The Development of Democracy through Praxis 2013051940

The development of democracy has been rampant since the start of the concept

in the Ancient Greek civilization. The start of so called democracy could be traced back

to the ancient Greek city-state of Chios, but it can be said that the development of the

concept of democracy was observed in the city-state of Athens (Held, 2006). Democracy

in Athens during this period is called by some as where democracys foundations are said

to have been laid (Held, 2006). The very structure of Athenian society during the ancient

Greek civilization has been described by the likes of Plato, Aristotle as a government by

the many (Aristotle, 1981). The examples of this would range from people gathering at

the Ekklesia to discuss matters of state and society. It is also in Athens where the

concepts of equality among citizens, liberty, respect for the law, and justice (Held, 2006)

that are very much attributed to democracy were observed. These concepts would also

form the very foundation of modern democratic political thought, but this will be discussed

later on. It was also discussed by Held (2006), that the legacy of Ancient Greek

democracy was the thinkers, the likes of Thucydides, Plato and Aristotle that influenced

majority of the modern democratic political thought. Their works contain majority of the

foundations of Democratic theory (Held, 2006). Again the concepts of equality, liberty,

respect for law and justice form the basis of their works through their experiences during

this period. What can be said about Athenian democracy is that it was very committed to

the concept of civic virtue. In other words, this meant that each citizen of the city-state

had an obligation to serve the the state and society.

But there is a problem with this form of democracy. Athenian democracy is

considered by Held, as somewhat founded on a undemocratic base, in the sense that if

one would put ancient democracy in the eyes or lens of the modern age, Athenian

democracy would not be considered democracy because of the limits it had laid. In order

for one to be part of Athenian democracy it was discussed that he must be a citizen.

Notice that the term he was used. Not he or she, but just He. This is one of the problems

of Athenian democracy that made this form of democracy exclusive to its own era only.

This problem of exclusivity that belonged to citizens of Athens who were the only ones

permitted to join the assemblies is a contradiction of the concept of democracy that was

espoused in Abraham Lincolns Gettysburg address in 1863, wherein he provided the

most memorable characterizations of Democracy, Government of the people, by the

people, for the people. (Sartori, 1987). This statement on democracy contradicts that of

the practices of democracy in Athens because in Athens, democracy was exclusive to

male citizens of Athens alone (Held, 2006). Going back to the characterization of Lincoln

of democracy as government of the people, by the people and of the people, this is not a

clear definition of democracy itself. For the fact that democracy itself cannot be defined

(Mill, 1873). In actuality there are numerous attempts to define democracy, in the

discussion of Giovanni Satoris The Theory of Democracy Revisited, it was said that

Democracy is the power of the people over the people (Sartori, 1987). Here another

concept of democracy is introduced. A concept of self-rule among the people. This also

entails that democracy is the rule of autocrats. Another concept of democracy is that

Democracy is a system of government that contains four elements. This being, 1. A

political system for choosing and replacing governments through free and fair elections.

2. Active participation of the people. 3. Protection of the human rights of all citizens. 4. A

rule of law that applies to all citizens (Diamond, 2004). Thus the discussion of elections
and people deciding who they want to represent themselves in the matters of the state.

Another definition of democracy comes from Joseph Schumpeter, wherein he describes

democracy as a political method. A method wherein people are granted the power to

decide on issues of legislative, political and administrative decisions from the people

through elections (O'Donnell, 1999). This new definition brings about another problem of

democracy. Schumpeters definition of democracy hinges on mechanisms or institution

for democracy to work, thus breathing new problems of democracy. With the numerous

definitions of democracy, it is apparent that what Giovanni Sartori discussed that if

democracy is not properly defined, the world is in danger of getting something the world

does not want at all (Sartori, 1987).

With the issue of democracy having no clear definition of what it really is, leading

to many types and forms of democracy being developed. Some of this being Political

Democracy if discussed as a political concept. But there are numerous instances where

democracy has moved away from the political realm and introduced in the nonpolitical

realms, such as Social democracy, Industrial Democracy and Economic Democracy

(Sartori, 1987). With the introduction of these types of democracy in other types or fields

of life. The development of new types does not stop here. According to Barry Holden, he

has organized Democracy into five more types, this being Radical Democratic Theory,

New Radical Democratic Theory, Pluralist Democratic Theory, Elitist Democratic Theory

and Liberal-Democratic Theory (Sartori, 1987). Another discussion of the types of

democracy is the discussion of Sartori wherein he distinguishes democracy into five

different theories: 1. Electoral Democracy 2. Participatory Democracy 3. Referendum

Democracy (Sartori, 1987). These additional 3 new types of democracy have further

skewed what democracy is.

With the problems of democracy building up, this then would present more

obstacles in the practice of democracy itself. The fact that one cannot completely practice

a concept without clearly defining it is the problem of democracy itself (Sartori, 1987). The

practice of democracy in itself is an issue because of the problems stated in the problems

stated before. There have already been a lot of examples of the practices of democracy

over the years since it had started. During the period of Ancient Greece, Athenian

democracy was a prime example of the practice of democracy. The participation of the

people during assemblies is one of the most striking and straight forward example. But

the problem here is that Athenian democracy was only exclusive to male citizens of

Athens (Held, 2006). But nevertheless, the practice of direct democracy is observable in

Athens. Evidence to this is the assemblies that citizens of Athens are expected to gather

at least forty times a year to discuss matters of the state (Held, 2006).

Practice of democracy is manifested in many ways. Be it direct or indirect. The

manifestation of direct democracy is attributed to the action man without the use of

representatives or tools for representation (Sartori, 1987). The introduction of the very

concept of direct democracy has been associated with the dissatisfaction from the

performance of representative institutions (Bowler, Donovan, & Karp, 2007). This

dissatisfaction has led to many people to favor that they be part of the decision making

process of the state themselves. An example of this would be the referenda done by the

members of society. This would appear that for people who have a distaste for the

performance of representative democracies have a more favorable inclination towards

participating in public decisions. This stems from the problem of indirect democracy itself.

The problem is that the representatives that are elected are prone to putting their own

self-interests before that of their constituents (Bowler, Donovan, & Karp, 2007).

Indirect democracy itself is already known as representative democracy, wherein

the people themselves elect their representatives (Mill, 1873). In this form of participation,

people put trust on their choice of elected officials to act on the matters of the state on

their behalf. This form of democracy puts emphasis that the people elected to the position

of representative must first clearly put their own interests aside in order for them to do

their duties as a representative to their respective community. This is a fact because

another definition of democracy comes into play as discussed by Philippe Schimitter and

Terry Lynn Karl. For them, Democracy, Modern Political Democracy is a system of

governance in which rulers are held accountable for their actions in the public realm by

citizens (O'Donnell, 1999). The fact that this definition exists means that democracy goes

far beyond just the concept of people. Here the concept of accountability is introduced

and that it becomes part and parcel with the practice of democracy, because of whatever

consensus people decide they must be able to live with that decision, as it was decided

by all. And usually reversing such decisions will require more effort than decision making

itself when it was made in the first place.

The introduction of another definition of Democracy further increases the problem

of democracy and how to go about and practice it. But in most civilizations to date,

institutions of democratic ideals are focused on developing their very own societies. This

would then be connected to the definition of Joseph Schumpeter that democracy is a

political method wherein he describes democracy as a political method, wherein people

are given the powers to decide on the issues of political, legislative and administration

through elections. (O'Donnell, 1999). This definition is crucial for the development of

democracy and its practice because this definition presupposes that democratic

institutions must be able to cater to the needs of the polity it belongs to. And the

democratic institution that is most crucial here is the electoral system and party system

of that democratic nation or state. These two are very crucial in the development of

democracy itself because elections and party systems are important in the process of

choosing ones candidate for an election or choosing which political party to join because

of the ideals a specific political party would hold. Putting into context these two concepts,

both will fall under the category of Political Competition. Political Competition can be

summarized into two concepts, a contested elections and how many seats political parties

are to obtain from the resulting elections (Wright, 2008). In Joseph Wrights discussion of

Political Competition, he espouses that political completion is crucial for any democracy

to be stable hence importance to the development of democracy. Here he discusses that

if the elections that are to be held in a certain nation are unrestricted, it may lead to the

stability of democracy in that state especially if this state is a new democracy (Wright,

2008). It also in the arena of elections where one can say the democracy can be best

manifested. In the elections, the will of the people is the most observe and that it also

here where each person is able to exercise equal opportunity to vote. One can also

include a new definition of Democracy according to Adam Przeworski, wherein

democracy is a system in which parties lose elections (O'Donnell, 1999). Another

definition of Democracy that can be applied to the concept of political competition through

elections is that of Samuel Huntingtons wherein he discusses that the most powerful
collective decision makers are selected through fair, honest and periodic elections

(O'Donnell, 1999). Hence putting emphasis on the importance of holding elections.

Basically outlining the importance of elections as a whole. The importance of tis elections

is that each person who participates in any elections of nation has an equal chance to

vote for their respective choice of candidate and or political party. This would then ensure

that democracy or the practice of democracy is clearly present through elections. The

congruence or the link of party politics here is that more often than not, people who

participate in elections are people who vote for the candidate or political party that have

the same principles as the voter has.

Whenever one talks about Democracy, two concepts are always included, these

are political and economic development. Political development in the strictest is the

development or improvement of institutions that would address the pre-requisites of

democracy, which are civil society, presence of a competitive electoral system and

equality among members of society. The development of institutions that cater to these

three aspects are clear indicators of democracy itself. Now for Economic development to

happen, only one issue must be addressed in any democratic state. This would be the

presence of inequality within society. And the only for this issue to be addressed is

through the improvement of the institutions that prevent the abuses of inequalities in

society. Inequalities within any society is always a factor that hinders any development.

According to Dietrich Rueschemeyer, democracy addresses the issues of inequality

through giving every adult and equal vote (Rueschemeyer, 2004). He also discusses the

economic implications of inequality within elections. Here he provides insight as to why

the economic disparity is such a big factor in any given elections. It was also discussed
here that when it comes to economic issues, people are most likely to focus on matters

of employment or in laymans terms putting food on the table every night (Rueschemeyer,

2004). Another indication of economic development is the measurements of economic

growth, the GDPs GNPs of nations (Przeworski, 2004). This makes for another important

point of economic development. It can be said that economic development can only be

achieved with political stability. And in order to achieve political stability the elections that

are to be held in a nation must of a fair, honest and competitive nature. Ensuring that this

kind of elections, this can lead to political stability (Wright, 2008). Once political stability

is then achieved in the nation, then economic development or any development for that

matter will soon follow (Przeworski, 2004).

All in all, the development of democracy hinges on the the practice of it. Since

democracy cannot be clearly defined, or there is no clear cut definition of what democracy

really is. One can say that since democracy is the fusion of many ideas and concepts and

that is what makes democracy work in the first place. It is a given that democracy not

perfect, and that one can say that it is a miracle that democracy even works. But it isnt a

miracle at all. This all hinges on the development of the different democratic institutions.

As such, when these institutions are improved for the better and that the continued

practice of democracy will breathe more definitions and new techniques on how to

properly practice democracy. With the possible emergence of more new definitions and

methods of practicing democracy, this would then be the answer to issue at hand, of does

one go about putting democracy into practice. This would the put into light that the practice

of politics is that of a learning experience (Mill, 1873).

References
Aristotle. (1981). The Politics. (T. A. Sinclair, Trans.) New York: Penguin Books.
Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Karp, J. A. (2007). Enraged or Engaged? Preferences for
Direct Citizen Participation in Affluent Democracies. Political Research Quarterly
, 351-362.
Diamond, L. (2004, January 21). What is Democracy? Retrieved from Stanford: What is
Democracy?
Held, D. (2006). Models of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Mill, J. (1873). Considerations on Representative Government. New York: Henry Holt
and Company.
O'Donnell, G. (1999). Democratic theory and comparative politics. Berlin, Germany.
Retrieved from ECONSTOR: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/50266
Przeworski, A. (2004). Democracy and Economic Development. In E. D. Mansfield, & R.
Sisson, The Evolution of Political Knowledge. Ohio: Ohio State University Press.
Rueschemeyer, D. (2004). Addressing Inequality. Journal of Democracy, 77-89.
Sartori, G. (1987). The Theory of Democracy Revisited. Chatham: Chatham House
Publishers, Inc. .
Wright, J. (2008). Political Competition and Democratic Stability in New Democracies.
British Journal of Political Science, 221-245.