The study of the American democracy in today's world

· Need for vigilance. The people in positions of authority perform their responsibilities within acceptable limits. For example, citizen "watchdog or watchdog committee" groups monitor the activities of government agencies and elected representatives.

· Inflexibility and resistance to change. In some instances, positions of authority can promote an unwillingness to change among those who hold these positions. This rigidity may make adjusting to new and different situations difficult. For example, many local government officials opposed the Supreme Court's school desegregation rulings.

· Inaccessibility. Due to the complexity and size of many large institutions, gaining access to people in specific positions of authority may be difficult. For example, a family needing affordable housing might need to visit several different government agencies to get help.

· Limitation on freedom. Every exercise of authority involves by definition a limitation on freedom. For example, parents' authority to set curfews for their children's freedom.

· Economic costs. It costs money to support people and institutions in positions of authority. For example, we pay taxes to the federal government to pay the salaries of bureaucrats, elected officials, judges, law enforcement officers, and members of the armed services.

Some of the most important issues Americans and not only Americans face as citizens involve questions about the scope and limits of authority. The framers of the American Constitution understood the importance of limiting the authority. That is why they created the system of shared powers and checks and balances in the Constitution. They designed the Bill of Rights to further protect individual liberties against possible abuse by those in authority. And what can happen when a position of authority is designed badly or when a person holding such a position misuses or abuses authority. So, the US constitutional system of government is based on majority rule, but it also protects individual rights and the rights of minorities. It allows those who do not agree with the decisions of the government to protest those decisions and try to change them.

4.2 Privacy

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…" [2] The 4^th Amendment of the US Constitution, quoted above, requires the government to respect people's right to privacy. Nowadays, the right to privacy includes much more than the protection of people's homes and persons against unreasonable searches and seizures. The Supreme Court has recognized that privacy also involves being able to decide for people what personal information people will share with others and how they will resolve certain issues that fundamentally affect their lives.

Although the Bill of Rights does not specifically refer to a right to privacy, the Supreme Court has found protections of privacy in the Fourth Amendment, in the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, in the Third Amendment's prohibition against housing soldiers in private homes, and in the First Amendment's protection of assembly and expression. Most importantly, the court has determined that the right to privacy is a fundamental part of the `liberty" guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment.

The right to privacy is an essential protection of human freedom and dignity. Privacy is valuable not only for itself, but also for the enjoyment of people's rights to property and to freedom of thought, expression, religion, and conscience. Without the right to privacy, these other important rights would not mean very much at all. Privacy involves the ability to control or decide the extent to which information will be shared with others. But privacy also involves other things. Also, privacy can be defined as the right to be left alone. Thus, the right to privacy may include:

· The right to decide whether information will be shared with others.

· The right to solitude - that is, to be alone, away from other people.

· The right to be free from the interference of others.

The things we want to keep others from finding out about, observing, or interfering with are called objects of privacy. Objects of privacy may include: facts, actions, places and possessions, thoughts and feelings, communications.

The following are some of the most common ways that American people behave to protect their privacy:

1. Isolation. People may isolate themselves, that is, they may keep away from other people.

2. Secrecy. People may keep objects of privacy secret that is, they may purposely not tell others about them.

3. Confidentiality. When people share private information with someone who is expected and trusted not to tell anyone else. For example, what people say in private to their doctors, lawyers, and religions counselors is confidential.

Maintaining privacy entails certain consequences. Some consequences are benefits, or advantages; some are costs, or disadvantages. It is important to recognize and consider the consequences of privacy in making decisions about issues of privacy.

The benefits of the privacy:

· Freedom. Privacy helps people think and act freely, without unreasonable influence or control by others. This freedom may prevent a society from becoming totalitarian, that is, subject to complete control by a dictator or ruling party.

· Security. Respect for privacy fosters a sense of security; if one's privacy is respected, one can feel safe and secure.

· Individuality. Without privacy, the pressure to be like others might inhibit an individual from forming his or her own values, beliefs, and opinions.

· Protection of economic interests. Privacy enables people to keep their ideas, plans, and inventions secret. This may help them create and sell new products and complete with others.

· Creativity. Privacy may be necessary for creative thought or work.

· Intimacy. Privacy is necessary for people to develop warm and affectionate relationships with other people.

The costs of privacy:

· Loneliness and alienation. Too much privacy can lead to loneliness and to poor relations with others.

· Loss of stimulation and intellectual growth. People correct errors in their thinking and learn new ideas through interaction with other people; too much privacy can inhibit the exchange of ideas and prevent learning from others.

· Misbehavior and lawlessness. Privacy enables unlawful behavior to remain undiscovered and unpunished.

· Financial costs. Maintaining privacy increases the cost of doing things.

· Lack of accountability. Privacy enables people to do things that others cannot observe; as a result, it may be impossible to hold them responsible for wrong doing.

In some cases government is able to invade people's privacy. Since the colonial times, Americans have believed strongly that citizens should have a right to privacy protecting them from arbitrary arrest and unreasonable searches, and protecting their homes from forced entry by government officials. The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures" by the government of their "persons, houses, papers, and effects." However, it is not always easy to agree on what is unreasonable.

But the privacy is not absolute; there are times when an individual's right to privacy must be limited to protect society's need for order and information. Government officials are allowed to enter people's homes under certain conditions. For example, firefighters may enter our homes to put out a fire. Police may enter our homes if necessary to stop a crime in progress. Police also may enter our homes if they first convince a judge that there is good reason to believe evidence of a crime will be found inside, and the judge issues a search warrant authorizing them to search for that evidence. Government officials also may enter someone's home if that person gives them permission or invites them inside.

4.3 Responsibility

The Preamble to the Constitution of the USA clearly states the purposes for which Americans have created their government. They have given it the responsibility to treat all people fairly, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and safeguard their freedoms. American people have given their government a great deal of power to carry out these responsibilities.

For centuries, people have been writing about responsibility - responsibilities to themselves, to others, and to their country. And what is responsibility? There are two main definitions:

· Responsibility is the duty or obligation of a person to do something or to behave in a particular way.

· Responsibility is also the duty or obligation of a person not to do something or not to behave in a particular way.

Responsibilities may come from a variety of sources. They may develop as a result of our jobs, our school, the law, or our moral principles. Some responsibilities may come from only one source, others from two or more sources.

And what happens when somebody assume a responsibility? The results, the consequences of fulfilling the responsibility may be various and classified as benefits and costs. A benefit is an advantage to others or to the person carrying out the responsibility. A cost is a loss or disadvantage.

Consequences of fulfilling the responsibility as benefits:

· Predictability. When people consistently fulfill responsibilities, others know what to expect from them.

· Security. Knowing that others will fulfill their responsibilities enables a person to feel more secure.

· Efficiency. Work can be accomplished more efficiently when the people involved fulfill their responsibilities.

· Cooperation. When people working together on a task fulfill their responsibilities, cooperation increases.

· Fairness. If responsibilities are distributed fairly, and everyone fulfills his or her share, it is unlikely that some people will need to do more or less than their share.

· Community Spirit. If all members of a group fulfill their responsibilities, a sense of community spirit or group pride is likely to develop.

· Individual Rewards. Rewards may include a sense of independence and self-esteem; feelings of satisfaction; approval from others; increased recognition, status, or payment; and gains in knowledge, skills and experience.

Consequences of fulfilling the responsibility as costs:

· Burdens. It may be necessary to spend time, effort, or money to fulfill a responsibility.

· Resentment. People may resent an unwelcome responsibility even though they have agreed to accept it. Others may feel resentment towards someone who has the responsibility they wanted.

· Fear of failure. If people are unsure that they can fulfill a particular responsibility, they may be anxious and uneasy.

· Sacrifice of other interests. When people accept particular responsibilities, they may need to put aside other values, needs, or interests.

· Abdication of responsibility by others. If one person or group seems to have primary responsibility for a task, it is easy for others not to do their fair share.

4.4 Justice

It is almost impossible for a day to go by in which we don't think of something that is just or unjust; for issues of justice arise in our daily lives, in the news media, on entertainment programs, and in the news media, on entertainment programs, and in the actions of American government and others. The preamble to the U.S. Constitution states that one of the main purposes of American government is to establish justice in American nation; and the Pledge of Allegiance ends with the phrase with liberty and justice for all. The central idea of justice is fairness, but it is not always easy to decide what is fair in many situations.

For more than 2000 years, scholars dealing with the subject of justice have divided issues of justice into three categories. These categories are the following:

· Distributive justice. Issues of distributive justice concern the fairness of the distribution of something among several people or groups. Whatever is distributed or divided can be a benefit, such as pay for work or the right to speak or vote, or it can be a burden, such as taxes, household chores, or homework.

· Corrective justice. Issues of corrective justice concern the fairness of the response to a wrong or injury to a person or group. Common responses include making a person who has wronged or injured another suffer some form of punishment, give back something that was stolen, or pay for damages.

· Procedural justice. Issues of procedural justice concern the fairness of how information is gathered and/or how a decision is made. It is important to emphasize that procedural justice deals with the fairness of how we gather information or make decisions, not with what information we gathered or decision we make.

The main tool for determining of issues of distributive justice is the principle of similarity. This principle means that in a particular situation, people who are the same or similar in certain important ways should be treated the same, or equally. In that situation, people who are the same or similar in certain important ways should be treated differently or unequally. For example, suppose that out of ten people stranded on an island, three are sick and there is a limited amount of medicine. The three sick people are similar in an important way: need. They all have equal needs for the medicine and it would be fair to give each of the three persons the same amount. The seven other people are different from the sick people in an important way: need. They do not need the medicine, so it would be fair to treat them differently from the sick people and not give them the medicine.

Deciding what would be just or fair using the principle of similarity and the consideration of need, capacity, or desert is essential in many situations. Before taking action on a decision regarding what would be just, however, it is important to take into account values and interests other than distributive justice. A value is something that you think is worthwhile and important, something that is right or good, that you ought to try to achieve, such as kindness, honesty, loyalty, privacy, and freedom. An interest is something that you want or that you are concerned about, such as free time, good health, or rewards of one kind or another.

And what about the corrective justice, what is the need for corrective justice? In all societies there are situations in which one individual or group wrongs or injures another. In some cases the wrong or injury may be accidental and in other cases intentional. Since the earliest civilization, human beings have felt that if someone commits a wrong or causes an injury to another, things should be set right in some way. Ideally, this would mean restoring things to the way they were before; people have developed other ways to respond to wrongs and injuries.

Corrective justice is concerned with fair or proper responses to wrongs and injuries and has one principal goal - the fair correction of a wrong or injury. Additionally, we may want to prevent or discourage future wrongful or careless conduct by teaching a lesson to the wrong doer or by making an example of him or her. Thus, the purposes or goals of corrective justice are: Correction, Prevention, and Deterrence. They are essential to the very existence of society. Without efforts to serve these goals, disorder and chaos may result.

Scholars and others who have studied procedural justice often claim that is the keystone of liberty or the heart of the law. Observers of world affairs have sometimes claimed that the degree of procedural justice present in a country is a good indicator of the degree of freedom, respect for human dignity, and other basic human rights in that country. A lack of procedural justice is often considered an indication of an authoritarian or totalitarian political system. Respect for procedural justice is often a key indicator of a democratic political system.

Procedural justice refers to the fairness of how certain things are done. More specifically, procedural justice refers to the following:

· The fairness of how information is gathered

· The fairness of how decisions are made.

It does not refer to the fairness of the decisions themselves. The goals of procedural justice are the following:

· To increase the changes that all information necessary for making wise and just decisions is gathered

· To ensure the wise and just use of information in the making of decisions

· To protect the right to privacy, human dignity, freedom, and other important values and interests such as distributive justice and corrective justice; and to promote efficiency

5. Americans in Today's World

5.1 National values of Americans

The form of the government of any country is deeply connected and based on the sociocultural and historical background of the nation and the national values and beliefs.

The list of typically American values would stand in sharp contrast to the values of people in many other countries. If a foreign visitor really understood how deeply ingrained these values are in Americans, he or she would then be able to understand 95 % of Americans actions-actions which might otherwise appear strange, confusing, or unbelievable when evaluated from the perspective of the foreigner's own society and its values.

1. Personal Control over the Environment. Americans nо longer believe in the power of Fate, and they have come to look at people who do as being backward, primitive, or hopelessly naive. To be called "fatalistic" is one of the worst criticisms one can receive in the American context; to an American, it means one is superstitious and lazy, unwilling to take any initiative in bringing about improvements. In the United States people consider that Man should control Nature, rather than the other way around. More specifically, people believe every single individual should have control over whatever in the environment might potentially affect him or her. The problems of one's life are not seen as having resulted from bad luck as much as having come from one's laziness in pursuing а better life. Furthermore, it is considered normal that anyone should look out for his or her own self-interests first and foremost.

2. Change. In the American mind change is linked to development, improvement, progress, and growth. Many older, more traditional cultures consider change as а disruptive, destructive force, to be avoided if at all possible. Instead of change, such societies value stability, continuity, tradition, and а rich and ancient heritage - none of which are valued very much in the United States.

3. Time and Its Control. Time is, for the average American, of utmost importance. To the foreign visitor, Americans seem to be more concerned with getting things accomplished on time. Schedules for the American are meant to be planned and then followed in the smallest detail. Americans' language is filled with references to time, giving а clear indication of how much it is valued. Time is something to be "оn," to be "kept," "filled," "saved," "used," "spent," "wasted." Many American proverbs stress the value in guarding the time, using it wisely, setting and working toward specific goals. Proverbs: time to kill, time is money, time is of the essence, time flies.

4. Equality/Egalitarianism. Equality for Americans is one of their most cherished values. This concept is sо important for Americans that they have even given it а religious basis. They say all people have been "created equal." Most Americans believe that God views all humans alike without regard to intelligence, physical condition or economic status. In secular terms this belief is translated into the assertion that all people have an equal opportunity to succeed in life.

5. Individualism and Privacy. The individualism, which has been developed in the Western world since the Renaissance, beginning in the late 15th century, has taken its most exaggerated form in 20th century in the United States. Here, each individual is seen as completely and marvelously unique, that is, totally different from all other individuals and, therefore, particularly precious and wonderful. Americans resist being thought of as representatives of а homogeneous group, whatever the group. They may, and do, join groups - in fact many groups - but somehow they're just а little different, just а little unique, just а little special, from other members of the same group. And they tend to leave groups as easily as they enter them. Privacy, the ultimate result of individualism is perhaps even more difficult for the foreigner to comprehend. In the United States, privacy is viewed as а requirement, which all humans would find equally necessary, desirable and satisfying. Individualism, as it exists in the United States, does mean that you will find а much greater variety of opinions along with the absolute freedom to express them.In spite of this wide range of personal opinion, almost all Americans will ultimately vote for one of the two major political parties. That means that Americans take pride in crediting themselves with claiming more individualism than, in fact, they really have.

6. Self-Help Concept. In the United States, а person can take credit only for what he or she has accomplished by himself or herself. Americans get no credit for having been born into а rich family. In the United States, that would be considered "an accident of birth." Americans pride themselves in having climbed the difficult ladder of success to whatever level they have achieved - all by themselves. The American social system has made it possible for Americans to move, relatively easily, up the social ladder.

7. Competition and Free Enterprise. Americans believe that competition brings out the best in any individual. They assert that it challenges or forces each person to produce the very best that is humanly possible. Americans, valuing competition, have devised an economic system to go with it - free enterprise. Americans feel very strongly that а highly competitive economy will bring out the best in its people and ultimately, that the society which fosters competition will progress most rapidly.

8. Action/Work Orientation. "Don't just stand there," goes а typical bit of American advice, "do something". This expression is normally used in а crisis situation, it describes most Americans' entire working life, where action - any action - is seen to be superior to inaction. Americans routinely plan and, schedule an extremely active day. Any relaxation must be limited in time, pre-planned, and aimed at "recreating" their ability to work harder and more productively once the recreation is over. Americans believe leisure activities should assume а relatively small portion of one's total life. People think that it is "sinful" to "waste one's time," "to sit around doing nothing," or just to "daydream." The workaholic syndrome, in turn, causes Americans to identify themselves wholly with their professions. The first question one American will ask another American when meeting for the first time is related to his or her work "What do you do?" "Where do you work?" And when such а person goes on vacation, even the vacation will be carefully planned, very busy and active.

9. Informality. Americans are extremely informal. Americans are one of the most informal and casual groups of people in the world. As one example of this informality, American bosses often urge their employees to call them by their first names and even feel uncomfortable if they are called bу the title "Мг." or "Mrs." Dress is another area where American informality will be most noticeable, perhaps even shocking. One can go to а symphony performance, for example, in any large American city nowadays and find some people in the audience dressed in blue jeans and tieless, short-sleeved shirts.

10. Directness, Openness and Honesty. Many other countries have developed subtle, sometimes highly ritualistic ways of informing other people of unpleasant information. Americans, however, have always preferred the direct approach. They are likely to be completely honest in delivering their negative evaluations. Americans are trying to urge their fellow country men to become even more open and direct. The large number of "assertiveness" training courses, which appeared in the United States in the late 1970's, reflects such а commitment. Anyone who, in the United States, chooses to use an intermediary to deliver the message will also be considered manipulative and untrustworthy.

11. Practicality and Efficiency. Americans have а reputation for being an extremely realistic, practical and efficient people. The practical consideration is likely to be given highest priority in making any important decision in the United States. Americans pride themselves in not being very philosophically or theoretically oriented. If Americans would even admit to having а philosophy, it would probably be that of pragmatism. They judge every situation "on its merits." The popular American "trial-and-error" approach to problem-solving also reflects the practical. This approach suggests listing several possible solutions to any given problem, then trying them out, one by one, to see which is most effective.

12. Materialism/Acquisitiveness. Foreigners generally consider Americans much more materialistic than Americans are likely to consider themselves. Americans would like to think that their material objects are just the natural benefits, which always result from hard work and serious intent - а reward, they think, which all people could enjoy, were they as industrious and hard-working as Americans. But by any standard, Americans are materialistic. This means that they value and collect more material objects than most people would ever dream of owning. It also means they give higher priority to obtaining, maintaining and protecting their material objects than they do in developing and enjoying interpersonal relationships.

5.2 The USA in today's world

To see how American democracy works in today's world we are to outline the USA strategy towards other countries, to analyze its role in the global processes that have been taking place in the world over the last several years.

September 11, 2001, without doubt, was a break point event in these processes. First, it showed people a danger of an international terrorism. Second, the event brought about a confrontation between two different viewpoints on the development of world politics. On the one hand, politicians from many countries believe that any active actions to preserve world order must be organized only by United Nations. On the other hand, the United States is pushing forward its aggressive unilateral policy that is based only on Washington's (sometimes biased) understanding of the current international situation. [14]

This US strategy was clearly demonstrated in Iraq. Now, after 6 years of the war, the question must be asked if this policy achieved its goals. Did it bring peace and stabilization in the post Saddam country? Yes, the military operation itself was a success. Actually, it was difficult to imagine any other result of that war considering that the conflict was between a mighty US and Iraq, a third level military power. Despite the military successes, this strategy did not produce desirable results. The USA cannot stabilize the situation, and the Iraqis continue to organize attacks against the US and coalition forces. [24]

May be the USA had another reason to start the war? Some people (in Russia, anyway) believe that a real goal of US policy in the Middle East is to take under the so-called world's hydrocarbon ellipse. It is obvious, that a power controlling that region would become a master of the world in this century. Now, the USA is in much less favorable economical position than some other countries (America's potential enemies). So, the US efforts to extend its influence over that area are an attempt to liquidate this imbalance once and for all.

But this goal could hardly be achieved by military means. If the USA decided to occupy some other states in that area, they would surely face a guerrilla resistance, like in Iraq and Afghanistan. History proved that the only way to suppress insurgency is a policy of mass terror, and it is unlikely that America will ever use it. The attempts to organize puppet democratic governments will fail too. Such regimes will be hated by the general population and overthrown as soon as the US army leaves the country.

By the way, why did Bush's administration decide to occupy a sovereign country to fight international terrorism? What is the connection between an organized group of criminals and an independent state? Why not occupy Italy to fight the Italian Mafia?

Washington's current unilateral policy can be useless and even dangerous. It has increased a general instability in the World. Iraq became a place that attracts terrorism from all over the globe. The wave of anti-Americanism grew up in the world, even in Western Europe, a traditional ally of the United States. The danger of a terrorist attack on the territory of the United States is even higher than it was before the Iraq war. It seems that the only purpose of US actions is to remain the world's single superpower by any means.

It will be great if the USA will not be able to continue its unilateral policy anymore because it goes against objective processes in the world economy and international relations. First of these processes is globalization that does make the world more and more interconnected and interdependent place. Another factor is a steady development of a multipolar world. It's doubtful that China would join a unipolar structure and be obedient to US decisions. The European Union would become another world's center of power. The political regimes in European countries are very close to American, so any military confrontations are very unlikely at this point. But an economical competition would be intense. The war between the euro and the dollar is already on, and the dollar is losing so far.

There is another potential threat to the USA. Only a few years ago, a dollar was almost equivalent to gold. People and businesses all over the world tried to keep their savings in dollars. A huge amount of American currency was accumulated in foreign countries. Now, when a dollar is getting cheaper, many try to get rid of it and buy Euros. What would happen if all this dollar cash came back to the USA? India, Japan, and Russia will probably also try to make their influence on the world politics comparable with their economical potential.

The USA demonstrates again a despotic behavior towards other countries: American ABM system is located now near the borders of the Russian Federation. In May 2007 the American ABM system was placed in Lithuania. In July 8, 2008, the American radar of the ABM system was placed in Prague, in the Czech Republic. [21]

The USA imposes their understanding of democracy on other countries. The reason of this policy is as follows: the USA was based on the principles of freedom and they think that these principles distinguish them from other nations. In American society there is an idea that the countries with the stable democracy are worth keeping friendship with. It doesn't mean that undemocratic countries are the enemies of the USA. The strategy of the USA is promotion of the growing number of democratic countries. But they forget that this intrusion is undemocratic, because America deprives other countries of the free choice of the form of the government. According to their idea, the countries in which a tyrant or despot holds the ruling post, may be companions of the USA, if they recognize the American democracy as the best government. Americans propagandize their way of life thereby they try to deprive foreigners and common Americans of their free choice using mass media. The most effective means to impose these views are advertising and mass media with their brain-washing function.

There are horrifying examples of violation of human rights which contradict the basic principles of democracy such as the beating of prisoners in Guantanamo by the American soldiers or the situation with the American airbase in Kyrgyzstan. The USA concluded a treaty with Kyrgyzstan in 2001. The contract was to be terminated in 2002, but this airbase is still in Kyrgyzstan and the Americans don't try to withdraw with it.

To crown it all, there were some states in the USA where death penalty was exercised. And in some states this kind of punishment is still in use. In addition to that the execution of mentally retarded people was used in the USA up to 2001. From 1976 up to 2001, there were 35 mentally retarded people killed in America. 6 of them were executed in Texas, and one of the six was executed during the governor of Texas, George Bush, Jr's pre-election campaign for the president's office.

5.3 The US policy of double standards

The political philosophy, the approach of the American ruling elite is that makes the weather. Domestic and foreign policies of Washington rest on double standards that allow the elite to praise what benefits it and dismiss as unacceptable what fails to meet its interests. The American response to the Russian elections comes as another manifestation of that doubtful sort of policy-making.

Ignoble policies of double standards date way back. When his attention was turned to American support of Nicaraguan dictator Anastacio Somoza, President Roosevelt made the following contribution to the global compendium of political quotations: "Somoza may be a son of a bitch," he cynically said, "but he's our son of a bitch." [17; 151]

We can't but mention one more example of philosophy of double standards: the way the President of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili dealt with unarmed protesters on the main square of Tbilisi left the American protectors of democracy unimpressed. "Their own son of a bitch!" At the same time, the Moscow march of hired anti-government protesters was staged up by Washington as an event of historical significance.

Double standards are applied equally well to global policy-making. Washington and its allies and partners in the Old World have, for eight years now, been reluctant to sign the Treaty on conventional armed forces in Europe. But a by-product of their reluctance, suspended Russian membership of that piece of international law, outrages them. So, that is the most telling example of the application of double standards.

In conclusion, no one can say what the world will look like even in the nearest future; we can only predict. One thing is clear, however, the future of all the countries directly depends on today's policy.

Conclusion

We find the theme of our graduation paper "The study of the American democracy in today's world" topical for English language learners in various aspects. Nowadays every educated person is aware of the processes of globalization taking part on our planet when different countries with different forms of government, economic systems, religions, national values and mentality have to come in close contact with each other. The subjects of this multipolar world should learn to co-exist and cooperate. Foreign language students are especially interested in getting this kind of information as it gives the background knowledge of the country, conductive to developing socio-cultural competence.

Our graduation research was implied to find out whether the democratic principles proclaimed by the Founding Fathers are still strictly observed. We supposed that some current policies in both domestic and foreign affairs exercised by the USA do not correspond to the basic democratic principles. To prove or disprove our hypothesis we were to study different concepts of democracy. The question "What is democracy?" is still rather disputable and not fully solved. Having studied a great amount of reference books on this issue we offered and analyzed some concepts of democracy paying attention to its understanding by ancient philosophers and modern scholars. This led us to considering different kinds of democracy.

This information combined with a brief excursus into the history of the USA helped to highlight the reasons of emergence of a new democratic republic with the principles reflected in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the USA.

A considerable part of our work is devoted to foundations of American democracy including authority, privacy, responsibility and justice. It was important for us to outline not only the benefits but their costs as well.

Authentic up-to-date materials studied and analyzed allowed to prove our hypothesis.

The USA used to claim that their country was the guarantor of political freedom and economic order. But the fact is that for the past 50 years, this country has become a factor of international disorder. They demand that the whole planet should recognize some of the third world countries as "the axis of evil", and they say about the necessity of destruction of these countries: Iraq of Saddam Hussein, the North Korea of Kim Chen Ir, and Iran. The Pentagon deliberately organizes the leakage of documents containing the information about the plans of nuclear strikes on the non-nuclear states. Washington conducts the policy of a classical model, called "the strategy of madman", which creates an image of an irresponsible country to frighten all possible opponents. The present situation is characterized by the fact that the USA hasn't any model of behavior to explain the motivations of their actions. Why is the superpower not appearing, according the tradition, which set after the Second World War, as a reasonable and orderly country? Why has it become so unstable? We can suppose that the USA doesn't feel all the other countries to be under its control as they used to be.

After the terrible events of the 11^th of September 2001 and the beginning of the war with terrorism, the majority of the countries accepted the legitimacy of the USA authority, and this brought to considering the USA as "the Empire of good", where the dependent peoples of the whole planet recognize the central power, and the ruling Americans submit to the ideas of justice.

American democracy is based on the four ideas: authority, privacy, responsibility, and justice. But these foundations have their costs, for example, authority is frequently accompanied by the misuse of power, because people in office might misuse their positions and the power allocated to them. Another cost is the need for vigilance as the people in positions of authority should perform their responsibilities within acceptable limits without violating them. One of the main costs is the inaccessibility of authority. Due to the complexity and size of many large institutions, gaining access to people in specific positions of authority may be difficult. The next cost of authority is the limitation on freedom. Every exercise of authority involves by definition a limitation on freedom.

The next idea of foundations of democracy is privacy. Privacy has its own costs, people become lonely and alien to each other, and then they lose the stimulus to intellectual growth. Nowadays in the USA it's a real problem that majority of Americans know fewer about the history of the USA, the position of the USA in the world than some of the foreigners and the majority of the immigrants. But is it really a problem for the government of the USA? Or maybe it is useful for corporations to have as labor force poor people of little education. And it is useful not only for corporations, but for the government as well. The reason is obvious, highly educated people demand more freedom, more rights and, thus, more democracy. The successful, politically conscious population, which is constantly fighting for better social conditions, is not an answer to the idea of American plutocracy about an ideal labor force. They, investors, prefer poor society. Poor people are ready to work for small wages, and, today, poor people have fewer mechanisms for protection in the USA, the country of freedom and equality.

Besides, privacy may lead to the lack of accountability. Privacy enables people to do things that others cannot observe; as a result, it may be impossible to hold them responsible for wrong doing. And, even, responsibility and justice may have costs and may become burdens for people, or they may be a cause of resentment of people. People will be afraid of making a failure; they may sacrifice others' interests.

Americans hold the war with terrorism as World War IV. They are not even afraid of being ridiculous considering "the Cold War" as World War III. It seems as if the USA were aiming at maintaining some international tension, the situation of a limited permanent war. Is it democratic? Is it freedom?

The "Al Caeda" organization, a band of mentally unbalanced, genius terrorists, appeared in Saudi Arabia. But America endeavors it to look as a powerful, baneful force, the ever-existing terrorism, from Bosnia to Philippines, from Chechnya to Pakistan, from Lebanon to Yemen. Thus it justifies any punitive action any time.

Considering liberalism in American democracy, one can see that it has changed greatly, because of different crises, for example, in 1870-1890, 1929-1933. America was based on the principles of freedom and liberalism. Liberalism means freedom and the motto of the USA is the words of Henry Patrick, a political figure, a fighter for independence of the colonies, a member of the legislative assembly of Virginia, later the governor of the state of Virginia: "Give me liberty or give me death!" The basic idea of liberalism is simple: to destroy all barriers, which limit individual freedom. That's why the government shouldn't interfere in the private life of people. During the years American liberalism undergoes changes. In the beginning of XX century the monopoly organization transformed the USA into the country of corporative capitalism.

The USA is a country of highly developed capitalism. Capitalism is not just a business system, but holistic social system, which distorts the norms of democracy for benefit of capitalists. The American democracy becomes an impediment for American corporations when it functions normally, when it follows the social progress, when it helps to create a more just social system or when it makes a chasm, that separates the wealthy minority from the other society.

In the country, in which corporations are provided with free trade, the number of billionaires is growing faster and faster and at the same time the number of poor people is growing faster than the population of the Earth. In the USA, for example, the number of poor people has increased by 6 million people, the income of an average American family has decreased by 2000 dollars and at the same time the sizes of the biggest fortunes reach record levels.

For all this, the USA is still a highly developed democratic country. But their democracy displays itself for Americans, inside the USA, but to some countries it is sometimes despotic, for example, the war in Iraq. Under the disguise of the war with terrorism and searching for the nuclear weapon, they began invasion. But the real aim was to conquer the Middle East, the region of mineral riches. The USA demonstrates again an example of undemocratic behavior towards other countries: American ABM system is now located near the borders of the Russian Federation.

Americans publicly use the policy of double standards and impose their understanding of democracy on other countries. Americans propagandize their way of life thereby they try to deprive foreigners and common Americans of their free choice using mass media. The most effective means to impose these views are advertising and mass media with their brain-washing function. That's why many Americans have very expensive houses, cars. How do they pay for this way of life? The answer is simple. They will take credits. And the government will get taxes from credits. That's why the government will have people, through mass media, buy more and more goods, and the government will get profit, imposing more taxes.

Generally speaking, Americans are masters of promotion and advertising. They "sell themselves" or create a world, using the mass media, in which the USA appears as the country of freedom or, in other words, American dream.

There are horrifying examples of violation of human rights which contradict the basic principles of democracy such as the beating of prisoners in Guantanamo by the American soldiers or the situation with the American airbase in Kyrgyzstan. The USA concluded a treaty with Kyrgyzstan in 2001. The contract was to be terminated in 2002, but this airbase is still in Kyrgyzstan and the Americans don't try to withdraw with it.

To crown it all, there were some states in the USA where death penalty was exercised. And in some states this kind of punishment is still in use. In addition to that the execution of mentally retarded people was used in the USA up to 2001.

Having studied a great amount of literature, different concepts, views and ideas about democracy and, particularly, American democracy, we may say that modern American democracy is not an ideal or example of democracy for all other countries to follow, it has its own disadvantages and contradictions thus distorting the ideas introduced by the framers in the year 1789. We may claim that our hypothesis is fully corroborated.

Our research is also supplemented by some materials to be used at the lessons of Country study at Slavgorod Teachers' Training College. One of the appendices is a glossary on the theme "Politics and government of the USA" compiled from different reference books for students to understand and operate with political terms. We also submit some fragments of Country study lessons on the themes "The Colonial Times of the USA"and "Authority in the USA". They aim at increasing the students' socio-cultural awareness, at developing critical thinking and analyzing abilities.

The list of the used literature

1. Приказ от 11.02.2002 N 393. О Концепции модернизации российского образования на период до 2010 года от 29 декабря 2001 г. N 1756-р Москва

2. The Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the USA. - New York: Random House, 1998. - 112p.

3. Большая Советская Энциклопедия: Т.13. - М.: Государственное научное издательство "Большая Советская Энциклопедия",1967. - 669c.

4. Государственный образовательный стандарт среднего профессионального образования для специальности 050303 "ИНОСТРАННЫЙ ЯЗЫК" от 12 ноября 2004г.

5. Днепров, Э.Д. Образовательный стандарт - инструмент обновления содержания общего образования Министерства образования Российской Федерации /Э.Д. Днепров. - М.: АПКиПРО, 2004. - 104с

6. Ефремова, Т.Ф. Большой современный толковый словарь русского языка /Т.Ф. Ефремова. - М.:АСТ, 2006. - 1165с.

7. Кравченко, А.И. Основы социологии и политологии: Учебное пособие для студентов средних специальных учебных заведений. - 4-е издание /А.И. Кравченко. - М.: Академический проект: трикста (Gaudeamus), 2004. - 352с

8. Кристиан, Т. Стандарты и Директивы для Агентств Гарантии Качества в Высшем Образовании на Территории Европы /Т. Кристиан. - Президент ENQA, 2005. -150 c

9. Паренти, М. Демократия для избранных. Власть над миром. Майкл Паренти (пер. с англ. В.Н. Горбатенко) /М. Паренти. - М.: Поколение, 2006. - 416с

10. Словарь английского языка Collins English Dictionary. - 8^th edition: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006. - 12000 entries

11. Советская Историческая Энциклопедия: Т.1, 2. - М.: Советская Энциклопедия, 1961. - 456 с

12. Тодд, Э. Pax Americana - начало конца /Э. Тодд. - М.: Международные отношения, Йditions Gallimard, 2004. - 225 с

13. Bordman, M. In The USA /M. Bordman. - London: Chancerel International Publishers Ltd., 2000. - 105p

14. Cole, D. Enemy Aliens. Constitutional freedoms in the war on Terrorism /D. Cole. - New York: The New press, 2005. - 316p

15. Quigley, N C. Foundations of democracy: Authority, Privacy, Responsibility, and Justice: Teacher's Guide, High School Level Law in a Free Society Series /N.C. Quigley. - Calabasas: Copyright Center for Civic Education, 2000. - 163p.

16. Quigley, N C. Foundations of democracy: Authority, Privacy, Responsibility, and Justice: Student Text High School Level, High School Level Law in a Free Society Series /N.C. Quigley. - Calabasas: Copyright Center for Civic Education, 2000. - 236p.

17. Russel, W.J. Double standard: Social policy in Europe and the US / W.J. Russel. - Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, inc., 2006. - 355p

18. Большая энциклопедия Кирилла и Мефодия / Электронные данные. - 2 электронных диска (CD-ROM)

19. http://english.pravda.ru/filing/Democracy/

20. http://thetruthonly.narod.ru/01_CIA_American_double.htm

21. http://usa.russiansabroad.com/country_page.aspx?page=70

22. http:/ wikipedia.org/wiki

23. http://www.america.gov

24. http://www.iraq-war.ru

25. http://www.isesco.org.ma/english/publications/Democracy.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...