Democracy
Part of the Politics series |
Democracy |
---|
Politics portal |
Part of the Politics series |
Basic forms of government |
---|
List of countries by system of government |
Politics portal |
Part of the Politics series |
Republicanism |
---|
Politics portal |
Democracy (from
In a
The notion of democracy has evolved over time considerably. Throughout history, one can find evidence of direct democracy, in which
The term appeared in the 5th century BC in
Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is not vested in the
Characteristics
Although democracy is generally understood to be defined by voting,[1][8] no consensus exists on a precise definition of democracy.[13] Karl Popper says that the "classical" view of democracy is, "in brief, the theory that democracy is the rule of the people, and that the people have a right to rule".[14] One study identified 2,234 adjectives used to describe democracy in the English language.[15]
Democratic principles are reflected in all eligible citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes.[16] For example, in a representative democracy, every vote has (in theory) equal weight, and the freedom of eligible citizens is secured by legitimised rights and liberties which are typically enshrined in a constitution,[17][18] while other uses of "democracy" may encompass direct democracy, in which citizens vote on issues directly. According to the United Nations, democracy "provides an environment that respects human rights and fundamental freedoms, and in which the freely expressed will of people is exercised."[19]
One theory holds that democracy requires three fundamental principles: upward control (sovereignty residing at the lowest levels of authority),
In some countries, notably in the
Democracies may use many different decision-making methods, but
It has also been suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of all voters to participate freely and fully in the life of their society.
Republics, though often popularly associated with democracy because of the shared principle of rule by consent of the governed, are not necessarily democracies, as republicanism does not specify how the people are to rule.[29] Classically the term "republic" encompassed both democracies and aristocracies.[30][31] In a modern sense the republican form of government is a form of government without a monarch. Because of this, democracies can be republics or constitutional monarchies, such as the United Kingdom.
History
Democratic assemblies are as old as the human species and are found throughout human history,[33] but up until the nineteenth century, major political figures have largely opposed democracy.[34] Republican theorists linked democracy to small size: as political units grew in size, the likelihood increased that the government would turn despotic.[35][36] At the same time, small political units were vulnerable to conquest.[35] Montesquieu wrote, "If a republic be small, it is destroyed by a foreign force; if it be large, it is ruined by an internal imperfection."[37] According to Johns Hopkins University political scientist Daniel Deudney, the creation of the United States, with its large size and its system of checks and balances, was a solution to the dual problems of size.[35][pages needed]
Retrospectively different polities, outside of declared democracies, have been described as proto-democratic.
Origins
Forms of democracy occurred organically in societies around the world that had no contact with each other.[38][39]
Ancient India
Greece and Rome
The term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity.[43][44] The word comes from dêmos '(common) people' and krátos 'force/might'.[45] Under Cleisthenes, what is generally held as the first example of a type of democracy in 508–507 BC was established in Athens. Cleisthenes is referred to as "the father of Athenian democracy".[46] The first attested use of the word democracy is found in prose works of the 430s BC, such as Herodotus' Histories, but its usage was older by several decades, as two Athenians born in the 470s were named Democrates, a new political name—likely in support of democracy—given at a time of debates over constitutional issues in Athens. Aeschylus also strongly alludes to the word in his play The Suppliants, staged in c.463 BC, where he mentions "the demos's ruling hand" [demou kratousa cheir]. Before that time, the word used to define the new political system of Cleisthenes was probably isonomia, meaning political equality.[47]
Athenian democracy took the form of a direct democracy, and it had two distinguishing features: the random selection of ordinary citizens to fill the few existing government administrative and judicial offices,[48] and a legislative assembly consisting of all Athenian citizens.[49] All eligible citizens were allowed to speak and vote in the assembly, which set the laws of the city state. However, Athenian citizenship excluded women, slaves, foreigners (μέτοικοι / métoikoi), and youths below the age of military service.[50][51][contradictory] Effectively, only 1 in 4 residents in Athens qualified as citizens. Owning land was not a requirement for citizenship.[52] The exclusion of large parts of the population from the citizen body is closely related to the ancient understanding of citizenship. In most of antiquity the benefit of citizenship was tied to the obligation to fight war campaigns.[53]
Athenian democracy was not only direct in the sense that decisions were made by the assembled people, but also the most direct in the sense that the people through the assembly, boule and courts of law controlled the entire political process and a large proportion of citizens were involved constantly in the public business.[54] Even though the rights of the individual were not secured by the Athenian constitution in the modern sense (the ancient Greeks had no word for "rights"[55]), those who were citizens of Athens enjoyed their liberties not in opposition to the government but by living in a city that was not subject to another power and by not being subjects themselves to the rule of another person.[56]
Even though the Roman Republic contributed significantly to many aspects of democracy, only a minority of Romans were citizens with votes in elections for representatives. The votes of the powerful were given more weight through a system of weighted voting, so most high officials, including members of the Senate, came from a few wealthy and noble families.[58] In addition, the overthrow of the Roman Kingdom was the first case in the Western world of a polity being formed with the explicit purpose of being a republic, although it didn't have much of a democracy. The Roman model of governance inspired many political thinkers over the centuries.[59]
The Americas
Other cultures, such as the Iroquois Nation in the Americas also developed a form of democratic society between 1450 and 1660 (and possibly in 1142[60]), well before contact with the Europeans. This democracy continues to the present day and is the world's oldest standing representative democracy.[61][62]
Middle Ages
While most regions in
The Parliament of England had its roots in the restrictions on the power of kings written into Magna Carta (1215), which explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects and implicitly supported what became the English writ of habeas corpus, safeguarding individual freedom against unlawful imprisonment with right to appeal.[66][67] The first representative national assembly in England was Simon de Montfort's Parliament in 1265.[68][69] The emergence of petitioning is some of the earliest evidence of parliament being used as a forum to address the general grievances of ordinary people. However, the power to call parliament remained at the pleasure of the monarch.[70]
Studies have linked the emergence of parliamentary institutions in Europe during the medieval period to urban agglomeration and the creation of new classes, such as artisans,[71] as well as the presence of nobility and religious elites.[72] Scholars have also linked the emergence of representative government to Europe's relative political fragmentation.[73] Political scientist David Stasavage links the fragmentation of Europe, and its subsequent democratization, to the manner in which the Roman Empire collapsed: Roman territory was conquered by small fragmented groups of Germanic tribes, thus leading to the creation of small political units where rulers were relatively weak and needed the consent of the governed to ward off foreign threats.[74]
In
Modern era
Early modern period
In 17th century England, there was
Renewed interest in the Magna Carta, the English Civil War, and the Glorious Revolution in the 17th century prompted the growth of
In the Cossack republics of Ukraine in the 16th and 17th centuries, the
In North America, representative government began in
18th and 19th centuries
The first Parliament of Great Britain was established in 1707, after the merger of the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland under the Acts of Union. Two key documents of the UK's uncodified constitution, the English Declaration of Right, 1689 (restated in the Bill of Rights 1689) and the Scottish Claim of Right 1689, had both cemented Parliament's position as the supreme law-making body, and said that the "election of members of Parliament ought to be free".[91] However, Parliament was only elected by male property owners, which amounted to 3% of the population in 1780.[92] The first known British person of African heritage to vote in a general election, Ignatius Sancho, voted in 1774 and 1780.[93]
During the
The creation of the short-lived
In 1789,
In the United States, the
The voting franchise in the United Kingdom was expanded and made more uniform in a
In 1876 the Ottoman Empire transitioned from an
In 1893 the self-governing colony New Zealand became the first country in the world (except for the short-lived 18th-century Corsican Republic) to establish active universal suffrage by recognizing women as having the right to vote.[119]
20th and 21st centuries
20th-century transitions to liberal democracy have come in successive "
The war was followed by
A subsequent wave of
The liberal trend spread to some states in Africa in the 1990s, most prominently in South Africa. Some recent examples of attempts of liberalisation include the
According to Freedom House, in 2007 there were 123 electoral democracies (up from 40 in 1972).[129] According to World Forum on Democracy, electoral democracies now represent 120 of the 192 existing countries and constitute 58.2 per cent of the world's population. At the same time liberal democracies i.e. countries Freedom House regards as free and respectful of basic human rights and the rule of law are 85 in number and represent 38 per cent of the global population.[130] Also in 2007 the United Nations declared 15 September the International Day of Democracy.[131]
Many countries reduced their voting age to 18 years; the major democracies began to do so in the 1970s starting in Western Europe and North America.[132][failed verification][133][134] Most electoral democracies continue to exclude those younger than 18 from voting.[135] The voting age has been lowered to 16 for national elections in a number of countries, including Brazil, Austria, Cuba, and Nicaragua. In California, a 2004 proposal to permit a quarter vote at 14 and a half vote at 16 was ultimately defeated. In 2008, the German parliament proposed but shelved a bill that would grant the vote to each citizen at birth, to be used by a parent until the child claims it for themselves.
According to Freedom House, starting in 2005, there have been 17 consecutive years in which declines in political rights and civil liberties throughout the world have outnumbered improvements,
"
Theory
Early theory
A common view among early and renaissance Republican theorists was that democracy could only survive in small political communities.[153] Heeding the lessons of the Roman Republic's shift to monarchism as it grew larger or smaller, these Republican theorists held that the expansion of territory and population inevitably led to tyranny.[153] Democracy was therefore highly fragile and rare historically, as it could only survive in small political units, which due to their size were vulnerable to conquest by larger political units.[153] Montesquieu famously said, "if a republic is small, it is destroyed by an outside force; if it is large, it is destroyed by an internal vice."[153] Rousseau asserted, "It is, therefore the natural property of small states to be governed as a republic, of middling ones to be subject to a monarch, and of large empires to be swayed by a despotic prince."[153]
Contemporary theory
Among modern political theorists, there are three contending conceptions of democracy: aggregative democracy, deliberative democracy, and radical democracy.[154]
Aggregative
The theory of aggregative democracy claims that the aim of the democratic processes is to solicit citizens' preferences and aggregate them together to determine what social policies society should adopt. Therefore, proponents of this view hold that democratic participation should primarily focus on voting, where the policy with the most votes gets implemented.
Different variants of aggregative democracy exist. Under minimalism, democracy is a system of government in which citizens have given teams of political leaders the right to rule in periodic elections. According to this minimalist conception, citizens cannot and should not "rule" because, for example, on most issues, most of the time, they have no clear views or their views are not well-founded. Joseph Schumpeter articulated this view most famously in his book Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy.[155] Contemporary proponents of minimalism include William H. Riker, Adam Przeworski, Richard Posner.
According to the theory of direct democracy, on the other hand, citizens should vote directly, not through their representatives, on legislative proposals. Proponents of direct democracy offer varied reasons to support this view. Political activity can be valuable in itself, it socialises and educates citizens, and popular participation can check powerful elites. Most importantly, citizens do not rule themselves unless they directly decide laws and policies.
Governments will tend to produce laws and policies that are close to the views of the median voter—with half to their left and the other half to their right. This is not a desirable outcome as it represents the action of self-interested and somewhat unaccountable political elites competing for votes. Anthony Downs suggests that ideological political parties are necessary to act as a mediating broker between individual and governments. Downs laid out this view in his 1957 book An Economic Theory of Democracy.[156]
Deliberative
Radical
Radical democracy is based on the idea that there are hierarchical and oppressive power relations that exist in society. Democracy's role is to make visible and challenge those relations by allowing for difference, dissent and antagonisms in decision-making processes.
Measurement of democracy
Democracy indices
Democracy indices are quantitative and comparative assessments of the state of democracy[166] for different countries according to various definitions of democracy.[167]
The democracies indices differ in whether they are categorical, such as classifying countries into democracies,
0.900–1.000 0.800–0.899 0.700–0.799 0.600–0.699 | 0.500–0.599 0.400–0.499 0.300–0.399 0.200–0.299 | 0.100–0.199 0.000–0.099 No data |
Difficulties in measuring democracy
Types of governmental democracies
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.[179][180] However, if any democracy is not structured 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 favour, then a branch of the system can accumulate too much power and destroy the democracy.[181][182][183]
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.
Basic forms
Several variants of democracy exist, but there are two basic forms, both of which concern how the whole body of all eligible citizens executes its will. One form of democracy is direct democracy, in which all eligible citizens have active participation in the political decision making, for example voting on policy initiatives directly.[184] In most modern democracies, the whole body of eligible citizens remain the sovereign power but political power is exercised indirectly through elected representatives; this is called a representative democracy.
Direct
Direct democracy is a political system where the citizens participate in the decision-making personally, contrary to relying on intermediaries or representatives. A direct democracy gives the voting population the power to:
- Change constitutional laws,
- Put forth initiatives, referendums and suggestions for laws
Within modern-day representative governments, certain electoral tools like referendums, citizens' initiatives and
Semi-direct
Some modern democracies that are predominantly representative in nature also heavily rely upon forms of political action that are directly democratic. These democracies, which combine elements of representative democracy and direct democracy, are termed semi-direct democracies or participatory democracies. Examples include Switzerland and some
The
Examples include the extensive use of referendums in the US state of California, which is a state that has more than 20 million voters.[192]
In New England, town meetings are often used, especially in rural areas, to manage local government. This creates a hybrid form of government, with a local direct democracy and a representative state government. For example, most Vermont towns hold annual town meetings in March in which town officers are elected, budgets for the town and schools are voted on, and citizens have the opportunity to speak and be heard on political matters.[193]
Lot system
The use of a lot system, a characteristic of Athenian democracy, is a feature of some versions of direct democracies. In this system, important governmental and administrative tasks are performed by citizens picked from a lottery.[194]
Representative
Representative democracy involves the election of government officials by the people being represented. If the head of state is also
Representatives may be elected or become diplomatic representatives by a particular district (or
Parliamentary
Parliamentary democracy is a representative democracy where government is appointed by or can be dismissed 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.[201][202][203][204]
In a parliamentary system, the Prime Minister may be dismissed by the legislature at any point in time for not meeting 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 with majority support for dismissal.[205] In some countries, the Prime Minister can also call an election at any point in time, typically when the Prime Minister believes that they are in good favour 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. An important feature of the parliamentary democracy is the concept of the "loyal opposition". The essence of the concept is that the second largest political party (or opposition) opposes the governing party (or coalition), while still remaining loyal to the state and its democratic principles.
Presidential
Presidential Democracy is a system where the public elects the president through an election. 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. The legislature often has limited ability to remove a president from office. Elections typically have a fixed date and aren't easily changed. The president has direct control over the cabinet, specifically appointing the cabinet members.[205]
The executive usually has the responsibility to execute or implement legislation and may have the limited legislative powers, such as a veto. However, a legislative branch passes legislation and budgets. This provides some measure of separation of powers. In consequence, however, the president and the legislature may end up in the control of separate parties, allowing one to block the other and thereby interfere with the orderly operation of the state. This may be the reason why presidential democracy is not very common outside the Americas, Africa, and Central and Southeast Asia.[205]
A
Typology
Constitutional monarchy
Many countries such as the United Kingdom, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Scandinavian countries, Thailand, Japan and Bhutan turned powerful monarchs into constitutional monarchs (often gradually) with limited or symbolic roles. For example, in the predecessor states to the United Kingdom, constitutional monarchy began to emerge and has continued uninterrupted since the Glorious Revolution of 1688 and passage of the Bill of Rights 1689.[22][80] Strongly limited constitutional monarchies, such as the United Kingdom, have been referred to as crowned republics by writers such as H. G. Wells.[206]
In other countries, the monarchy was abolished along with the aristocratic system (as in France, China, Russia, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Italy, Greece and Egypt). An elected person, with or without significant powers, became the head of state in these countries.
Elite upper houses of legislatures, which often had lifetime or hereditary tenure, were common in many states. Over time, these either had their powers limited (as with the British House of Lords) or else became elective and remained powerful (as with the Australian Senate).
Republic
The term
The Founding Fathers of the United States often criticised direct democracy, which in their view often came without the protection of a constitution enshrining inalienable rights; James Madison argued, especially in The Federalist No. 10, that what distinguished a direct 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.[208]
Professors Richard Ellis of Willamette University and Michael Nelson of Rhodes College argue that much constitutional thought, from Madison to Lincoln and beyond, has focused on "the problem of majority tyranny". They conclude, "The principles of republican government embedded in the Constitution represent an effort by the framers to ensure that the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would not be trampled by majorities."[209] What was critical to American values, John Adams insisted,[210] 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, Elizabeth Willing Powel[211] asked him "Well, Doctor, what have we got—a republic or a monarchy?". He replied "A republic—if you can keep it."[212]
Liberal
A liberal 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 moderated by a constitution or laws that emphasise 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 liberal 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.
Socialist
Socialist thought has several different views on democracy. Social democracy, democratic socialism, and the dictatorship of the proletariat are some examples. Many democratic socialists and social democrats believe in a form of participatory, industrial, economic and/or workplace democracy combined with a representative democracy.
Marxist
Within
Anarchist
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.[216]
Sortition
Consociational
Consociational democracy, also called
Consensus
Consensus democracy[219] requires consensus decision-making and supermajority to obtain a larger support than majority. In contrast, in majoritarian democracy minority opinions can potentially be ignored by vote-winning majorities.[220] Constitutions typically require consensus or supermajorities.[221]
Inclusive
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.
Participatory
A
A council court of randomly chosen citizens serves as a check on the
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.[222]
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
Cosmopolitan Democracy has been promoted, among others, by physicist Albert Einstein,[223] writer Kurt Vonnegut, columnist George Monbiot, and professors David Held and Daniele Archibugi.[224] 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.
Creative
Creative Democracy is advocated by American philosopher John Dewey. The main idea about Creative Democracy is that democracy encourages individual capacity building and the interaction among the society. Dewey argues that democracy is a way of life in his work of "Creative Democracy: The Task Before Us"[225] and an experience built on faith in human nature, faith in human beings, and faith in working with others. Democracy, in Dewey's view, is a moral ideal requiring actual effort and work by people; it is not an institutional concept that exists outside of ourselves. "The task of democracy", Dewey concludes, "is forever that of creation of a freer and more humane experience in which all share and to which all contribute".
Guided
Guided democracy is a form of democracy that incorporates regular popular elections, but which often carefully "guides" the choices offered to the electorate in a manner that may reduce the ability of the electorate to truly determine the type of government exercised over them. Such democracies typically have only one central authority which is often not subject to meaningful public review by any other governmental authority. Russian-style democracy has often been referred to as a "Guided democracy".[226] Russian politicians have referred to their government as having only one center of power/ authority, as opposed to most other forms of democracy which usually attempt to incorporate two or more naturally competing sources of authority within the same government.[227]
Non-governmental democracy
Aside from the public sphere, similar democratic principles and mechanisms of voting and representation have been used to govern other kinds of groups. Many
Shareholder democracy is a concept relating to the governance of corporations by their shareholders. In the United States, shareholders are typically granted voting rights according to the one share, one vote principle. Shareholders may vote annually to elect the company's board of directors, who themselves may choose the company's executives. The shareholder democracy framework may be inaccurate for companies which have different classes of stock that further alter the distribution of voting rights.
Justification
Several justifications for democracy have been postulated.
Legitimacy
Social contract theory argues that the legitimacy of government is based on consent of the governed, i.e. an election, and that political decisions must reflect the general will. Some proponents of the theory like Jean-Jacques Rousseau advocate for a direct democracy on this basis.[229]
Better decision-making
Condorcet's jury theorem is logical proof that if each decision-maker has a better than chance probability of making the right decision, then having the largest number of decision-makers, i.e. a democracy, will result in the best decisions. This has also been argued by theories of the wisdom of the crowd.
Economic success
In
A 2019 study by Acemoglu and others estimated that countries switching to democratic from authoritarian rule had on average a 20% higher GDP after 25 years than if they had remained authoritarian. The study examined 122 transitions to democracy and 71 transitions to authoritarian rule, occurring from 1960 to 2010.[230] Acemoglu said this was because democracies tended to invest more in health care and human capital, and reduce special treatment of regime allies.[231]
Democracy promotion
Much experience was gained after the Revolutions of 1989 resulted in the fall of the Iron Curtain and a wave of democratic transitions in former Communist states, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe. According to Freedom House, the number of democracies increased from 41 of 150 existing states in 1974 to 123 of 192 states in 2006.[236] The pace of transition slowed considerably since the beginning of the twenty-first century, which encouraged discussion of whether democracy was under threat.[237] In the early twenty-first century, a democratic deficit was noticed in countries where democratic systems already existed, including Britain, the US and the European Union.[238] In the financial sense, democracy promotion grew from 2% of aid in 1990 to nearly 20% in 2005.[239]
An open question for democracy promotion around the world, both in countries where it is already at the core of the system of governance and in those where it is not, is defining the terminology of promoting, supporting or assisting democracy in the post-Cold War situation.[240]Democracy promotion can increase the quality of already existing democracies, reduce political apathy, and the chance of democratic backsliding. Democracy promotion measures include voting advice applications,[241] participatory democracy,[242] increasing youth suffrage, increasing civic education,[243] reducing barriers to entry for new political parties,[244] increasing proportionality[245] and reducing presidentialism.[246]
Democratic transitions
A democratic transition describes a phase in a countries
Democratization
Several philosophers and researchers have outlined historical and social factors seen as supporting the evolution of democracy. Other commentators have mentioned the influence of economic development.[251] In a related theory, Ronald Inglehart suggests that improved living-standards in modern developed countries can convince people that they can take their basic survival for granted, leading to increased emphasis on self-expression values, which correlates closely with democracy.[252][253]
Douglas M. Gibler and Andrew Owsiak in their study argued about the importance of peace and stable borders for the development of democracy. It has often been assumed that democracy causes peace, but this study shows that, historically, peace has almost always predated the establishment of democracy.[254]
Carroll Quigley concludes that the characteristics of weapons are the main predictor of democracy:[255][256] Democracy—this scenario—tends to emerge only when the best weapons available are easy for individuals to obtain and use.[257] By the 1800s, guns were the best personal weapons available, and in the United States of America (already nominally democratic), almost everyone could afford to buy a gun, and could learn how to use it fairly easily. Governments could not do any better: it became the age of mass armies of citizen soldiers with guns.[257] Similarly, Periclean Greece was an age of the citizen soldier and democracy.[258]
Other theories stressed the relevance of education and of human capital—and within them of cognitive ability to increasing tolerance, rationality, political literacy and participation. Two effects of education and cognitive ability are distinguished:[259][need quotation to verify][260][261]
- a cognitive effect (competence to make rational choices, better information-processing)
- an ethical effect (support of democratic values, freedom, human rights etc.), which itself depends on intelligence.
Evidence consistent with conventional theories of why democracy emerges and is sustained has been hard to come by. Statistical analyses have challenged
The assumed link between education and economic growth is called into question when analyzing empirical evidence. Across different countries, the correlation between education attainment and math test scores is very weak (.07). A similarly weak relationship exists between per-pupil expenditures and math competency (.26). Additionally, historical evidence suggests that average human capital (measured using literacy rates) of the masses does not explain the onset of industrialization in France from 1750 to 1850 despite arguments to the contrary.[264] Together, these findings show that education does not always promote human capital and economic growth as is generally argued to be the case. Instead, the evidence implies that education provision often falls short of its expressed goals, or, alternatively, that political actors use education to promote goals other than economic growth and development.
Some scholars have searched for the "deep" determinants of contemporary political institutions, be they geographical or demographic.[265][266]
An example of this is the disease environment. Places with different mortality rates had different populations and productivity levels around the world. For example, in Africa, the
An example of geographical determinants for democracy is having access to coastal areas and rivers. This natural endowment has a positive relation with economic development thanks to the benefits of trade.[269] Trade brought economic development, which in turn, broadened power. Rulers wanting to increase revenues had to protect property-rights to create incentives for people to invest. As more people had more power, more concessions had to be made by the ruler and in many[quantify] places this process lead to democracy. These determinants defined the structure of the society moving the balance of political power.[270]
Robert Michels asserts that although democracy can never be fully realised, democracy may be developed automatically in the act of striving for democracy:
The peasant in the fable, when on his deathbed, tells his sons that a treasure is buried in the field. After the old man's death the sons dig everywhere in order to discover the treasure. They do not find it. But their indefatigable labor improves the soil and secures for them a comparative well-being. The treasure in the fable may well symbolise democracy.[271]
Democracy in modern times has almost always faced opposition from the previously existing government, and many times it has faced opposition from social elites. The implementation of a democratic government from a non-democratic state is typically brought by peaceful or violent democratic revolution.
Autocratization
Disruption
Some democratic governments have experienced sudden
- German occupation of Czechoslovakia, and the fall of South Vietnam.
- Self-coup, in which the leader of the government extra-legally seizes all power or unlawfully extends the term in office. This can be done through:
- Suspension of the constitution by decree, such as with the 1992 Peruvian coup d'état
- An "electoral self-coup" using election fraud to obtain re-election of a previously fairly elected official or political party. For example, in the 1999 Ukrainian presidential election, 2003 Russian legislative election, and 2004 Russian presidential election.[285]
- Suspension of the constitution by decree, such as with the
- Royal coup, in which a monarch not normally involved in government seizes all power. For example, the 6 January Dictatorship, begun in 1929 when King Alexander I of Yugoslavia dismissed parliament and started ruling by decree.[286]
Temporary or long-term
Debates on democracy
This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. (February 2024) |
Part of the Politics series |
Democracy |
---|
Politics portal |
Criticism of democracy, or debate on democracy and the different aspects of how to implement democracy best have been widely discussed. There are both internal critics (those who call upon the constitutional regime to be true to its own highest principles) and external ones who reject the values promoted by constitutional democracy.[288]
Criticism of democracy has been a key part of democracy, its functions, and its development throughout history. Plato famously opposed democracy, arguing for a 'government of the best qualified'; James Madison extensively studied the historic attempts at and arguments on democracy in his preparation for the Constitutional Convention; and Winston Churchill remarked that "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."[289]
Critics of democracy have often tried to highlight democracy's inconsistencies, paradoxes, and limits by contrasting it with other forms of government, such as a less democratic epistocracy or a more democratic lottocracy. They have characterized most modern democracies as democratic polyarchies[290] and democratic aristocracies;[291] they have identified fascist moments in modern democracies; they have termed the societies produced by modern democracies as neo-feudal;[292] and they have contrasted democracy with fascism, anarcho-capitalism, theocracy, and absolute monarchy.Importance of mass media
The theory of democracy relies on the implicit assumption that voters are well informed about social issues, policies, and candidates so that they can make a truly informed decision. Since the late 20'th century there has been a growing concern that voters may be poorly informed because the news media are focusing more on entertainment and gossip and less on serious journalistic research on political issues.[293][294]
The media professors Michael Gurevitch and Jay Blumler have proposed a number of functions that the mass media are expected to fulfill in a democracy:[295]
- Surveillance of the sociopolitical environment
- Meaningful agenda setting
- Platforms for an intelligible and illuminating advocacy
- Dialogue across a diverse range of views
- Mechanisms for holding officials to account for how they have exercised power
- Incentives for citizens to learn, choose, and become involved
- A principled resistance to the efforts of forces outside the media to subvert their independence, integrity, and ability to serve the audience
- A sense of respect for the audience member, as potentially concerned and able to make sense of his or her political environment
This proposal has inspired a lot of discussions over whether the news media are actually fulfilling the requirements that a well functioning democracy requires.[296] Commercial mass media are generally not accountable to anybody but their owners, and they have no obligation to serve a democratic function.[296][297] They are controlled mainly by economic
The tabloidization and popularization of the news media is seen in an increasing focus on human examples rather than statistics and principles. There is more focus on politicians as personalities and less focus on political issues in the popular media. Election campaigns are covered more as horse races and less as debates about ideologies and issues. The dominating media focus on spin, conflict, and competitive strategies has made voters perceive the politicians as egoists rather than idealists. This fosters mistrust and a cynical attitude to politics, less civic engagement, and less interest in voting.[300][301][302] The ability to find effective political solutions to social problems is hampered when problems tend to be blamed on individuals rather than on structural causes.[301] This person-centered focus may have far-reaching consequences not only for domestic problems but also for foreign policy when international conflicts are blamed on foreign heads of state rather than on political and economic structures.[303][304] A strong media focus on fear and
The responsiveness[306] and accountability of the democratic system is compromised when lack of access to substantive, diverse, and undistorted information is handicapping the citizens' capability of evaluating the political process.[297][302] The fast pace and trivialization in the competitive news media is dumbing down the political debate. Thorough and balanced investigation of complex political issues does not fit into this format. The political communication is characterized by short time horizons, short slogans, simple explanations, and simple solutions. This is conducive to political populism rather than serious deliberation.[297][305]
Commercial mass media are often differentiated along the political spectrum so that people can hear mainly opinions that they already agree with. Too much controversy and diverse opinions are not always profitable for the commercial news media.[307] Political polarization is emerging when different people read different news and watch different TV channels. This polarization has been worsened by the emergence of the social media that allow people to communicate mainly with groups of like-minded people, the so-called echo chambers.[308] Extreme political polarization may undermine the trust in democratic institutions, leading to erosion of
Many media scholars have discussed non-commercial news media with
The emergence of the internet and the social media has profoundly altered the conditions for political communication. The social media have given ordinary citizens easy access to voice their opinion and share information while bypassing the filters of the large news media. This is often seen as an advantage for democracy.[317] The new possibilities for communication have fundamentally changed the way
A serious problem with the social media is that they have no truth filters. The established news media have to guard their reputation as trustworthy, while ordinary citizens may post unreliable information.[318] In fact, studies show that false stories are going more viral than true stories.[320][321] The proliferation of false stories and
Reliable information sources are essential for the democratic process. Less democratic governments rely heavily on censorship, propaganda, and misinformation in order to stay in power, while independent sources of information are able to undermine their legitimacy.[322]
See also
Footnotes
- Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966) that all state poll taxes were unconstitutional as violating the Equal Protection Clauseof the Fourteenth Amendment. This removed a burden on the poor.
- .
References
- ^ a b "Democracy". Oxford University Press. Retrieved 24 February 2021.
- ^ "Democracy | Definition, History, Meaning, Types, Examples, & Facts". Britannica. 16 August 2023. Retrieved 17 August 2023.
- ISBN 978-0-262-54147-3.
- from the original on 22 February 2024.
- ^ "Definition of DEMOCRACY". Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 5 July 2018.
- ^ Locke, John. Two Treatises on Government: a Translation into Modern English. Quote: "There is no practical alternative to majority political rule – i.e, to taking the consent of the majority as the act of the whole and binding every individual. It would be next to impossible to obtain the consent of every individual before acting collectively ... No rational people could desire and constitute a society that had to dissolve straightaway because the majority was unable to make the final decision and the society was incapable of acting as one body."There is no practical alternative to majority political rule %E2%80%93 i.e., to taking the consent of the majority as the act of the whole and binding every individual." Google Books.
- ^ Oxford English Dictionary: "democracy".
- ^ ISBN 978-0-85229-135-1.
- ISBN 978-0-415-97334-2.
- PMID 35035302.
- ^ V-Dem Institute DEMOCRACY REPORT 2022: Autocratization Changing Nature? pp. 6, 13, 18: "Dictatorships are on the rise and harbor 70% of the world population – 5.4 billion people."
- ^ Economic Intelligence Unit Democracy Index, 2022, p. 4: "According to our measure of democracy, less than half (45.7%) of the world's population now live in a democracy of some sort, a significant decline from 2020 (49.4%)."
- ^ Economist Group.
Democracy can be seen as a set of practices and principles that institutionalise and thus ultimately protect freedom. Even if a consensus on precise definitions has proved elusive, most observers today would agree that, at a minimum, the fundamental features of a democracy include government based on majority rule and the consent of the governed, the existence of free and fair elections, the protection of minorities and respect for basic human rights. Democracy presupposes equality before the law, due process and political pluralism.
- ^ Popper, Karl (23 April 1988). "The open society and its enemies revisited", The Economist (2016 reprint).
- S2CID 149825810.
- ^ "direct democracy | Definition, History, & Facts". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 2 February 2022.
- ISBN 978-0-262-54147-3. Details.
- ISBN 978-0-8166-3388-3.
- ^ Nations, United. "Democracy". United Nations. Retrieved 17 August 2023.
- ISBN 978-0-8018-8287-6– via Google Books.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-139-99138-4.
- ^ "Parliamentary sovereignty". UK Parliament. Retrieved 18 August 2014; "Independence". Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. Retrieved 9 November 2014.
- ^ Daily Express News (2 August 2013). "All-party meet vows to uphold Parliament supremacy". The New Indian Express. Express Publications (Madurai) Limited. Archived from the original on 27 March 2016. Retrieved 18 August 2013.
- ISBN 978-0-691-12017-1– via Google Books.
- S2CID 144699481.
- ISBN 978-0-521-00385-8.
- ISBN 978-0-8018-8475-7.
- (1959)
- ^ Montesquieu, Spirit of Law, Bk. II, ch. 2–3.
- ISBN 978-0-226-22482-4.
- ^ "Pericles' Funeral Oration". the-athenaeum.org.
- ^ Graeber 2013, p. 184.
- ^ Graeber 2013, pp. 168–169.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-691-13830-5.
- ISBN 978-0-19-022863-7
- ^ de Montesquieu, Charles. "Book IX. Of Laws in the Relation They Bear to a Defensive Force". The Spirit of Laws. Constitution Society. Archived from the original on 22 December 2019. Retrieved 22 December 2019.
- OCLC 194977.
- ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 4 March 2024.
- ISBN 978-1-74104-308-2.
- ISBN 978-0-85229-760-5.
- ISBN 978-0-415-32919-4.
- ISBN 978-0-19-827934-1
- ^ Raaflaub, Ober & Wallace 2007, p. [page needed].
- ^ Luciano Canfora, La democrazias:Storia di un'ideologia, Laterza (2004) 2018 pp.12–13
- ^ R. Po-chia Hsia, Lynn Hunt, Thomas R. Martin, Barbara H. Rosenwein, and Bonnie G. Smith, The Making of the West, Peoples and Cultures, A Concise History, Volume I: To 1740 (Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2007), 44.
- ^ Kurt A. Raaflaub, Origins of Democracy in Ancient Greece, pp. 108, 109.
- ^ Aristotle Book 6
- ^ Grinin, Leonid E. (2004). The Early State, Its Alternatives and Analogues. Uchitel' Publishing House.
- JSTOR 3296866.
- ^ "Women and Family in Athenian Law". www.stoa.org. Archived from the original on 1 March 2018. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
- ISBN 978-1-4008-6083-8.
- ISBN 978-1-4008-2591-2
- ^ Raaflaub, Ober & Wallace 2007, p. 5.
- ^ Ober & Hedrick 1996, p. 107.
- ^ Clarke & Foweraker 2001, pp. 194–201.
- ISBN 978-90-04-05971-9
- ^ "Ancient Rome from the earliest times down to 476 A.D". Annourbis.com. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ Livy & De Sélincourt 2002, p. 34
- ^ Mann & Fields 1997.
- S2CID 237710260.
- ^ Communications. "Government". Haudenosaunee Confederacy. Retrieved 19 May 2022.
- ISBN 978-0-300-23332-2.
- ISBN 978-1-317-74224-1.
- JSTOR j.ctv513b8x.12.
- ^ "Magna Carta: an introduction". The British Library. Archived from the original on 23 April 2021. Retrieved 28 January 2015.
Magna Carta is sometimes regarded as the foundation of democracy in England. ...Revised versions of Magna Carta were issued by King Henry III (in 1216, 1217 and 1225), and the text of the 1225 version was entered onto the statute roll in 1297. ...The 1225 version of Magna Carta had been granted explicitly in return for a payment of tax by the whole kingdom, and this paved the way for the first summons of Parliament in 1265, to approve the granting of taxation.
- ^ "Citizen or Subject?". The National Archives. Retrieved 17 November 2013.
- ISBN 978-1-84725-226-5.
- ^ "Simon de Montfort: The turning point for democracy that gets overlooked". BBC. 19 January 2015. Retrieved 19 January 2015; "The January Parliament and how it defined Britain". The Telegraph. 20 January 2015. Archived from the original on 10 January 2022. Retrieved 28 January 2015.
- ^ "Origins and growth of Parliament". The National Archives. Retrieved 17 November 2013.
- S2CID 211428630.
- .
- ISSN 0022-0507.
- S2CID 14393625.
- ISBN 978-1-108-33399-3.
- ^ "From legal document to public myth: Magna Carta in the 17th century". The British Library. Archived from the original on 18 October 2017. Retrieved 16 October 2017; "Magna Carta: Magna Carta in the 17th Century". The Society of Antiquaries of London. Archived from the original on 25 September 2018. Retrieved 16 October 2017.
- ^ "Origins and growth of Parliament". The National Archives. Retrieved 7 April 2015.
- ^ "Rise of Parliament". The National Archives. Retrieved 7 April 2015.
- ^ "Putney debates". The British Library. Archived from the original on 22 December 2016. Retrieved 22 December 2016.
- ^ a b "Britain's unwritten constitution". British Library. Archived from the original on 8 December 2015. Retrieved 27 November 2015.
The key landmark is the Bill of Rights (1689), which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown.... The Bill of Rights (1689) then settled the primacy of Parliament over the monarch's prerogatives, providing for the regular meeting of Parliament, free elections to the Commons, free speech in parliamentary debates, and some basic human rights, most famously freedom from 'cruel or unusual punishment'.
- ^ "Constitutionalism: America & Beyond". Bureau of International Information Programs (IIP), U.S. Department of State. Archived from the original on 24 October 2014. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
The earliest, and perhaps greatest, victory for liberalism was achieved in England. The rising commercial class that had supported the Tudor monarchy in the 16th century led the revolutionary battle in the 17th and succeeded in establishing the supremacy of Parliament and, eventually, of the House of Commons. What emerged as the distinctive feature of modern constitutionalism was not the insistence on the idea that the king is subject to law (although this concept is an essential attribute of all constitutionalism). This notion was already well established in the Middle Ages. What was distinctive was the establishment of effective means of political control whereby the rule of law might be enforced. Modern constitutionalism was born with the political requirement that representative government depended upon the consent of citizen subjects... However, as can be seen through provisions in the 1689 Bill of Rights, the English Revolution was fought not just to protect the rights of property (in the narrow sense) but to establish those liberties which liberals believed essential to human dignity and moral worth. The "rights of man" enumerated in the English Bill of Rights gradually were proclaimed beyond the boundaries of England, notably in the American Declaration of Independence of 1776 and in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789.
- S2CID 3198200.
- ISBN 978-0-521-35448-6.
- ^ Locke, John. Two Treatises on Government: a Translation into Modern English. Quote: "Government has no other end, but the preservation of property. There is no practical alternative to majority political rule %E2%80%93 i.e., to taking the consent of the majority as the act of the whole and binding every individual." Google Books.
- JSTOR 3818115.
- ISBN 978-0-7607-5230-2.
- ISBN 978-0-7894-8903-6, p. 61
- ^ Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in the United States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 63–65, 74–75, 102–05, 114–15
- ^ Christopher Fennell (1998), Plymouth Colony Legal Structure Archived 29 April 2012 at the Wayback Machine
- ISBN 978-0-415-30066-7.
- ^ Chavetz, Josh (2007). Democracy's Privileged Few. Legislative Privilege and Democratic Norms in the British and American Constitutions. Yale University Press. p. 274.
- ^ "Getting the vote". The National Archives. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ "Record of Ignatius Sancho's vote in the general election, October 1774". British Library. Archived from the original on 30 September 2020. Retrieved 2 October 2020.
- ^ Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Sweden". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 26 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 188–221.
- ISBN 978-0-8386-3225-3.
- ^ Donald Ratcliffe, "The right to vote and the rise of democracy, 1787—1828". Journal of the Early Republic 33.2 (2013): 219–254.
- ISBN 978-0-313-23091-2.
- (PDF) from the original on 2 June 2023.
- (PDF) from the original on 2 June 2023.
- ^ "Expansion of Rights and Liberties – The Right of Suffrage". Online Exhibit: The Charters of Freedom. National Archives. Archived from the original on 6 July 2016. Retrieved 21 April 2015.
- ISBN 978-1-57356-148-8. Retrieved 8 October 2015.
- ^ "The Bill Of Rights: A Brief History". ACLU. Retrieved 21 April 2015.
- ^ "The French Revolution II". Mars.wnec.edu. Archived from the original on 27 August 2008. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ Norman Davies (15 May 1991). The Third of May 1791 (PDF). Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Harvard University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 September 2019. Retrieved 5 September 2019.
- ISBN 978-83-945455-0-5.
- ^ William G. Shade, "The Second Party System". in Paul Kleppner, et al. Evolution of American Electoral Systems (1983) pp 77–111
- ^ Engerman, Stanley L.; Sokoloff, Kenneth L. (2005). "The Evolution of Suffrage Institutions in the New World" (PDF). pp. 14–16. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 November 2020. Retrieved 12 October 2020.
- ISBN 978-1-317-45536-3.
- ^ "Civil Rights in America: Racial Voting Rights" (PDF). A National Historic Landmarks Theme Study. 2009. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2 July 2015.
- ^ "Introduction – Social Aspects of the Civil War". Itd.nps.gov. Archived from the original on 14 July 2007. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ Gillette, William (1986). "Fifteenth Amendment: Framing and ratification". Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. Archived from the original on 10 June 2014. Retrieved 23 June 2013.
- ^ "Black voting rights, 15th Amendment still challenged after 150 years". USA Today. Retrieved 18 November 2020.
- ^ Transcript of Voting Rights Act (1965) U.S. National Archives.
- ^ The Constitution: The 24th Amendment Time.
- ^ French National Assembly. "1848 " Désormais le bulletin de vote doit remplacer le fusil "". Retrieved 26 September 2009.
- ^ "Movement toward greater democracy in Europe Archived 4 August 2010 at the Wayback Machine". Indiana University Northwest.
- ^ Hasan Kayalı (1995) Elections in the Ott Empire (1995).pdf "Elections and the Electoral Process in the Ottoman Empire, 1876–1919" International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp 265–286
- ^ Reconstructing Gender in Middle East: Tradition, Identity, and Power. Columbia University Press. 1995. p. 101.
- ^ Nohlen, Dieter (2001). Elections in Asia and the Pacific: South East Asia, East Asia, and the South Pacific. Oxford University Press. p. 14.
- ^ Diamond, Larry (15 September 2015). "Timeline: Democracy in Recession". The New York Times. Retrieved 25 January 2016.
- ^ a b Kurlantzick, Joshua (11 May 2017). "Mini-Trumps Are Running for Election All Over the World". Bloomberg.com. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
- ^ Mounk, Yascha (January 2017). "The Signs of Deconsolidation". Journal of Democracy. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
- ^ "Age of Dictators: Totalitarianism in the inter-war period". Archived from the original on 7 September 2006. Retrieved 7 September 2006.
- ^ "Did the United States Create Democracy in Germany?: The Independent Review: The Independent Institute". Independent.org. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ "World | South Asia | Country profiles | Country profile: India". BBC News. 7 June 2010. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ISBN 978-90-04-15174-1.
- ^ "How the Westminster Parliamentary System was exported around the World". University of Cambridge. 2 December 2013. Retrieved 16 December 2013.
- ^ "Age of democracies at the end of 2015". Our World in Data. Archived from the original on 15 February 2020. Retrieved 15 February 2020.
- ^ "Tables and Charts". Freedomhouse.org. 10 May 2004. Archived from the original on 13 July 2009. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ "List of Electoral Democracies". World Forum on Democracy. Archived from the original on 16 October 2013.
- ^ "General Assembly declares 15 September International Day of Democracy; Also elects 18 Members to Economic and Social Council". Un.org. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ Bingham, Adrian (25 June 2019). "'The last milestone' on the journey to full adult suffrage? 50 years of debates about the voting age". History & Policy. Retrieved 31 December 2022.
- ^ "Archives of Maryland, Volume 0138, Page 0051 – Constitutional Revision Study Documents of the Constitutional Convention Commission, 1968". msa.maryland.gov. Retrieved 3 January 2023.
- ^ Sanders, Mark (2000). Your Right To Vote. United States: Raintree Steck- Vaugh company.
- (PDF) from the original on 20 April 2017 – via Rutgers University.
- ^ a b "Freedom in the Word 2017". freedomhouse.org. 2016. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
- ^ "Biden Says Democracy Is Winning. It's Not That Simple". Bloomberg.com. 16 July 2023. Retrieved 19 July 2023.
- ^ "Freedom House: Democracy Scores for Most Countries Decline for 12th Consecutive Year", VOA News, 16 January 2018. Retrieved 21 January 2018.
- ISSN 0882-7729. Retrieved 14 November 2018.
- ^ Nazifa Alizada, Rowan Cole, Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Sebastian Hellmeier, Palina Kolvani, Jean Lachapelle, Anna Lührmann, Seraphine F. Maerz, Shreeya Pillai, and Staffan I. Lindberg. 2021. Autocratization Turns Viral. Democracy Report 2021. University of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute. https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/74/8c/748c68ad-f224-4cd7-87f9-8794add5c60f/dr_2021_updated.pdf Archived 14 September 2021 at the Wayback Machine
- .
- S2CID 212974380.
- ^ "Global overview of COVID-19: Impact on elections". www.idea.int. Retrieved 28 January 2021.
- ^ Repucci, Sarah; Slipowitz, Amy. "Democracy under Lockdown". Freedom House. Retrieved 28 January 2021.
- ^ Democracy Facing Global Challenges: V-Dem Annual Democracy Report 2019 (PDF) (Report). V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg. May 2019. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 June 2019. Retrieved 26 April 2021.
- OCLC 1155487679.
- ^ Farrell, Henry (14 August 2020). "History tells us there are four key threats to U.S. democracy". The Washington Post.
- ^ Lieberman, By Suzanne Mettler and Robert C. (10 August 2020). "The Fragile Republic". Foreign Affairs. Retrieved 15 August 2020.
- S2CID 242013001. Retrieved 21 January 2021.
- S2CID 225207244.
- ^ "Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book VIII, Chapter 10 (1160a.31-1161a.9)". Internet Classics Archive. Retrieved 21 June 2018.
- ^ "Aristotle". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-691-13830-5. Retrieved 14 March 2017.
- .
- ISBN 978-0-06-133008-7.
- ISBN 978-0-06-041750-5.
- ISBN 978-0-300-04938-1
- ISBN 978-0-691-13872-5, p. 134.
- ISBN 978-0-691-12019-5
- ^ Joshua Cohen, "Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy" in Essays on Reason and Politics: Deliberative Democracy Ed. James Bohman and William Rehg (The MIT Press: Cambridge) 1997, 72–73.
- ^ Ethan J. "Can Direct Democracy Be Made Deliberative?", Buffalo Law Review, Vol. 54, 2006
- ^ Warren, Mark E.; Pearse, Hilary (2008). Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens' Assembly. Cambridge University Press.
- S2CID 155953192.
- ISBN 978-0-521-51477-4.
- ^ "Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave | en | OECD". www.oecd.org. Retrieved 20 November 2020.
- S2CID 151808737. Retrieved 3 April 2023.
- ^ Greenwood, Shannon (6 December 2022). "Appendix A: Classifying democracies". Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project. Retrieved 27 December 2022.
- ISBN 978-1-317-34529-9. Retrieved 30 April 2023.
- ISBN 978-1-135-93226-8. Retrieved 3 April 2023.
- ^ "Democracy data: how do researchers measure democracy?". Our World in Data. 17 June 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2023.
- ^ "The 'Varieties of Democracy' data: how do researchers measure democracy?". Our World in Data. 30 November 2022. Retrieved 3 April 2023.
- ^ "Breaking Down Democracy". Freedom House. Retrieved 3 April 2023.
- ^ Democracy and Autocracy, Why do Democracies Develop and Decline, Vol. 21(1) June 2023, Democracy and Autocracy Section, American Political Science Association
- ^ "Democracy Report 2023, Table 3, V-Dem Institute, 2023" (PDF).
- S2CID 51782149– via CrossRef.
- ^ Dahl, Robert A., Ian Shapiro, José Antônio Cheibub, and Adam Przeworski. “Minimalist Conception of Democracy: A Defense.” Essay. In The Democracy Sourcebook, 12–17. Cambridge, MA, MA: MIT Press, 2003.
- ^ Schmitter, Philippe C. and Terry Lynn Karl. 1991. "What Democracy is.. . and is Not." Journal of Democracy 2 (3): 75-88
- ^ Esaiasson, Peter, and Christopher Wlezien. "Advances in the study of democratic responsiveness: An introduction." Comparative political studies 50.6 (2017): 699-710.
- ^ U.K. Preuss, "Perspectives of Democracy and the Rule of Law". Journal of Law and Society, 18:3 (1991). pp. 353–64
- ISBN 978-0-415-19396-2.
- ^ Beramendi, Virginia, and Jennifer Somalie. Angeyo. Direct Democracy: The International Idea Handbook. Stockholm, Sweden: International IDEA, 2008. Print.
- ^ ISBN 978-2-606-01295-3.
- ^ Niels Barmeyer, Developing Zapatista Autonomy, Chapter Three: Who is Running the Show? The Workings of Zapatista Government.
- ^ Denham, Diana (2008). Teaching Rebellion: Stories from the Grassroots Mobilization in Oaxaca.
- ^ Zibechi, Raul (2013). Dispersing Power: Social Movements as Anti-State Forces in Latin America.
- ^ "A Very Different Ideology in the Middle East". Rudaw.
- ISBN 978-1-137-31470-3, retrieved 17 June 2022
- ^ "Article on direct democracy by Imraan Buccus". Themercury.co.za. Archived from the original on 17 January 2010. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ "A Citizen's Guide To Vermont Town Meeting". July 2008. Archived from the original on 5 August 2012. Retrieved 12 October 2012.
- S2CID 153766786.
- ^ "Radical Revolution – The Thermidorean Reaction". Wsu.edu. 6 June 1999. Archived from the original on 3 February 1999. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ISBN 0-75258-227-5.
- ISBN 978-3-8204-8843-2.
- ISBN 978-0-226-84279-0.
- S2CID 154048078.
- ^ Aristotle. "Ch. 9". Politics. Vol. Book 4.
- ^ Keen, Benjamin, A History of Latin America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1980.
- ^ Kuykendall, Ralph, Hawaii: A History. New York: Prentice Hall, 1948.
- ^ Brown, Charles H., The Correspondents' War. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1967.
- ^ Taussig, Capt. J.K., "Experiences during the Boxer Rebellion," in Quarterdeck and Fo'c'sle. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company, 1963
- ^ a b c d O'Neil, Patrick H. Essentials of Comparative Politics. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton 2010. Print
- ^ "64. The British Empire in 1914. Wells, H.G. 1922. A Short History of the World". www.bartleby.com. Retrieved 8 January 2022.
- ^ "Republic – Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary". M-W.com. 25 April 2007. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ "The Federalist Papers : No. 10". Avalon Project. 29 December 1998. Retrieved 7 January 2022.
- ^ Richard J. Ellis and Michael Nelson, Debating the presidency (2009) p. 211
- ^ Novanglus, no. 7. 6 March 1775
- ^ Brockell, Gillian (19 December 2019). "'A republic, if you can keep it': Did Ben Franklin really say Impeachment Day's favorite quote?". The Washington Post. Retrieved 20 January 2021.
- ^ "The Founders' Constitution: Volume 1, Chapter 18, Introduction, "Epilogue: Securing the Republic"". Press-pubs.uchicago.edu. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- Graham, Robert. The General Idea of Proudhon's Revolution
- ^ Bookchin, Murray. Communalism: The Democratic Dimensions of Social Anarchism. Anarchism, Marxism and the Future of the Left: Interviews and Essays, 1993–1998, AK Press 1999, p. 155
- ^ Bookchin, Murray. Social Anarchism or Lifestyle Anarchism: An Unbridgeable Chasm
- ^ Graeber, David and Grubacic, Andrej. Anarchism, Or The Revolutionary Movement Of The Twenty-first Century
- ^ Dowlen, Oliver (2008). The Political Potential of Sortition: A study of the random selection of citizens for public office. Imprint Academic.
- S2CID 251572712.
- – via CrossRef.
- – via CrossRef.
- ^ "Redirecting..." heinonline.org.
{{cite web}}
: Cite uses generic title (help) - ^ "Article on Cosmopolitan democracy by Daniele Archibugi" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 July 2011. Retrieved 22 August 2010.
- ^ "letter by Einstein – "To the General Assembly of the United Nations"". Archived from the original on 10 May 2013. Retrieved 2 July 2013., first published in United Nations World New York, October 1947, pp. 13–14
- ^ Daniele Archibugi & David Held, eds., Cosmopolitan Democracy. An Agenda for a New World Order, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1995; David Held, Democracy and the Global Order, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1995, Daniele Archibugi, The Global Commonwealth of Citizens. Toward Cosmopolitan Democracy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008
- ^ "Creative Democracy – The Task Before Us" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 February 2015. Retrieved 12 February 2015.
- S2CID 201790528.
- ^ Putin's Rule: Its Main Features and the Current Diarchy Johnson's Russia List. By Peter Reddaway. 18 February 2009. Downloaded 28 April 2017.
- ISBN 978-1-135-92468-3.
- ^ Friend, Celeste (n.d.). "Social Contract Theory". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 26 April 2022.
- S2CID 222452675.
- Technology ReviewMIT News. p. 03.
- ^ see Peter Burnell, From Evaluating Democracy Assistance to Appraising Democracy Promotion, Political Studies Association, Political Studies 2008 VOL 56
- ^ "Democracy Building and Conflict Management: Overview". International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA). n.d. Archived from the original on 9 February 2006. Retrieved 18 January 2006.
- Hoover Digest. 2. Archived from the original on 5 July 2008. Also see this page.
- S2CID 51897214.
- ^ Lise Rakner, Alina Rocha Menocal and Verena Fritz (2008) Assessing international democracy assistance: Key lessons and challenges Archived March 7, 2012, at the Wayback Machine London: Overseas Development Institute
- ^ Azar Gat, The Return of Authoritarian Great Powers, in Foreign Affairs, July–August 2007, [1]
- ^ Saskia Sassen, Globalisation, the State and Democratic Deficit, Open Democracy, 18 July 2007, [2] Archived November 13, 2009, at the Wayback Machine; Patrice de Beer, France and Europe: the Democratic Deficit Exposed, Open Democracy, 4 June 2006, [3] Archived August 31, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
- ISSN 1094-2939.
- ^ Christopher Hobson & Milja Kurki, Democracy and democracy-support: a new era, Open Democracy, 20 March 2009, [4]
- S2CID 149640396.
- ^ "Book Review: Against Elections: The Case for Democracy by David Van Reybrouck". 20 October 2016. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
- ^ Wong, Alia (5 October 2018). "Civics Education Helps Create Young Voters and Activists". The Atlantic. Retrieved 17 September 2020.
- JSTOR 1816288.
- S2CID 55486399.
- OCLC 1053623603.
- S2CID 240235199.
- ISBN 978-0-08-043076-8.
- S2CID 240235199.
- .
- S2CID 53686238.
- ^ Inglehart, Ronald. Welzel, Christian Modernisation, Cultural Change and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence, 2005. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
- ISBN 978-1-108-61388-0.
- S2CID 158036471.
- ^ Foreword, written by historian Harry J Hogan Archived 1 September 2013 at the Wayback Machine in 1982, to Quigley's Weapons Systems and Political Stability
- ^ see also Chester G Starr, Review of Weapons Systems and Political Stability, American Historical Review, Feb 1984, p. 98, available at carrollquigley.net
- ^ ISBN 978-0-8191-2947-5. Retrieved 20 May 2013.
- ISBN 978-0-8191-2947-5. Retrieved 20 May 2013.
- . Retrieved 3 July 2017.
- S2CID 21297949.
- .
Political theory has described a positive linkage between education, cognitive ability and democracy. This assumption is confirmed by positive correlations between education, cognitive ability, and positively valued political conditions (N = 183–130). [...] It is shown that in the second half of the 20th century, education and intelligence had a strong positive impact on democracy, rule of law and political liberty independent from wealth (GDP) and chosen country sample. One possible mediator of these relationships is the attainment of higher stages of moral judgment fostered by cognitive ability, which is necessary for the function of democratic rules in society. The other mediators for citizens as well as for leaders could be the increased competence and willingness to process and seek information necessary for political decisions due to greater cognitive ability. There are also weaker and less stable reverse effects of the rule of law and political freedom on cognitive ability.
- S2CID 153949862.
- ^ ISSN 0003-0554.
- ^ Squicciarini, Mara and Voigtländer, Nico, Knowledge Elites and Modernization: Evidence from Revolutionary France (October 2016). NBER Working Paper No. w22779, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2861711
- ISBN 978-0-521-85526-6.
- ^ "Rainfall and Democracy".
- (PDF) from the original on 24 September 2015.
- ISBN 978-0-444-52041-8.
- ^ Mellinger, Andrew D., Jeffrey Sachs, and John L. Gallup. (1999). "Climate, Water Navigability, and Economic Development". Working Paper.
- ISBN 978-0-444-52041-8.
- ISBN 978-1-4128-3116-1. Retrieved 5 June 2013.
- ^ S2CID 225475139.
- ISBN 978-0-19-023487-4
- S2CID 234870008.
- S2CID 159354232.
- .
- S2CID 228959708.
- S2CID 221472047.
- (PDF) from the original on 6 February 2023. Retrieved 7 November 2022.
- S2CID 150992660.
The decline of democratic regime attributes – autocratization
- ISBN 978-3-030-03125-1.
- .
Backsliding entails deterioration of qualities associated with democratic governance, within any regime. In democratic regimes, it is a decline in the quality of democracy; in autocracies, it is a decline in democratic qualities of governance.
- ^ Lindberg, Staffan I. "The Nature of Democratic Backsliding in Europe". Carnegie Europe. Archived from the original on 13 April 2021. Retrieved 27 January 2021.
- from the original on 21 January 2020.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-4426-0012-6.
- ^ Edwin Leland James (7 January 1929). "King of Yugoslavia Assumes All Power". The New York Times. Retrieved 10 October 2023.
- ^ Pinfield, Nick (2015). A/AS Level History for AQA Democracy and Nazism: Germany, 1918–1945 Student Book. Cambridge University Press. p. 98.
- SSRN 1426841.
- ^ "Parliament Bill". api.parliament.uk. 11 November 1947. Retrieved 22 April 2018.
- ISBN 978-0300015652.
- ISBN 978-0521458917.
- ^ Thom Hartmann, "Time to Remove the Bananas...and Return Our Republic to Democracy," CommonDreams.org, 6 November 2002
- ^ MacChesney, Robert W (1999). Rich media, poor democracy: Communication politics in dubious times. University of Illinois Press.
- .
- ^ Gurevitch, Michael; Blumler, Jay G. (1990). "Political Communication Systems and Democratic Values". In Lichtenberg, Judith (ed.). Democracy and the mass media: A collection of essays. Cambridge University Press. pp. 269–289.
- ^ a b Bucy, Erik P.; D'Angelo, Paul (1999). "The Crisis of Political Communication: Normative Critiques of News and Democratic Processes". Communication Yearbook. 22: 301–339.
- ^ a b c Blumler, Jay G. (2014). "Mediatization and Democracy". In Esser, Frank; Strömbäck, Jesper (eds.). Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of Western democracies. Springer. pp. 31–41.
- ^ Donges, Patrick; Jarren, Otfried (2014). "Mediatization of Organizations: Changing Parties and Interest Groups?". In Esser, Frank; Strömbäck, Jesper (eds.). Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of Western democracies. Springer. pp. 31–41.
- ^ Esser, Frank (2013). "Mediatization as a Challenge: Media Logic versus Political Logic". In Kriesi, Hanspeter; Esser, Frank; Bühlmann, Marc (eds.). Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 155–176.
- ^ Cappella, Joseph N.; Jamieson, Kathleen Hall (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. Oxford University Press.
- ^ a b Vreese, Claes H. de (2014). "Mediatization of News: The Role of Journalistic Framing". In Esser, Frank; Strömbäck, Jesper (eds.). Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of Western democracies. Springer. pp. 137–155.
- ^ a b Esser, Frank; Matthes, Jörg (2013). "Mediatization Effects on Political News, Political Actors, Political Decisions, and Political Audiences". In Kriesi, Hanspeter; Esser, Frank; Bühlmann, Marc (eds.). Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 177–201.
- ^ Baum, Matthew A. (2003). Soft news goes to war. Public opinion and american foreign policy in the new media era. Princeton University Press.
- ISBN 978-1-138-52143-8.
- ^ a b Altheide, David L. (2014). Media edge: Media logic and social reality. Peter Lang.
- S2CID 155126179.
- ^ Nielsen, Rasmus Kleis (2016). "The Business of News". In Witschge, Tamara; Anderson, Christopher William; Domingo, David; Hermida, Alfred (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Digital Journalism. Sage. pp. 51–67.
- PMID 33622786.
- ^ S2CID 150169330.
- ^ Cushion, Stephen (2012). The Democratic Value of News: Why Public Service Media Matter. Macmillan.
- ^ Cushion, Stephen; Franklin, Bob (2015). "Public Service Broadcasting: Markets and Vulnerable Values in Broadcast and Print Journalism". In Coleman, Stephen; Moss, Giles; Parry, Katy; Halperin, John; Ryan, Michael (eds.). Can the Media Serve Democracy?: Essays in Honour of Jay G. Blumler. Springer. pp. 65–75.
- ^ Buckley, Steve; Duer, Kreszentia; Mendel, Toby; Siochrú, Seán Ó (2008). Broadcasting, voice, and accountability: A public interest approach to policy, law, and regulation. World Bank and University of Michigan Press.
- ^ a b Gunther, Richard; Mugham, Anthony (2000). "The Political Impact of the Media: A Reassessment". In Gunther, Richard; Mugham, Anthony (eds.). Democracy and the Media: A Comparative Perspective. Cambridge University Press. pp. 402–448.
- ^ Pickard, Victor (2020). "The Public Media Option: Confronting Policy Failure in an Age of Misinformation". In Bennett, W. Lance; Livingston, Steven (eds.). The Disinformation Age: Politics, Technology, and Disruptive Communication in the United States. Cambridge University Press. pp. 238–258.
- ^ Udris, Linards; Lucht, Jens (2014). "Mediatization at the Structural Level: Independence from Politics, Dependence on the Market". In Esser, Frank; Strömbäck, Jesper (eds.). Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of Western democracies. Springer. pp. 114–136.
- ^ Thoday, Jon (2018). "Public Service Television and the Crisis of Content". In Freedman, Des; Goblot, Vana (eds.). A Future for Public Service Television. MIT Press. pp. 29–39.
- ^ Schulz, Winfried (2014). "Mediatization and New Media". In Esser, Frank; Strömbäck, Jesper (eds.). Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of Western democracies. Springer. pp. 114–136.
- ^ S2CID 219769484.
- ^ Voltmer, Katrin; Sorensen, Lone (2019). "Media, Power, Citizenship: The Mediatization of Democratic Change". In Voltmer, Katrin; et al. (eds.). Media, Communication and the Struggle for Democratic Change. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 35–58.
- S2CID 4549072. Archived from the original(PDF) on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 12 October 2021.
- ^ PMID 34260744.
- ^ Egorov, Georgy; Sonin, Konstantin (2020). The political economics of non-democracy. National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER Working Paper No. w27949.
Works cited
- Clarke, P.; Foweraker, J. (2001). Encyclopedia of Democratic Thought. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-19396-2.
- Graeber, David (2013). The Democracy Project : a history, a crisis, a movement. New York. )
- Livy; De Sélincourt, A.; Ogilvie, R. M.; Oakley, S. P. (2002). The early history of Rome: books I-V of The history of Rome from its foundations. Penguin Classics. ISBN 978-0-14-044809-2.
- Mann, Barbara A.; Fields, Jerry L. (1997). "A Sign in the Sky: Dating the League of the Haudenosaunee". American Indian Culture and Research Journal. 21 (2): 105–163. .
- Ober, J.; Hedrick, C.W. (1996). Dēmokratia: a conversation on democracies, ancient and modern. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-01108-0.
- Raaflaub, Kurt A.; Ober, Josiah; Wallace, Robert W (2007). Origins of Democracy in Ancient Greece. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-24562-4.
Further reading
- Provost, Claire; ISBN 978-1350269989.
- Biagini, Eugenio (general editor). 2021. A Cultural History of Democracy, 6 Volumes New York : Bloomsbury Academic.
- ISBN 978-1250179845.
- Przeworski, Adam (2018) Why Bother With Elections? Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
- Munck, Gerardo L. (2016) "What is Democracy? A Reconceptualization of the Quality of Democracy." Democratization 23(1): 1–26.
- ISBN 978-1-78360-542-2.