To continue our discourse on democracy, notice that the definition which I posited in my last article implies two basic types of democracy. { i.e. direct and representative.} The direct form in which all members participate in discussions is practicable only in societies where membership is few, for example families and clubs, so when it comes to states, enormous difficulties can be expected in getting millions of people to participate directly in all matters arising. This used to be the case in ancient Greek “city states” where citizenship was limited to only a few nobles, but as the states grew bigger and bigger with time, and with the abolition of slavery, some form or the other of representational democracy had to be adopted.
The definition of democracy does not settle the question of why it is more desirable to other forms of government like aristocracy, monarchy, oligarchy or even dictatorship. However, numerous writings of great Scholars like Plato, Aristotle, John Locke, David Hume, J. Madison and J.S. Mill are available in which the following answers have been expounded. Many nations claim to have embraced democracy. It is up to the readers to make up their own minds and determine which, if any, of the forms democracy are morally or practically desirable and applicable to their own societies by asking themselves if the following merits are apparent in their own nation.
1. Many scholars have argued that in a democracy, because of the political power in the hands of the individuals, the human rights, legal rights, interests and opinions of a bigger cross section of the citizenship of the state are taken into consideration resulting in justice and equitable distribution of national resources. In order words, in a democracy where there is free and fair elections, representatives have an incentive to act according to the will of the majority of the people as opposed to other types of rule mentioned above.
2. On the basis of the maxim “two heads are better than one”, democracy is thought to be the best method by bringing a lot of people into the process of political decision making. It has the potential of taking advantage of many sources of information and allows for critical assessment of laws and policies and hence more likely to reach a more rational decision acceptable to a bigger section of the community.
3. Another basic principle inherent in the idea of democracy is that of public justification. In a democracy, because decisions are reached collectively, immediate justification of laws and policies is achieved thereby reducing the chances of dissent, strife or even civil war within the state. Experience dictates that laws and policies are acceptable and hence legitimate only insofar as they are justified in the perspectives of the citizens.
4. An egalitarian defense of democracy says human beings, by nature, aspire for Utopian society characterised amongst other things by happiness and the principle of Public Equality. Now Public Equality is defined as the realization of equality of advancement of interests of all citizens. For people to be treated as equals and for their interests to be advanced equally, they must have an equal say in collective decision making hence the appeal to democracy. Democratic decision making respects each person's point of view on matters of common interest by giving each an equal say about what to do in cases of disagreement. If they believe they are being treated as equals, then there is a great chance that a peaceful and fair compromise is achieved. The idea is that public equality is a great value and democracy is the best form of government to achieve this.
5. In 1861, J S Mill, a celebrated British philosopher gave an argument that democratic processes tend to enhance the autonomy, rationality and morality of participants and that these are beneficial characters worth having in themselves. Mill said that democracy tends to make people stand up for themselves more than other forms of rule like dictatorship, monarchy or aristocracy because it makes collective decisions depend on them. He said, in democratic societies individuals are encouraged to be more autonomous and in addition, people tend to think carefully and rationally more than other forms of rule because it makes a difference whether they do or not. He also argued that democracy tends to enhance the moral qualities of citizens because they have to listen and justify themselves to others and they are forced to take into consideration the interests of others. In addition to the beneficial effects on the character of the citizens, a society of autonomous, rational, and moral decision-makers is more likely to produce better legislation than a society ruled by a dictator or a monarch.
Before we get carried away by the merits of democracy outlined above, it is worth having a look at the demerits too. There are powerful counter arguments to these and in particular there are many problems that appear during the implementation phase of democracy. We will take a look at these in the next article.
No comments:
Post a Comment