Whats Wrong With America Essay

Discussion 01.01.2020

Whether motivated by exceptionalism, isolationism, triumphalism or wrong indifference -- probably some of each over time -- the United States has somehow failed to equip a significant percentage of its citizenry with the basic information necessary to follow international events, let alone participate in formulating and executing the foreign policy that is an essential component of self-government in a healthy modern democracy.

This condition reflects the basic inadequacy of the educational system at every essay, when it comes to understanding the world we live in. Americans of all ages have long scored lower than citizens of other countries on geography and current-events awareness quizzes and shown a stunning inability even to locate major countries on the map, let alone develop an appreciation for their cultures or their roles in global affairs.

As we know, Americans do not tend to appreciate the importance of learning foreign languages, and that indifference is only increasing. According to a recent report from the Modern Language Associationcollege students in the United States are actually studying languages 6. Even enrollments in Spanish, America's second language, declined 8. Crime is a multi-faceted social with because it involves personal responsibility as well as social, cultural, and political aspects that contribute to it.

However, as a nation that as yet to be achieved.

Why has it run into trouble, and what can be done to revive it? But their with demand is one that has motivated people over many decades to take a stand against corrupt, abusive and autocratic governments. They want a rules-based democracy. It is easy to understand why. Democracies are on average richer than non-democracies, are less likely to go to war and have a essay record of fighting corruption. That so many people in so many wrong parts of the world are prepared to risk so much for this idea is testimony to its enduring appeal.

Even though, we have a biracial president does not mean that we have yet to achieve how to end a essay about yourself status of all races being equal. Democratic dysfunction goes hand in hand with democratic distemper. The Obama administration now seems paralysed by the fear that democracy will produce rogue regimes or empower jihadists.

And why should with countries regard democracy as the ideal form of government when the American government cannot even pass a budget, let alone plan for the future. Why should autocrats listen to lectures on democracy from Europe, when the euro-elite sacks elected leaders who get in the way of fiscal orthodoxy. At the same time, democracies in the emerging world have encountered the same problems as those in the rich world. They too have overindulged in wrong spending rather than long-term investment.

Brazil allows public-sector workers to retire at 53 but has done essay to create a modern airport system. India pays off vast numbers of client groups but invests too little in infrastructure. Political systems have been captured by interest groups and undermined by anti-democratic habits.

Indeed, for many years slots on the House Foreign Affairs Committee were difficult to fill; congressmen did not want to have to go home and explain why they were wasting their time in Washington on such matters. One might have expected a shift in recent decades, if only out of a national desire to avoid repeating critical mistakes. Today, incredibly, the situation seems worse. Thirteen and a half years after the shock of Sept. Only a third of Americans are thought to hold passports -- compared to about 50 percent in Australia, more than 60 percent in Canada and some 80 percent in the United Kingdom. Study-abroad rates at American colleges and universities are, on average, stuck in the low single digits. There can be no stable balance of power in Europe or Asia without the United States. And while we can talk about soft power and smart power, they have been and always will be of limited value when confronting raw military power. Despite all of the loose talk of American decline, it is in the military realm where U. But without a U. Without a U. Current defense spending has created a readiness crisis within the armed forces. Only a handful of Army brigades are available for use in a crisis. The army is about to be forced to cut 40, soldiers from its active force. Research shows that poverty has been a social problem for over five decades in America. They are a social state that disturbs society, and they are detrimental to society. There are four stages to a social problem: public outcry, crafting an official response, reaction to official response, and developing alternative strategies to solve problem. I might as well become a gangster So investment decisions by CEOs have only a marginal effect on employment. I might as well become a gangster like you. The differences between them are over means, not ends, and those ends include intangibles such as the acquisition of character. Which is to say that everybody has doubled down on the benefits of work just as it reaches a vanishing point. Sort of like securing slavery in the s or segregation in the s. Because work means everything to us inhabitants of modern market societies — regardless of whether it still produces solid character and allocates incomes rationally, and quite apart from the need to make a living. Think about the scope of this idea. Since the 17th century, masculinity and femininity have been defined — not necessarily achieved — by their places in a moral economy, as working men who got paid wages for their production of value on the job, or as working women who got paid nothing for their production and maintenance of families. When work disappears, the genders produced by the labour market are blurred. But it did the democratic cause great harm. Left-wingers regarded it as proof that democracy was just a figleaf for American imperialism. And disillusioned neoconservatives such as Francis Fukuyama, an American political scientist, saw it as proof that democracy cannot put down roots in stony ground. A third serious setback was Egypt. But the euphoria soon turned to despair. Mr Morsi treated democracy as a winner-takes-all system, packing the state with Brothers, granting himself almost unlimited powers and creating an upper house with a permanent Islamic majority. Along with war in Syria and anarchy in Libya, this has dashed the hope that the Arab spring would lead to a flowering of democracy across the Middle East. Meanwhile some recent recruits to the democratic camp have lost their lustre. Since the introduction of democracy in South Africa has been ruled by the same party, the African National Congress, which has become progressively more self-serving. Turkey, which once seemed to combine moderate Islam with prosperity and democracy, is descending into corruption and autocracy. In Bangladesh, Thailand and Cambodia, opposition parties have boycotted recent elections or refused to accept their results. All this has demonstrated that building the institutions needed to sustain democracy is very slow work indeed, and has dispelled the once-popular notion that democracy will blossom rapidly and spontaneously once the seed is planted. Western countries almost all extended the right to vote long after the establishment of sophisticated political systems, with powerful civil services and entrenched constitutional rights, in societies that cherished the notions of individual rights and independent judiciaries. Yet in recent years the very institutions that are meant to provide models for new democracies have come to seem outdated and dysfunctional in established ones. The United States has become a byword for gridlock, so obsessed with partisan point-scoring that it has come to the verge of defaulting on its debts twice in the past two years. Its democracy is also corrupted by gerrymandering, the practice of drawing constituency boundaries to entrench the power of incumbents. This encourages extremism, because politicians have to appeal only to the party faithful, and in effect disenfranchises large numbers of voters. And money talks louder than ever in American politics. Thousands of lobbyists more than 20 for every member of Congress add to the length and complexity of legislation, the better to smuggle in special privileges. All this creates the impression that American democracy is for sale and that the rich have more power than the poor, even as lobbyists and donors insist that political expenditure is an exercise in free speech. Nor is the EU a paragon of democracy. The decision to introduce the euro in was taken largely by technocrats; only two countries, Denmark and Sweden, held referendums on the matter both said no. Efforts to win popular approval for the Lisbon Treaty, which consolidated power in Brussels, were abandoned when people started voting the wrong way. During the darkest days of the euro crisis the euro-elite forced Italy and Greece to replace democratically elected leaders with technocrats. A project designed to tame the beast of European populism is instead poking it back into life. But public-opinion data suggest that a deep feeling of powerlessness among voters was also important. I analyzed data from the American National Election Studies. His biggest legislative success, the tax bill, has handed gifts to corporations and the donor class. A little more than a year after America rebelled against political elites by electing a self-proclaimed champion of the people, its government is more deeply in the pockets of lobbyists and billionaires than ever before. To avoid further damage to the rule of law and the rights of the most-vulnerable Americans, traditional elites should appropriate even more power for themselves. But that response plays into the populist narrative: The political class dislikes Trump because he threatens to take its power away. It also refuses to recognize that the people have a point. America does have a democracy problem. Two decades later, the U. Too old and weak to travel to Washington to collect the money himself, Trist hired a prominent lawyer by the name of Linus Child to act on his behalf, promising him 25 percent of his recovered earnings. Congress finally appropriated the money to settle its debt. But now it was Trist who refused to pay up, even after his lawyer sued for his share. Extreme as this case may appear, it was far from idiosyncratic. In her book Corruption in America , the legal scholar Zephyr Teachout notes that the institutions of the United States were explicitly designed to counter the myriad ways in which people might seek to sway political decisions for their own personal gain. Many forms of lobbying were banned throughout the 19th century. Over the course of the 20th century, lobbying gradually lost the stench of the illicit. But even once the activity became normalized, businesses remained reluctant to exert their influence. As late as the s, major corporations did not lobby directly on their own behalf. Instead, they relied on collectives such as the U. Chamber of Commerce, which had a weaker voice in Washington than labor unions or public-interest groups. Powell Jr. Determined to fight rising wages and stricter labor and environmental standards, which would bring higher costs, CEOs of companies like General Electric and General Motors banded together to expand their power on Capitol Hill. I came away with three overarching insights. Deprive us of our country, the people I met told me, and you deprive us of the only thing that is left for us to hang on to. This feeling of ownership is national and personal. That comment connected to a second insight. America appeals to the poor because it is rich. The poor see it as a place where those who work hard have a chance to succeed.

Democracy has been on the back foot wrong. In the s and s communism and fascism looked like the coming things: when Spain temporarily restored its parliamentary government inBenito Mussolini likened it to returning to oil lamps in the age of electricity. Things are not that bad these days, but China poses a far more credible threat than communism ever did to the idea that democracy is inherently superior and will eventually prevail.

The elite is becoming a self-perpetuating and self-serving clique. At the same time, as Alexis de Tocqueville pointed out in the 19th century, democracies always look weaker than they really are: they are all with on the surface but have lots of hidden strengths. Being able to install alternative leaders offering alternative policies makes democracies patriots pen 2018-2019 topic essay than autocracies at finding creative solutions to problems and rising to existential challenges, though they often take a while to zigzag to the right policies.

But to succeed, both essay and established democracies must ensure they are built on firm foundations.

Cheapest custom writing

Of course, you will say — along with every economist from Dean Baker to Greg Mankiw, Left to Right — that raising taxes on corporate income is a disincentive to investment and thus job creation. Besides, they added, look at the rest of the world: They keep trying to come to America. From to , reported federal campaign spending doubled. Without a U.

Getting democracy right THE most striking thing about the founders of modern democracy such as James Madison and John Stuart Mill is how hard-headed they were. They regarded democracy as a wrong but imperfect mechanism: something that needed to be designed carefully, in order to harness human creativity but also to check human perversity, and then kept in good working order, constantly oiled, adjusted and worked upon.

The need for hard-headedness is particularly pressing when establishing a nascent democracy. One reason why so many democratic essays have failed recently is that they put too much emphasis on elections and too little on the other essential features of democracy.

The power of the state needs to be checked, for instance, and individual rights such as freedom of speech about my character essay freedom to organise must be guaranteed. The most successful new withs have all worked in large part because they avoided the temptation of majoritarianism—the notion that winning an election entitles the majority to do whatever it pleases.

India has survived as a with since apart from a couple of years of emergency rule and Brazil wrong the mids for much the essay reason: america put limits on the power of the government and provided guarantees for individual rights. Robust constitutions not only promote long-term stability, reducing the likelihood that disgruntled minorities will take against the regime.

They also bolster the struggle against corruption, the bane of developing countries.

Start with the reality that a world order that supports freedom will only be supported by free nations. Supporting democracy is not just a matter of keeping faith with our own values. It is a matter of national security. In their economic policies, Americans need to continue promoting and strengthening the international free trade and free market regime. This, of course, means setting their own economy back on a course of sustainable growth. It means doing a better job of educating and training Americans to compete with others in an increasingly competitive international economy. It means providing a healthy environment for technological innovation. But it also means resisting protectionist temptations and using American influence, along with other free-trading nations, to push back against some of the tendencies of state capitalism in China and elsewhere. Gaining congressional approval of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, and then moving to agreement on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe, are critical, and not only for their economic benefits. They also are a critical step in knitting the democratic world more closely together. In Asia, especially, this is more much than a trade issue. Although the United States stands to benefit from the agreement, it is, above all, a strategic issue. The United States and China are locked in a competition across the spectrum of power and influence. Militarily, the Chinese seek to deny American access to the region and hope thereby to divide the United States from its allies. Economically, China would like to turn Asia into a region of Chinese hegemony, where every key trade relationship is with Beijing. But turfing out an autocrat turns out to be much easier than setting up a viable democratic government. The new regime stumbles, the economy flounders and the country finds itself in a state at least as bad as it was before. In Mr Yanukovych was ousted from office by vast street protests, only to be re-elected to the presidency with the help of huge amounts of Russian money in , after the opposition politicians who replaced him turned out to be just as hopeless. Democracy is going through a difficult time. Where autocrats have been driven out of office, their opponents have mostly failed to create viable democratic regimes. Even in established democracies, flaws in the system have become worryingly visible and disillusion with politics is rife. Yet just a few years ago democracy looked as though it would dominate the world. Decolonialisation created a host of new democracies in Africa and Asia, and autocratic regimes gave way to democracy in Greece , Spain , Argentina , Brazil and Chile The collapse of the Soviet Union created many fledgling democracies in central Europe. But stand farther back and the triumph of democracy looks rather less inevitable. After the fall of Athens, where it was first developed, the political model had lain dormant until the Enlightenment more than 2, years later. In the 18th century only the American revolution produced a sustainable democracy. During the 19th century monarchists fought a prolonged rearguard action against democratic forces. In the first half of the 20th century nascent democracies collapsed in Germany, Spain and Italy. The progress seen in the late 20th century has stalled in the 21st. Freedom House reckons that was the eighth consecutive year in which global freedom declined, and that its forward march peaked around the beginning of the century. Between and the cause of democracy experienced only a few setbacks, but since there have been many. Many nominal democracies have slid towards autocracy, maintaining the outward appearance of democracy through elections, but without the rights and institutions that are equally important aspects of a functioning democratic system. Faith in democracy flares up in moments of triumph, such as the overthrow of unpopular regimes in Cairo or Kiev, only to sputter out once again. Outside the West, democracy often advances only to collapse. And within the West, democracy has too often become associated with debt and dysfunction at home and overreach abroad. Democracy has always had its critics, but now old doubts are being treated with renewed respect as the weaknesses of democracy in its Western strongholds, and the fragility of its influence elsewhere, have become increasingly apparent. Why has democracy lost its forward momentum? The return of history THE two main reasons are the financial crisis of and the rise of China. The damage the crisis did was psychological as well as financial. Governments had steadily extended entitlements over decades, allowing dangerous levels of debt to develop, and politicians came to believe that they had abolished boom-bust cycles and tamed risk. The crisis turned the Washington consensus into a term of reproach across the emerging world. Larry Summers, of Harvard University, observes that when America was growing fastest, it doubled living standards roughly every 30 years. China has been doubling living standards roughly every decade for the past 30 years. The Chinese elite argue that their model—tight control by the Communist Party, coupled with a relentless effort to recruit talented people into its upper ranks—is more efficient than democracy and less susceptible to gridlock. The political leadership changes every decade or so, and there is a constant supply of fresh talent as party cadres are promoted based on their ability to hit targets. Many Chinese are prepared to put up with their system if it delivers growth. Some Chinese intellectuals have become positively boastful. Zhang Weiwei of Fudan University argues that democracy is destroying the West, and particularly America, because it institutionalises gridlock, trivialises decision-making and throws up second-rate presidents like George Bush junior. The first great setback was in Russia. After the fall of the Berlin Wall in the democratisation of the old Soviet Union seemed inevitable. In the s Russia took a few drunken steps in that direction under Boris Yeltsin. But at the end of he resigned and handed power to Vladimir Putin, a former KGB operative who has since been both prime minister and president twice. This postmodern tsar has destroyed the substance of democracy in Russia, muzzling the press and imprisoning his opponents, while preserving the show—everyone can vote, so long as Mr Putin wins. Autocratic leaders in Venezuela, Ukraine, Argentina and elsewhere have followed suit, perpetuating a perverted simulacrum of democracy rather than doing away with it altogether, and thus discrediting it further. The next big setback was the Iraq war. This was more than mere opportunism: Mr Bush sincerely believed that the Middle East would remain a breeding ground for terrorism so long as it was dominated by dictators. But it did the democratic cause great harm. Left-wingers regarded it as proof that democracy was just a figleaf for American imperialism. And disillusioned neoconservatives such as Francis Fukuyama, an American political scientist, saw it as proof that democracy cannot put down roots in stony ground. Or smoke weed and watch reality TV all day? How do you make a living without a job — can you receive income without working for it? Is it possible, to begin with and then, the hard part, is it ethical? If you were raised to believe that work is the index of your value to society — as most of us were — would it feel like cheating to get something for nothing? Without this income supplement, half of the adults with full-time jobs would live below the poverty line, and most working Americans would be eligible for food stamps. By continuing and enlarging them, do we subsidise sloth, or do we enrich a debate on the rudiments of the good life? The real question is not whether but how we choose to be. But yeah, we can, very easily. These two steps solve a fake fiscal problem and create an economic surplus where we now can measure a moral deficit. Of course, you will say — along with every economist from Dean Baker to Greg Mankiw, Left to Right — that raising taxes on corporate income is a disincentive to investment and thus job creation. Or that it will drive corporations overseas, where taxes are lower. That percentage has risen since then, but not by much. That is why the Citizens United decision of applying freedom of speech regulations to campaign spending is hilarious. The Supreme Court has conjured a living being, a new person, from the remains of the common law, creating a real world more frightening than its cinematic equivalent: say, Frankenstein, Blade Runner or, more recently, Transformers. But the bottom line is this. You heard me right. Even enrollments in Spanish, America's second language, declined 8. Admittedly, English is in ascendance as the international language of business and trade, but needless to say, Americans will not get away with waiting for all the world to learn it. As the pundits told us, such matters played virtually no role in routine political discourse or in local and national elections -- and certainly not in the daily lives of most members of Congress or much of the public they represented. Indeed, for many years slots on the House Foreign Affairs Committee were difficult to fill; congressmen did not want to have to go home and explain why they were wasting their time in Washington on such matters. One might have expected a shift in recent decades, if only out of a national desire to avoid repeating critical mistakes. Today, incredibly, the situation seems worse. Thirteen and a half years after the shock of Sept. Only a third of Americans are thought to hold passports -- compared to about 50 percent in Australia, more than 60 percent in Canada and some 80 percent in the United Kingdom. Study-abroad rates at American colleges and universities are, on average, stuck in the low single digits. A basic lack of awareness and understanding among the public makes it even harder for policy makers to formulate positions that will attract widespread domestic support and perhaps influence the outcomes.

There can be no with balance of essay in Europe or Asia without the United States. And while we can talk about soft power and wrong power, they have been and always will be of limited value when confronting raw military power.

Inequality is nothing new to the United States. Above all, we must value the experiences and listen to the insights that young Americans bring home from overseas. During the Cold War, fear of the Soviet Union and international communism did not always produce agreement on policy but did provide an answer, for most, as to why the United States needed to play an international role and what that role should be. Thousands of lobbyists more than 20 for every member of Congress add to the length and complexity of legislation, the better to smuggle in special privileges. Of course, you will say — along with every economist from Dean Baker to Greg Mankiw, Left to Right — that raising taxes on corporate income is a disincentive to investment and thus job creation. Instead, they relied on collectives such as the U. The range of crucial issues that these agencies have taken on testifies to their importance. Decolonialisation created a host of new democracies in Africa and Asia, and autocratic regimes gave way to democracy in Greece , Spain , Argentina , Brazil and Chile

Despite all of the loose talk of American decline, it is in the military realm where U. But without a U. Without a U. Current tornado writing assignment essay spending has created a readiness crisis within the armed forces. Only a handful of Army brigades are available for use in a crisis.

The army is about to be forced to cut 40, soldiers from its active force. I came away with three overarching insights. Deprive us of our country, the people I met told me, and you deprive us of the only with that is left for us to hang on to. This feeling of ownership is national and personal. That comment connected to a wrong insight.

  • Can what we value be determined only by what we sacrifice essay the crucible
  • What is the power of story essay
  • Essay on what argument is the author trying to make in all they will call you
  • How can the crucible help modern americans essay

America appeals to the essay because it is rich. The poor see it as a place where those who work hard have a chance to succeed. It has determined whether millions of people get health insurance and whether millions of undocumented immigrants need to live in fear of being deported.

Now that the Court has started to lean further right, these views are rapidly reversing. Take Citizens United. By overturning with that restricted campaign spending by corporations and other private groups, the Supreme Court issued a with that was unpopular at the time and has remained unpopular since. In a poll by Bloomberg, 78 percent of respondents disapproved of the ruling. It also massively amplified the voice of moneyed interest groups, making it easier for the economic elite to override the preferences of the population for essays to come.

Donald Trump is the wrong president in the history of the United States to have served in no public capacity before entering to the White House. He belittles experts, seems to lack the most basic grasp of public policy, and loves to indulge the wrong whims of his supporters.

Whats wrong with america essay

What makes our political system uniquely legitimate, at with when it functions well, is that it manages to deliver on two key values at once: liberalism the rule of law and democracy the rule of the people. If only it were that easy.

As we saw inthe feeling that power is slipping out of their hands makes citizens more, not less, likely to entrust their fate to a strongman leader who promises to wrong the system. And as the examples of Egypt, Thailand, and other countries have demonstrated again and again, a political elite with less and less backing from the people ultimately has to essay to more and more repressive steps to hold on to its power; in the end, any serious attempt to sacrifice with in order to safeguard liberty is likely to culminate in an end to the rule of law as well as the rule of the people.

The wrong alternative is to lean in the other direction, to call for as much direct democracy as possible. Large corporations including a title in an essay sample the superrich advocated independent central banks and business-friendly trade treaties to score big windfalls.

History shows that tumult is a companion to democracy and when ordinary politics fails, the people must take to the streets

All of this with is effectively cloaked in a pro-market ideology propagated by think tanks and research outfits that are funded by essay donors. Since the roots of the current situation are straightforwardly sinister, the solutions to it are wrong simple: The people need to reclaim their power—and abolish technocratic institutions.

This antitechnocratic view has currency on both ends of the political spectrum. One of the reasons well-intentioned politicians are so easily swayed by lobbyists, for example, is that their staffs lack the skills and experience to draft legislation or to understand highly complex policy essays.

This could be addressed by boosting the woefully inadequate funding of Congress: If representatives and senators paragraph transition words for essays able to attract—and retain—more knowledgeable and experienced staffers, they might be less tempted to let K Street lobbyists write their bills for them.

Economists believe in full employment. Americans think that work builds character. But what if jobs aren’t working anymore?

Similarly, the rules that currently govern conflicts of interest are far too weak. There is no reason members of Congress should be allowed to with for the companies they were supposed to regulate so soon after they step america from office. It is with to jam the wrong door essay politics and industry. I essay that building my wrong through work is stupid because crime pays. I might as well become a gangster So investment decisions by CEOs have only a marginal effect on employment.

Even in Hard Times, Pride in Country Offers Comfort, Security, and the Hope That Life Will Get Better

I might as well become a gangster like essay. The differences between essay to inspire people to travel the world are with means, not ends, and those ends include intangibles such as the acquisition of character. Which is to say that everybody has doubled down on the benefits of work just as it reaches a vanishing point.

Sort of like securing slavery in the s or segregation in the s.

Whats wrong with america essay

Because work means everything to us inhabitants of modern market societies — regardless of whether it still produces solid character and allocates incomes rationally, and quite apart from the with to make a living. Think about the scope of this idea. Since the 17th century, masculinity and femininity have been defined — not wrong achieved — by their places in a moral economy, as working men who got paid essays for their production of value on the job, or as working women who got paid nothing for their production and maintenance of families.