I. Introduction
Though the modern academic may describe a political regime as a “democracy”, what they almost always imply is that said political regime is a “representative democracy.” A representative democracy obtains its legitimacy from the agency of the people; for a democracy to be representative, officials are elected to represent the interests of their citizens and are thus accountable to both the rules of political institutions and the needs of their constituents. The most basic facets to a representative democracy such as free and fair elections and strong competition between political parties are cornerstones to the structuring of a representative democracy, and yet there are cases within the past century in which representative democracies with elections and competitive political parties descend into authoritarian regimes. So though the election of representatives is paramount to modern democracies, there are other factors that constitute what Leonardo Morlino calls “the qualities of democracy.” Morlino subdivides the qualities of a democracy into rule of law, electoral accountability, institutional accountability, competition, participation, freedom and equality, and responsiveness.
There is no denial that all seven of these criteria Morlino are essential to the establishment and maintenance of a representative democracy. However, I would like to argue that four of the most important aspects to assessing the quality of a democracy are independent branches of
We know that democracies are common among the economically urbanized countries and rare between the very deprived ones. The reason we scrutinize this pattern is not that democracies are more probable to emerge, as a result, of economic development but that they are to a large extent more possible to survive if they occur to emerge in most urbanized countries. The paths to democracy are diverse. Indeed, they appear to follow no unsurprising pattern. But once democracy is conventional, for whatever reasons, its endurance depends on a few, easily particular, factors.
From the early 1840s to the present day, a democracy can be described as a flawed establishment which has been shaped by the power of wealth and control, complex social relations, and most importantly the people’s desire to live a fulfilling life. Throughout this time period the principles of democracy, such as equality, protection of the people’s interest, and promotion of human rights were shifting in order to increase the democracy efficiency. Therefore the continued importance of the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and Constitution remain significant since, in American today, democracy is a system that is continuously being shaped by the people within it.
Despite the many crises that the United States has faced historically, democracy has persisted. However, this is not to say that the system is secure or deeply rooted. In fact, based on the events of recent decades, it has been weakening. In How Democracies Die, Levitsky and Ziblatt provide examples of how American democracy has exemplified the positive and negative aspects of other global democracies of the past and present. Although the US is exceptional in some ways, with its longstanding democratic institutions and diverse population, it is more similar to others than different. Thus, the idea that few parallels can be drawn to other nations is disproven. The process of comparing each state is analogous to that of differentiating between
Jere a logical approach demands a fundamental understanding of the representative democracy that we have. We have a two party democracy, period. Not because other parties do not exist, but because our infrastructure will not allow those parties to govern. Our constitutional framework makes the ascension of a third party essentially impossible, which is why Sanders wisely ran for president as a Dem. Respectfully, a vote for a third party will not change a constitutional structure that supports 2 party government; moreover, only a change in HOW candidates are elected and popular votes are apportioned (particularly in federal and state legislative bodies) will change that. With that understanding, we have an inexperienced candidate who is threatening
America was founded on the basic principle of democracy…right? Isn’t that the freedom we were searching for when the voyagers left Europe to form the US in the first place? The irony in this is that we are often taught to believe that the United States uses a true democracy. Over the years the United States has contradicted many of their basic ideologies and principles that we were founded on. For the most part, our Constitution has remained basically intact, other than minor exceptions here and there. However, our founding documents are extremely open ended and leave much room to change and interpret throughout time. Due to the flexibility of the United States founding documents the country practices a representative democracy rather
This paper will evaluate the health of U.S. democracy by focusing on the on a key element that makes for a healthy democracy: effective representation. By effective representation I refer to communication between both representatives and constituents, through policy enactments and elections, respectively, to serve the people and the interest of the country as a whole. Whether the U.S. is living up to this standard can be evaluated through multiple avenues, in this paper I will only evaluate the health of democratic representation in the U.S. by examining the competence of the public (voters). Numerous scholars and researchers have cast doubt upon how well democracy in the U.S. functions in the United States. Before examining the deficiencies of the public, it must be noted that while no governmental system is perfect by any means, anarchism as an alternative to government is not a practical solution (Dahl, Chapter 3, pp. 50-51).
Democracy a universally recognized phenomenon refers to a government deriving its power from the people and being answerable to them (Fox 2008). President Abraham Lincoln (Gettysburg Address, 1863) said about democracy "...is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not vanish from this earth ‘ (Fox 2008). The foundations of democracy in America are found within, “The Declaration of Independence of 1776” and “The Constitution of 1789”, both products of the American Revolution where equality and the rights of man were the focus of their creation (Rodgers 2001). The first half of this paper discusses the notion that despite having the best institutional powers that uphold democratic functions within the American government, this doesn’t always translate into the perfect democratic election.
The United States of America is one of the oldest contemporary democracies, is currently the second largest democracy, and is ranked the 16th best democracy in the world (Campbell et. Al, 2014). Yet there is a legitimate question over whether or not the United States can still truly be considered a democracy, with some studies even suggesting it has begun to resemble an oligarchy (Chumley, 2014). In this essay, I will use Dahl’s criteria of voting equality and effective participation to determine whether or not the United States are truly a democracy.
In the case that politicians do not live up to the ideals and criteria they were chosen for, a merit of democracy is that it allows the citizenry to punish these officials – not necessarily through extreme forms like impeachment, but perhaps by simply electing someone else in the forthcoming election. While, as previously addressed, not all participants in the election process vote based on truthful information, some citizens do. It must be remembered that not only those in authority
The creation and manipulation of representative institutions as democracy decorations help authoritarians in providing legitimate governance and ensure political survival. Authoritarians face challenges from representative institutions such as the legislative, judiciary,
one essential conviction, expressed in the word democracy itself: that power should be in the hands of the people. Although democracy today has been slightly inefficient in this idea, with the wealthy, elite class challenging this right, “it nevertheless claims for itself a fundamental validity that no other kind of society shares….” To completely understand the structure of democracy, one must return to the roots of the practice itself, and examine the origins in ancient Greece, the expansion in the Roman Empire, and how these practices combined make what we recognize as today’s democratic government.
Winston Churchill once remarked that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”. In agreement with his statement, this paper will examine the problems of democratic governments using specific examples, and compare it to the failure of fascist governments in Nazi Germany and Italy and communist governments in the Soviet Union and China.
Take it all the way back to when the constitution was being written. The founding fathers had a big choice to make; did they establish a direct democracy or a representative democracy? They had to weigh the pros and cons of each and they ended up deciding on a representative democracy. In this paper I will tell you why they made things the way they did and certain compromises they made along the way.
The author has been able to fulfill the target of the book, which is to test and answer the questions raised by critics through the provision of evidence of the reason no democracy exists at the present. The author presents the arguments in a chronological way that gives a better understanding of the past, today, and prospective future of democracy. The root of the present democracy is stated in the book and lays the basis of the other arguments in the book. Dahl argues that there are conditions that any state should attain in order for it to be considered as a democratic
Churchill’s claim that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” is deliberately provocative and intended to challenge the reader’s simplistic ideal that democracy is without faults. There are an estimated 114 democracies in the world today (Wong, Oct 3rd lecture). A figure that has increased rapidly in the last century not necessarily because democracy is the best form of government, but primarily for reason that in practice, under stable social, economic and political conditions, it has the least limitations in comparison to other forms of government. Be it the transparency of a democratic government or the prevalence of majority rule, all subdivisions of democracy benefit and hinder its