1.
Republics of the Soviet Union
–
The Republics of the Soviet Union or the Union Republics of the Soviet Union were ethnically based proto-states that were subordinated directly to the Government of the Soviet Union. Article 81 of the Constitution stated that the rights of Union Republics shall be safeguarded by the USSR. In the final decades of its existence, the Soviet Union officially consisted of fifteen Soviet Socialist Republics, all of them, with the exception of the Russian Federation, had their own local party chapters of the All-Union Communist Party. In 1944, amendments to the All-Union Constitution allowed for branches of the Red Army for each Soviet Republic. They also allowed for Republic-level commissariats for foreign affairs and defense and this allowed for two Soviet Republics, Ukraine and Byelorussia, to join the United Nations General Assembly as founding members in 1945. All of the former Republics of the Union are now independent countries, however, most of the international community did not consider the Baltic countries to have legitimately been part of the USSR. Their position is supported by the European Union, the European Court of Human Rights, the United Nations Human Rights Council, in contrast, the Russian government and state officials maintain that the Soviet annexation of the Baltic states was legitimate. Constitutionally, the Soviet Union was a federation, in accordance with provisions present in the Constitution, each republic retained the right to secede from the USSR. Under the constitution adopted in 1936 and modified along the way until October 1977, along with the state administrative hierarchy, there existed a parallel structure of party organizations, which allowed the Politburo to exercise large amounts of control over the republics. State administrative organs took direction from the party organs, and appointments of all party. Each republic had its own set of state symbols, a flag, a coat of arms, and, with the exception of Russia until 1990. Every republic of the Soviet Union also was awarded with the Order of Lenin, number of the union republics of the USSR varied from 4 to 16. In majority of years and at the decades of its existence. The Soviet Union considered the initial annexation legal, but officially recognized their independence on September 6,1991, the Socialist Soviet Republic of Byelorussia, in winter of 1919 The Lithuanian–Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic was proclaimed in 1919 but fell very soon. The Persian Socialist Soviet Republic, in what is now Iran, the Turkestan Soviet Federative Republic was proclaimed in 1918 but did not survive to the founding of the USSR, becoming the short-lived Turkestan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of the RSFSR. When the Tuvan Peoples Republic joined the Soviet Union in 1944, it did not become a union republic, the leader of the Peoples Republic of Bulgaria, Todor Zhivkov, suggested in the early 1960s that the country should become a union republic, but the offer was rejected. During the Soviet–Afghan War, the Soviet Union proposed to annex the Northern Afghanistan as its 16th union republic in what was to become the Afghan Soviet Socialist Republic, though administratively part of their respective Union Republics, ASSRs were also established based on ethnic/cultural lines. Under Mikhail Gorbachev, openness and restructuring were intended to liberalise, however, they had a number of effects which caused the power of the republics to increase
2.
Democracy
–
Democracy, in modern usage, is a system of government in which the citizens exercise power directly or elect representatives from among themselves to form a governing body, such as a parliament. Democracy is sometimes referred to as rule of the majority, Democracy was originally conceived in Classical Greece, where political representatives were chosen by a jury from amongst the male citizens, rich and poor. The English word dates to the 16th century, from the older Middle French, in the 5th century BC, to denote the political systems then existing in Greek city-states, notably Athens, the term is an antonym to aristocracy, meaning rule of an elite. While theoretically these definitions are in opposition, in practice the distinction has been blurred historically, the political system of Classical Athens, for example, granted democratic citizenship to free men and excluded slaves and women from political participation. In 1906, Finland became the first government to harald a more inclusive democracy at the national level. Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is held by an individual, as in an absolute monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders, No consensus exists on how to define democracy, but legal equality, political freedom and rule of law have been identified as important characteristics. These principles are reflected in all eligible citizens being equal before the law, other uses of democracy include that of direct democracy. In some countries, notably in the United Kingdom which originated the Westminster system, in the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute. In India, parliamentary sovereignty is subject to the Constitution of India which includes judicial review, though the term democracy is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles also are applicable to private organisations. Majority rule is listed as a characteristic of democracy. Hence, democracy allows for political minorities to be oppressed by the tyranny of the majority in the absence of legal protections of individual or group rights. An essential part of a representative democracy is competitive elections that are substantively and procedurally fair, i. e. just. It has also suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of all voters to participate freely and fully in the life of their society. While representative democracy is sometimes equated with the form of government. Many democracies are constitutional monarchies, such as the United Kingdom, the term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity. The word comes from demos, common people and kratos, strength, led by Cleisthenes, Athenians established what is generally held as the first democracy in 508–507 BC
3.
History of democracy
–
A democracy is of political system, or a system of decision-making within an institution, or organization, in which all members have the equal share to power. Systems of democracy stand in contrast to forms of government. Democracy can be traced back from the present day to classical Athens, in a modern representative democracy, this formal equality is embodied primarily in the right to vote. C. Within that broad sense it is plausible to assume that democracy in one form or another arises naturally in any well-bonded group, scholars identify this form of democracy as tribalism, or primitive democracy. This becomes more complex on a scale, such as when the village. All other forms of rule – including monarchy, tyranny, aristocracy, studying pre-Babylonian Mesopotamia, renowned scholar Thorkild Jacobsen used Sumerian epic, myth, and historical records to identify what he has called primitive democracy. In early Sumer, kings like Gilgamesh did not hold the power that later Mesopotamian rulers wielded. Rather, major city-states functioned with councils of elders and young men that possessed the political authority. Although pioneering in nature, the work has invoked little serious discussion, Jacobsen has conceded that the vagueness of the evidence prohibits the separation between the Mesopotamian democracy from a primitive oligarchy. The evidence for this is scattered, however, and no historical source exists for that period. Modern scholars note the word democracy at the time of the 3rd century B. C. and later suffered from degradation and could mean any autonomous state, key characteristics of the gana seem to include a monarch, usually known by the name raja, and a deliberative assembly. It discussed all major state decisions, at least in some states, attendance was open to all free men. This body also had full financial, administrative, and judicial authority, other officers, who rarely receive any mention, obeyed the decisions of the assembly. Elected by the gana, the monarch apparently always belonged to a family of the class of Ksatriya Varna. The monarch coordinated his activities with the assembly, in some states, the Licchavis had a primary governing body of 7,077 rajas, the heads of the most important families. On the other hand, the Shakyas, Koliyas, Mallas, scholars differ over how best to describe these governments, and the vague, sporadic quality of the evidence allows for wide disagreements. Despite the assemblys power, it has not yet been established whether the composition and participation was truly popular. The first main obstacle is the lack of evidence describing the power of the assembly
4.
Athenian democracy
–
Other Greek cities set up democracies, most following the Athenian model, but none are as well documented as Athens. It was a system of democracy, in which participating citizens voted directly on legislation. The longest-lasting democratic leader was Pericles, after his death, Athenian democracy was twice briefly interrupted by oligarchic revolutions towards the end of the Peloponnesian War. It was modified somewhat after it was restored under Eucleides, the most detailed accounts of the system are of this fourth-century modification rather than the Periclean system, Democracy was suppressed by the Macedonians in 322 BC. The Athenian institutions were revived, but how close they were to a real democracy is debatable. Solon, Cleisthenes, and Ephialtes contributed to the development of Athenian democracy and he broke up the power of the nobility by organizing citizens into ten groups based on where they lived rather than on their wealth. The word democracy combines the elements dêmos and krátos, and thus means literally people power, in the words monarchy and oligarchy, the second element comes from archē, meaning beginning, and hence also first place or power, sovereignty. One might expect the term demarchy to have adopted, by analogy. However, the word demarchy had already taken and meant mayoralty. We are not certain that the democracy was extant when systems that came to be called democratic were first instituted. The word is attested in Herodotus, who some of the earliest surviving Greek prose. Around 460 BC an individual is known with the name of Democrates, a name possibly coined as a gesture of democratic loyalty, Athens was not the only polis in Ancient Greece that instituted a democratic regime. Aristotle cites many other cities as well, yet, it is only with reference to Athens that we can attempt to trace some of specific sixth century events that led to the institution of democracy at the end of the century. Before the first attempt at government, Athens was ruled by a series of archons or chief magistrates. The members of these institutions were generally aristocrats, who ruled the polis for their own advantage, in 621 BC Draco codified a set of notoriously harsh laws that were a clear expression of the power of the aristocracy over everybody else. This did not stop the aristocratic families feuding amongst themselves to obtain as much power as possible, however, the enfranchisement of the local laboring classes was succeeded by the development of chattel slavery, the enslavement of, in large part, foreigners. Solon, the mediator, reshaped the city by absorbing the traditional aristocracy in a definition of citizenship which allotted a political function to every resident of Attica. Athenians were not slaves but citizens, with the right, at the very least, under these reforms, the position of archon was opened to all with certain property qualifications, and a Boule, a rival council of 400, was set up
5.
Direct democracy
–
Direct democracy is a form of democracy in which people decide policy initiatives directly. This differs from the majority of democracies, which are representative democracies. Direct democracy is similar to, but distinct from, representative democracy, two leading forms of direct democracy are participatory democracy and deliberative democracy. Semi direct democracies in which representatives administer day-to-day governance, but the citizens remain the sovereign, the first two forms—referendums and initiatives—are examples of direct legislation. Compulsory referendum subjects the legislation drafted by political elites to a popular vote. This is the most common form of direct legislation, popular referendum empowers citizens to make a petition that calls existing legislation to a citizens vote. Institutions specify the frame for a valid petition and the number of signatures required. This form of direct democracy effectively grants the voting public a veto on laws adopted by the elected legislature, initiatives may be direct or indirect, With the direct initiative, a successful proposition is placed directly on the ballot to be subject to vote. Such a form of initiative is utilized by Switzerland for constitutional amendments. Power of Recall gives the public the power to elected officials from office before the end of their term. Some of the most important modern thinkers who were inspired by the concept of democracy are Cornelius Castoriadis, Hannah Arendt. The earliest known direct democracy is said to be the Athenian democracy in the 5th century BC, although it was not a democracy, women, foreigners. There were only about 30,000 male citizens, but several thousand of them were active in each year. Modern democracies, being representative, not direct, do not resemble the Athenian system, also relevant to the history of direct democracy is the history of Ancient Rome, specifically the Roman Republic, beginning around 509 BC. Rome displayed many aspects of democracy, both direct and indirect, from the era of Roman monarchy all the way to the collapse of the Roman Empire. As to direct democracy, the ancient Roman Republic had a system of citizen lawmaking, or citizen formulation and passage of law, and a citizen veto of legislature-made law. Many historians mark the end of the Republic with the passage of a law named the Lex Titia,27 November 43 BC, modern-era citizen lawmaking began in the towns of Switzerland in the 13th century. In 1847, the Swiss added the statute referendum to their national constitution and they soon discovered that merely having the power to veto Parliaments laws was not enough
6.
Economic democracy
–
In addition to these moral concerns, economic democracy makes practical claims, such as that it can compensate for capitalisms inherent effective demand gap. Economic democracy has been proposed as a component of larger socioeconomic ideologies, as a stand-alone theory, for example, as a means to securing full economic rights, it opens a path to full political rights, defined as including the former. Both market and non-market theories of economic democracy have been proposed, according to many analysts, deficiency of effective demand is the most fundamental economic problem. That is, modern society does not earn income to purchase its output. While balanced mixed economies have existed throughout history, veteran Project Manager for the U. S. Treasury Department. Cook, and other critics claim that command economies are predominate, as common resources are monopolized by imperial centers of wealth and power, conditions of scarcity are imposed artificially upon the majority, resulting in large-scale socio-economic imbalance. In the Georgist view of any system, wealth includes all material things produced by labor for the satisfaction of human desires. Land, labor and capital are generally considered the essential factors in producing wealth, land includes all natural opportunities and forces. Capital includes the portion of wealth devoted to producing more wealth, according to Henry George, People seek to satisfy their desires with the least exertion. Human beings interact with nature to produce goods and services that other human beings need or desire, the laws and customs that govern the relationships among these entities constitute the economic structure of a given society. Products are exchanged in a market -- that is to say, goods and services are bought and sold at prices determined for the most part by competition, individual enterprises compete with one another in providing goods and services to consumers, each enterprise trying to make a profit. This competition is the determinant of prices. Most of the people who work for pay in this society work for other people, most working people are wage labourers. Supply and demand are generally accepted as market functions for establishing prices, organisations typically endeavor to 1) minimize the cost of production, 2) increase sales, in order to 3) maximize profits. In chapter 3 of his book, Community Organizing, Theory and Practice, Biklen states that, according to this viewpoint, orporate power, upper class power, uneven distribution of wealth and prejudice cause social problems. He problem is not one of poverty, but of enormous wealth, the problem is not one of gaps or cracks in an otherwise fine system but of a system which perpetuates prejudicial views concerning race, sex, age, and disability. The problem is not one of incompetence but of barriers to education, jobs and this perspective is, above all, eclectic. It embraces Marxs criticism of class inequality but is not only a social class analysis
7.
E-democracy
–
E-democracy, also known as digital democracy or Internet democracy, incorporates 21st-century information and communications technology to promote democracy. It is a form of government in all adult citizens are presumed to be eligible to participate equally in the proposal, development. E-democracy encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free, a speech given by Hillary Clinton on January 21,2010, addressed the issue of internet freedom and the role that new technologies have played in shaping democratic practices. The spread of information through the internet has encouraged freedom. The internet is used for promoting human rights, including speech, religion, expression, peaceful assembly, to governments accountability. Clinton supports the freedom to connect, the freedom to connect – the idea that governments should not prevent people from connecting to the internet, to websites, or to each other. The freedom to connect is like the freedom of assembly, only in cyberspace and it allows individuals to get online, come together, and hopefully cooperate. Once youre on the internet, you dont need to be a tycoon or a star to have a huge impact on society. The Internet has several attributes that encourage thinking about it as a democratic medium, the lack of centralized control makes censorship difficult. Another example is the mass communication on the internet, such as through newsgroups, chat rooms. This communication ignored the boundaries established with broadcast media, such as newspapers or radio, finally, because Internet is a massive digital network with open standards, universal and inexpensive access to a wide variety of communication media and models could actually be attained. Some practical issues involving e-democracy include, effective participation, voting equality at decision stage, enlightened understanding, control of the agenda, systemic issues may include cyber-security concerns and protection of sensitive data from third parties. Strictly speaking, modern democracies are generally republics, where the people elect representatives, they are not true democracies and they may be referred to as more or less democratic depending on how well the government represents the will of the people. A shift to E-democracy would resemble a change in the form of government as much as an improvement in the existing system, Democracy in America has become reliant on the Internet, because the Internet is a primary source of information for most Americans. The Internet educates people on democracy, helping people stay up to date with what is happening in their government, Online advertising is becoming more popular for political candidates and groups opinions on propositions. The Internet is the first place that most people look for information, the reason for this, and especially for younger voters, is that it is easy and reliable when used correctly, thus lowering an individuals workload. This gives the user a sense of instant gratification that is crucial in the era of multitasking on computers, if the information is not easy to find then most people will not look for it. Because the Internet is so friendly, people are more likely to research
8.
Jacksonian democracy
–
Jacksonian democracy was a 19th-century political philosophy in the United States that espoused greater democracy for the common man, as that term was then defined. Originating with President Andrew Jackson and his supporters, it became the dominant political worldview for a generation. It emerged when the long-dominant Democratic-Republican Party became factionalized during the early-to-mid 1820s, broadly speaking, the era was characterized by a democratic spirit, and built upon Jacksons equal political policy. Even before the Jacksonian era began, suffrage had been extended to a majority of male adult citizens. Jacksonian democracy also promoted the strength of the presidency and executive branch at the expense of Congress, the Jacksonians demanded elected judges and rewrote many state constitutions to reflect the new values. In national terms they favored geographical expansion, justifying it in terms of Manifest Destiny, there was usually a consensus among both Jacksonians and Whigs that battles over slavery should be avoided. Jacksons expansion of democracy was largely limited to Americans of European descent, there was little or no progress for the rights of African-Americans and Native Americans. Jacksons biographer Robert V. Remini argues that Jacksonian Democracy, stretches the concept of democracy about as far as it can go, Jacksonian Democracy was built on the following, Expanded Suffrage – The Jacksonians believed that voting rights should be extended to all white men. The Whigs generally opposed Manifest Destiny and expansion, saying the nation should build up its cities, patronage – Also known as the spoils system, patronage was the policy of placing political supporters into appointed offices. Many Jacksonians held the view that political appointees in and out of office was not only the right. Jacksonians also held that long tenure in the service was corrupting. However, it led to the hiring of incompetent and sometimes corrupt officials due to the emphasis on party loyalty above any other qualifications. Strict constructionism – Like the Jeffersonians who strongly believed in the Kentucky, Jackson said that he would guard against all encroachments upon the legitimate sphere of State sovereignty. However, he was not a states rights extremist, indeed and this position was one basis for the Jacksonians opposition to the Second Bank of the United States. As the Jacksonians consolidated power, they more often advocated expanding federal power, the chief spokesman amongst laissez-faire advocates was William Leggett of the Locofocos in New York City. Opposition to banking – In particular, the Jacksonians opposed government-granted monopolies to banks, especially the national bank, Jackson said, The bank is trying to kill me, but I will kill it. The Whigs, who supported the Bank, were led by Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, and Nicholas Biddle. An important movement in the period from 1800 to 1830—before the Jacksonians were organized—was the expansion of the right to vote toward including all white men, older states with property restrictions dropped them, all but Rhode Island, Virginia and North Carolina by the mid 1820s
9.
Jeffersonian democracy
–
Jeffersonian democracy, named after its advocate Thomas Jefferson, was one of two dominant political outlooks and movements in the United States from the 1790s to the 1820s. The term was used to refer to the Democratic-Republican Party. Its themes continue to echo in the 21st century, although more of a base in the Libertarian and Republican parties. At the beginning of the Jeffersonian era, only two states, Vermont and Kentucky, had established universal white male suffrage by abolishing property requirements. By the end of the period, more than half of the states had followed suit, also, states now moved on to allowing popular votes for Presidential elections, canvassing voters in a more modern style. Jeffersons party, known today as the Democratic-Republican Party, was now in control of the apparatus of government, from the state legislature. Jefferson has been called the most democratic of the Founding fathers, the Jeffersonians advocated a narrow interpretation of the Constitutions Article I provisions granting powers to the federal government. They strenuously opposed the Federalist Party, led by Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton, President George Washington generally supported Hamiltons program for a financially strong national government. The election of Jefferson in 1800, which he called The revolution of 1800, brought in the Presidency of Thomas Jefferson, the spirit of Jeffersonian democracy dominated American politics from 1800 to 1824, the First Party System, under Jefferson and succeeding presidents James Madison and James Monroe. The Jeffersonians proved much more successful than the Federalists in building state, voters in every state formed blocs loyal to the Jeffersonian coalition. Prominent spokesmen for Jeffersonian principles included Madison, Albert Gallatin, John Randolph of Roanoke, Nathaniel Macon, John Taylor of Caroline, calhoun, John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay. Calhoun represented republicanism in the South and closely followed Jeffersonian themes, after 1830 the principles were still talked about but did not form the basis of a political party. Jeffersonian democracy is characterized by the core ideals, which Jefferson and his followers expressed in their writings, speeches. Jeffersonian democracy is a term, and some factions favored some positions more than others. While principled, with vehemently held core beliefs, the Jeffersonians had factions that disputed the meaning of their creed. For example, during the War of 1812, it became apparent that independent state militia units were inadequate for conducting a war against a major country. The new Secretary of War John C, calhoun, a Jeffersonian, proposed to build up the Army. With the support of most Republicans in Congress he got his way, the Jeffersonian party was officially the Republican Party It was the duty of citizens to vote, and the Jeffersonians invented many modern campaign techniques designed to get out the vote
10.
Liberal democracy
–
Liberal democracy is a liberal political ideology and a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of classical liberalism. It is also called western democracy, to define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either formally written or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world, a liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms, it may be a constitutional monarchy or a republic. It may have a system, a presidential system, or a semi-presidential system. Liberal democracies usually have universal suffrage, granting all citizens the right to vote regardless of race. Historically, however, some regarded as liberal democracies have had a more limited franchise. There may also be such as voters being required to register before being allowed to vote. The decisions made through elections are not by all of the citizens. The liberal democratic constitution defines the character of the state. The purpose of a constitution is seen as a limit on the authority of the government. Liberal democracy emphasises the separation of powers, an independent judiciary, Liberal democracies are likely to emphasise the importance of the state being a Rechtsstaat, i. e. a state that follows the principle of rule of law. Governmental authority is exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedure. In practice, democracies do have limits on certain freedoms, there are various legal limitations such as copyright and laws against defamation. There may be limits on speech, on attempts to undermine human rights. In the United States more than in Europe, during the Cold War, now they are more commonly applied to organisations perceived as promoting actual terrorism or the incitement of group hatred. Examples include anti-terrorism legislation, the shutting down of Hezbollah satellite broadcasts, critics claim that these limitations may go too far and that there may be no due and fair judicial process. The common justification for these limits is that they are necessary to guarantee the existence of democracy, for example, allowing free speech for those advocating mass murder undermines the right to life and security. Opinion is divided on how far democracy can extend to include the enemies of democracy in the democratic process, if relatively small numbers of people are excluded from such freedoms for these reasons, a country may still be seen as a liberal democracy
11.
Multi-party system
–
First-past-the-post requires concentrated areas of support for large representation in the legislature whereas proportional representation better reflects the range of a populations views. Proportional systems have multi-member districts with more than one elected from a given district to the same legislative body. Duvergers Law states that the number of political parties is one plus the number of seats in a district. In these countries, usually no single party has a majority by itself. Instead, multiple political parties form coalitions for the purpose of developing power blocks for governing, a system where only two parties have the possibility of winning an election is called two-party system. A system where three parties have a realistic possibility of winning an election or forming a coalition is sometimes called a Third-party system. Usually this is because the electoral system penalises the third party, in the 2010 elections, the Liberal Democrats gained 23% of the total vote but won less than 10% of the seats due to the First-Past-The-Post electoral system. Despite this, they still had enough seats to form coalitions with one of the two parties, or to make deals in order to gain their support. An example is the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition formed after the 2010 general election, another is the Lib-Lab pact during Prime Minister James Callaghans Minority Labour Government, when Labour lost its three-seat majority in 1977, the pact fell short of a full coalition. Unlike a one-party system, a multi-party system encourages the general constituency to form distinct, officially recognized groups. Each party competes for votes from the enfranchised constituents, a multi-party system prevents the leadership of a single party from controlling a single legislative chamber without challenge. If the government includes an elected Congress or Parliament, the parties may share power according to proportional representation or the first-past-the-post system, in proportional representation, each party wins a number of seats proportional to the number of votes it receives. In first-past-the-post, the electorate is divided into a number of districts and this gravitation is known as Duvergers law. Proportional representation, on the hand, does not have this tendency. But, recent coalition governments, such as that in the U. K. represent two-party systems rather than multi-party systems and this is regardless of the number of parties in government. A two-party system requires voters to align themselves in large blocs, some theories argue that this allows centrists to gain control. On the other hand, if there are multiple parties, each with less than a majority of the vote. This also promotes centrism, as well as promoting coalition-building skills while discouraging polarization, coalition Polarized pluralism Political organisation Ingroups and outgroups
12.
Participatory democracy
–
Participatory democracy emphasizes the broad participation of constituents in the direction and operation of political systems. Etymological roots of democracy imply that the people are in power, however, participatory democracy tends to advocate more involved forms of citizen participation and greater political representation than traditional representative democracy. Effectively increasing the scale of participation, and translating small but effective participation groups into small world networks, are currently being studied. Other advocates have emphasised the importance of face to face meetings and these scholars tend to stress the value of separation between the realm of civil society and the formal political realm. In 2011, considerable grassroots interest in participatory democracy was generated by the Occupy movement, Participatory democracy has a long history. One instance is the Iroquois confederacy which operates under the oldest surviving constitution in the world and this caused much hardship and discontent among the common people, with many having to sell their land due to debts, and even suffer from debt slavery. About a century later, Solons reforms were further enhanced for even more direct involvement of citizens by Cleisthenes. Athenian democracy came to an end in 322BC, when democracy was revived as a political system about 2000 years later, decisions were made by representatives rather than by the people themselves. A minor exception to this was the form of direct democracy which flourished in the Swiss Cantons from the later Middle Ages. In the late 19th century, a number of thinkers, including Oscar Wilde. During the Spanish civil war, from 1936–1938, the parts of Spain controlled by anarchist members of the Spanish Republican faction was governed almost totally by participatory democracy. In 1938 the anarchists were displaced after betrayal by their former Republican allies in the Communist party, the mystic and philosopher Simone Weil, who had helped the Spanish anarchists as a combat soldier, would later promote participatory democracy in her political manifesto The Need for Roots. In the 1960s the promotion and use of participatory democracy was a theme for elements of the American Left. In the 1980s, the profile of participatory democracy within academia was raised by James S. Fishkin, a World Bank study found that participatory democracy in these cities seemed to result in considerable improvement in the quality of life for residents. In the early 21st century, low profile experiments in participatory democracy began to spread throughout South and North Americas, to China, across the European Union and also to Great Britain. A partial example in the USA occurred with drawing up the plans to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina and their decision process was an attempt to combine equality, mass participation, and deliberation, but caused slow decisions. By November 2011 the movement had been criticized for not yet coalescing around clearly identifiable aims. Bioregional democracy is often but not necessarily participatory, grassroots democracy is an alternative term that has been used to imply almost any combination of the above
13.
Radical democracy
–
Radical democracy was articulated by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe in their book Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, written in 1985. They argue that social movements which attempt to create social and political change need a strategy which challenges neoliberal and this strategy is to expand the liberal definition of democracy, based on freedom and equality, to include difference. Radical democracy means the root of democracy, Laclau and Mouffe claim that liberal democracy and deliberative democracy, in their attempts to build consensus, oppress differing opinions, races, classes, genders, and worldviews. In the world, in a country, and in a movement there are many differences which resist consensus. Radical democracy is not only accepting of difference, dissent and antagonisms, Laclau and Mouffe argue based on the assumption that there are oppressive power relations that exist in society and that those oppressive relations should be made visible, re-negotiated and altered. By building democracy around difference and dissent, oppressive power relations existing in societies are able to come to the forefront so that they can be challenged, in other contexts, radical democracy is a term used to refer to the post-Marxist perspectives of Italian radicalism—especially Paolo Virno. Since Laclau and Mouffe argued for a democracy, many other theorists. For example, bell hooks and Henry Giroux have all written about education for a radical democracy, paulo Freires work, although initiated decades before Laclau and Mouffe, can also be read through similar lenses. Theorists such as Paul Chatterton and Richard JF Day have written about the importance of democracy within some of the autonomous movements in Latin America. Because of radical democracys focus on difference, and challenging oppressive power relations, it has seen as conducive to post-colonial theory. However, the concept of democracy is seen in some circles as colonial in nature due to its reliance on a western notion of democracy. Also, radical democracy challenges consensus decision-making processes which are essential to many indigenous governing practices, the EZLN – Zapatista Army of National Liberation in Mexico. Wolin Romand Coles William E. Connolly
14.
Representative democracy
–
Representative democracy is a type of democracy founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people, as opposed to direct democracy. Representative democracy is often presented as the most efficient form of democracy possible in mass societies and it arguably allows for efficient ruling by a sufficiently small number of people on behalf of the larger number. Government efficiency can be judged based on metric of cost effectiveness, representatives voting on behalf of the people allows for a monetary benefit as there is lessened use of polling stations, vote counters, etc. The government is responsible for paying for the wages of the representatives. This system of governance is also time efficient as decisions can be made by a select few and it is a system in which people elect their lawmakers, who are then held accountable to them for their activity within government. It has been described by political theorists including Robert A Dahl, Gregory Houston. In it the power is in the hands of the representatives who are elected by the people in elections. Representatives are elected by the public, as in elections for the national legislature. Elected representatives may hold the power to other representatives, presidents, or other officers of the government or of the legislature. The constitution may also provide for some deliberative democracy or direct popular measures, however, these are not always binding and usually require some legislative action—legal power usually remains firmly with representatives. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him, their opinion, high respect, their business, unremitted attention. It is his duty to sacrifice his repose, his pleasures, his satisfactions, to theirs, and above all, ever, and in all cases, to prefer their interest to his own. But his unbiassed opinion, his judgment, his enlightened conscience, he ought not to sacrifice to you, to any man. These he does not derive from your pleasure, no, nor from the law and they are a trust from Providence, for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you, not his only, but his judgment. The Roman Republic was the first government in the world to have a representative government. In Britain, Simon de Montfort is remembered as one of the fathers of representative government for holding two famous parliaments, the first, in 1258, stripped the King of unlimited authority and the second, in 1265, included ordinary citizens from the towns. Later, in the 17th century, the Parliament of England pioneered some of the ideas and systems of liberal democracy culminating in the Glorious Revolution, the American Revolution led to the creation of a new Constitution of the United States in 1787
15.
Islamic democracy
–
Islamic democracy is a political ideology that seeks to apply Islamic principles to public policy within a democratic framework. Countries which fulfil the three basic features include Afghanistan, Iran, and Malaysia, the concepts of liberalism and democratic participation were already present in the medieval Islamic world. It can be viewed similar to how the minister is chosen in many nations. The legislative power of the Caliph was always restricted by the class, the ulama. Since the law came from the scholars, this prevented the Caliph from dictating legal results. Laws were decided based on the ijma of the Ummah, which was most often represented by the legal scholars, in order to qualify as a legal scholar, it was required that they obtain a doctorate known as the ijazat attadris wa l-ifttd from a madrasa. In many ways, classical Islamic law functioned like a constitutional law, legal scholar L. Ali Khan argues that Islam is fully compatible with democracy. In his book, A Theory of Universal Democracy, Khan provides a critique of liberal democracy and he presents the concept of fusion state in which religion and state are fused. There are no contradictions in Gods universe, says Khan, contradictions represent the limited knowledge that human beings have. According to the Quran and the Sunnah, Muslims are fully capable of preserving spirituality, Muslim democrats, including Ahmad Moussalli, argue that concepts in the Quran point towards some form of democracy, or at least away from despotism. These concepts include shura, ijma, al-hurriyya, al-huqquq al-shariyya, for example, shura may include electing leaders to represent and govern on the community’s behalf. This viewpoint, however, is disputed by more traditional Muslims, much debate occurs on the subject of which Islamic traditions are fixed principles, and which are subject to democratic change, or other forms of modification in view of changing circumstances. Some Muslims allude to an Islamic style of democracy which would recognize such distinctions, another sensitive issue involves the status of monarchs and other leaders, the degree of loyalty which Muslims owe such people, and what to do in case of a conflicting loyalties. According to the Shia understanding, Muhammad named as his successor, his son-in-law, the largest Shia grouping — the Twelvers branch — recognizes a series of Twelve Imams, the last of which is still alive and the Shia are waiting for his reappearance. Since the revolution in Iran, the largest Shia country, Twelver Shia political thought has been dominated by that of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder and leader of the revolution. Khomeini argued that in the absence of the Hidden Imam and other divinely-appointed figures, Muslims have not only the right, to that end they must turn to scholars of Islamic law who are qualified to interpret the Quran and the writings of the imams. Khomeini distinguishes between Conventional Fiqh and Dynamic Fiqh, which he believes to also be necessary, Khomeini divided the Islamic commandments or Ahkam into three branches, the primary commandments the secondary commandments and the state commandments. This list includes all commandments which relate to public affairs, such as constitutions, social security, insurance, bank, labour law, taxation, elections, congress, etc
16.
Theodemocracy
–
Theodemocracy was a theocratic political system that included elements of democracy. It was theorized by Joseph Smith, founder of the Latter Day Saint movement, according to Smith, theodemocracy was meant to be a fusion of traditional republican democratic rights under the United States Constitution with theocratic principles. Smith described it as a system under which God and the held the power to rule in righteousness. Smith believed that this would be the form of government that would rule the world upon the Second Coming of Christ and this polity would constitute the Kingdom of God which was foretold by the prophet Daniel in the Old Testament. Theodemocracy was an influence for the short lived State of Deseret in the American Old West, early Latter Day Saints were typically Jacksonian Democrats and were highly involved in representative republican political processes. According to historian Marvin S. Smith wrote in 1842 that earthly governments have failed in all their attempts to promote eternal peace, is rent, from center to circumference, with party strife, political intrigues, and sectional interest. Smiths belief was that only a government led by deity could banish the destructiveness of unlimited faction and bring order, Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt stated in 1855, the government of God is a government of union. Smith believed that a theodemocratic polity would be the fulfillment of Christs prayer in the Gospel of Matthew, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth. Further, Smith taught that the Kingdom of God, which he called the gospel of Jesus Christ. He Lord does not, neither will we control you in the least in the exercise of your agency and we place the principles of life before you. Do as you please, and we will protect you in your rights, the theodemocratic system was to be based on principles extant in the United States Constitution, and held sacred the will of the people and individual rights. Indeed, the United States and the Constitution in particular were revered by Smith, however, in a theodemocratic system, God was to be the ultimate power and would give law to the people which they would be free to accept or reject, presumably based on republican principles. Somewhat analogous to a system within a theodemocracy, sovereignty would reside jointly with the people. While Christ would be the king of kings and lord of lords, He would only reside on Earth. Young explained that a theodemocracy would consist of officers and branches. as there are now to that of the United States. It is known that the Council of Fifty, which Smith organized in Nauvoo, the Council was led by Smith and included many members of the LDS central leadership. However it also included several prominent non-Mormons, full consensus was required for the Council to pass any measures, and each participant was encouraged and in fact commanded to fully speak their minds on all issues brought before the body. Debate would continue until consensus could be reached, however, if consensus could not be reached, then Smith would seek the will of the Lord and break the deadlock through divine revelation
17.
Semi-direct democracy
–
Direct democracy is a form of democracy in which people decide policy initiatives directly. This differs from the majority of democracies, which are representative democracies. Direct democracy is similar to, but distinct from, representative democracy, two leading forms of direct democracy are participatory democracy and deliberative democracy. Semi direct democracies in which representatives administer day-to-day governance, but the citizens remain the sovereign, the first two forms—referendums and initiatives—are examples of direct legislation. Compulsory referendum subjects the legislation drafted by political elites to a popular vote. This is the most common form of direct legislation, popular referendum empowers citizens to make a petition that calls existing legislation to a citizens vote. Institutions specify the frame for a valid petition and the number of signatures required. This form of direct democracy effectively grants the voting public a veto on laws adopted by the elected legislature, initiatives may be direct or indirect, With the direct initiative, a successful proposition is placed directly on the ballot to be subject to vote. Such a form of initiative is utilized by Switzerland for constitutional amendments. Power of Recall gives the public the power to elected officials from office before the end of their term. Some of the most important modern thinkers who were inspired by the concept of democracy are Cornelius Castoriadis, Hannah Arendt. The earliest known direct democracy is said to be the Athenian democracy in the 5th century BC, although it was not a democracy, women, foreigners. There were only about 30,000 male citizens, but several thousand of them were active in each year. Modern democracies, being representative, not direct, do not resemble the Athenian system, also relevant to the history of direct democracy is the history of Ancient Rome, specifically the Roman Republic, beginning around 509 BC. Rome displayed many aspects of democracy, both direct and indirect, from the era of Roman monarchy all the way to the collapse of the Roman Empire. As to direct democracy, the ancient Roman Republic had a system of citizen lawmaking, or citizen formulation and passage of law, and a citizen veto of legislature-made law. Many historians mark the end of the Republic with the passage of a law named the Lex Titia,27 November 43 BC, modern-era citizen lawmaking began in the towns of Switzerland in the 13th century. In 1847, the Swiss added the statute referendum to their national constitution and they soon discovered that merely having the power to veto Parliaments laws was not enough
18.
Social democracy
–
In this period, social democrats embraced a mixed economy based on the predominance of private property, with only a minority of essential utilities and public services under public ownership. By 1868–1869, Marxism had become the official theoretical basis of the first social democratic party established in Europe, in this period, social democracy became associated with reformist socialism. The origins of social democracy have been traced to the 1860s, with the rise of the first major party in Europe. 1864 saw the founding of the International Workingmens Association, also known as the First International, another issue in the First International was the role of reformism. Although Lassalle was not a Marxist, he was influenced by the theories of Marx and Engels, however unlike Marxs and Engelss The Communist Manifesto, Lassalle promoted class struggle in a more moderate form. While Marx viewed the state negatively as an instrument of class rule that should only exist temporarily upon the rise to power of the proletariat and then dismantled, Lassalle accepted the state. Lassalle viewed the state as a means through which workers could enhance their interests, Lassalles strategy was primarily electoral and reformist, with Lassalleans contending that the working class needed a political party that fought above all for universal adult male suffrage. The ADAVs party newspaper was called Der Sozialdemokrat, Marx and Engels responded to the title Sozialdemocrat with distaste, Engels once writing, But what a title, Sozialdemokrat. Why dont they simply call it The Proletarian. Marx agreed with Engels that Sozialdemokrat was a bad title, there was a Marxist faction within the ADAV represented by Wilhelm Liebknecht who became one of the editors of the Die Sozialdemokrat. Friction in the ADAV arose over Lassalles policy of an approach to Bismarck that had assumed incorrectly that Bismarck in turn would be friendly towards them. This approach was opposed by the partys Marxists, including Liebknecht, opposition in the ADAV to Lassalles friendly approach to Bismarcks government resulted in Liebknecht resigning from his position as editor of Die Sozialdemokrat and leaving the ADAV in 1865. Though the SDAP was not officially Marxist, it was the first major organization to be led by Marxists and Marx. The party adopted stances similar to those adopted by Marx at the First International, there was intense rivalry and antagonism between the SDAP and the ADAV, with the SDAP being highly hostile to the Prussian government while the ADAV pursued a reformist and more cooperative approach. In spite of such militant rhetoric to appeal to the working class, in 1875 Marx attacked the Gotha Program that became the program of Social Democratic Party of Germany in the same year in his Critique of the Gotha Program. Marx was not optimistic that Germany at the time was not open to a means to achieve socialism. In addition he noticed a change over the relations between the two classes. The Reform Acts of 1867 and 1884 make an approach to universal suffrage. The Fabian Society was founded as a group from the Fellowship of the New Life due to opposition within that group to socialism
19.
Democratic socialism
–
Some tendencies of democratic socialism advocate for revolution in order to transition to socialism, distinguishing it from some forms of social democracy. For Hain, this divide is more important than the revolutionary/reformist divide. A similar, but more complex, argument is made by Nicos Poulantzas, Draper himself uses the term revolutionary-democratic socialism as a type of socialism from below in his The Two Souls of Socialism. Similarly, about Eugene Debs, he writes, Debsian socialism evoked a response from the heart of the people. In contrast, other tendencies of democratic socialism advocate for eventual socialism that follow a gradual, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism, rather than a revolutionary one. We are socialists because we are developing a strategy for achieving that vision. The term is used to refer to policies that are compatible with and exist within capitalism. Though this is not always the case, for example, Robert M. contended that a more benevolent form of capitalism had emerged since the. According to Crosland, it was now possible to achieve equality in society without the need for fundamental economic transformation. Some proponents of market socialism see it as a system compatible with the political ideology of democratic socialism. The term democratic socialism can be used even another way, to refer to a version of the Soviet model that was reformed in a democratic way, for example, Mikhail Gorbachev described perestroika as building a new, humane and democratic socialism. Consequently, some former Communist parties have rebranded themselves as democratic socialist, justification of democratic socialism can be found in the works of social philosophers like Charles Taylor and Axel Honneth, among others. Honneth has put forward the view that political and economic ideologies have a social basis, contra liberal individualism, Honneth has emphasised the inter-subjective dependence between humans, that is, our well-being depends on recognising others and being recognised by them. Democratic socialism, with its emphasis on social collectivism, could be seen as a way of safeguarding this dependency and their concern for both democracy and social justice marks them out as key precursors of democratic socialism. Owens followers again stressed both participatory democracy and economic socialisation, in the form of consumer co-operatives, credit unions, the Chartists similarly combined a working class politics with a call for greater democracy. The British moral philosopher John Stuart Mill also came to advocate a form of socialism within a liberal context. Democratic socialism became a prominent movement at the end of the 19th century, in Germany, the Eisenacher socialist group merged with the Lassallean socialist group, in 1875, to form the German Social Democratic Party. In Australia, the Labour and Socialist movements were gaining traction, the ALP has been the main driving force for workers rights in Australia, backed by Australian Trade Unions, in particular the Australian Workers Union
This article incorporates public domain material from the Library of Congress Country Studies website http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/.