| Who or what are single-issue people or groups? Examples are environmentalists,
gun lobbyists, large agribusinesses. The reason that single-issue
people are so successful in most political environments is that they have
the passion to become versed and practiced in the ins and outs of the political
environment of their time. They will be present and heard in any
political environment. The real question, given the fact that they
will go to whatever necessary lengths to be heard, is what will be their
effectiveness. This hinges on two things: 1) their ability to make
their issue big in the necessary venue, and 2) the complacency, apathy
and inaction of everyone else to whom the issue means little.
The government of the US today is an indirect democracy, a republic
of democratically elected officials. Since our rules of law are actually
made by the people we elect, that is where the single-issue advocates have
focused their attention. Access to these people is what single-issue
people have figured out. If a true democracy were in place, they
would try to figure out a way to influence that, too.
The easier it is for all people to register their opinions, the more
widely available would be the means to access and influence the generation
of laws. If a single-issue advocacy group were to raise their issue
to the point where it became a focus on the political agenda, it would
be more likely to arouse the response of at least a few people in a land
of 260-plus million people. An indication of this is the number of
viewers who watch the national broadcast of things going on in the two
houses of Congress.
Ultimately, single-issue advocacy holds parallel negative connotations
to those laid upon the tyranny of the masses. These two polar extremes
would provide the checks and balances one against the other -- indeed it
is almost a given that single-issue advocacy would have to arise if democracy
were to generate laws that favored only the masses with no consideration
for the people who were not part of the majority. |
