Democracy

Democracy is an egalitarian form of government in which all the citizens of a nation together
determine public policy, the laws and the actions of their state, requiring that all citizens (meeting certain
qualifications) have an equal opportunity to express their opinion. In practise, "democracy" is the extent to
which a given system approximates this ideal, and a given political system is referred to as "a democracy"
if it allows a certain approximation to ideal democracy. Although no country has ever granted all its citizens
(i.e. including minors) the vote, most countries today hold regular elections based on egalitarian principles,
at least in theory.

The most common system that is deemed "democratic" in the modern world is parliamentary
democracy in which the voting public takes part in elections and chooses politicians to represent them in
a Legislative Assembly. The members of the assembly then make decisions with a majority vote. A purer
form is direct democracy in which the voting public makes direct decisions or participates directly in the
political process. Elements of direct democracy exist on a local level and on exceptions on national level in
many countries, though these systems coexist with representative assemblies.

The term comes from the Greek word δημοκρατία (dēmokratía) "rule of the people",which was coined from
δῆμος (dēmos) "people" and κρατία (kratia) "rule", in the middle of the 5th-4th century BC to denote
the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notablyAthens following a popular uprising
in 508 BC. Other cultures since Greece have significantly contributed to the evolution of democracy such
as Ancient Rome, Europe, and North and South America. The concept of representative democracy arose
largely from ideas and institutions that developed during the European Middle Ages and the Age of
Enlightenment and in the American and French Revolutions. The right to vote has been expanded in many
jurisdictions over time from relatively narrow groups (such as wealthy men of a particular ethnic group),
with New Zealand the first nation to grant universal suffrage for all its citizens in 1893.

Elements considered essential to democracy include freedom of political expression, freedom of speech,

and freedom of the press, so that citizens are adequately informed and able to vote according to their own
best interests as they see them. The term "democracy" is often used as shorthand for liberal democracy,
which may include elements such as political pluralism; equality before the law; the right to petitionelected
officials for redress of grievances; due process; civil liberties; human rights; and elements of civil
society outside the government.

Democracy is often confused with the republic form of government. In some definitions of "republic," a

republic is a form of democracy. Other definitions make "republic" a separate, unrelated term.
Definition
While there is no universally accepted definition of 'democracy', equality and freedom have both been
identified as important characteristics of democracy since ancient times.These principles are reflected in all
citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes. For example, in a
representative democracy, every vote has equal weight, no unreasonable restrictions can apply to anyone
seeking to become a representative, and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and
liberties which are generally protected by a constitution

According to some theories of democracy, popular sovereignty is the founding principle of such a system.
However, the democratic principle has also been expressed as "the freedom to call something into being
which did not exist before, which was not given… and which therefore, strictly speaking, could not be
known." This type of freedom, which is connected to human "natality," or the capacity to begin anew, sees
democracy as "not only a political system… [but] an ideal, an aspiration, really, intimately connected to and
dependent upon a picture of what it is to be human—of what it is a human should be to be fully human." [

Many people use the term "democracy" as shorthand for liberal democracy, which may include elements
such as political pluralism; equality before the law; the right to petition elected officials for redress of
grievances; due process; civil liberties; human rights; and elements of civil society outside the government.
In the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute, but in other countries, such
as the United Kingdom, the dominant principle is that of parliamentary sovereignty (whilst
maintaining judicial independence). In other cases, "democracy" is used to mean direct democracy.
Though the term "democracy" is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles are
applicable to privateorganizations and other groups as well.

Majority rule is often listed as a characteristic of democracy. However, it is also possible for a minority to be
oppressed by a "tyranny of the majority" in the absence of governmental or constitutional protections of
individual or group rights. An essential part of an "ideal" representative democracy is
competitive elections that are fair both substantively and procedurally. Furthermore, freedom of political
expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press are considered to be essential, so that citizens
are adequately informed and able to vote according to their own best interests as they see them. It has also
been suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of individuals to participate freely and
fully in the life of their society. With its emphasis on notions of social contract and the collective will of the
people, democracy can also be characterized as a form of political collectivism because it is defined as a
form of government in which all adult citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.

Forms
Democracy has taken a number of forms, both in theory and practice. Some varieties of democracy provide
better representation and more freedom for their citizens than others. However, if any democracy is not
structured so as to prohibit the government from excluding the people from the legislative process, or any
branch of government from altering the separation of powers in its own favor, then a branch of the system
can accumulate too much power and destroy the democracy. Representative Democracy, Consensus
Democracy, and Deliberative Democracy are all major examples of attempts at a form of government that
is both practical and responsive to the needs and desires of citizens.

The following kinds of democracy are not exclusive of one another: many specify details of aspects that are
independent of one another and can co-exist in a single system.

Political ratings of countries according to Freedom House’s Freedom in the World survey, 2011:

  Free
  Partly free
  Not free

Countries highlighted in blue are designated "electoral democracies" in Freedom House's 2010 survey Freedom in the
World

Representative
Representative democracy involves the selection of government officials by the people being represented.
If the head of state is also democratically elected then it is called a democratic republic.[55] The most
common mechanisms involve election of the candidate with a majority or a plurality of the votes.

Representatives may be elected or become diplomatic representatives by a particular district

(or constituency), or represent the entire electorate proportionally proportional systems, with some using a
combination of the two. Some representative democracies also incorporate elements of direct democracy,
such as referendums. A characteristic of representative democracy is that while the representatives are
elected by the people to act in the people's interest, they retain the freedom to exercise their own judgment
as how best to do so.
Parliamentary
Parliamentary democracy is a representative democracy where government is appointed by
representatives as opposed to a 'presidential rule' wherein the President is both head of state and the head
of government and is elected by the voters. Under a parliamentary democracy, government is exercised by
delegation to an executive ministry and subject to ongoing review, checks and balances by the legislative
parliament elected by the people. Parliamentary systems have the right to dismiss a Prime Minister at any
point in time that they feel he or she is not doing their job to the expectations of the legislature. This is done
through a Vote of No Confidence where the legislature decides whether or not to remove the Prime
Minister from office by a majority support for his or her dismissal. In some countries, the Prime Minister can
also call an election whenever he or she so chooses, and typically the Prime Minister will hold an election
when he or she knows that they are in good favor with the public as to get re-elected. In other
parliamentary democracies extra elections are virtually never held, a minority government being preferred
until the next ordinary elections.

Presidential
Presidential Democracy is a system where the public elects the president through free and fair elections.
The president serves as both the head of state and head of government controlling most of the executive
powers. The president serves for a specific term and cannot exceed that amount of time. By being elected
by the people, the president can say that he is the choice of the people and for the people. Elections
typically have a fixed date and aren’t easily changed. Combining head of state and head of government
makes the president not only the face of the people but as the head of policy as well. The president has
direct control over the cabinet, the members of which are specifically appointed by the president himself.
The president cannot be easily removed from office by the legislature. While the president holds most of
the executive powers, he cannot remove members of the legislative branch any more easily than they
could remove him from office This increases separation of powers. This can also create discord between
the president and the legislature if they are of separate parties, allowing one to block the other. This type of
democracy is not common around the world today due to the conflicts to which it can lead, but most
countries in the Americas, including the USA, use this system.

Semi-presidential
A semi-presidential system is a system of democracy in which the government includes both a prime
minister and a president. This form of democracy is even less common than a presidential system. This
system has both a prime minister with no fixed term and a president with a fixed term. Depending on the
country, the separation of powers between the prime minister and president varies. In one instance, the
president can hold more power than the prime minister, with the prime minister accountable to both the
legislature and president.[61]On the other hand, the prime minister can hold more power than the president.
The president and prime minister share power, while the president holds powers separate from those of the
legislature.[61] The president holds the role of commander in chief, controls foreign policy, and is head of
state ("the face of the people"). The prime minister is expected to formulate the Presidents policies into
legislature. The prime minister is the head of government and as such he is expected to formulate the
policies of the party that won the election into legislature. This type of government can also create issues
over who holds what responsibilities.

Constitutional
A Constitutional democracy is a representative democracy in which the ability of the elected
representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and usually moderated by a
constitution that emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places
constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the
rights of minorities (see civil liberties). In a constitutional democracy, it is possible for some large-scale
decisions to emerge from the many individual decisions that citizens are free to make. In other words,
citizens can "vote with their feet" or "vote with their dollars", resulting in significant informal government-by-
the-masses that exercises many "powers" associated with formal government elsewhere.

Liberal constitutional
Direct
Direct democracy is a political system where the citizens participate in the decision-making personally,
contrary to relying on intermediaries or representatives. The supporters of direct democracy argue that
democracy is more than merely a procedural issue. A direct democracy gives the voting population the
power to:

1. Change constitutional laws,

2. Put forth initiatives, referendums and suggestions for laws,

3. Give binding orders to elective officials, such as revoking them before the end of their elected
term, or initiating a lawsuit for breaking a campaign promise.

Of the three measures mentioned, most operate in developed democracies today. This is part of a
gradual shift towards direct democracies. Elements of direct democracy exist on a local level in many
countries, though these systems often coexist with representative assemblies. Usually, this includes
equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation
into law.

Examples of this include the extensive use of referendums in the US state of California with more than
20 million voters. Also in the US, Vermont towns have been known for their yearly town meetings, held
every March to decide on local issues. In Switzerland, five million voters decide on national
referendums and initiatives two to four times a year, and direct democratic instruments are also well
established at the cantonal and communal level; there are Landsgemeinden in two Swiss Cantons. No
direct democracy is in existence outside the framework of a different overarching form of government.
Inclusive democracy
Inclusive democracy is a political theory and political project that aims for direct democracy in all
fields of social life: political democracy in the form of face-to-face assemblies which are
confederated, economic democracy in a stateless, moneyless and marketless economy,
democracy in the social realm, i.e.self-management in places of work and education, and
ecological democracy which aims to reintegrate society and nature. The theoretical project of
inclusive democracy emerged from the work of political philosopher Takis Fotopoulos in "Towards
An Inclusive Democracy" and was further developed in the journal Democracy & Nature' and its
successor The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy.

The basic unit of decision making in an inclusive democracy is the demotic assembly, i.e. the
assembly of demos, the citizen body in a given geographical area which may encompass a town
and the surrounding villages, or even neighbourhoods of large cities. An inclusive democracy
today can only take the form of a confederal democracy that is based on a network of
administrative councils whose members or delegates are elected from popular face-to-face
democratic assemblies in the various demoi. Thus, their role is purely administrative and practical,
not one of policy-making like that of representatives in representative democracy.The citizen body
is advised by experts but it is the citizen body which functions as the ultimate decision-taker .
Authority can be delegated to a segment of the citizen body to carry out specific duties, for
example to serve as members of popular courts, or of regional and confederal councils. Such
delegation is made, in principle, by lot, on a rotation basis, and is always recallable by the citizen
body. Delegates to regional and confederal bodies should have specific mandates.

Participatory
A Parpolity or Participatory Polity is a theoretical form of democracy that is ruled by a Nested
Council structure. The guiding philosophy is that people should have decision making power in
proportion to how much they are affected by the decision. Local councils of 25–50 people are
completely autonomous on issues that affect only them, and these councils send delegates to
higher level councils who are again autonomous regarding issues that affect only the population
affected by that council.

A council court of randomly chosen citizens serves as a check on the tyranny of the majority, and
rules on which body gets to vote on which issue. Delegates can vote differently than their sending
council might wish, but are mandated to communicate the wishes of their sending council.
Delegates are recallable at any time. Referendums are possible at any time via votes of the
majority of lower level councils, however, not everything is a referendum as this is most likely a
waste of time. A parpolity is meant to work in tandem with a participatory economy.
Socialist
"Democracy cannot consist solely of elections that are nearly always fictitious and
managed by rich landowners and professional politicians."
— Che Guevara, Marxist revolutionary.

Socialist thought has several different views on democracy. Social democracy, democratic

socialism, and the dictatorship of the proletariat (usually exercised through Soviet democracy) are
some examples. Many democratic socialists and social democrats believe in a form
of participatory democracy and workplace democracy combined with a representative democracy.

Within Marxist orthodoxy there is a hostility to what is commonly called "liberal democracy", which

they simply refer to as parliamentary democracy because of its often centralized nature. Because
of their desire to eliminate the political elitism they see in
capitalism, Marxists, Leninists and Trotskyists believe in direct democracy implemented through a
system ofcommunes (which are sometimes called soviets). This system ultimately manifests itself
as council democracy and begins with workplace democracy. (See Democracy in Marxism)

Anarchist
Anarchists are split in this domain, depending on whether they believe that a majority-rule is
tyrannic or not. The only form of democracy considered acceptable to many anarchists isdirect
democracy. 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, even when
unanimous. However, anarcho-communist Murray Bookchin criticized individualist anarchists for
opposing democracy, and says "majority rule" is consistent with anarchism.

Some anarcho-communists oppose the majoritarian nature of direct democracy, feeling that it can
impede individual liberty and opt in favour of a non-majoritarian form of consensus democracy,
similar to Proudhon's position on direct democracy. Henry David Thoreau, who did not self-identify
as an anarchist but argued for "a better government"and is cited as an inspiration by some
anarchists, argued that people should not be in the position of ruling others or being ruled when
there is no consent.

Iroquois
Iroquois society had a form of participatory democracy and representative democracy. Elizabeth
Tooker, a Temple University professor of anthropology and an authority on the culture and history
of the Northern Iroquois, has reviewed the claims that the Iroquois inspired the American
Confederation and concluded they are myth rather than fact. The relationship between the
Iroquois League and the Constitution is based on a portion of a letter written by Benjamin
Franklin and a speech by the Iroquois chief Canasatego in 1744. Tooker concluded that the
documents only indicate that some groups of Iroquois and white settlers realized the advantages
of uniting against a common enemy, and that ultimately there is little evidence to support the idea
that 18th century colonists were knowledgeable regarding the Iroquois system of governance.
What little evidence there is regarding this system indicates chiefs of different tribes were
permitted representation in the Iroquois League council, and this ability to represent the tribe was
hereditary. The council itself did not practice representative government, and there were no
elections; deceased chiefs' successors were selected by the most senior woman within the
hereditary lineage, in consultation with other women in the clan. Decision making occurred
through lengthy discussion and decisions were unanimous, with topics discussed being
introduced by a single tribe. Tooker concludes that "...there is virtually no evidence that the
framers [of the Constitution] borrowed from the Iroquois" and that the myth that this was the case
is the result of exaggerations and misunderstandings of a claim made by Iroquois linguist and
ethnographer J.N.B. Hewitt after his death in 1937.

Sortition
Main article:  Sortition

Sometimes called "democracy without elections", sortition is the process of choosing decision

makers via a random process. The intention is that those chosen will be representative of the
opinions and interests of the people at large, and be more fair and impartial than an elected
official. The technique was in widespread use in Athenian Democracy and is still used in
modern jury selection.

Consensus
Main article:  Consensus democracy

Consensus democracy requires varying degrees of consensus rather than just a mere democratic
majority. It typically attempts to protect minority rights from domination by majority rule.

Supranational
Qualified majority voting (QMV) is designed by the Treaty of Rome to be the principal method of
reaching decisions in the European Council of Ministers. This system allocates votes to member
states in part according to their population, but heavily weighted in favour of the smaller states.
This might be seen as a form of representative democracy, but representatives to the Council
might be appointed rather than directly elected.

Some might consider the "individuals" being democratically represented to be states rather than
people, as with many other international organizations. European Parliament members are
democratically directly elected on the basis of universal suffrage, may be seen as an example of
a supranational democratic institution.

Cosmopolitan
Cosmopolitan democracy, also known as Global democracy or World Federalism, is a political
system in which democracy is implemented on a global scale, either directly or through
representatives. An important justification for this kind of system is that the decisions made in
national or regional democracies often affect people outside the constituency who, by definition,
cannot vote. By contrast, in a cosmopolitan democracy, the people who are affected by decisions
also have a say in them. According to its supporters, any attempt to solve global problems is
undemocratic without some form of cosmopolitan democracy. The general principle of
cosmopolitan democracy is to expand some or all of the values and norms of democracy,
including the rule of law; the non-violent resolution of conflicts; and equality among citizens,
beyond the limits of the state. To be fully implemented, this would require reforming
existing international organizations, e.g. the United Nations, as well as the creation of new
institutions such as a World Parliament, which ideally would enhance public control over, and
accountability in, international politics.

Cosmopolitan Democracy has been promoted, among others, by physicist Albert Einstein, writer
Kurt Vonnegut, columnist George Monbiot, and professors David Held and Daniele Archibugi.

The creation of the International Criminal Court in 2003 was seen as a major step forward by
many supporters of this type of cosmopolitan democracy.

Non-governmental
Aside from the public sphere, similar democratic principles and mechanisms of voting and
representation have been used to govern other kinds of communities and organizations.

 Many non-governmental organizations decide policy and leadership by voting.

 Most trade unions choose their leadership through democratic elections.

 Cooperatives are enterprises owned and democratically controlled by their customers or

workers.

 Corporations are controlled by shareholders on the principle, one share, one vote; most have
a board of directors elected by the shareholders which in turn vote to determine high-level
company policy and leadership.
Theory
Aristotle
Aristotle contrasted rule by the many (democracy/polity), with rule by the few
(oligarchy/aristocracy), and with rule by a single person (tyrannyor today autocracy/monarchy). He
also thought that there was a good and a bad variant of each system (he considered democracy
to be the degenerate counterpart to polity).

For Aristotle the underlying principle of democracy is freedom, since only in a democracy the
citizens can have a share in freedom. In essence, he argues that this is what every democracy
should make its aim. There are two main aspects of freedom: being ruled and ruling in turn, since
everyone is equal according to number, not merit, and to be able to live as one pleases.
Republic
In contemporary usage, the term democracy refers to a government chosen by the people,
whether it is direct or representative. The term republic has many different meanings, but today
often refers to a representative democracy with an elected head of state, such as a president,
serving for a limited term, in contrast to states with a hereditary monarch as a head of state, even
if these states also are representative democracies with an elected or appointed head of
government such as a prime minister.

The Founding Fathers of the United States rarely praised and often criticized democracy, which in
their time tended to specifically mean direct democracy; James Madison argued, especially in The
Federalist No. 10, that what distinguished a democracy from a republic was that the former
became weaker as it got larger and suffered more violently from the effects of faction, whereas a
republic could get stronger as it got larger and combats faction by its very structure.

What was critical to American values, John Adams insisted,  was that the government be "bound
by fixed laws, which the people have a voice in making, and a right to defend." As Benjamin
Franklin was exiting after writing the U.S. constitution, a woman asked him "Well, Doctor, what
have we got—a republic or a monarchy?". He replied "A republic—if you can keep it." [

Election misconducts
In practice it may not pay the incumbents to conduct fair elections in countries that have no history
of democracy. A study showed that incumbents who rig elections stay in office 2.5 times as long
as those who permit fair elections. Above $2,700 per capita democracies have been found to be
less prone to violence, but below that threshold, more violence. The same study shows that
election misconduct is more likely in countries with low per capita incomes, small populations, rich
in natural resources, and a lack of institutional checks and balances. Sub-Saharan countries, as
well as Afghanistan, all tend to fall into that category.

Governments that have frequent elections averaged over the political cycle have significantly
better economic policies than those who don't. This does not apply to governments with fraudulent
elections, however.

Opposition to democracy
Democracy in modern times has almost always faced opposition from the existing government.
The implementation of a democratic government within a non-democratic state is typically brought
about by democratic revolution. Monarchy had traditionally been opposed to democracy, and to
this day remains opposed to its abolition, although often political compromise has been reached in
the form of shared government.
Post-Enlightenment ideologies such as, Fascism, Nazism and Neo-Fundamentalism oppose
liberal democracy on different grounds, generally citing that the concept of democracy as a
constant process is flawed and detrimental to a preferable course of development.

Criticisms
Economists since Milton Friedman have strongly criticized the efficiency of democracy. They base
this on their premise of the irrational voter. Their argument is that voters are highly uninformed
about many political issues, especially relating to economics, and have a strong bias about the
few issues on which they are fairly knowledgeable.

Popular rule as a façade

The 20th Century Italian thinkers Vilfredo Pareto and Gaetano Mosca (independently) argued that
democracy was illusory, and served only to mask the reality of elite rule. Indeed, they argued that
elite oligarchy is the unbendable law of human nature, due largely to the apathy and division of
the masses (as opposed to the drive, initiative and unity of the elites), and that democratic
institutions would do no more than shift the exercise of power from oppression to manipulation.

Mob rule
Plato's The Republic presents a critical view of democracy through the narration of Socrates:
"Democracy, which is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing
a sort of equality to equals and unequaled alike." In his work, Plato lists 5 forms of
government from best to worst. Assuming that the Republic was intended to be a serious critique
of the political thought in Athens, Plato argues that only Kallipolis, an aristocracy led by the
unwilling philosopher-kings (the wisest men) is a just form of government.

Political instability
More recently, democracy is criticised for not offering enough political stability. As governments
are frequently elected on and off there tends to be frequent changes in the policies of democratic
countries both domestically and internationally. Even if a political party maintains power,
vociferous, headline grabbing protests and harsh criticism from the mass media are often enough
to force sudden, unexpected political change. Frequent policy changes with regard to business
and immigration are likely to deter investment and so hinder economic growth. For this reason,
many people have put forward the idea that democracy is undesirable for a developing country in
which economic growth and the reduction of poverty are top priority. [

This opportunist alliance not only has the handicap of having to cater to too many ideologically
opposing factions, but it is usually short lived since any perceived or actual imbalance in the
treatment of coalition partners, or changes to leadership in the coalition partners themselves, can
very easily result in the coalition partner withdrawing its support from the government.