Democracy

The Economist identifies democracies as: full democracy (examples: Norway and Canada); flawed democracy (examples: United States and France); as hybrid regime (for example Pakistan); or as authoritarian democracy (examples: Russia and China) (Economist, 2015). Each type of democracy represents a different perspective on structure and practice.

Early Greek philosopher Plato taught about a style of democracy he had experienced in Athens: “Democracy, which is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequaled alike (Plato: 558C).” Plato suggested that an aristocracy led by philosopher-kings (the wisest men) would be a more just form of government. Plato claimed that government which serves individual citizen’s changing needs, instead of works to help the population as a group, would lead to mob rule. To Plato, the pursuit of freedom in a pure democracy would result in anarchy and chaos.

The British liberal political philosopher John Locke claimed that under a social contract between citizens and rulers, those who are ruled can resist their obligation to support any government that takes away property or enslaves its citizens and have the right to express this resistance violently. “Man has a right to enforce the law of nature and punish offenders,” claimed Locke in 1689 (Locke 1689: 4).

In the United States, there is a constitutional republic as stated in the preamble of the constitution; “ in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.” U.S. President Abraham Lincoln supported the structure of American democracy during the Civil War of 1861-1865, which was fundamentally caused by disagreements over what a democracy should protect. “Of the people, for the people and by the people” was his claim for purpose in democracy (Lincoln, 1863).

All democracies possess some characteristics in common. These include: citizen participation in government processes with voting, issue group participation, direct participation, and the rule of law developed to balance behaviors of both
citizens and their government.

A principle element of democracy in the United States is the separation of powers among the three different branches (areas): legislative, executive, and judicial.

• Citizens determine government through indirect voting
• Open elections to all citizens of legal age to determine representatives who act on their behalf
• Representation in government through political party influence
• Rotation of leadership when determined by leadership to be necessary
• Rule of law developed by representative leaders

Citizens participate in direct elections for their legislative leadership, but it is this representative
leadership that determines the form and process of central government.

Regime is a government in which the system has not changed even though there have been different leaders.

Totalitarianism,fascism,oligarchy,theocracy,plutocracy,stratocracy

Totalitarian governments centralize all government functions. While a single political party has all of the power, it needs to eliminate any other political party expressing different political opinions. Even the thoughts of citizens must be controlled.

An oligarchy is a form of government by a few with a continuous base of power through privilege or through corruption. Power may be limited to political parties, individuals, or wealthy groups.The results of action from this government focus on self-preservation and retention of a base fortotal power.

Plutocracy is a form of leadership resulting from the very wealthy taking control of government. Its only purpose for its members is to make them richer by controlling the government that supported their wealth in the first place.

A stratocracy is a form of government headed by military chiefs. It is not the same as a military dictatorship or junta in which military power is not supported by law. A stratocracy actually provides citizen support as a constitutional enablement. Thus, the state and the military are constitutionally the same entity.

As discussed earlier, totalitarian power appears in several different forms of government control. Power for regimes may derive alternatively from a mix of individual leadership, the military, and a national political party. Power may also derive from religious leadership whether or not the leadership comes from human or spiritual elements. We might also ask if theocracy necessarily means totalitarianism. Here we run into a problem in understanding what role is available for government and what remains for the individual. For government, control addresses the behavior of society, setting rules based on what is best for society. For theocracy, responsibility for behavior rests with the individual, solely. Rules for behavior come from what is perceived as spiritual.

With some ambiguity, fascism is known as right-wing politics. It stresses strict nationalistic policies and rigid control over social behavior. Just as ambiguous is the idea that fascism represents left-wing politics to the extent it rejects social class structure and emphasizes stability through economic gains. What is closer to reality is that neither right-wing nor left-wing politics apply. The dominant feature avoids party alignment for other than developing nationalism as a first priority for government. Fascism promotes the influential power of nationalism and is similar to totalitarianism. Spain in the early 1930s under General Francisco Franco resisted communist political influence by spreading a strong sense of nationalistic pride in a monarchical government. Italy presented a somewhat earlier attempt under Benito Mussolini to rebuild tightly controlled nationalistic social systems in support of its monarchy. For its part as a dominant fascist society, it follows the example set by Mussolini in Italy, As for other totalitarian forms of political control, fascists depend on the blind faith of citizens for their leadership. Under fascism, unlike
under religious totalitarian systems, a single leader serving as dictator provides strong leadership. State supported violence is often the way to assure success. A binding element in a fascist doctrine is the anticipation of what is promised by the future if obedience is total in expectation of destiny. In a totalitarian society, politics is everything. No aspect of society is separable from political theory and action. A good example of the process of political control is depicted in George Orwell’s novel, 1984.

Language differences present potential problems, interfering with accurate communication. Compromise is sometimes forced by making all citizens use a single language, such as Mandarin in China. With a growing Spanish speaking population with Hispanic social values in the United States, the government dedicates great resources to teach English to all immigrant citizens. In Canada, the government has successfully accommodated two standard languages (English from its British heritage and French from its French heritage) for different sections of the country. India reports more than 122 different major languages across its vastly different cultural regions. Although the Indian constitution attempted to set Hindi as the single national language, accommodation for English is also cited in the same constitution.

In most presidential democracies, an inherent separation between head of state and head of government provides
for protection against tyrannical control by one or the other. However, less change is accommodated when deliberation of law and policy is required for state and government to cooperate. On the other hand, lack of adequate separation, in rule or in practice, could result in a tyrannical government.

In many democracies law is determined by constitutional allowances and restrictions. In other democracies where constitutions are weak or do not exist, law making resorts to natural law or to common law, both subject to extreme liberalism requiring interpretation of circumstance and its constant changes.

The size of a government contributes to the risk. With broad interests among citizens it is difficult to have effective governance. How, for example, does majority rule operate effectively across a citizenship of diverse and conflicting cultural or social values? A democracy unable to manage differences so that accommodation is made for minority interests is likely to face civil unrest and possible revolution.