Essay Sample on Tyranny of the Minority

People belonging to the following groups are likely to be a minority in many societies- LGBT, migrants, informal workers, chronically sick people, indigenous people, racial and ethnic minorities, older persons and people living with disabilities. Although all these groups can claim the title of “disadvantaged minority”, in the US that term mostly applies to racial minorities –Black Americans, Native Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Pacific Americans and people from federal states and Native Americans. The federal law considers disadvantaged minority groups to be people who have been subjected to cultural, ethnic, or racial bias within the American society (Bishin, 2009). The majority population or groups have become opposed to policies aimed at uplifting the minorities because they feel that minorities get their rights way to easily and some policies give minorities an unfair advantage. Additionally, there exists many institutions in US such as the criminal justice system, as well as institutions in education, healthcare and the work environment which are resistant to change intended to expand minority rights. Disadvantaged minority groups in the United States can get the policies they want in the face of both majority opposition and an institutional design that seeks to thwart change by having those rights also conferred to the majority, having equitable policies, constitutional protection of fundamental rights, and showing consistency and proper organization when pursuing policy changes. 

Disadvantaged minorities can enjoy more policies if such policies are equitable and do not disadvantage the majority. This is in line with the Subconstituency Politics Theory which states that there is increasing likelihood of more policies to be made in favor of small groups of citizens (subconstituencies) as opposed to policies in favor of the majority. Bishin (2009) notes that the continued prioritization of minority interests in the past such as the Cuban Trade Embargo, the extension of hate crimes legislations to protect the LGBT, renewal of the ban on assault weapons as well as the abortion politics are all issues where the minority have enjoyed favorable policies against the wishes and desires of the majority. The enjoyment of such policies has worked against the minorities because the majority are now pushing policy makers to be more cautious when making policies to favor disadvantaged minorities. The majority argue that they too have rights and freedoms. In the spirit of the constitution, the enjoyment of rights and freedoms should not in any way undermine how the majority enjoy their rights.

 Disadvantaged minorities can enjoy more policies because systemic discrimination is progressively reducing and allowing for all to enjoy equal access to education and policy-making positions. Narrow recruitment pools and underrepresentation have been major barriers to disadvantaged minorities enjoying the policies they want. Many companies and organizations used to recruit from the top or elite universities which are largely dominated by students from the majority group (Rothstein, 2017). However, people from across the racial, and class divide get equal educational access. This means that the people who later rise to policy making bodies are likely to come from both the minority and the majority groups. This educational policy issue is a huge opening for minorities to rise to positions where they can influence policies. Disadvantaged minorities need to take full advantage of policies that allow them to pursue education from the best there is in America and beyond. Once they are well educated and exposed to global affairs, the minorities acquire some power and they have a better chance of getting recruited into positions where they can learn leadership and other aspects that make them suitable political candidates hence attaining positions to influence policies. 

Disadvantaged minority groups can get the policies they want by appealing to identities that lie at the heart of subconstituency politics theory. Bishin (2009) notes that people compare their legislators and policy makers with their preferred social identities. Social identities are about the self and minorities are ready to contribute, push and lobby for the social identities that they see their politicians relate to. For instance, when disadvantaged minorities realize that certain politicians are ready to sponsor bills to favor LGBT among African Americans say those in incarceration, the members of this group are likely to become more knowledgeable about the policies at hand. These people are likely to hold politicians accountable because they feel that favorable policies raise the group’s social identity. Such push to advance a social identity among that minority group helps to overcome the institutional barriers built over time. 

Disadvantaged minority groups in the United States can get the policy they want by taking advantage of how politicians react to popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty means that majority should rule, that all people are equal and liberty should be upheld. In most societies popular sovereignty means that the majority always prevail over the minority. Since all people are taken to be equal then those who align in a certain way (say racially) will always have their way since the minority will have had their say in a democratic process, for instance, through an election. However, researchers have established that politicians tend to behave in a manner that is inconsistent with popular sovereignty and liberalism (Bishin, 2009). The politicians, for instance, senators who come from the majority group want to support some legislations and policies to appeal to the minorities since they feel the constitutional protections and provisions guarantee all people equality. The politicians feel that by reaching out to help the minorities, they enrich themselves politically without standing to lose the majority support that they enjoy since they feel that the majority are not necessarily threatened by pro-minority policies. Disadvantaged minorities can take advantage of this and lobby to have their legislators pass for them favorable policies even through the wider society may have had institutional designs purposed on thwarting change. 

 Disadvantaged minorities can have their desired policies by being consistent and organized in disrupting established norms. They can create doubt, conflict and uncertainty in an entire population especially among the majority group. The civil activism of the 1950s and 1960s is a good example of how organized and consistent minority groups can have favorable policies passed. The majority white population had to take African American grievances seriously and institute changes such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act which outlawed discrimination on the basis of color, race, religion or nationality in public facilities such as hotels, theaters, schools and public transport (Rothstein, 2017). Recently, the Black Lives matter movement demonstrated that when disadvantaged minorities are organized and consistent they can achieve significant policy changes. Though the changes can take time due to constitutional rigidity, the awareness that intense activism creates is a huge step in helping minorities enjoy more favorable policies. The first and main step is to make the majority group question their views and beliefs. It is to make the majority uncomfortable, to breakdown myths and misconceptions and allow true equality to emerge in a diverse society.

Minorities need to demand for an expanded body of policies that guarantee them more than the constitutional basics of protection of life, discrimination, persecution, political rights and the promotion of their identity. By drafting the constitution to offer these rights, the Madisonian democracy tried to resolve the issue of minorities by having them best protected under the federal government (Bishin, 2009). The system of democracy to ensure equality for all as drafted by Madison and the Founding Fathers was based on the doctrine of separation of powers into the legislature, the judiciary and the executive. This system has worked well to prevent any single organ from abusing powers and destroying democracy. Disadvantaged minorities should continually support all efforts to ensure greater separation of powers at the local, state and federal levels because such Madisonian democracy works well in helping all people get favorable policies. 

Disadvantaged minority groups in the United States can get the policies they want in the face of both majority opposition and an institutional design that seeks to thwart change by having those rights also conferred to the majority, having equitable policies, constitutional protection of fundamental rights, and showing consistency and proper organization when pursuing policy changes. Subconstituency Politics Theory which states that there is increasing likelihood of more policies to be made in favor of small groups of citizens (subconstituencies) works in favor of the disadvantaged groups. Although there are rigid institutional issues against minorities, the US constitution has numerous guarantees and assurances to support minorities in their pursuit for more favorable policies. 

Work Cited

Bishin, B. (2009). Tyranny of the Minority. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.