their influence with the sole intention of identifying some of the critical areas of leadership that present some form of social divisions. Ultimately, this would mean that the leaders will engage in practical approaches from which to ensure that they limit the general outcomes associated with such divisions.
Open Avenue for Debate and Discussion
The United States Constitution has created an open avenue from which political leaders and members of the public can reflect, discuss, and debate on some of the critical issues affecting the United States from a constitutional perspective. That means that it will be much easier for such discussions to provoke the need for electoral reforms aimed at ensuring that citizens are given the authority of selecting their leaders directly. That would not only help towards improving the overall possibilities of accountability but will also seek to ensure that the leaders elected to understand the value of democracy.
Conclusion
In summary, an in-depth review of the United States Constitution, as it is, indicates that it has created essential avenues from which to facilitate authoritarian leadership considering that it fails to recognize the overall structure of expectation in promoting inclusion of the citizens. Instead, the constitution gives authority to a few people, referred to as electors, who are mandated with the process of having to elect their respective leaders within the expected timeline. Consequently, that creates a situation where some of the leaders elected fail to meet overall expectations regarding promoting and upholding democracy. That is the case in the current administration where President Donald J. Trump is viewed as an authoritarian leader but was elected to the position of leadership in the country.
References
Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How Democracies Die . New York, NY: Crown/Archetype.
