Role Of Democracy In 12 Angry Men

The American Democracy Now textbook explains about the different 9 chapters, such as The Constitution, Federalism, Civil Liberties, Public Opinion, Interest Groups, Political, and etc. Within each of the 9 chapters it describes a brief history of America and how it help mold and shaped the way we live, and the way we think from a different perspective of a person opinion. Throughout the years, technology has influenced different ways people and government communicates and organizes their political campaigns such as television, computers, cell phones, and news services. Technology has challenged people to give them opportunities to respond to make a deep impact in the future of the nation.

Problems in America only grew worse when democracy was being added to the mixture of already complicated politics. In Woody Holton’s book, Unruly American and the Origins of the Constitution, he stated that, “many Americans. . . were growing ‘tired of an excess of democracy,’ a ‘prevailing rage of excessive democracy. . .’ [or] ‘democratical tyranny.’” Democracy was an attempt at home rule among the colonies, but not everyone was happy with this extreme excess of colonial citizens contribution to the government.

Many people, if asked what they would prefer, would prefer to read the book instead of watching the movie. It could be because the movie will always leave some parts from the story out. It seems like directors of the movie always leave out parts from the book, only incorporating the important parts from the story. Some also say that they prefer to leave the descriptions of things in the book up to their imagination. Also, when you are reading the book, you get to read the main characters point of view on things.

“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.” ( Voltaire) This quote helps explain the main idea of The Tell Tale Heart by Edgar Allan Poe , a story about a narrator who is the caregiver of the old man who explains his reasons and his exact ways for killing the old man he was taking care of. Out of spite for the victims vulture-like cataract eye, he plots this plan to kill for weeks to rid of the eye. He finally succeeds until a nosy neighbor foils the scheme. These are 3 reasons why the narrator is guilty of murder.

It is through examples like these that it is possible for Stewart to show the audience the importance of democracy – not for its benefits, but as an ideal. To get this intention across to the audience, Stewart focuses on how the concept of democracy still is being challenged and misinterpreted by various institutions of power while he explains the elements necessary for a democracy to function optimally as well. To explain the ways that democracy is challenged and misinterpreted today, Stewart uses the country of Jamaica as an example. In his given example, Stewart explains how the power balance in Jamaica is off as the people in power, such as congressmen, is highly educated graduating from universities such as Harvard and Princeton, while much of the general public lives in poverty with restricted access to power through education. Stewart furthermore explains how the concept of democracy is misinterpreted through mistrust.

In the excerpt from the play “The Twelve Angry Men” a peret scenario is given on how not to take decisions. There are twelve jurors who have to decide whether a boy from the slums to get punished or not. Jury Eight is making statements based on his feeling and the rest feel, he is biased. People usually have an obligation with other people for some small reason or big reasons. That is why people end up taking bad decisions.

William Jennings Bryan once said, “Never be afraid to stand with the minority when the minority is right, for the minority which is right will one day be the majority”. Standing up to the majority is vital, it gives individuals the opportunity to express their individual, unique opinions and experiences. It allows the majority to become open to diversity and the cultures that come along with it. This has been shown throughout history, Martin Luther King Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech, is an instance of this. This speech encapsulated all that he was fighting for, for the African American minority in America and their rights.

Twelve Angry Men is in many ways a love letter to the American legal justice system. We find here eleven men, swayed to conclusions by prejudices, past experience, and short-sightedness, challenged by one man who holds himself and his peers to a higher standard of justice, demanding that this marginalized member of society be given his due process. We see the jurors struggle between the two, seemingly conflicting, purposes of a jury, to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent. It proves, however, that the logic of the American trial-by-jury system does work.

This movie is the best example of minority influence where in the earlier stage only one juror no. 8 says defendant is not guilty but in the end of the movie we see that he is able to influence all the jurors in a very logical manner which I am going to point out later so that all the jurors lastly says the defendant is not guilty. Minority influence is more likely to occur if the point of view of the minority is consistent, flexible, and appealing to the majority. The juror no. 8 doesn’t know defendant is guilty or not guilty but he has only doubt in his mind which he trying to clear during the entire film and with which he also able to clear the views of other

What if one day, twenty years from now you were chosen to discuss the fate of an eighteen year old boy. What would you do? Would you take your job and do it responsibly, or would you do it like some of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men and blow it off so you can finish early and leave. Even though there was a lot of controversy in that jury room, I noticed that Jurors 3,7, and 9 used their personalities, beliefs, and views of their responsibilities to bring the boy on trial to justice. This very excitable juror is the last to change his vote, and while his stubbornness could be seen as being based more on emotions than facts, he starts off with his little notebook with facts of the case and tries to insist that he has no personal feelings on the matter.

It is a natural human instinct to want to be acknowledge by your peers, yet it is also important to be a critical thinker. Irving Janis in 1972 created the term groupthink. He believed groupthink occurs inside a group of similar people that want to keep from being different, resulting in incoherent decision-making. The 1957 film "12 Angry Men," uses groupthink, which influenced the verdict vote in the case of a teenager accused of murdering his father. The purpose of this essay is to examine groupthink and to represent Dr. Irving Janis’ symptoms of groupthink in the film.

Leadership and roles are depicted throughout the whole movie by many different jurors. The designated leader of the jury group was Juror #1. Juror #1 was when they first entered into the room but Juror #8 took the emergent role when he declined to agree with a guilty verdict. His rejection to agree in a guilty verdict was crucial since he voiced his uncertainty to the evidence at a early stage.

In these two critically-acclaimed movies, government ignorance is explored in distinct ways. In 12 Angry Men, a jury of 12 men is sent to determine the fate of an 18-year-old slum-raised Latino boy accused of stabbing his father to death. A guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. In Beasts of the Southern Wild we are taken on an adventure alongside Hushpuppy, an African-American six-year old, who lives on a poverty-stricken island called the Bathtub and whose father’s tough love prepares her for a harsh world. As completely opposite as these two perspectives seem, each represents opposing sides of social injustice and ultimately deliver similar messages.

The movie “Twelve Angry Men” illustrates lots of social psychology theories. This stretched and attractive film, characterize a group of jurors who have to decide the innocence or guiltiness of an accused murder. They are simply deliberating the destiny of a Puerto Rican teenaged boy accused of murdering his father. Initially, as the film begins, except the juror Davis (Henry Fonda), all other jurors vote guilty. Progressively, the jurors begin trying to compromise on a point that everybody agree because the decision of the jury has to be unanimous.

Persuasion is the key to success. However, to achieve the best outcome, many things play a role, some of which include logos, ethos and pathos. In the book Twelve Angry Men, jurors brought their ideas to the table through different perspectives. Having facts and evidence shows that you know what you talking about, and have looked further into the topic. The best persuasive appeal presented in Twelve Angry Men was logic.