Democracy and the Institutions Which Foster Its Two Most Important Ideals
O’Neil defines democracy as “a system where political power resides with the people” and is “exercised either directly or indirectly through participation, competition, and liberty.” (149) This definition implies that the most important ideals underlying a democracy are equality and freedom. Equality ensures that no man or faction has power over another, and that all are subject to the same obligations under government, while freedom guarantees the people’s ability to live and make decisions without suppression by more powerful factions or opposing interests. It is also “the active creation of rights that otherwise would not exist” or civil rights. (O’Neil 172) The definition also shows that there are additional ideals which, when applied under these first two fundamentals, are also significant to the concept of democracy.
They are participation, representation, separation of powers, and competition. First, it is clear that the people must have some participation in the government in order to possess political power. In addition, representation ensures that the government is attempting to represent all the people’s interests, therefore encouraging equality. Separation of powers guarantees that no single individual or faction may have supreme power, so as not to undermine or neglect the interests of the remainder of the people or the minority. If a group is neglected, then the power exists in only a portion of the people, thereby making them unequal. Lastly, the presence of competition means that there is never one single option for the people, whether it be regarding a political candidate, party, or opinion. It also means that different interests are in competition with each other for power in the government, thereby allowing all viewpoints to be heard and considered. This makes competition extremely encouraging towards freedom and equality.
There are several institutions which best encourage these ideals. The first is proportional representation with multi-member districts. This electoral system means that not only do citizens actively participate in government by voting, but their participation is more equally counted than in other systems. Because votes are cast for a party, and not an individual candidate, there are more parties involved, and therefore more competition between them and more interests being represented per district. Also, no votes are wasted because the vote percentage that a party achieves, is the percentage of seats they receive in the district. By contrast, a first past the post system (FPTP), in which citizens vote for candidates, and the districts are single-member, votes which were not for the winning candidate, essentially mean nothing.
For example, which utilizes the proportional representation system, had nine political parties which were voted for in its 1999 elections. The result was those same nine parties winning seats in the legislature in the same percentage as received by vote. Therefore, the Pan-African Congress which received 1% of the vote, also received 1% of the seats in legislature. In an FPTP system such as the , the party would not have won any seats. The single candidate with the most votes would have won, and votes for the losing parties would not be taken into account. In countries like however, the people who vote for small parties like the Pan-African Congress, receive some degree of representation, however small.
The political party is another useful institution, which represents specific interests and agendas. Presence of political parties, in any governmental structure ensures that many interests are represented within the government. In addition, members may be held accountable in adhering to the agendas set forth by their parties. “Lacking parties, the public would have a difficult time evaluating the goals and achievements or failures of each candidate.” (O’Neil 164) This further exacerbates competition between parties and encourages party members to stick with their agendas in order to properly represent the people who voted for them. For example, South African President Thabo Mbeki’s party, the African National Congress (ANC), denounces racism in and calls for the empowerment of black South Africans. These ideals are directly in line with those of his party, and those who voted for him, see their vote represented in his actions.
Other important institutions are executive/government, judicial, and legislative branches of government. This ensures separation of powers, with no branch ever holding supreme power, and a system of checks and balances which allows each branch to make sure the others act constitutionally. , , the , and the are all examples of countries which separate the government into these three branches. In the for instance, Congress (the legislative branch) can make a law, but the President (the executive branch) may veto it. However, the Congress may override this veto with a 2/3 majority vote. Similarly, a law may be passed and therefore approved by both President and Congress, but the Supreme Court (the judicial branch) may declare this law unconstitutional. For instance, after the Great Depression, two of President Roosevelt’s New Deal programs were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and therefore, did not go into effect. A system without these branches would allow a President, for instance, to make a decision without any legal form of contest or opposition. There is no obligation to anyone, and every opportunity to act independently, and perhaps quite mistakenly, or even tyrannically.
Finally, a very significant institution is a constitution, which explicitly states not only the law, but civil rights (part of the definition of liberty). A constitution puts all people under equal obligations, including leaders. It establishes rights like freedom of speech, which are essential to the ideal of freedom, and brings the diversities of the nation’s people together under one law. For instance, has four official languages and several diverse groups of people. Under one constitution, these peoples are united under the same obligations and given all the same rights, establishing their equality.
Works Cited
1. Lijphart, Arend. “Majoritarian Versus Consensual Democracy.” Brown, Bernard E. Comparative Politics, Notes & Readings. New York: HarcourtCollege Publishers, 2000.
2. O’Neil, Patrick. Essentials of Comparative Politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004.
3. Pateman, Carol. “Democracy and Democratization.” Brown, Bernard E. Comparative Politics, Notes & Readings. New York: HarcourtCollege Publishers, 2000.
