Dahl, on Democracy Essay

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.

Have you heard of the Patricians? The Patricians were Roman people of higher class. Then there was the Plebeians, they were of lower class, although they were lower class they were the Patricians life support. The Plebeians were the people that manded the farms and animals. They were really important to Rome. At this time in this empire the Roman people had no say in there goverment. The government was made up of 2 councils, those councils were ruled by the republic. A republic a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch. I think we can all say that Rome has a very weird government, in a republic government

No matter where one goes there will always be a set of rules that govern what behaviors are acceptable, and therefore create a certain society around that. Robert Dahl wrote the essay entitled “Why Democracy?” to explain the effects of government own its citizens. The Midshipman Regulations are no exception to influencing the society of the regiment. They create a society that closely mirrors the society Dahl envisions in his essay. The Midshipman Regulations intentionally create a certain kind of atmosphere that provides an outlet for moral responsibility, to develop as a person, but at the same time restricts numerous freedoms. Dahl’s idea of a democratic society closely follows what the Midshipmen Regulations are trying to create, but would

As Dahl hints with the title of his book, How Democratic is the American Constitution? he is trying to make the citizens of America think about the constitution and what reasons the population is committed to upholding its democratic values.

In California, where I currently reside, the Californian residents vote on referendums, which are simply referenda or plebiscitary, and this means that every and each Californian resident has the right to vote on any issue. The plebiscitary politics make every and each citizen contribute to offer ideas about any issues. With this direct democracy, there is no middle man, who are delegates, but according to Steven S. Smith, Jason M. Roberts and Ryan J. Vander Wielen, this direct participation may be a good thing that “it seems better to have public opinion influencing members’ decisions than to have highly paid lobbyists representing organized interests swaying their votes” (Smith, Roberts and Wielen, 2011). However, they offer Robert A. Dahl’s arguments over the plebiscitary politics that “elected officials and special interests might manipulate direct communication to their advantage”

The base of the Roman Republic’s political system was the Assemblies in which Roman males would pass laws, elect Magistrates, and perform ceremonial duties. They had the power to approve or disapprove the Senate’s policies. In the empire, Augustus became a perpetual Tribune. He alone had the power to approve or veto laws.

Roman Republic Triumphs Over Athenian Democracy Ancient Rome’s republic was a successful form of government that was influenced by Athenian democracy because of the originality of the idea of democracy. Never before had the world seen a government where the people had such a strong voice. The ideological influence of Athens on Rome is the reason these two forms of government are commonly confused. During its time as a republic, Roman government was more centered around the decisions of the people rather than the decisions of one emperor-like personality (Stevenson). Unlike democracy, the republic also provided an equal chance for different classes of citizens to participate in voting.

Today’s democratic theory assumes that a society is free, equal and made up of autonomous individuals. The system offers all individuals the right to vote, express political views and have influence regarding government decisions. During the 19th century, more than a third of the world's population lived in countries colonized by imperial powers, while the rest lived under dictatorship. By the 20th century, many colonial empires started to disappear which saw the rise of democracy. Today, a majority of the world is governed by democratic governments,

In chapter 9, Dahl discusses the varieties of democracy. Democracy can mean many different things to people. Some authoritarian leaders claim that their government is a type of democracy, and it is also superior to other sorts of governments. We have learned that in order for a country to qualify as democratic, it must possess all the political institutions, and also meet all the criteria listed in the previous chapters. The size of a government is also an important matter to consider. Smaller units or associations do not strictly require polyarchal democracy, they are not as limited as larger units. Democratic government vary in specific political institutions. I believe this is so because no country is the same, their political ideal have to do with the history and

Countries such the United Kingdom, Germany, and India followed a common theme of having undergone a process of democratization that has entailed a divergence from or acceptance of authoritarian rule before embracing a consolidated democratic system of government. Each of the countries listed also experienced a level of economic instability or turmoil that is connected to their past conflicts with authoritarian rule that acted as the catalyst to an eventual acceptance of an improved democratic system that would yield greater economic stability. Countries such as Mexico, Brazil, and Nigeria all followed the concept of being afflicted by influences of past or present corruption that has prevented the governments of each country from yielding a more consolidated democratic format. Regional identity divisions and unequal distributions of power and representation for electoral arrangements have put each of the listed countries at risk for a democratic breakdown if changes are not enacted for the sake of veritably hindering the causes behind such instability. Moreover, countries such as China Iran, Russia both follow the concept of operating under a system of creeping authoritarianism

In recognition of the indicators of democratic consolidation in various countries, it is significant to understand the features that characterize the presence of successful consolidation within a country’s government. Features such as the holding of free repeated elections, peaceful transfers of power through elections, survival of tribulations, adherence to a rule of law, lengthy survival, and legitimacy recognized by the populace are all characteristics of a successful consolidation of democracy. In terms of which indicators would convincingly indicate truly successful consolidation of democracy, it is evident that legitimacy, survival of tests and tribulations, the presence of free consistent elections, and an adherence to a rule of law by the public are the most appropriate characteristics that would indicate or refute veritable consolidation. Each of these democratic

No matter where one goes there will always be a set of rules that control what behaviors are acceptable, and therefore create a certain society around that. Robert Dahl wrote the essay entitled Why Democracy? to clarify what society an ideal set of rules create. The midshipman regulations are not exception. They create a society that closely mirrors what society Dahl envisioned in his essay. The midshipman regulations intentionally create a certain kind of atmosphere that provides an outlet for moral responsibility, develop as a person, but at the same time restricts numerus freedoms. Robert Dahl’s idea of democracy closely follows what the regulations are trying to create but would deeply disagree with the lack of freedoms we have.

This democratic consolidation challenges the nation secure the new democracy after democratic transition (Schedler, 1998). Consequently, the results of consolidation have turned out in both stable and unstable cases. For stable case, the permanent institutions can eliminate undemocratic features of post-authoritarian system, on the contrary, new democratic system can decrease the power of elites (Power and Powers, 1998). Political elites are not powerful as in the post-authoritarian due to people’s rights to vote. Interestingly, the prospect of consolidation makes the economy grow if the governments promote democracy with good policies. Pettersson (2004) pointed out that “as democracy grows older, the governments adopt more growth policies”.

Democracy varies in every country depending on the type of government or regime they have. There is the liberal democracy, which is all about giving people their rights and liberties; everything is done through fair voting and electing. The people are aware of everything that happens in their government. Illiberal democracies are basically the same as liberal, but the people in power are more secretive of their activities, and there is less civil liberty. It is essentially a partial democracy. Now Authoritarian regimes designate any political system that concentrates power in the hands of one leader or a small elite. There are no free elections and very little regard for the law. Political institutions, social structures, and the democratic rule of law all affect liberal, illiberal, and authoritarian regimes democratic quality differently.

In order to answer the question “Can we have too many rights?” There are many things that we must consider, first we must be able to define exactly what rights are, how they work and what they do for citizens and then further into Political and civil rights in the same way as both are essential to the structure of a democracy and play very important roles in enabling citizens to take part in politics and help structure their democracy into something that is for the better. We will also closely examine Robert Dahl, Democracy and its Critics, by first going into a brief description of his opinions in chapters 12 and 13 relating to democracy and how rights affect it. Finally we will deconstruct that argument and find the weaknesses and strengths of his said opinion and come to a conclusion to our original question “Can we have too many rights”