Democracy

One notion that has always fascinated me is the nature of democracy. Like many abstract philosophical items, everyone has an opinion but no one has a clear definition. Clearly, one of the main aspects of democracy is voting. So be it. But is voting the main prerequisite for democracy? Voting for what? Was the US a democratic country when slavery was allowed? When women could not vote? Is a nation democratic when only a percentage of the population can vote?

I won't have clear cut answers, just a list of observations and I welcome feedback.

While not a definitive source, wikipedia does have interesting text. Accordingly,

"While there is no universally accepted definition of 'democracy', equality and freedom have both been identified as important characteristics of democracy since ancient times. These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes. For example, in a representative democracy, every vote has equal weight, no unreasonable restrictions can apply to anyone seeking to become a representative, and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution."


Let us recall that Plato, going back to the birth of democracy in Greece, was not very fond of democracy. He called it the rule of the mob, meaning that democracy very much controlled not by rational thinking but immediate emotional responses. In other words you elect people who look nice and tell you what you want to hear.

Clearly democracy seems to entail people electing a set of representatives to govern them, along with a chief administrator be it a president or a prime minister. Leaders are not institutionalized, meaning they are not like kings where the leader is a heriditary positions. Leaders are not bound by family name to be next in line.

So why is this interesting?

Currently there are some interesting elections that will occur in the near future. The most publicized are the US and Russia. Of course there are many other elections occurring due to the Arab Spring manifestations. Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, all electing leaders through a mostly untampered process. Furthermore, the financial crisis in Europe has developed into a philosophical debate about democracy and capitalism.

In a recent article in the Atlantic, the notion of democracy in the EU is questioned

With the financial crisis, the debt crisis, and the worldwide coverage of Occupy Wall Street, capitalism has been under fire publicly for quite some time in Europe. Since the debt crisis started to show real potential for damaging the euro zone, both the euro and the European Union have had their futures dissected as well. The question has been this: can the European federal project survive the debt crisis? But now, that question is being repeated with a more melodramatic substitution: can democracy survive the debt crisis?


One of my objections is the notion that capitalism and democracy are somehow joined at the hip. I believe you cam have a market-driven economy without democracy and similarly you can have democracy without capitalism. And in any case desperate times require desperate measures. Thus in times of crisis why not appoint leaders that are best suited for the job. And when a sense of normality returns have elections and restore democratic process with the hopeful understanding that people learn through adversity and would elect smarter leaders.

So we will see how all this plays out in the next few months. I'm certainly curious how the Russian elections play out, how much support Putin will actually get. Especially interested in the US elections, who the Republicans select. And Egypt, what kind of democracy can exists in a country dominated by religion. Not too long ago, nationalism and socialism was dominating the so-called third world, now it's religion.

Anyway, enough for now more to come. This is a very broad and interesting topic, and certainly of very immediate concern.