Everyone Looks at Democracy in Their Own Way

Democracy. Such a simple word, isn't it? A simple concept, though? Not so much. You see, democracy, as a concept, has envolved over time. While some simply look at democracy as a procedure — a method in which representation, accountability and legitimacy is assured, others look at it as something more than that — a concept which is not only procedural, but one which is defined by a set of necessary conditions that serve the people in a more purposive sense. In other words, democracy is subjective.

Therefore, it only makes sense that the concept of democracy has evolved to include more liberal ideas as necessary conditions; however, as Fareed Zakaria warns in his 2003 book—The future of freedom: illiberal democracy at home and abroad, when he says that 'democracy is flourishing while liberty is not', that idealistic vision of democracy as a concept is in peril, across the globe.

So, first things first, democracy — how exactly has said concept evolved? Have all democracies, throughout history, always adhered to liberal principles that define modern-day liberal democracies? The answer is no.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified writer

Proficient in: Democracy

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Case in point, the Roman Republic — often cited as the model for modern-day liberal democracies, such as the United States. As an Inquiries Journal study, by Zachary S. Brown finds, the Roman Republic had many elements to it, which go against those very same ideals which define modern-day liberal democracies. For example, not everyone was adequately represented.

Rural Romans, who often belonged to lower classes, were often disenfranchised. Meanwhile, the interests wealthy citizens, whom could afford to travel to the Roman Capital to vote, were disproportionately represented.

Said elements were also apparent in the early history of the United States itself. As an article by Business Insider accurately states, initially, only land-owning white men — 6% of the U.S. population at the time could vote at the time. You see, for the longest of times, democracy as a concept was viewed as a method — a process — the competitive struggle for the people's vote. It was only over time that the concept evolved to being popularly known as liberal democracy. Having said that though, a tough road lies ahead for that conception of democracy.

As a recent article by The Guardian states, illiberal democracies, as Fareed calls them, are on the rise, while liberal democracies are eroding. This is, in large part, due to the fact that people are becoming more distant from each other (i.e. societies are turning inward), that the population is becoming less informed/educated, paving the way for movements that thrive on a poorly educated populace (i.e. nationalist movements), and that the elite is not doing their part, in strengthening said foundations of liberal democracy. Therefore, with all of that being said, it is my most sincere belief, that if these issues are not adequately addressed, liberal democracies are going to continue to erode, and reckless strongmen who foment illiberal democracies will continue to rise. However, if they are addressed — if most populations are indeed guaranteed a higher standard of education, and the elite becomes less greedy (i.e. they foment a greater sense of community), then there is indeed hope for the future of liberal democracy.