What is a democracy?

[Puppycow]

Can a country with institutionalized slavery be a democracy?

Can a country that only allows one sex to vote be a democracy?

Can a country that only allows one political party be a democracy?

Can a country with an unelected Supreme Leader be a democracy?

Can a country where the fairness of the election process is doubtful be a democracy?

Can a country where only members of a certain religion have full rights as citizens be a democracy?

Can a country with a monarch be a democracy?

Can a country where the votes of some citizens count more than those of others be a democracy?

 

[Virus]

Democracy most often refers to Liberal Democracy or Liberalism. That is fair, secret ballot elections, separation of powers, independent judiciary, equality of rights, protection of minorities and so on.

You could have plebiscites with those things but such a country would not be thought of as a liberal democracy. Except the monarch one, many liberal democracies have monarchs.

 

[theprestige]

Can a country with institutionalized slavery be a democracy?

Can a country that only allows one sex to vote be a democracy?

Can a country that only allows one political party be a democracy?

Can a country with an unelected Supreme Leader be a democracy?

Can a country where the fairness of the election process is doubtful be a democracy?

Can a country where only members of a certain religion have full rights as citizens be a democracy?

Can a country with a monarch be a democracy?

Can a country where the votes of some citizens count more than those of others be a democracy?

Every self-styled democracy on the planet today discriminates between people who are allowed to vote, and people who aren't.

Can a country where only registered citizens are allowed to vote be a democracy?

Can a country where convicted felons are barred from voting be a democracy?

Every democracy draws the line somewhere. In the OP, you draw the line in a variety of distasteful places. I imagine that would make for some pretty distasteful democracies, but it's not clear to me why drawing the line in any of those places would make it no longer a democracy.

This seems to me like the flip side of the Gaza-voting-for-Hamas coin. Assume for the sake of argument that Hamas was elected "democratically". That doesn't magically make it a good idea, nor does it magically make the people of Gaza right in their choice of government.

Democracies can be wrong, or distasteful, and still be democracies, I think.

What do you think, Puppycow? How do you define democracy? Where do you draw the line?

Do you find it offensive that a community with slavery might still claim the label "democracy"?

 

[Segnosaur]

Can a country with an unelected Supreme Leader be a democracy?
Can a country with a monarch be a democracy?

Happens in Canada and some of the other commenwealth countries. Technically our 'head of state' is the Queen. Much of the monarch's function is ceremonial (with real power held by our House of Commons), but she's still there (or, here representative is anyways). Yet we're a "democracy" of sorts.

Perhaps you should make a distinction between monarchs with "absolute power" and those with powers limited by a constitution.

Can a country where the fairness of the election process is doubtful be a democracy?

Every democracy probably has "fairness issues". The U.S. has gerrymandering. In the 1995 Referendum in Quebec there was a problem of "missing ballots". The question is whether those issues have the ability to overwhelm the decisions of the majority.

Can a country where the votes of some citizens count more than those of others be a democracy?

That probably happens in a lot of countries too.

In Canada, MPs in urban ridings represent a larger number of voters than MPs in urban ridings. Therefore, a voter living in the country has more 'power' than one in the city. Similar situation occurs in the U.S., where a senator for a central state is representing fewer people than a senator for New York/California/Texas.

 

[Thunder]

answers inserted

Can a country with institutionalized slavery be a democracy?

-no

Can a country that only allows one sex to vote be a democracy?

-no

Can a country that only allows one political party be a democracy?

-no

Can a country with an unelected Supreme Leader be a democracy?

-no

Can a country where the fairness of the election process is doubtful be a democracy?

Can a country where only members of a certain religion have full rights as citizens be a democracy?

-no

Can a country with a monarch be a democracy?

-a ceremonail monarch? sure.

Can a country where the votes of some citizens count more than those of others be a democracy?

-no

 

[Bob Blaylock]

In Canada, MPs in urban ridings represent a larger number of voters than MPs in urban ridings. Therefore, a voter living in the country has more 'power' than one in the city.

I think you did not mean for the highlighted phrase to be the same in these two instances.

Similar situation occurs in the U.S., where a senator for a central state is representing fewer people than a senator for New York/California/Texas.

It is this way by design—the reason why our Congress consists of two houses.

In the Senate, each state is equally represented, regardless of size or population. In the House of representatives, each citizen is equally-represented, regardless of the size or population of the state in which he lives.

 

[Thunder]

In the strictest terms, a democracy is a nation ruled by the popular rule of the people. No monarch and no dictator.

But today, a democracy also means a democratic state that upholds certain fundamental freedoms & rights, along with respecting and protecting the needs and will of the minority.

 

[angrysoba]

Can a country where the fairness of the election process is doubtful be a democracy?

Yes, the fairness of the electoral process of any democracy is endlessly doubted and mulled over.

A country where the fairness of the electoral process is never doubted is almost certainly not a democracy.

 

[angrysoba]

In the strictest terms, a democracy is a nation ruled by the popular rule of the people. No monarch and no dictator.

But today, a democracy also means a democratic state that upholds certain fundamental freedoms & rights, along with respecting and protecting the needs and will of the minority.

You're confusing democracy with "liberalism". What you may be describing is some kind of liberal democracy but there probably are democracies which are simply illiberal.

 

[Thunder]

You're confusing democracy with "liberalism". What you may be describing is some kind of liberal democracy but there probably are democracies which are simply illiberal.

no, I am connecting democracy with liberal democracy.

most if not all democracies in the world today are indeed liberal democracies...or at least strive to be.

 

[Puppycow]

Every self-styled democracy on the planet today discriminates between people who are allowed to vote, and people who aren't.

Can a country where only registered citizens are allowed to vote be a democracy?

Can a country where convicted felons are barred from voting be a democracy?

Every democracy draws the line somewhere. In the OP, you draw the line in a variety of distasteful places. I imagine that would make for some pretty distasteful democracies, but it's not clear to me why drawing the line in any of those places would make it no longer a democracy.

This seems to me like the flip side of the Gaza-voting-for-Hamas coin. Assume for the sake of argument that Hamas was elected "democratically". That doesn't magically make it a good idea, nor does it magically make the people of Gaza right in their choice of government.

Democracies can be wrong, or distasteful, and still be democracies, I think.

What do you think, Puppycow? How do you define democracy? Where do you draw the line?

Do you find it offensive that a community with slavery might still claim the label "democracy"?

Of the ones I mentioned in the OP, I wouldn't consider any of the ones other than the last two to be democracies worth the name.

And you have a good point: If a democracy elects Hitler, it doesn't matter how fair the process was, it's not a choice we have to respect or legitimate.

Anyway, it was just a thought that occurred to me, because although America is considered a democracy, is it really true that America has always been a democracy. I would say that it didn't truly become one until women were granted suffrage. Perhaps even until Jim Crow was overturned. And certainly not when there was slavery and only men of property had the franchise.

 

[angrysoba]

no, I am connecting democracy with liberal democracy.

most if not all democracies in the world today are indeed liberal democracies...or at least strive to be.

Like Iraq?

The point is that the distinction is necessary. In some sectarian cultures where people vote for whoever best fits their ethnic or religious outlook, liberalism is not a concern for the voters in the majority. They'll simply say, "Ha ha, we're in the majority and that's democracy!"

 

[Thunder]

Like Iraq?

Most= many but not all.

 

[theprestige]

Of the ones I mentioned in the OP, I wouldn't consider any of the ones other than the last two to be democracies worth the name.

What's the name worth, though?

You seem to be implying that only certain levels of representation can properly be called democracies, and that it's improper to use the term for other, lower levels of representation.

If this is what you mean, can you be more specific about your definition of democracy?

Do you know whether your definition closely corresponds to other, mainstream definitions of democracy?

Is it important to you to use the mainstream definition of democracy, or do you prefer to use your own, alternative definition in this thread?

And you have a good point: If a democracy elects Hitler, it doesn't matter how fair the process was, it's not a choice we have to respect or legitimate.

How fair? Or how democratic? Do you mean for the two to be synonymous?

Anyway, it was just a thought that occurred to me, because although America is considered a democracy, is it really true that America has always been a democracy. I would say that it didn't truly become one until women were granted suffrage. Perhaps even until Jim Crow was overturned. And certainly not when there was slavery and only men of property had the franchise.

Why do you draw the line there? Why doesn't your definition of democracy require that the franchise be extended to all residents, and felons, and children above the age of twelve?

 

[Segnosaur]

Re: Can a country where the votes of some citizens count more than those of others be a democracy?

In Canada, MPs in urban ridings represent a larger number of voters than MPs in urban ridings. Therefore, a voter living in the country has more 'power' than one in the city.

I think you did not mean for the highlighted phrase to be the same in these two instances.

Yup, you're right... meant to say MPs in urban ridings represent a larger number of voters than MPs in rural ridings. (I did clarify things in the second sentence, when I talked about voters in the country having more power.)

Similar situation occurs in the U.S., where a senator for a central state is representing fewer people than a senator for New York/California/Texas.

It is this way by design...In the Senate, each state is equally represented, regardless of size or population.

Oh, I know why its done, and I actually think its a good idea. However, it still means that a voter in (for example) Wyoming has more power than one in California.

(Its not that a difference in "voter power" doesn't exist, its just that the benefits of that difference outweigh whatever problems it may cause.)