t suggests the possibility of unlimited success against them. The less limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears” (Connolly & Gordon, 1974: 81). Furthermore, as was noted in a previous section, individuals, once having fulfilled lower-level needs, are often unable to relate to struggles necessary at previous need levels. For most Americans, the physiological and safety needs are automatically provided. This position means that for most Americans, the “principles of Democracy” that Elshtain refer to are of an irrelevant past – they are an assumed privilege, the security of which is taken for granted.The focus instead becomes not of Democratic justice through the vote, but Democratic “equality” through governmental intervention; it is not freedom from oppression, but freedom to do whatever one desires without interference; not commitment to national unity, but commitment to everyone’s individual needs and desires – each portrays a distinct way of viewing what is “important” for Democracy today because each begins from different need levels. When a woman’s individual right to participate in the political process had been denied, Democratic justice through the vote was sought. Once obtained, the issue became Democratic justice through equality of work, followed by equality of pay. Subsequently it became Democratic justice through the right to do with one’s body what one wished. At each stage, a new level of “Democratic justice” seemed “the” injustice of the day – previous advances were already internalized and secured as “rights” automatically, therefore a new level of justice was sought.Each of these examples exemplifies both the continual nature of need fulfillment as well as the unique ability of man to conveniently forget battles won, advances made, and previous desires fulfilled, and to desire ne...
