https://www.humantruth.info/democracy.html
By Vexen Crabtree 2017
Democracy is rule for the people1. The democratic process is designed to avoid dictatorships and totalitarianism by making government accountable for its actions through voting and legal sanctions. There are different ways to implement democracy. Party-based democracy is where the electorate (those who can vote) choose a governing party (out of several) every few years, based on their overall policies and style2. Direct democracy has the people vote on an issue-by-issue basis. The separation of powers means that no particular government organ has unfettered control. The rule of law applies to all: politicians from the ruling party and from other parties, rich businessmen, and poor citizens, are all subject to the same equalities and restrictions. Human rights are protected by allowing reporters, watchdogs and civilian concern groups to scrutinize government. The principal of secularism requires that Government must not come to represent a sole ethnic or religious group (i.e., it should be secular and unbiased)3, and there should be no laws that grant particular freedoms to particular ethnic or religious groups, and likewise, no laws that specifically prohibit them.
Democracy faces many challenges. Large multinational companies can outmanoeuvre and ignore local governments, which sometimes places them above-the-law. Therefore regional and international agreements are now an essential part of maintaining the rule of law - bodies such as the UN and EU answer this call. Special interest groups and single-issue lobbies (as well as parties) can, through their hearty activism, undermine democracy. Mass stupidity and voter apathy means that the people normally vote (if they vote at all) on short-sighted, shallow and unimportant issues, hindering the ability of government to overcome long-term problems. Nationalism, ethnic divides, religious impulses and mass intolerance can all pressurize a democratic government into allow the 'tyranny of the masses' to overcome human dignity and freedom: new ways of curbing populism need to be tested and implemented.
Democracy needs to be actively monitored and defended against its challenges. Despite weaknesses, its democracy has proven itself to be the superior method of governance4 and facilitates personal freedom, human development (technological and moral) and human rights and has had "overwhelmingly... wonderful consequences"5. But good national governance is not a simple affair, and those in power should be dedicated to their job, highly educated and capable.
#democracy #elections #good_governance #referendums #voting
The most visible feature of democracy, its primary symbol, is the election6. A government maintains its very legitimacy 'through success in regular and competitive elections'7, and these are the way in which a nation decides if it wants its current leaders to continue in power, or if the reigns should be passed to others8. The re-election frequency of politicians and other democratic positions should be shorter than six years9. This system encourages elected officials to try to govern well, for fear of future electoral outcomes10. Those with power and influence have the capability to spread misinformation, and often have, to the extent that it disrupts elections and deprives the electorate of accurate information. It is the duty of democratic governments to facilitate fair elections, and this is a serious enough issue that a process of peer-review must be enacted, wherein independent international bodies check on elections as they occur, to ensure that they are duly proper.11
For more, see:
#capitalism #democracy #democracy_challenges #government #politics
Free-market capitalism matured as a concept alongside democracy12; it bolsters democracy by allowing large numbers of the citizenry to mobilize economically and socially13,14, and by creating a business class that can influence government and thus feed into the democratic system13. The natural effect of open commercial global regions is to bring peace between countries (Montesquieu, 1748)15. But unfettered capitalism can derail a country16, creating more losers than winners, so democracies require welfare services and social programmes managed by the government, to protect people against capitalism's negative side. Mitigations must also be put in place to protect democracy itself against the spectre of government becoming purely focused on business interests17. Donations to politicians and parties must be meticulously publicized and similar legal requirements must exist for politicians and political entities to reveal all business interests. In short, free-market capitalism can raise the quality of life and wealth of entire nations, but, it must be regulated if democracy and social justice is to be maintained.
For more, see:
In a democracy, "citizens are free as of right to organise themselves and further their interests and values"19; the key way this is achieved is via a political party. These are groupings of politicians that share a set of values and aims. Because individual politicians cannot steer government unaided, in order to have a chance of succeeding in their aims, they must group together with others. The trade-off for this increase in effectiveness is that sometimes they must submit to the greater will of their party on topics where they disagree.
Another benefit of having political parties is that it reduces the extent to which the electorate must study politics: parties can have an overall look and feel, and the electorate can vote for their preferred party. Without parties, voters would have to analyse the voting records of each politician that they could possibly vote for as it would be the only way of knowing what to expect from candidates.
Political parties bring stability and effectiveness to politics20. The alternative is that coalitions of supporters must be built for every piece of legislation20, resulting in politicians spending their time making behind-the-scenes deals, paving the way for mass corruption.
If there were no political parties, like-minded politicians will still find themselves combining with the same people on multiple issues and the result is that you will always have more-or-less consistent parties: it is better for the voters if this system is made open and specific, rather than implied and secretive20. Therefore, there is no sensible alternative but to have stable parties, visible to the public in their aims and demands.
But the party system can go wrong. Democracy is damaged when parties represent limited social classes, ethnic communities or particular religious adherents21; many people will vote for them regardless of their policies, and simply because they want to be represented even if this means exclusion for the other groups. If a country becomes stuck in an undemocratic battle between fixed and stable demographic groups, it can result in the party-in-power permanently representing the largest ethnic or religious group, and all other communities becoming directly or indirectly discriminated against21. This is the problem of single-issue-parties, of which ethnic and religious parties are the worst.
For more, see: Single Issue Parties are Dangerous: Against Nationalist and Ethnic Parties.
#democracy #france #politics #USA #voting
In Presidential democracies, the head of state is the same person as the head of government, and is voted in2. This is the case in the USA and France. and a handful of other countries but is quite uncommon (especially historically22). In Parliamentary democracies, the votes determine which parties have the most MPs (Members of Parliament), and each party selects its own leader2. In both systems the personality of the leader is highly influential for the country as a whole, however in Parliamentary systems the focus is on party policies, and the leader themselves have limited powers to act autocratically. In Presidential systems, the President should also be faced with restrictions on their own activities which are designed to protect democracy against autocratic abuse (wherein one person can undermine democracy and/or other element of good governance).
#canada #democracy #democratic_challenges #elections #india #poland #politics #UK #USA #voting
To have people vote on issues directly is disastrous for a country's health, stability and economy, so much so that systems of 'direct democracy' never last long. Instead, 'representative democracy' is the norm, wherein citizens elect representatives who sit in a parliament or national assembly19,23. The principal advantage is that they can give governance the full-time attention that it requires19 and following this train of thought, the philosopher Plato argued that only the best-educated should be politicians, to ensure that they make wise choices24. Others argue that it's more about specialisation:
“What differentiates our representatives from the rest of us is not that they have some superior qualities which others do not possess, but that they are given the necessary time to deliberate and decide public issues in our place and on our behalf. But in a democracy they still have to listen to and take notice of the rest of us.”
"Democracy: A Beginner's Guide" by Beetham, David (2005)19
The spirit of democracy demands that anyone can, in theory, propose themselves as a representative for a constituency19, and if elected, become a politician. Representatives should be available to meet with voters and engage them25 - although in the modern world with high populations, it seems that this is best achieved primarily through opinion polls and associations, rather than direct one-on-one contacts.
“The eighteenth-century philosophy of democracy may be couched in the following definition: the democratic method is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions which realizes the common good by making the people itself decide issues through the election of individuals who are to assemble in order to carry out its will.”
"Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy" by Joseph A. Schumpeter (1942)26
Not all forms of representative democracy are equal. One of the earliest, but most flawed, was the common-sense approach of simply electing local officials, and also having them form government:
“First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) was a historical voting system27 devised in the Middle Ages. It is very simple - the local candidate with the highest number of votes wins, and, government is formed from all the winners27. But FPTP didn't survive the era of Political Parties, where its simplicity results in skewed elected bodies that don't represent the overall wishes of the country28,29,30,31.
FPTP causes:(1) A great deal of votes to be 'lost' because there's no mechanism to count party votes overall and assign a correct number of seats at the national level. (2) 'Gerrymandering' by which constituency sizes and shapes are manipulated in order to get local victories, because total votes-by-party are disregarded. (3) Votes in populous constituencies to be worth less. (4) The need for tactical voting rather than true voting. (5) Undue support for popular (but small) local parties, unfairly boosting their influence at the national level. (6) Almost permanently squeezes-out most parties from government except the largest ones and therefore leads to two-party systems that have been so deleterious for political quality-control. The overall effect is a democratic loss as representation does not endure in government for a large portion of the populace, and so FPTP "can enflame underlying tensions, competitions, domination, clan politics, exclusion, hence conflicts"32.
These problems are mitigated by Proportional Representation (PR) voting systems, where total votes for each party are used to assign an appropriate number of national seats, eliminating the 'lost votes' and most of the skew problems. PR has been adopted by all developed democracies except the UK and the USA28, who both suffer from two-party political divisions that diminish their democratic legitimacy and effectiveness. About a fifth of Africa still uses FPTP, and some other developed countries such as Canada, India and Poland still use it for some elements of government. It is maintained mostly by archaic top-tier parties who have a vested interest in keeping FPTP27 in order to continue long-term informal power-swapping practices with minimum competition.”
"First Past the Post (FPTP) Voting System Damages Party-Based Democracies"
Vexen Crabtree (2024)
#brexit #constitutions #democracy #ireland #referendums #UK
A well-written Constitution is a backbone of stability, and should be protected from single-party amendments. It embodies the core principles, values, freedoms and governmental limits that define a nation-state. Constitutional changes should only be possible slowly, after comprehensive deliberation, and they should require overall approval from all portions of the electorate19, not just single-party will. A Constitution needs protecting against mob rule, wherein a single demographic group can come to harm other groups, resulting in a loss of democracy - which after all, should protect all citizens.
A Constitution should have some in-depth text and discussions, but also, have a single or double front page presented for general reading. The spirit of a Constitution is as important as its legal details. Having said that, it is not always necessary to have supporting values encoded in a single text.
It's possible, however, that non-written Constitutions are more easily ignored and less readily understood; Brexit was an example where two Constitutional criteria were broken, but, knowledge of the innards of the UK's political structure was too sparse to create any widespread objection especially because there's no clear single document for the general public to refer to:
“The United Kingdom is comprised of four countries - England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Constitutional-level alterations to the UK such as to EU membership and the Good Friday Agreement with Ireland, both require unanimous approval, but, in the 2016 referendum Northern Ireland voted Remain by 56% and Scotland by 62%. The UK signed the Venice Commission's 2006 document on how to run a referendum. Section 2.3 states that a referendum is only democratic if minority countries (e.g. NI and Scotland) are not forced into decisions by a majority nation (England).34. Brexit only had a mandate in England and Wales so the Referendum was invalid, and the result was Constitutional.”
"The UK's Referendum on Brexit in 2016 was Invalid and Undemocratic"
Vexen Crabtree (2019)
#good_governance #government #politics
A democratic government must not just rule for the people; it must also do so well, and in liaison with the people. A democratic government is responsible for the long-term health of the nation, for future as well as current citizens, and it must rule wisely and strategically without being distracted by the allure of short-term wins that are poorly thought-out. As such, over time, the developed world has accumulated a hard-learnt set of checks and balances as part of the democratic system. Although the following items could be implemented by any form of government, these features are required in democracies35, and in reality, only democracies have whole-heartedly embraced these elements of good governance.
How do you govern a nation well, looking after people fairly and allowing maximum freedom and prosperity? These are the ways. Authoritarian, religious and democratic governments can all, and should all, be doing these things. If you are in power, you have a responsibility to be pursuing these goals.
#commercialism #democracy #democracy_challenges #government #politics
Democracy does not work well in all circumstances36; it faces challenges from every level of society. These must be continually resisted on every front37.
Voters themselves need to be educated and well-informed in order to vote wisely47,48 but they do not do so, often voting on short-term and shallow issues that are not in their own long-term interests49,50, making some worry if democracy at all can continue to function49. Many democracies witness a continual decline in the numbers of people who bother to pay any interest in politics, let alone to vote51. A constant threat is the 'majority rules' impulse, that can lead to the 'tyranny of the majority' or 'mob rule' situations in which outsiders and minorities become unfairly persecuted52,53,54.
There are problems with political parties and governments. Short-term policies such as increasing spending keep governments in power55,56 whereas wiser, long-term policies are less popular with parties - voters. Highly motivated activists can exert undue pressure on governments57. Dictators, bigots, fascists and separatists can all be voted in along the same lines as anyone else58. Some governments come to abuse power, and, single-issue-parties and ethnic/separatist parties prevent the equality-of-opportunity and balance that should come from government. Finally, politicians themselves are sometimes corrupt.
Aside from these systemic problems, the machinations of global trade can present economic tumult, and the workings of capitalism can create such inequality and injustice that it stimulates unrest and instability59 - keeping the economic stable, and moderating its ugly side, is a constant struggle for democracies and non-democracies alike.60
In short, constant vigilance is required to prevent "democracy´s own weaknesses lead[ing] to disaster"57 , and a system of balances and checks must be maintained, to ensure that the democratic system is not going astray.
For more, see:
The appeal of democracy comes from its success. Horrible dictators such as Hosni Mubarak (Egypt) and Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe) orchestrate fake elections they can never lose61. But why do they do this? Because they know that their populations, and those they work with around the world, are convinced of the worth of democracy.
“When the enemies of democracy mouth its rhetoric and ape its rituals, you know it was won the war. [...] We live in a democratic age. Over the last century the world has been shaped by one trend above all others - the rise of democracy. In 1900 not a single country had what we would today consider a democracy: a government created by elections in which every citizen could vote. Today 119 do, comprising 62 percent of all countries in the world.”
"The Future of Freedom" by Fareed Zakaria (2003)61
An academic once said, "democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others"62. The most positive way of putting it may be this: "Democracies aren't perfect, but democracy [...] remains the best form of government human societies have yet experienced" - Walid Phares (2008)4.
The success of good government can be measured by its results via the comparison of international statistics, with a slant to selecting data sets that reflect on the policies that aid human community across the longest-possible timeranges. See: "Which are the Countries for International Contributions, Creativity, Peace and Inequality?" by Vexen Crabtree (2025), and its menu, which reveals the data sets: