Democracy is a form of government where citizens have the power to elect representatives and influence decisions through voting, promoting equality and civic participation in shaping policies.
Introduction
Democracy, often referred to as a form of government, is much more than that. It is a comprehensive system that influences not only the political landscape but also the state and society as a whole. It is the backbone of a well-functioning society, emphasizing the involvement of people in decision-making and dispute resolution while upholding principles of equality and justice. Democracy places supreme power in the hands of the people, to be exercised directly or indirectly through a representative system, typically through periodic elections.
Table of Contents
Meaning of Democracy
At its core, democracy seeks to empower the masses, giving a voice to those who may otherwise be voiceless and power to those who may feel powerless. The term “democracy” finds its roots in the Greek word “Demokratia,” where “demos” signifies people and “kratos” denotes power or rule. As famously quoted by Abraham Lincoln, democracy is “a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.”
Democracy revolves around several key components that shape its culture:
Respect for Human Dignity: Democracy places a high value on the dignity of every individual, ensuring their rights and freedoms are safeguarded.
Respecting Individuality: It recognizes the uniqueness of each person, acknowledging their distinct needs and aspirations.
Culture of Rights, Toleration, and Rationalism: In a democratic society, the rights of all individuals are protected, and a culture of tolerance and rational discourse is encouraged.
Definitions and Views
Democracy has been viewed and defined in various ways by different scholars:
Fareed Zakaria argues that “democracy without constitutional liberalism is producing centralized regimes, the erosion of liberty, ethnic competition, conflict, and war.”
Harry Emerson states that “Democracy is based upon the conviction that there are extraordinary possibilities in ordinary people.”
MacIver sees “democracy as a form of state that primarily focuses on appointing, controlling, and dismissing a government.”
Gettel’s perspective is that “democracy is a form of government in which everyone has a share.”
A.V Dicey in his work, “Law and Opinion in England”, describes democracy as a process in which majority opinion determines legislation.
Bryce defines “democracy as the rule of the entire people, expressed through their votes.”
Amartya Sen, “Democracy is a precondition for development. Not only democracy is needed for development, but development also needs to be democratized. It is necessary that economic growth remains inclusive.”
John Dewey in his work, “Creative Democracy” argues that “democracy is more than a form of government, it is primarily a mode of associated living of conjoint communicated experience.”
Features of Democracy
Embarking on the exploration of democracy’s intrinsic qualities, Let’s delve into the essential features that shape its character and distinguish it on the political landscape.
Constitution:
At the heart of a democratic state lies its constitution, a document that may be written or unwritten, defining the fundamental laws governing both the state and society. This foundational piece plays a pivotal role in shaping and sustaining institutions such as the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Within its pages, the constitution delineates the rights and duties of both citizens and the government.
People Power: Participation in Politics
A defining feature of democracy is the active participation of its citizens in the political process. Any system that stifles people’s involvement in decision-making cannot be deemed truly democratic. The democratic ethos allows people the choice to engage in politics, whether through direct or indirect means.
Legitimacy: The Backbone of Democracy
Legitimacy is the linchpin that holds the democratic framework together. A country’s democratic status relies heavily on the presence of legitimate authority, grounded in the rules and laws of the nation. This legitimacy is a key factor in upholding the democratic principles that guide the governance of the state.
The Democratic Rhythm: Periodic Elections
At the core of a democratic state are the recurring rhythms of periodic elections. This essential feature ensures that no single leader or governing body can retain control indefinitely. The power to choose and change leaders is considered a supreme right of the people, a cornerstone in the democratic edifice.
Montesquieu’s Legacy: Separation of Powers
Inspired by the political philosophy of Montesquieu, the separation of powers is a concept critical to the democratic system. This principle advocates for the distribution of political power among different individuals and institutions, a safeguard against concentration that could lead to dictatorship. It ensures that no single entity has unchecked authority.
Balancing Act: Checks and Balances
Building on the separation of powers, the theory of checks and balances is another vital element in the democratic structure. This concept involves the various branches of government monitoring and regulating each other’s activities, fostering order and upholding the rule of law.
Equality Unveiled: Before the Law
In a truly democratic state, the principle of equality before the law prevails. Regardless of age, gender, caste, or creed, every individual stands on equal ground when facing the law. This commitment to equality is a fundamental tenet of democratic governance.
Guardians of Liberty: Fundamental Human Rights
Fundamental human rights stand tall as the guardians of individual liberties in a democratic state. Inalienable and bestowed upon all by virtue of being human, these rights serve as a bulwark against authoritarianism, ensuring the protection of citizens within the democratic framework.
The Fourth Pillar: Freedom of the Press
A democratic state’s vitality is further amplified by the freedom of the press, often referred to as its fourth pillar. This freedom brings accountability to governance, offering transparency and clarity to the public. Without the freedom of the press, democracy falters, as it relies on an informed and engaged citizenry.
Waves of Democracy
Samuel P. Huntington’s “Third Wave: Democratization in the Twentieth Century” explains the global expansion of democracy in waves:
First Wave (1828-1926):
The initial wave of democratization, spanning from 1828 to 1926, marked the era of universal adult suffrage. During this period, the right to vote extended to a majority of white males, famously known as Jacksonian Democracy in the USA. This wave witnessed democratic transitions in various countries, including France, Britain, Canada, Australia, Italy, and Argentina. Its pinnacle was in 1918 when the disintegration of the Russian and German, Austrian, and Ottoman empires led to 29 democracies globally. However, the peak gave way to a reversal, initiated by Mussolini in 1922, resulting in the decline of democracies to 12 by 1942.
Second Wave (Post-World War II – 1962):
The second wave emerged post-World War II and persisted until around 1962. This period saw the downfall of democracies, with 36 recognized globally. Although the number dropped from the peak, there wasn’t a significant gap between the second and third waves.
Third Wave (1974 Onwards):
The third wave of democratization commenced in 1974, featuring historic democratic transitions, particularly in underdeveloped colonies of Latin America in the 1980s and Asia Pacific countries like the Philippines and South Korea. The peak of this wave was around 1988. This period witnessed a remarkable surge in democratization.
In essence, these waves depict the evolving landscape of democracy, marked by peaks, reversals, and transformative moments across different regions and timeframes.
Models of Democracy
Models of democracy are conceptual frameworks that attempt to describe and analyze the functioning of democratic systems. There are several models, each with its own emphasis on different aspects of democracy. Some of the prominent models include:
Direct Democracy
Direct democracy originated in Greece, the oldest form of government, places power directly in the hands of individuals. In this system, when political decisions need to be made, all members of the state come together to discuss relevant issues. Each person is treated as an equal participant, given the opportunity to directly influence the policy-making process. This form of governance has its roots in the early days of history, where small political communities employed the idea of direct democracy. Even as time progressed, small towns and communities continued to gather for direct debates.
However, as states grew in size, the practicality of managing direct democracy became challenging. Larger states found it necessary to transition to a representative form of democracy. Direct democracy, also known as pure democracy, operates through citizen assemblies or through mechanisms like referendums and initiatives. In referendums, individuals cast votes on specific issues rather than for people. There are four key devices in direct democracies: Referendum, Initiative, Recall, and Plebiscites. Historically, these mechanisms were present in ancient Greek city-states.
Over time, Switzerland emerged as a notable example of direct democracy, introducing it at the federal level in 1848. Even before this, Swiss cantons had been utilizing various forms of direct democracy. Today, Switzerland employs a variety of direct democracy methods at both federal and cantonal levels. Referendums and initiatives are commonly used, with the issues eligible for referendums outlined in the constitution.
Representative Democracy
Representative democracy, a system where government is formed by elected representatives, is considered the second-best form of government by J.S. Mill. It primarily relies on elections as its key mechanism.
There are two primary models of representation:
The Delegate Model, advocated by figures like Locke and Bentham, emphasizes that delegates should not possess the authority to make decisions and should strictly adhere to the mandates given to them by the people.
The Enlightened Model, as championed by J.S. Mill and Edmund Burke, argue that representatives should have more independence. Mill grants greater freedom to representatives due to their superior experience, while Edmund Burke contends that parliament represents a national assembly rather than a forum for promoting local interests. In this representative democracy, it is expected that representatives follow their own conscience, a concept often referred to as the ‘Burkean Notion.’
Electoral systems play a crucial role in shaping the way a country conducts its elections and determines the representatives who govern it. The choice of an electoral system can have far-reaching implications for the representation, legitimacy, and effectiveness of a government. Let’s explore various types of electoral systems used around the world.
Majoritarian System: Majoritarian systems are commonly employed in Single Member Constituencies, where each district elects a single representative. The majoritarian system includes several subtypes:
- Plurality System (First Past the Post): In this system, the candidate who receives the most votes wins, even if they do not secure an absolute majority. It is criticized for not being very representative.
- Second Ballot: Used in Presidential elections in France, this system requires the winning candidate to secure an absolute majority. If no candidate achieves this in the first round, a runoff election is held.
- Alternative Vote System: Implemented in Australia, this system also demands a winning candidate to obtain an absolute majority. It features a unique mechanism where votes are redistributed based on voters’ preferences.
Proportional System: Proportional systems are typically used in Multi-member Constituencies, aiming for a more democratic representation. Here are a couple of variants:
- Single Transferable Vote System (STV): Originating in Ireland, the STV system requires candidates to achieve a specific quota of votes to get elected. It’s designed to ensure that minority voices are represented.
- List System: Regarded as the most representative system, it treats the entire country as a single constituency. People vote for political parties rather than individual candidates, making it ideal for multi-party systems.
Critique: It’s worth noting that electoral systems are not without criticism. As Jean-Jacques Rousseau once famously said, “Englishmen are free only once in five years.” This quote reflects a common criticism of representative democracy, where citizens might feel that their voice is only heard during elections and not consistently throughout the political term.
Participatory Democracy
Also known as direct democracy, this system encourages active participation of citizens in decision-making processes, ensuring transparency, accountability, and an educative value.
Participatory democracy is a concept that has found favor with numerous prominent thinkers throughout history. It revolves around the idea that governance is at its best when the general populace actively engages in political decision-making.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The Filtered General Will
Rousseau, a prominent philosopher of the 18th century, argued that the “General Will” of a society could only be realized through active participation of its people. He believed that citizens’ input was crucial in shaping collective decisions.
John Stuart Mill: Direct Democracy vs. Representative Government
John Stuart Mill, a distinguished political thinker, placed direct democracy as the ideal form of government. While he acknowledged the practicality of representative government, he deemed it a second-best option in comparison to direct citizen involvement.
Amartya Sen: Building Capacity for Participatory Democracy
Amartya Sen emphasized that participatory democracy is not a given but requires an enabling environment and capacity-building efforts to empower individuals to actively engage in the democratic process.
Jacques Ranciere: Political Participation to End Domination
Ranciere believed that political participation is the key to dismantling systems of domination and exploitation. By involving the masses in decision-making, he saw a path toward more equitable governance.
Nancy Fraser: The Concept of ‘Counter Public’
Nancy Fraser coined the term ‘Counter Public,’ referring to marginalized sections of society. She advocated for these groups to form their own public sphere, allowing their voices and concerns to be heard in the larger discourse of participatory democracy.
Jürgen Habermas: The Power of the Public Sphere
Habermas introduced the concept of the “public sphere,” emphasizing that the true strength of democracy in Western countries arises from open discourse and debate. He believed that coffeehouses, not legislative bodies, fostered democratic culture.
Benjamin Barber: Participatory Democracy and Corruption
Benjamin Barber argued that participatory democracy is vital for addressing the issue of corruption. The active involvement of citizens can act as a safeguard against corrupt practices in government.
Carole Pateman: Participation and Democratic Theory
Carole Pateman, in her book ‘Participation and Democratic Theory,’ presented a participatory model that emphasizes maximum citizen participation. She stressed that democratic outcomes should not solely focus on policies but also on the development of social and political capabilities in every individual.
Pluralist Theory of Democracy
In the intricate landscape of political theories, the pluralist theory of democracy emerges as a captivating tapestry woven from the threads of diverse perspectives. As we embark on this exploration, we’ll delve into the works of influential theorists like Arthur Bentley, David Truman, and the indispensable Robert Dahl, particularly focusing on his seminal piece, “A Preface to Democratic Theory.”
Defining Pluralist Democracy
Pluralist democracy is a concept that embraces the idea that power in society is distributed among various groups, each representing different interests. Unlike some monolithic theories that envision power concentrated in the hands of a few, pluralism paints a picture of a dynamic and multifaceted political landscape.
Arthur Bentley’s Contribution
Arthur Bentley, a pioneering figure in political science, laid the foundation for pluralist thought. In his work, “The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressures,” Bentley argued that politics is a continuous process influenced by social pressures. His emphasis on the ever-changing nature of political dynamics paved the way for a more nuanced understanding of democracy.
David Truman’s Group Theory
David Truman’s “The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public Opinion” further enriches the pluralist perspective. Truman introduced the group theory, asserting that political power is dispersed among numerous interest groups, each striving to influence policy outcomes. This theory highlights the intricate web of relationships and negotiations that shape democratic decision-making.
Robert Dahl’s “A Preface to Democratic Theory”
At the heart of pluralist democracy lies Robert Dahl’s groundbreaking work, “A Preface to Democratic Theory.” Dahl, often hailed as one of the foremost political scientists of the 20th century, dissects democracy, dissecting its essential components and laying bare its complexities.
Dahl argues that democracy is more than just the act of voting; it is a system where citizens have equal opportunities to participate in decision-making. He introduces the concept of “polyarchy,” a form of government where power is vested in multiple hands, preventing any single group from dominating.
Dahl’s work challenges the notion of an idealized, perfectly functioning democracy and instead focuses on the pragmatic aspects. He acknowledges the existence of inequalities but argues that what matters is the degree of inclusiveness and the ability of citizens to influence decisions.
Critiques and Challenges
While the pluralist theory of democracy has its merits, it is not without criticisms. Scholars argue that it may oversimplify power dynamics and neglect systemic issues that perpetuate inequality. Additionally, concerns arise about the influence of powerful interest groups and the potential marginalization of certain voices.
Overall, the pluralist theory of democracy, as expounded by Bentley, Truman, and especially Dahl, provides a lens through which we can better understand the intricate dance of power in democratic societies. By acknowledging the diversity of interests and the dynamic nature of political processes, pluralism offers a nuanced perspective that continues to shape discussions on democracy in the modern era.
Deliberative Democracy: The Power of Dialogue
Deliberative democracy stands as a counterbalance to the prevalent notion of democracy as a numerical exercise. It centers on the idea that democracy should involve deliberation, fostering constructive dialogue and informed debate. This approach offers several advantages:
Better Policy Making: Deliberative democracy leads to more informed and carefully considered policy decisions, as it encourages thorough discussions and the exploration of various perspectives.
Laws Generate Wider Consent: When laws are the outcome of deliberation, they tend to gain wider societal consent, reducing the potential for discontent and division.
James Fishkin, who has been advocating for deliberative democracy for over 15 years, developed the Fishkin model of deliberation, delineates five key features of deliberation. These include Information, Substantive Balance, Diversity, Conscientiousness, and Equal Consideration.
Prominent Exponents of Deliberative Democracy
Pericles: The ancient Greek statesman believed that discussion is an indispensable preliminary to wise action, emphasizing the significance of dialogue in governance.
Aristotle: Aristotle asserted that ordinary people deliberating can arrive at better decisions than experts acting alone, underlining the value of diverse perspectives in decision-making.
John Rawls: Rawls introduced the concept of an “overlapping consensus,” suggesting that rational individuals with different comprehensive doctrines can arrive at a shared agreement.
Hannah Arendt: Arendt advocated for active political participation by individuals in civil affairs, viewing it as a fundamental aspect of human existence.
Amartya Sen: Sen introduced the concept of “public reasoning,” highlighting the necessity of public debate for sound public policy.
Habermas: A Neo-Marxist scholar, Habermas proposed the idea of communicative action and the ideal speech situation. He emphasized the importance of non-coercive environments and individuals possessing the capabilities for rational debate.
Joshua Cohen: Cohen outlined five key elements of deliberative democracy, including its independent and ongoing nature, the decisive role of deliberation in law and policy creation, a non-coercive environment, respect for diverse values, and deliberation as a source of legitimacy.
Consociational Democracy: Power Sharing in Diverse Societies
Consociational democracy represents a governance model designed to create stable governments in multicultural, multi-ethnic, or pluralist societies. In contrast to majoritarian democracy, it supports power-sharing to maintain harmony within diverse societies. The goals of consociationalism include governmental stability, the survival of power-sharing arrangements, the endurance of democracy, and the prevention of violence.
Key Characteristics of Consociational Democracy, as defined by Arendt Lijphart:
Executive Power Sharing: Consociational democracy features cooperation among leaders from different segments of a plural society to govern collectively.
Segmental Autonomy: Minority rule is encouraged, allowing segments to govern themselves in their areas of exclusive concern. Decisions on common interests are made collectively, while separate segments handle other matters.
Proportional Representation: The allocation of civil service appointments and funds is proportional to the numerical strength of different segments, ensuring that all groups influence decisions in proportion to their strength.
Mutual Veto Rights: Each segment retains the right to veto decisions that could harm its vital interests, representing negative minority rule.
Important Books by Arendt Lijphart
- The politics of accommodation (1968)
- Democracy in plural societies (1977)
- Electoral Systems and Party Systems (1994)
- Patterns of Democracy (1999)
- The Puzzle of Indian Democracy: A Consociational Interpretation (Article)
Countries where Consociational Democracy is practiced include Austria, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Lebanon, Cyprus, Malaysia, Surinam, Colombia, Northern Ireland, South Tyrol, Bosnia-Herzegovina, India, and South Africa.
Globalization and Democracy: Bridging the Gap
Globalization has expanded the reach of democracy, but it also presents challenges. The concept of the “democratic deficit” emerges in global governance institutions like the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB), and World Trade Organization (WTO). As globalization erodes the traditional boundaries of sovereignty, territoriality, and political power, David Held, in his work “Democracy and the Global Order,” proposes a “Cosmopolitan Model of Democracy.”
Key Points on Globalization and Democracy:
- Globalization leads to the loss of control by nation-states over key policy areas.
- Global governance institutions face democratic deficits, where decisions are made by elites without broad public input.
- David Held suggests both short-term and long-term reforms to address the democratic deficit. Long-term solutions include the establishment of a global government and a global parliament. Short-term reforms involve restructuring institutions like the UNSC, enhancing media freedom, strengthening grassroots democracy, and reinforcing judicial independence.
Macpherson’s Model of Democracy
Macpherson introduces an egalitarian perspective on democracy. In his book, ‘The Real world of Democracy’, he states that the purpose of Democracy should be the ‘Empowerment of the Masses’. He identifies two types of power: Extractive power (coercion) and developmental power (capabilities/creative freedom). Ideal democracy, according to Macpherson, should minimize extractive power while maximizing developmental power, advocating a move towards an egalitarian model in Western democracies.
Conclusion
Democracy thrives when it maintains a symbiotic relationship between the government and the people, with governmental sovereignty contingent on the consent of the governed. Deliberative democracy offers a vision of a more thoughtful and inclusive political process, while consociational democracy provides a governance model suited to diverse societies. In the face of globalization’s challenges, the call for a cosmopolitan model of democracy emphasizes the need for international institutions that are more accountable and representative. In the ongoing evolution of democracy, the dialogue, debate, and discussion at its heart remain vital for shaping a just and equitable world.
Read More:
