Compare Thomas Jefferson Approach To Democracy

Paper Assignment Democracy is, obviously, one of the most commonly used concepts in modern society; but despite the frequent use, there is no universally agreed interpretation of the notion. The validity of this claim becomes particularly noticeable when comparing the interpretations of Thomas Jefferson and Carl Schmitt. This comparison is conducted with an aim to choose the most plausible approach to democracy which could be implemented in our contemporary U.S. society. It’s argued that although both Jefferson and Schmitt criticized their contemporaries for apathy in political participation, they suggested different ways through which Americans could contribute to building a democratic society. Jefferson’s approach is considered to be more plausible because it reflects the diversified nature of the American nation and closes some possible …show more content…
The factors to examine are as follows: Original definition of the notion, historical context, as well as cultural and social realities in which the ideas are to be implemented. Evidently, the identification of the most plausible approach should start with examining the original interpretation of the notion of democracy. The common interpretation studied during this course states that democracy is the rule of the many, or the rule of the people. In the terms of this definition, direct involvement in political decision-making, advocated by Thomas Jefferson, is considered to be more plausible. This conclusion arises from Schmitt’s analysis of the problems associated with the act of identification. In a large number of cases, the will of the people does not underlie the act of identification, so it is possible that the minority group overrides the majority one. It means that the indirect participation in political decision making is not as straight forward as a direct one, thus it’s a less plausible approach to