Mr. Arend Lljphart Is An Author Of A Book Called Patterns Of Democracy

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.

An essential part of every nation lies in the structure of its government. There are many types of political systems such as dictatorships, monarchies, oligarchies and specifically what this essay is concerned about: democracies. The United States’ presidential system and Great Britain’s parliamentary system have both adopted a democratic type of government. Despite bearing some minor similarities, the differences between the United States presidential system and Great Britain’s parliamentary system are pronounced.

In the midst of the prevalence of democratic transitions, a number of developing countries are seeking to achieve the successful consolidation of civil order in modern days. Among those participants, Mexico and Nigeria has been spotlighted for the completely contrastive endings at the end of their long-adventures towards democratization since their independence; Mexico, from its independence, has maintained the political stability despite the authoritarian single-party regime and even accomplished the solid democratization at the time of the 2000 election whereas Nigerian regime has been deteriorated by a series of military cues d’états and

Two of the most powerful democracies in the modern era, the United States and the United Kingdom lead as examples as very successful forms of democratic government. Yet despite both states utilizing democratic governments, both differ greatly on how they operate as a state and through its governmental structure.

Democracy is a Greek invention, first practiced in the ancient Greek city of Athens. In the late 20th century, Democracy triumphed over all other major ideological systems, so overpowering was its victory that former critics now began to advocate their own democratic credentials. The vigorous rise of democracy has continued ever since and today there are over 112 self-proclaimed democratic countries around the world(Kekic 2007), whether all these countries are truly democratic or not is debatable and which will be discussed further in the essay. Important questions arise here: will democracies face a formidable opponent in the future? Have democracies remained true to their essence? or have they been breached by competing ideologies? A large majority of these 112 countries are not true democracies, as they do not adhere to the basic democratic credentials of :of the people, by the people and for the people. Serious revisions are needed in the workings of the modern state if democracy, in its true form, is to remain the dominant system. Whether democracy even in its purest form is flawed or not is a different question, one that I will not address in this essay.

Ever since the advent of democratic systems of political decision-making in Ancient Greece, one of the primary concerns about democratic functioning has been the principle of majority rule. Whether a majoritarian system is divisive in its essence, paves the way for demagoguery, or obstructs minority groups from having a fair say in public affairs, criticisms of majority rule have and still persist nowadays. Indeed, notorious political figures such as Hamilton, Madison or Mill expressed concerns about the potential threat of a tyranny of the majority which would infringe on citizens’ fundamental rights. Moreover and recently, the outcome of the Brexit referendum has renewed the debate around majority rule and its flaws. However, within the context of the contemporary world in which democracy prevails, majority rule is the norm many states follow. Why is this so; how can majority rule be defended and what are its limits? In order to provide an articulate and coherent answer, it is first necessary to lay down some premises to the functioning of the democratic process. Then, after arguing for majority rule, its flaws shall be assessed before eventually drawing potential alternatives from such dysfunctions.

In the reading “ Patterns of democracy” Lijphart states there are five different dimensions of the majoritarian-consensus typology which are based not only on characteristics of the party system, electoral system and government coalitions, but on federal vs. unitary traits as well. The first characteristic of Lijphart’s five dimensions is closely related with the majoritarian system in that it consists of a one party cabinet concentration of power versus a multiparty sharing

Democracy has become the most widespread political form of government during the past decade, after the fall of all its alternatives. During the second part of the 20th century, the 3 main enemies of democracy, namely communism, fascism and Nazism, lost most of their power and influence. However, democracy is still only to be found in less than half of this world's countries. China with a fifth of the total population "had never experienced a democratic government" and Russia still doesn't have a well established democracy. By adopting a democratic perspective, 3 types of governments emerge, non-democratic, new democracies, and old democracies, and all have a different challenge to overcome: either to become democratic, to "consolidate"

Democracy is a unique type of government, and the purpose of this essay is to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses that a democratic government provides. I will detail that many components of this type of society are both strengths and weakness as each component has beneficial aspects as well as unavoidable pitfalls.

When discussing the twentieth century in Europe everyone can agree that this period was a brutal one for the continent. A common opinion, many have is that despite all of the turmoil experienced throughout this period, including two world wars, the success of democracy as a style of government was never truly in doubt. This paper will go against this widely held belief, and argue that democracy’s success in this period was not written in stone.

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

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.

Democracy and its critics is a political science book written by Robert Dahl In 1989 and published by Yale University Press in America. The book looks at the assumptions of the democratic theory and is able to test them in relation to the questions raised by critics. Thereafter, Dahl suggests the ways in which the states must move towards improving their democracy.

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