How Democracy Has Made A Grand Mark On Humanity Essay

The concept of Democracy dates back to the Classic Period, otherwise known as the Golden Age of Greece. Prior to becoming a unified nation, Greece was made up of city-states that were constantly warring with one another. None of these city-states possessed full control over its neighbors. It was during this time and because of these circumstances that there was great advancement in Greek thought encompassing philosophy and politics. These advancements are responsible for the strong Greek

Democracy, the form of government in which there is a rule by the people, is said to have originated and thrived in the classical period of Athens, from 500-350 B.C.. Democracy inherently gave all that were considered citizens power to participate in politics in theory. That being said, it is highly debated as to how much power the people, also known as the demos, exercised in this democracy. Many practices and informal institutions can be said to have limited the power of the demos. The democracy in Athens can be proven to have been a democracy in theory yet not in practice, as can be proven through a variety of primary sources recounting Athenian political institutions and practices. Such primary sources that demonstrate this include Herodotus’

Today, much of the world’s governments have converted to democracies. In the Ancient World, there was only one truly notable example of a democratic society: The City-State of Athens. This is actually the birthplace of democracy, where instead of the rich or powerful ruling, it was the citizens of the city-state that held the power. This advanced way of government was so effective and well structured, it even laid the foundations for the development of our own democracy, right here in the United States, over 2,000 years in the future. Prior to Athens’s collapse during the Peloponnesian War, it truly had an efficient and very organized system of government.

Evolution of Democracy and the Athenian Constitution Democracy is defined in modern times as government by the people. To put that in perspective and better understand all that democracy entails we must consider its origins. It is surprising indeed that even today tyrannies and dictatorships exist in the world when more than two and a half thousand years ago the ancient Athenians had developed a functional and direct form of democracy. What contributed to this remarkable achievement and how it changed the socio-political scene in Athens is what will be considered in this paper.

In the era of the contemporary United States, a country that has had the longest standing democracy, we are used to thinking very highly of its system. However, throughout our history, there have been a couple of critics to the system of democracy. It comes as no surprise that democracy does have its issues. One of the first pieces of literature where democracy was mentioned and analyzed at a deeper level was The Republic by Plato. This ancient Greek philosopher did not completely agree with democracy, regardless of the fact that ancient Athens was the first civilization that gave rise to it. In fact, in a numerical list that he composes on which are the best ways of ruling, Plato puts democracy at one of the lowest levels. In order, Plato’s list of types of government from most desirable to least desirable looks like this: 1.) Republic (The ideal city) 2.) Timocracy 3.) Oligarchy 4.) Democracy 5.) Tyranny. Additionally, In The Republic, Plato tells us his beliefs and values on certain aspects of life through the eyes of Socrates. So, even though Plato himself does not appear in The Republic and instead Socrates does, nonetheless, Plato and Socrates shared the same ideology when it came to democracy. As we know, Plato did not agree with democracy. As a result, in this paper, I will explore the greatest intellectual strengths and weaknesses of Plato’s view on democracy.

“History of Democracy” HistoryWorld. 2001. Web. 24 Oct. 2014 < http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/plaintexthistories.asp?historyid=ac42> Greek Gateway.

Beginning in Athens circa 800-700 B.C.E, the population expanded at an unusual pace alongside rapidly improving economic conditions. It was this, “early development of a large middle class,” that allowed them to begin exploring the then novel concept of a democratic system (Hunt, 68). As early as the seventh century B.C.E, the Archaic Athenian government had begun to represent a democracy in its fledgling stages as a direct result of the success of the entrepreneurial middle class; with, “all freeborn adult Athenian male citizens,” reserving the right to vote on public matters by means of assembly. One such example of this newfound solidarity occurred around 632 B.C.E, with the common masses’ triumphant rally in opposition to an attempt to install an elite Athenian tyrant. After the likes of the harsh legislator Draco in 621 B.C.E, the reforms of Solon by 594 B.C.E, the tyrant rule of Peisistratus in 546 B.C.E, and alight upon the reforms of Cleisthenes in 508 B.C.E, for it was here that true democracy began to take root and would remain and grow as a result of all that had come and been done before.

The first evidence of democracy, government in which the citizens had a say in the rulings, was discovered in Ancient Athens. However, the direct democratic system seemed so successful that it overshadowed the Athenian’s views towards the power of their government. Through close examination of the writings of Sophocles and Plato, one can discover the that the Athenian’s thoughts regarding the governing power, evolved during Classical Athens’s 200 year span. Although at a glance the government of Ancient Athens did not seem to progress much during it’s time, a deeper look at Sophocles’ Antigone, written in 441 BCE, and Plato’s Crito, written in 360 BCE, reveal that the Athenian attitudes toward the authority of the state appeared to evolve even within eighty years.

In the fifth-century BC, Athens emerged as one of the most advanced state or polis in all of Greece. This formation of Athenian ‘democracy’ holds the main principle that citizens should enjoy political equality in order to be free to rule and be ruled in turn. The word ‘democracy’ originates from the Greek words demos (meaning people) and kratos (meaning power) therefore demokratia means “the power of the people.” The famous funeral speech of Pericles states that “Our constitution is called democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people.” However, only citizens (free adult men of Athenian descent) could participate in political matters. Women and slaves held no political rights, although they were

‘The Republic’ is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato around 380 BC, concerning about the order of justice, the order and character of just men and just city/states. The Republic is considered as the best known work of Plato and is considered one of the world’s most influential works of politics, history and philosophy. In this Socratic dialogue, Socrates discusses about the notions of justice and whether the just man is very happy when compared with his unjust, Athenian and foreign counterparts. Socrates considers the various facets of the existing regimes and proposes a series of hypothetical cities that are entirely different from his considerations. Such heated discussions result in the culmination of discussing kallipolis, a hypothetical city-state that was ruled by a philosopher king. In this paper, we are going to consider Socrates arguments about democracy by examining whether the concept of democracy always remains inconsistent with philosophical goals.

Democracy is often referred to as the rule of the many, but Aristotle called this definition incomplete. In his book “Politics”, he explained that in a city if the majorities are aristocrats and if they have political authority, then it is an aristocracy not a democracy. He therefore defined democracy as when “free people have authority and Oligarchy as when the wealthy have it” (1290b). Plato viewed Democracy as a flawed system with too much inefficiency that would make any implementation of a true democracy not worth it. While Aristotle viewed democracy as a system that could work if it is limited to certain restrictions and if it is the regime that best fits the culture of the people to be governed. In this essay it will be argued that Plato’s view on democracy as a flawed system is more prevalent or more compelling if the current political arena around the world is observed.

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.

Since the initiation of the Third Wave of Democracy, several countries have attempted to form a democratic system of governs. We take note that not all have succeeded. At the dawn of this era, democracy was being applied to countries with no prior history of a governing body that was place by the people for the people hence success of such a system could not be guaranteed because of the innumerous variables that existed in each country. People being the highlighted factor of variance, it may become easier to understand how countries such as Pakistan and Nigeria, both countries prior to the Wave had no local governing machinery. Pakistan further endured a partition from India which resulted in not only an instant religious and

According to Andrew Janos, “the price of economic progress has been political turmoil”. (Janos, pg. 21) If the Modernization Theory holds that countries tend to become more democratic the more they modernize, then political turmoil is to be expected in democracies. Certainly this can occur in both parliamentary and presidential systems: as Linz argues, the presidential system concentrates too much power on the president, resulting in “winner-take-all” politics (Linz, pg. 56) and the polarization of political parties. This is evident in the United States, where the president is elected separately and Congress is divided between the opposing Democrats and Republicans. Conversely, the parliamentary system in Britain, as well as that adapted by the former British colonies of Sri Lanka and Nigeria, has had its fair share of single-party hegemony and political abuse. (Horowitz, pg. 78) Democracy is therefore not a perfect form of government when put in practice, and much of its

Moreover, instating the right to choose also facilitates the incentive for people to speak out against an unruly leader. When a large mass of civilians disagrees or is concerned with a party’s implementation of policies, they can extract their title from them. Just because a party is elected, does not mean that they will remain in power for the entire duration originally allotted to them. The presence of foreseeable change is crucial to a societies degree of satisfaction associated with their current governmental system. Alteration gives democracy the upper hand. For example, in Spain in 1982, when Prime Minister Leopolodo Calvo Sotelo completely terminated the party that supported what the people wanted, the people in office forcibly made him resign.