Revision as of 18:35, 27 March 2006 view sourcePmanderson (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers62,751 edits →Liberal democracies around the world: It should be as visible as the map; but the phrasing is fine← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:40, 27 March 2006 view source Ultramarine (talk | contribs)33,507 edits rv to ElectionworldNext edit → | ||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
==Liberal democracies around the world== | ==Liberal democracies around the world== | ||
, concerning the state of world freedom in 2005. |
, concerning the state of world freedom in 2005. Several of these findings are disputed. | ||
<p style="margin:0px;font-size:90%"><span style="border:{{{border|none}}};background-color:#219A57;color:#219A57;">██</span> Free <span style="border:{{{border|none}}};background-color:#FFC27B;color:#FFC27B;">██</span> Partly Free <span style="border:{{{border|none}}};background-color:#B30000;color:#B30000;">██</span> Not Free</p>]] | <p style="margin:0px;font-size:90%"><span style="border:{{{border|none}}};background-color:#219A57;color:#219A57;">██</span> Free <span style="border:{{{border|none}}};background-color:#FFC27B;color:#FFC27B;">██</span> Partly Free <span style="border:{{{border|none}}};background-color:#B30000;color:#B30000;">██</span> Not Free</p>]] | ||
Several political scientists and think tanks maintain lists of free and unfree states, both in the present and going back a couple centuries. These can differ radically from each other<ref>{{cite journal|title= Give Democratic Peace a Chance? The Insignificance of the Liberal Peace|first=David E.|last= Spiro | Several political scientists and think tanks maintain lists of free and unfree states, both in the present and going back a couple centuries. These can differ radically from each other<ref>{{cite journal|title= Give Democratic Peace a Chance? The Insignificance of the Liberal Peace|first=David E.|last= Spiro |
Revision as of 18:40, 27 March 2006
This article does not cite any sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Liberal democracy" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
|
Part of the Politics series |
Elections |
---|
Basic types |
Terminology |
Subseries |
Lists |
Related |
Politics portal |
|
|} Liberal democracy is a form of representative democracy where the ability of elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law and moderated by a constitution which emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals and minorities (also called constitutional democracy and constitutional liberalism), and which places constraints on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised.
These rights and freedoms include the rights to due process, private ownership of property, privacy, and equality before the law, and freedoms of speech, assembly and religion. In liberal democracies these rights (also known as ‘’liberal rights’’) may sometimes be constitutionally guaranteed, or are otherwise created by statutory law or case law, which may in turn empower various civil institutions to administer or enforce these rights.
Liberal democracies also tend to be characterized by tolerance and pluralism; widely differing social and political views, even those viewed as extreme or fringe, are permitted to co-exist and compete for political power on a democratic basis. Liberal democracies periodically hold elections where groups with differing political views have the opportunity to achieve political power.
Preconditions and structure
Although they are not a system of government as such, it is now common to include aspects of society among the defining criteria of a liberal democracy. The presence of a middle class, and a broad and flourishing civil society are often seen as pre-conditions for liberal democracy.
Western support for democratisation is almost always associated with support for a market economy. In western countries, they do seem inseparable, but that is a geographically and historically limited view. China, which is not a liberal democracy, contains elements of a market economy. Many free-market proponents believe that the emergence of capitalism pre-dates the emergence of democracy, which leads some theorists to conclude that there is a historical sequence at work, and that market economics is not only a precondition, but will ultimately ensure the transition to democracy, in countries such as China. However, many Marxists and socialists say that capitalism and true democracy are at best unrelated and at worst contradictory.
The most liberal of the many criteria now used to define liberal democracy, or simply "democracy", is the requirement for political pluralism, which is usually defined as the presence of multiple and distinct political parties. The liberal-democratic political process should be competitive, and analogies with economic markets are often used in this context. Therefore liberal democracy is defined by free and fair elections.
The liberal-democratic constitution defines the democratic character of the state. In the American political tradition, the purpose of a constitution is often seen as a limit on the authority of the government, and American ideas of liberal democracy are influenced by this. They emphasise the separation of powers, an independent judiciary, and a system of checks and balances between branches of government. European constitutional liberalism is more likely to emphasise the Rechtsstaat, usually translated as rule of law, although it implies a specific form of state or regime.
Liberal democracy is also defined by universal suffrage, granting all citizens the right to vote regardless of race, gender or property ownership. However, the universality is relative: many countries regarded as democratic have practised various forms of exclusion from suffrage, or demand further qualifications (except for being a citizen), like a registration procedure to be allowed to vote. Voting rights are limited to those who are above a certain age, typically 18. In any case, decisions taken through elections are taken not by all of the citizens, but rather by those who choose to participate by voting.
- See also Elective rights.
Rights and freedoms
The most often quoted criteria for liberal democracy take the form of specific rights and freedoms. They were originally considered essential for the functioning of a liberal democracy, but they have acquired such prominence in its definition, that many people now think they are democracy. Since no state wants to admit it is "unfree", and since its enemies may be depicted as 'tyrannies' by its propagandists, they are also usually contested.
In practice, democracies do have specific limits on specific freedoms. In democratic theory, the common justification for these limits is that they are necessary to guarantee the existence of democracy, or the existence of the freedoms themselves. According to this argument, allowing free speech for the opponents of free speech logically undermines free speech. In Europe, this has become a political issue with the rise of Islamist political argument, which often does explicitly reject such liberal freedoms. Opinion is divided on how far democracy can extend, to include the enemies of democracy in the democratic process.
- Freedom of expression, including speech, assembly and protest. There are various legal limitations like copyright and defamation, more general restrictions may include restrictions on anti-democratic speech, on attempts to undermine human rights, on the promotion or justification of terrorism, and in some cases on "anti-western" ideas. In the United States more than in Europe, during the Cold War, such restrictions generally applied to Communists, now they are mainly applied to Islamists.
- Freedom of religion
- Freedom of the press and access to alternative information sources is considered a characteristic of liberal democracy. For certain groups, however, it may be limited: Islamist media now face restrictions in many democracies, including censorship of satellite broadcasting in France, and proposed bans on Islamist websites in several countries.
- Freedom of association and assembly is also restricted in democracies, for groups considered a threat to state or society. Most democracies have procedures to ban organisations, on suspicion of terrorism, for instance, and usually without a prior judicial procedure. The European Union has an official list of banned organisations, overriding the freedom of association in the European Convention on Human Rights and the national constitutions.
- Freedom of education
- Equality before the law and due process under the rule of law is considered a characteristic of liberal democracy. However, if relatively small numbers of people, seen as mortal enemies by the majority of the population, are excluded from legal protections, a country may still be seen as a liberal democracy: it is not qualitatively different from repressive autocracy, but quantitatively different.
Critique and defense
Some would argue that 'liberal democracy' is not democratic or liberal at all. They would argue that 'liberal democracy' does not respect majority rule (except when citizens are asked to vote for their representatives), and also that its "liberty" is restricted by the constitution or precedent (in the UK) decided by previous generations. They would argue that, by prohibiting citizens the right to cast votes on all issues (especially for serious subjects like going to war, constitutional amendments or constitution abolishment, etc.), this turns 'liberal democracy' into the precursor of oligarchy.
Anti-capitalists, which include Marxists, socialists and anarchists, argue that liberal democracy is an integral part of the capitalist system and is class-based and not fully democratic or participatory. It is bourgeois democracy where only the most financially powerful people rule. Because of this it is seen as fundamentally un-egalitarian, existing or operating in a way that facilitates economic exploitation.
Others would say that only a liberal democracy can guarantee the individual liberties of its citizens and prevent the development into a dictatorship. Unmoderated majority rule could, in this view, lead to an oppression of minorities. One important aspect of representative democracy is, however, the fact that the real power is actually held by a relatively small representative body. The rule is by no means held by the majority, but rather a small group elected on a popular basis.
No substantial famine has occurred in any independent country with a democratic government and a relatively free press. There is also strong evidence that war between liberal democracies is vanishingly rare and that lesser conflicts between them are less common, including civil wars within a liberal democracy, . There is also research associating democracy, parliamentary systems, political stability, and freedom of the press with lower corruption.
Relation to indirect democracy
Liberal democracies are representative democracies. Some of these democracies have additional systems of referenda to give the electorate a possibility to overrule decisions of the elected legislature or even to make decisions by plebiscite without giving the legislature a say in that decision. Switzerland and Uruguay are some of the liberal democracies with a representative system combined with referenda and plebiscites; so are several of the component states of the United States. Other countries have referenda to a lesser degree in their political system. Adding referenda to a political system could help prevent the evolution of a liberal democracy into an oligarchy.
Liberal democracies around the world
Several political scientists and think tanks maintain lists of free and unfree states, both in the present and going back a couple centuries. These can differ radically from each other, in part because they are making inherently subjective judgments, and in part because they are asking somewhat different questions. Of these, the best known may be the Polity Data Set, founded by Ted Gurr and that produced by Freedom House. . The map reflects the view of Freedom House; several of the assessments on this map are disputed.
There is general agreement that the states of the European Union, Japan, the United States, Canada, India, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand are liberal democracies.
References
- Amartya Sen, Democracy as a Universal Value
- The disputed democratic peace theory; see, for example Håvard Hegre et al.: "www.worldbank.org Towards A Democratic Civil Peace? Opportunity, Grievance, and Civil War 1816-1992": American Political Science Review (March) 95: 1 at]
- Lederman, Daniel, Loayza, Norman and Reis Soares, Rodrigo: "Accountability and Corruption: Political Institutions Matter" (November 2001). World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2708. at papers.ssrn.com
- Spiro, David E. (1994). "Give Democratic Peace a Chance? The Insignificance of the Liberal Peace". International Security (Vol. 19, No. 2. (Autumn, 1994)): 50–86.
{{cite journal}}
:|issue=
has extra text (help) cites two historical lists of liberal democracies, each of which leaves out about half the other. - Template:Citepaper version
See also
- History of democracy
- Illiberal democracy
- Totalitarian democracy
- Republicanism
- Democratic peace theory
- Anders Chydenius