From Greek demos (people) and kratia (authority), hence rule by the people; contrasted with rule by the few (oligarchy) or by one (monarchy or tyranny); also known as a liberal democracy. Since the Greeks first introduced demokratia in many city states in the 5th-c BC, there has been disagreement about what constitutes the essential elements of democracy. One debate concerns who should compose the people, and only in the 20th-c did this notion come to be viewed as covering the total adult citizenship. Another relates to how the people should rule, particularly in relation to the increasing size of states, which has resulted in a shift from direct democracy to systems of representation. Today it is widely accepted that because the people are too numerous and scattered to come together in assemblies, decision-making has to be handed over to a small group of representatives. Elections, including the right to choose among different groups of representatives offering different doctrines and party programmes, have therefore become seen as essential to democracy. Further necessary conditions are the legal equality of citizens, and the free flow of information to ensure that citizens are in an equal and informed position to choose and hold accountable their rulers. Some radicals argue that economic equality is also necessary, but moves towards economic democracy have been limited.
Democracy (literally "rule by the people", from the Greek demos, "people," and kratos, "rule") is a form of government for a nation state, or for an organization in which all the citizens have an equal vote or voice in shaping policy or electing government officials. While the term democracy is often used in the context of a political state, the principles are also applicable to other bodies, such as universities, labor unions, public companies, or civic organizations.
|
Forms of government |
|---|
|
This series is part of |
|
List of forms of government Aristocracy Autocracy Democracy Despotism Dictatorship Monarchy Absolute monarchy Constitutional monarchy Oligarchy Plutocracy Republic Single-party state Theocracy Tyranny |
| Politics Portal · edit |
Varieties
|
Democracy |
|---|
|
This series is part of |
| Democracy History of democracy Varieties List of types of democracy |
| Anticipatory democracy Athenian democracy Consensus democracy Deliberative democracy Direct democracy Liberal democracy Non-partisan democracy Participatory democracy Representative democracy Republican democracy Social democracy Soviet democracy Demarchy |
|
Politics Portal · edit |
The definition of democracy is made complex, therefore, varied concepts used at different periods of history in different contexts are necessary. Political systems, or proposed political systems, claiming or claimed to be democratic have ranged very broadly. Sortition/Allotment have formed the basis of systems randomly selecting officers from the population: For example, Aristotle described the law courts in Athens which were selected by lot as democratic and described elections as oligarchic. Certain tribes organised themselves using forms of participatory democracy. Democracy is used to describe systems seeking consensus (see Deliberative democracy). Many socialists have argued that socialism necessarily implies a form of democracy (see Democratic socialism). A soviet republic is a system of government in which the whole state power belongs to the Soviets - councils of employees. Although the term usually associated with communist states, it was not initially intended to represent only one political force, but merely a form of democracy and representation. People's democracy was considered a form of democracy in (mostly developing) countries that decided to follow socialist way, but did not eliminated some capitalist issues yet. representation
Direct
Direct democracy is a political system where the citizens vote on all major policy decisions. Therefore, these critics argue, democracy is more than merely a procedural issue.
All direct democracies to date have been relatively small communities; Today, a limited direct democracy exists in some Swiss cantons that practice it in its literal form. Direct democracy obviously becomes difficult when the electorate is large--for example some 30,000 or more citizens were eligible in Athenian democracy. However, the extensive use of referenda, as in California, is akin to direct democracy in a very large polity with over 20 million potential voters. Modern direct democracy tries to accommodate this problem and sees a role for strictly controlled representatives.
Representative
Representative democracy is so named because the people select representatives to a governing body. Some representative democracies also incorporate some elements of direct democracy, such as referenda. Representative democracy is susceptible to various problems such as Gerrymandering of constituencies.
History
Ancient origins
The word democracy was coined in ancient Greece and used interchangeably with isonomia (equality of political rights). Although Athenian democracy is today considered by many to have been a form of direct democracy originally it had two distinguishing features: firstly the allotment (selection by lot) of ordinary citizens to government offices and courts, and secondarily the assembly of all the citizens. In theory, all the Athenian citizens were eligible to speak and vote in the Assembly, which set the laws of the city-state, but neither political rights, nor citizenship, were granted to women, slaves, or metics. Key to the development of Athenian democracy was its huge juries allotted from the citizenry .
The seeds of representative democracy were arguably started in the Roman Republic. However, since usually only a minority had political rights they are often better described as oligarchies.
Middle Ages
During the Middle Ages, there were various systems involving elections or assemblies, such as the election of Gopala in Bengal, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Althing in Iceland, certain medieval Italian city-states such as Venice, the tuatha system in early medieval Ireland, the Veche in Slavic countries, and Scandinavian Things.
The Parliament of England had its roots in the restrictions on the power of kings written into Magna Carta.
18th and 19th centuries
Although not described as a Democracy by the founding fathers, the United States can be seen as the first liberal democracy. On the American frontier, democracy became a way of life, with widespread social, economic and political equality.By 1840s almost all property restrictions were ended and nearly all white adult male citizens could vote; The system gradually evolved, from Jeffersonian Democracy or the First Party System to Jacksonian Democracy or the Second Party System and later to the Third Party System.
Later in 1789, Revolutionary France adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and, although short-lived, the National Convention was elected by all males.
Liberal democracies were few and often short-lived before the late nineteenth century.
20th Century
20th century transitions to liberal democracy have come in successive "waves of democracy", variously resulting from wars, revolutions, decolonization and economic circumstances. In the 1920 democracy flourished, but the Great Depression brought a disenchantment and most of the countries of Europe, Latin America and Asia turned to strong-man rule or dictatorships.
World War II brought a definitive reversal of this trend in western Europe. The war was followed by decolonisation, and again most of the new independent states had nominally democratic constitutions.In the decades following World War II, most western democratic nations had a predominantly free-market economy and developed a welfare state, reflecting a general consensus among their electorates and political parties. By 1960, the vast majority of nation-states were nominally democracies, although the majority of the world's populations lived in nations that experienced sham elections, and other forms of subterfuge (particularly in Communist nations and the former colonies.)
A subsequent wave of democratisation brought substantial gains toward true liberal democracy for many nations.
The number of liberal democracies currently stands at an all-time high and has been growing without interruption for some time.
Marxist/Socialist view
Many on the left view democracy as essentially a system giving ordinary people power and therefore they view Socialism, Marxism, etc. As a result many left-wing political groups in the 18th and 19th century referred to themselves as democrats or their party as "democratic" (Notable examples include the German Democratic Republic & the US Democrat Party)
Social-Democrats see liberal democracy as being compatible with the interests of working class and therefore participate in elections.
The Marxist view is fundamentally opposed to liberal democracy believing that the capitalist state cannot be democratic by its nature, as it represents the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Marxism views liberal democracy as an unrealistic utopia. This is because they believe that in a capitalist state all "independent" media and most political parties are controlled by capitalists and one either needs large financial resources or to be supported by the bourgeoisie to win an election. parliamentary elections) is an opportunity citizens of a country get every four years to decide who among the ruling classes will misrepresent them in parliament." Thus the Marxists believe that in a capitalist state, the system focusses on resolving disputes within the ruling bourgeosie class and ignores the interests of the proletariat or labour class which are not represented and therefore dependent on the bourgeoisie's good will. Moreover, even if representatives of the proletariat class are elected in a capitalist country they have limited power over the country's affairs as the economic sphere is largely controlled by private capital and therefore the representative's power to act is curtailed.
Theory
Conceptions
Among political theorist, there are many contending conceptions of democracy.
Under minimalism, democracy is a system of government in which citizens give teams of political leaders the right to rule in periodic elections. This meaning of the word "democracy" has also been called polyarchy. The aggregative conception of democracy holds that government should produce laws and policies that are close to the views of the median voter — with half to his left and the other half to his right. Deliberative democracy is based on the notion that democracy is government by discussion. Deliberative democrats contend that laws and policies should be based upon reasons that all citizens can accept. The political arena should be one in which leaders and citizens make arguments, listen, and change their minds. The conceptions above assume a representative democracy. Direct democracy holds that citizens should participate directly, not through their representatives, in making laws and policies. Proponents of direct democracy offer varied reasons to support this view. Political activity can be valuable in itself, it socializes and educates citizens, and popular participation can check powerful elites. Most importantly, citizens do not really rule themselves unless they directly decide laws and policies. Another conception of democracy is that it means political equality between all citizens. It is also used to refer to societies in which there exists a certain set of institutions, procedures and patterns which are perceived as leading to equality in political power. First and foremost among these institutions is the regular occurrence of free and open elections which are used to select representatives who then manage all or most of the public policy of the society. This view may see it as a problem that the majority of the voters decide policy, as opposed to majority rule of the entire population. This can be used as an argument for making political participation mandatory, like compulsory voting."Democracy" and "Republic"
In historical usages and especially when considering the works of the Founding Fathers of the United States, the word "democracy" refers solely to direct democracy, while a representative democracy where representatives of the people are elected and whose power to govern is limited by laws enshrined in a constitution is referred to as a constitutional republic. Unlike a pure democracy, in a constitutional republic, citizens are not governed by the majority of the people but by the rule of law. The power of the majority of the people is checked by limiting that power to electing representatives who govern within limits of overarching constitutional law rather than the popular vote having legislative power itself. Morever, the power of elected representatives is also checked by prohibitions against any single individual having legislative, judicial, and executive powers so that basic constitutional law is extremely difficult to change. John Adams defined a constitutional republic as "a government of laws, and not of men."Using the term "democracy" to refer solely to direct democracy, or to representative democracy without checks on the power of elected officials, retains some popularity in United States conservative and libertarian circles.
The original framers of the United States Constitution were notably cognizant of what they perceived as a danger of majority rule in oppressing freedom and liberty of the individual. 10, advocates a constitutional republic over a democracy to protect the individual from the majority.
Republicanism and Liberalism have complex relationships to democracy and republic.
Constitutional monarchs and upper chambers
Initially after the American and French revolutions the question was open whether a democracy, in order to restrain unchecked majority rule, should have an elitist upper chamber, the members perhaps appointed meritorious experts or having lifetime tenures, or should have a constitutional monarch with limited but real powers.
Democratic state
Though there remains some philosophical debate as to the applicability and legitimacy of criteria in defining democracy what follows may be a minimum of requirements for a state to be considered democratic (note that for example anarchists may support a form of democracy but not a state):
A demos—a group which makes political decisions by some form of collective procedure—must exist. Political legitimacy is the willingness of the population to accept decisions of the state, its government and courts, which go against personal choices or interests.Criticism
Anarchists oppose "coercive" majority rule, it's a common saying that "democracy is a dictatorship of the majority". Many support a non-hierarchical and non-coercive system of direct democracy within free associations. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon argued that the only acceptable form of direct democracy is one in which it is recognized that majority decisions are not binding on the minority.
Some far right, theocratic, and monarchist groups oppose democracy.
For criticisms of specific forms of democracy, see the appropriate article.
Beyond the state level
While this article deals mainly with democracy as a system to rule countries, voting and representation have been used to govern many other kinds of communities and organisations. Benhabib, Seyla, ed., Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political (Princeton University Press, 1996) Charles Blattberg, From Pluralist to Patriotic Politics: Putting Practice First, Oxford University Press, 2000, ch. Ian Shapiro, and Jose Antonio Cheibub, eds, The Democracy Sourcebook MIT Press 2003 Diamond, Larry and Marc Plattner, The Global Resurgence of Democracy, 2nd edition Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996 Diamond, Larry and Richard Gunther, eds. Islam and Democracy in the Middle East (2003) Elster, Jon (ed.). "Contemporary Models of Democracy," Polity 33#4 (2001) pp 547+. Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies Princeton University Press. Patterns of Democracy. “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy”, American Political Science Review, (1959) 53 (1): 69-105. Making Democracy Work Princeton University Press. “The Political Foundations of the Rule of Law and Democracy”, American Political Science Review, (1997) 91 (2): 245-263.
User Comments Add a comment…