Democracy and What It Is - Essay Example

“The nation of Iraq – with its proud heritage, abundant resources and skilled educated people – isfully capable of moving toward democracy and living in freedom… Success could also begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace” George W. Bush. Democracy is a kind of government in which all citizens have a similar and equal opportunity in determining the decisions that do affect their own lives. This form of government allows people to participate equally. This happens directly or through elected officials or representatives. This is usually entrenched in the laws of the land. It involves social, cultural and economic conditions that provide free and fair practice of self determination politically. It hails from a Greek word demokratia whose meaning is “rule of the people”. This word can be divided into two. Demos meaning “people” and kratos meaning “power”. Democracy contrasts other forms of government like monarchy and aristocracy /oligarchy. Monarchy is where power is held by one individual while aristocracy is where power is held by a group of people. Contemporary governments tend to have a mixture of all these elements. There are several types of democracy (Lijphart 150-250). The two basic forms of democracy are direct democracy and representative or indirect democracy. In direct democracies, citizens have direct participation in the decision making process within the government. In indirect democracies, citizens elect representatives (Lijphart 200-250). He explains that in modern democracies, the sovereign power is retained by the people while the political power is exercised through the representatives (200-250). He further explains that an electoral democracy government is determined by popular sovereignty (200-300). People in the country determine who will govern them. They do t his by voting. A liberal democracy is one in which both sovereignty and liberties are manifested. The civil society is very active and restraints the government from misusing power. A substantive democracy is a working democracy. Under the representative democracy, we have parliamentary, presidential and constitutional democracy. Parliamentary democracy is a democracy where government is chosen by elected representatives (Lijphart 200-250). Government in this case is checked by the legislative parliament elected by people. The legislature can dismiss the prime minister under this system of government. This happens by passing a vote of no confidence. Presidential system of democracy is where the public elects the president through general elections (Lijphart 200-250). The elections are supposed to be free and fair. The president happens, in these cases, to be both head of state and government (Lijphart 200-300). In this system, there is a clear separation of power. The executive, legislature and judiciary are separate. A semi -presidential system is where power is shared between the e president and the prime minister. A constitutional democracy is a representative democracy whereby the elected representatives exercise the power to make decisions as per the constitution (Lijphart 200-250). It is subject to the rule of law. The constitution emphasizes the need for protection of rights of individuals. A hybrid is a system where representative democracy and direct democracy mingle (Lijphart 100-250). This happens in some states in the United States. What kind of democracy is suitable for the countries that have never enjoyed these rights and freedoms? World scholars doubt the possibility of none democratic countries to build both democratic and stable governments (Davis 13-17). To be specific, Iraq and Afghanistan tend to lack the necessary requirements for establishing and maintaining a stable democracy (Davis 10-17). Davis explains that the absence of these values causes the democratic values not to survive (13-17). When a country becomes exposed to a new form of government, many things have to change. Generally people resist change. To be more specific many Arab countries are dominated by clans as part of their governance. Religion too is viewed as part of the system of government. While many people are beginning to crave for true democracy as witnessed in Egypt and other Arab countries, change takes time to get established. The idea of people having to vent of their sentiments in the course of governance is very important (Davis 11-19). In Iraq for example, the idea of introducing democracy is likely to face some resistance. This is because it may be perceived as a foreign idea (Davis 13-17). He suggests that the determination and effort of American intervention i.e. military intervention is likely to fail. This is due to factors that are socio-economic, historical, political and cultural (13-17). People have to be convinced by these factors need to be changed. The idea and process of democratizing Iraq should involve a certain order. First, to change the mindset of dictatorship or authoritarian rule, installation of a democratic regime and establishing ways and means of sustaining that regime (Davis 3-10). In case the presidential system is used, people are likely to like the idea to have a change from an overall authoritarian leader (Lijphart 200-250). However they are not used to choosing their leader. This means that they may not hold their elected president to account due to ignorance. According to Lijphart, the other challenge is that if the regime is out to cling to power, oppression can still be propagated (150-250). This includes taking advantage of people who do not know their rights and freedoms. They may opt to cling to their oppressive cultures. In most cases, countries that have never experienced freedom misuse it the first instance they get it. This is because freedom comes with a sense of excitement and liberty. It is hardly thought of as a responsibility. Parliamentary system too is worth considering. The thought that countries like Afghanistan, which are used to anarchy, can have elections is important (Davis 13-17). The first importance of an election is that it instills a sense of order (Lijphart 200-250). In a parliamentary system, people choose representatives who proceed to choose the leader of the government. In a young democracy that is growing from the wounds of war, too much competition may not be a good thing. Many candidates may not exercise restraint during campaigns and this may divide people. This weakens the democracy (Lijphart 200-350). The next level of competition in the parliament whose aim is to seize power is also challenging for new democracies. At the end of the election, the country may be left very vulnerable to division and war. This is because the historical heritage of the countries is not pro democracy (Davis 10-15). Excitement may overwhelm people but in reality they are still ignorant. If this system is embraced it can lead to better representation of people and therefore better sharing of resources. In case of a constitutional democracy, the supreme law of the land should be followed by all people (Lijphart 200-350). This calls for a sincere commitment to upholding the law and a strong judicial system. This attitude and cultural aspect of the people are tested here. This is because people may be used to a corrupt lifestyle and may never subscribe to the spirit of the constitution. Leaders may use the law for their own benefit. Sadly, we have seen regimes altering clauses of the constitution to suit personal needs. This happens when they have the instruments of power. A constitutional democracy is important where the rule of law can be enforced and where institutions are very strong. Democracy is seen to be synonymous to freedom (Lijphart 100-190). “by using the power of the US government to ignite the fires of the democratic revolution, the Bush administration is fighting terrorism using methods pioneered by the political forefathers of modern terrorists”(Grigg,Lijphart 20). “There is no grassroots demand for democracy among Arabs and Muslims and any attempt to impose it is bound to encounter stiff resistance and to arouse the proverbial street to the new height of Anti-Americanism”(Davis,Karsh,24). This statement was nullified by the Arab spring uprising. The point is democracies can also give rise to dictators. Initially they start as great leaders and later stick to power forcefully. The idea that Iraqis view politics as a dirty thing is not helping the situation either. They believe religion and politics should not mix (Davis 13-17). According to Davis, this is a cultural aspect that affects the kind of democracy they end up with (10-17). Having analyzed almost all these forms of democracies, together with their merits and demerits, parliamentary system seems to be better. It is easier for the people in these emerging democracies to elect their representatives directly to the parliament (Lijphart 100-190). While this system may have numerous challenges it may be the most stable and sustainable for a start. A mature parliamentary system may give rise to a strong presidential system in the future. This can happen if people feel they need a system change. A hybrid system tends to combine both direct and indirect democracies Lijphart (110-190). This may be a challenge to these emerging democracies because of its complexities. The parliamentary system brings together powerful representatives from the entire country and the minorities feel they have a say according to Lijphart (110-190). The parliamentary system is sustainable. The parliament enacts laws that reflect the desires of their voters and come up with a balanced financial spending which is thoroughly discussed. The government is made through lobbying and coalitions sometimes. These intense consultations are healthy so that the country can stand as one. It is good to note that the basic rights are guaranteed by the constitution. Under this system, the president is the head of state and a symbol of national unity (Lijphart 100-190). This enhances the much needed national unity. The prime minister has the executive authority (Lijphart 100-200). He works together with the cabinet. These leaders are answerable to the parliament. The shifting of power from individuals to the parliament makes this system stable and hence sustainable. According to Lijphart, the system guarantees establishment of credible institutions by having lively parliamentary debates (150-290). Resources are shared based on the representatives’ discussions. This means that we rarely have a monopoly of ideas in decision making process. It is recommended in that it lays a foundation for servant leadership and shifts the limelight from individuals to institutions. Decisions are more structured, power is more spread out and it is easier to pass legislations. Debates too are quality under this system. This is crucial for a start. The people of these newly born democracies deserve this system. Works Cited Davis, Eric. Strategies for Promoting Democracy in Iraq. DIANE Publishing, 2008. 2-20. Web. 25 Aug. 2012. Lijphart, Arend . Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. 2nd ed. Yale University Press, 2012. 100-300. Web. . Read More