Ap Government Zinn

How Democratic is America?

Howard Zinn immediately jumps into his argument against American democracy by defining his view of a true democracy under a required set of criteria. To determine the success of a democracy, he argues, a society cannot be weighed against a previous time or competing nation; instead, Zinn asserts that a government must be measured against an admittedly unattainable ideal in order to avoid a complacent constituent population. Zinn maintains that in the present, the United States does not achieve an acceptable state of democracy. For example, when discussing the necessity for equal access to information, Zinn declares that the government “hides the very information which would reveal its position to be indefensible.” Zinn then continues to zealously debunk other misconceptions of societal equality in respect to his proposed criteria.

Like Zinn, Hook wastes no time in making his position clear. Indeed, Hook’s discord becomes apparent as he caustically contends, “First of all, he [Zinn] confuses democracy as a political process with democracy as a political product or state of welfare.” Hook then proceeds to argue that Zinn’s perception of democracy is invalid and off-center. He believes that true democracy does not directly imitate the unattainable ideals that Zinn set forth. Rather, Hook claims that democracy enables societal progression in order to meet such standards.

After reading both stances, I admit that both philosophers are insightful and credible. I do, however, severely disagree with Professor Zinn. In my opinion, the many contentions of Zinn were not failings of the American political system, but rather failings of societal morality. For example, Zinn states, “So long as that drive is for money and power, with no ceiling on either, so long as ruthlessness is built into the rules of the game, democracy does not have a chance.” What Professor Zinn condemns is greed, a unique characteristic of mankind. While religious...