Democracy

From Metapedia

(Redirected from Liberal democracy)
Jump to: navigation, search

Democracy (from Greek demos "common people" + kratos "rule, strength") is a form of government.

Contents

Different terms and meanings

Ancient Greek philosophy viewed democracy as differing from "oligarchy" (rule by a few) and "autocracy" (rule by a single individual).

The term "democracy" has been applied to many different forms of government. Examples include "direct democracy" where most or all decisions are made by voting and Communist states describing themselves as "democratic" (while outsiders usually view them as oligarchies and autocracies). There are few countries that today do not officially describe themselves as democracies.

A "liberal democracy" is a representative democracy in which the ability of the elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and moderated by a constitution or laws that emphasize the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the rights of minorities. In many cases, when the term "democracy" is used without qualifier, the intended meaning is actually "liberal democracy".

Criticisms of (liberal) democracy

Criticisms of (liberal) democracy include that certain groups such as the wealthy and/or the media may have undue influence (in effect meaning that the actual system is an oligarchy).

Another criticism is by arguing that voters are highly uninformed about many political issues. They may be influenced by incorrect propaganda and emotional manipulations. A less politically correct aspect is that many voters have low IQ.

Partial democracies

Research have found that partial democracies on some variables may be worse than authoritarian states. One example is research finding that partially democratic regimes have a higher risk of civil war than both highly democratic and highly authoritarian regimes.[1]

Democracy and ethnic heterogeneity

That democracy (or certain forms of democracy) can function well in ethnically heterogeneous countries has been questioned. Singapore's leader Lee Kuan Yew, accused of supporting an authoritarian form of government, stated in a 2005 interview: "Why should I be against democracy? The British came here, never gave me democracy, except when they were about to leave. But I cannot run my system based on their rules. I have to amend it to fit my people's position. In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion. Supposing I'd run their system here, Malays would vote for Muslims, Indians would vote for Indians, Chinese would vote for Chinese. I would have a constant clash in my Parliament which cannot be resolved because the Chinese majority would always overrule them."[2]

Democracy and average IQ

Another aspect is related to countries and intelligence. The 2009 book Limits to democratization stated that "all nations do not have equal chances to establish and maintain democratic systems. A central conclusion is that it is probably never possible to achieve the same level and quality of democracy in all countries of the world".[3]

Several IQ researchers have expressed very pessimistic views regarding the future of Western civilization and democracy due to mass immigration of low-IQ groups and other dysgenic trends. See Dysgenics: Pessimism regarding the future of Western civilization .

Democratic peace theory

See the article on the Democratic peace theory.

See also

External links

References

  1. Hegre, H. (2001, March). Toward a democratic civil peace? Democracy, political change, and civil war, 1816–1992. In American Political Science Association (Vol. 95, No. 01, pp. 33-48). Cambridge University Press. https://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=92181&fileId=S0003055401000119
  2. SPIEGEL Interview with Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew: "It's Stupid to be Afraid" http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/spiegel-interview-with-singapore-s-lee-kuan-yew-it-s-stupid-to-be-afraid-a-369128.html
  3. Tatu Vanhanen. (2009) The Limits of Democratization: Climate, Intelligence, and Resource Distribution. Atlanta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.
Part of this article consists of modified text from Wikipedia, and the article is therefore licensed under GFDL.
Personal tools
In other languages