Who Governs?
YouTube
debate- CNN
Recently in class we have been discussing the topic of
"who governs?" a question that our country seems divided on.
Ideally, in the United
States, which
labels itself as a democracy, the people should have the final word and should
govern themselves through their elected representatives. The problem is,
the country has an elaborate system in which laws are actually made and
implemented, and within each facet of this system other groups aside from the
people have a chance to exert power. This results in the people's actual
power to govern being diluted at every step.
The article I wanted to discuss concerns the presidential
candidates debates that were facilitated by YouTube, where the questions came
from viewers and the entire event was hosted by YouTube's site (link at top of
page). To me, this shows a step in which ordinary, individual people are
attempting to take back some of the power that they have lost through the
system. A perfect example; according to numerous studies the vast
majority of American's are disgusted with the war in Iraq
and want, at very least, a timetable to withdrawal. But since the system
in place prevents the people from directly, or even indirectly, controlling the
current president's actions, the people's power to end their war is
non-existent. Many of the questions proposed in the YouTube debate
concerned the candidates? positions on the war, not only showing the importance
of the issue but also showing that, if the candidates want to receive the votes
of that community, they must take the people's position on the war, and not
simply follow their own agenda. Thus the people are trying to end the war
through the new candidates.
All of this, of course, is made possible with technology, as
the vast majority of these individuals would have never gotten their questions
directly to these candidates without the help of the internet, which also
addresses another class-discussed topic of technology in a democracy. I
personally feel that this is a good example of how technology, and
non-face-to-face debates and communication can facilitate a more democratic
system. Technology allows, as shown in this case, even the most humble of
individuals to get their voice heard, and even if that removes some of the
traditional aspects of debate, it gives voices to people that would not have
had a voice at all.
Questions to consider:
Is this an example of power returning to the people, or is
this simply a political stunt that gives the illusion?
Does technology take away more from democracy than it adds?
Since we elect our officials to lead on our behalf, should
everyone be able to directly question them like in this situation?
Feel free to answer any number of the questions above.
-Vince
Posted at
04:07PM Aug 30, 2007
by AGOSTA, VINCENT in General |