Representative and Direct Democracy - Essay Example

Representative democracy and direct democracy are two forms or systems of governance that both seek to govern people, establish law and ensure order. People require a fundamental system in order to address the rights and welfare of everybody. There are many forms or systems of governance that are established in order to address this concern. One of them is a democratic form of governance. Concerning this point, it is essential task to investigate further things relevant to democracy. Democracy is split into two and it therefore performs functions equivalent to the ones performed by a representative form of democracy and the other initiated by a direct form of democracy. These systems of governance have many things in common, but despite of that they also have varying differences. The work at hand includes the relevant points linked to the actual differences between representative democracy and direct democracy. In an organisation, people are supposed to be encouraged to interact and take their role as integral components of everything that is taking place. In a democratic government, people in as much as possible will have to work out everything for their interest. Policy initiatives will have to be established by the people themselves. There is a form of democracy that allows every member of a group or a nation to take part of the actual decision-making process (Lewis, 2013, p.13). This is a relevant feature of a direct democracy. In this democracy, people, especially those who have right to suffrage are required to take part of the parliament and be part of the making of the law, for instance. This activity might be politically sound if only employed in a small organization, where there is only a considerable number of participating individuals. However, in the case of a country having thousands and millions of people in a population, it might take a longer period of time prior to achieving the actual decision, because everybody, especially those who have established their rights and privileges must be able to take part of the actual making of the law. In other words, it is hard to maintain direct democracy, especially if there is involvement of higher population (Breton, 1997, p.60). Direct democracy was evident in the ancient Athens where especially the free male Athenian citizens at the age of more than 20 had the right to be part of the Assembly (Hansen, 2005, p.45). It is clear that the good thing about direct democracy is its ability to give people the power to decide, especially in voting and choosing their leaders. In other words, direct or pure democracy is giving the people the responsibility to take part of what the actual events and happenings in the country there might be. However, there are also significant factors that might be able to affect the direct democracy. Considering the point that it is established by people who all have the freedom to take part of its establishment, there is also a chance that other groups or institutions will make use of this as an opportunity for them to influence the people. For instance, people’s decision when it comes to their involvement in the direct democracy might be influenced by the media (Bowler and Glazer, 2008, p.59). The media have become the great contributing factor for disseminating information or even establishing details that people might have greatly understood. On the other hand, there is also another established form of democracy that allows people to only elect people who will represent the interest of the entire body, population or every individual. Just like the case of direct democracy, a representative democracy considers the rights and welfare of every citizen, but its significant difference is its capacity to become efficient, especially in the context of governing the entire nation. What the people do in representative democracy is to elect their representatives to vote for them on certain issues, and other relevant considerations. In other words, representative democracy is the heart of the constitutional democracy (Bardes et al., 2008, p.8). The representative democracy is clearly establishing the point of its practicality especially in the context of a large society or a nation. Using representative democracy there can be a great way to represent various statuses or social classes in the society. However, there are some prevailing claims that representative democracy will just promote elitism and a large disproportion of representation in the society (Hollinger, 1996, p.4). For instance, individuals with strong influence can mostly be represented in the law, leading to their advantage primarily for the consideration of their individual and personal welfare. Although representative democracy is a good way to represent groups, institutions or social classes, its significant drawback if one will base it on the claim of elitism and disproportionate representation against it, will lie on how the elite power might be able to dominate in the policy making or creation of the law. In other words, understanding the significant advantages and disadvantages of the representative democracy and direct democracy will lead to the thought that neither of them is ideal at some certain level. Each of them has substantial advantages if used the right way. However, each of their disadvantages may prevail if they will be employed the wrong way. Each people, especially those who have certain voice will have to stand in both the democratic and representative democracy, but the level of their influence is a significant consideration prior to their actual contribution in the policy and law-making process. In a nutshell, direct democracy and representative democracy have important points of view especially in line with how to essentially engage the people or the entire member of an organisation, group or nation to represent their point of view and their freedom to take part of the policy and law-making process. However, none of them can be the ideal system considering that they all have significant drawbacks as already stated in the work at hand. For a democratic nation, the greatest choice of which system to consider should always boil down to the relevant consideration of the individual’s rights and welfare. References Bardes, B., Shelley, M., and Schmidt, S. (2008) American Government and Politics Today: The Essentials 2008. 14th ed. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning. Bowler, S., and Glazer, A. (2008) Direct Democracy’s Impact on American Political Institutions.Plagrave Macmillan. Breton, A. (1997) Understanding Democracy: Economic and Political Perspectives. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Hansen, M. H. (2005) The Tradition of Ancient Greek Democracy and Its Importance for Modern Democracy. Kgl. DanskeVidenskabernesSelskab. Hollinger, R. (1996) The Dark Side of Liberalism: Elitism vs. Democracy. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. Lewis, D. C. (2013) Direct Democracy and Minority Rights: A Critical Assessment of the Tyranny of the Majority in the American States. New York, NY: Routledge. Read More