Can We Criticize Democracy?
Uploaded by
ScribdTranslationsCan We Criticize Democracy?
Uploaded by
ScribdTranslationsCAN WE CRITICIZE DEMOCRACY?
Established in Ancient Greece in the 5th century before Christ, the
Democracy, as its etymology indicates, is a system based on the "
"sovereignty of the people." According to Abraham Lincoln, it represents "the
government of the people, by the people, for the people," a phrase that was introduced
in the French Constitution of 1958. It is possible and normal to criticize the
democracy, since the freedom of expression and therefore criticism are fundamental
even of the system. However, the question we can ask ourselves is: "Is
Is it legitimate to criticize democracy?" In the first instance, we will see for
what reasons democracy is difficult to criticize, as it represents
fundamental values that only she protects. Then, we will see that despite everything,
the system presents some questionable aspects.
Democracy is a system of government where the people are sovereign and
therefore participate in the decisions of your state as a citizen. These decisions are made
indirectly or representatively. As Aristotle states, power comes
from below: democracy rests on the governance of each by all and of all
by each in turn. It is worth noting that in this way, the link between governing
and governance is present, and that regimes, autocratic for example, are of this
Impossible facts. Indeed, totalitarian regimes control or even prohibit a
part of fundamental freedoms, particularly freedom of expression in order to
manipulate the population and justify a system that is nonetheless illegitimate. To make the
possible democracy, Montesquieu speaks to us about the separation of powers in his
work 'On the Spirit of Laws', because according to him, the separation of political powers
is necessary. This prevents putting into the hands of a single one and the same
man too much power because "every man who has power is prone to abuse it."
Democracy is therefore the most legitimate system there is; it is based on a
Constitution, fundamental law that defines the rights and freedoms of citizens as well
that the political organization, political power whose plurality is ensured. The
Regular consultation with citizens ensures effective sovereignty;
1
democracy seems to be the ideal way to connect the governed and the governing and
maintain a favorable cohesion for improvements, debates.... This system
seems therefore hardly critiquable insofar as it is the only one to guarantee a
"transparency" of power.
The law is established by all through sovereignty and remains the same for everyone.
According to the principle of equality in democracy. Citizens are obliged to engage in it.
to conform, in order to ensure rights and freedoms, concepts that seem difficult to guarantee
in another context. Indeed, how to maintain freedom and equality of
men without laws to guarantee it? As soon as freedom is uncontrolled, it
trespass on that of others because men are driven by desire and well
often unable to serve the common good; we quickly return to a state of
nature where "the law of the strongest" prevails. It is therefore necessary for the people to obey
laws that not only guarantee him fundamental freedoms, but
also guarantee those of its neighbor by repressing abuses of freedom. Thus, the
The principle of democracy takes into account the interests of all. This allows
summarized by the following precept of the Enlightenment philosophy: "The freedom of some
stops where that of others begins." Thus, as Martin Luther King says,
A law can never force a man to love me, but it is important that it
he forbids them to lynch me." Criticizing democracy thus seems illegitimate: the law
guarantees the freedom of all, but also equality, because "The love of democracy is that
of equality" according to Montesquieu. No other regime for the moment has been able to defend
these two values better than democracy, values that are a priori invaluable and
The Intouchables.
One of the glories of democracy is that it gives the people the right to
protester" says Martin Luther King. It is therefore possible, in a democracy,
to express any criticism whatsoever, and thus to make a judgment about the
the regime itself. Indeed, the government does not manage power alone; it must
legitimize their decisions with the people. That is why, in an attempt to improve
a decision so that it is oriented towards the general interest, discussion and debate
imposes itself: the people have the right to criticize their representatives because democracy does not
can be excluded from a public debate that allows for diverse opinions and beliefs. The
Critique is thus inseparable from democracy; rather than being a constraint.
for the system, it legitimizes it and is an integral part of it.
2
Despite the unmatched legitimacy of democracy, the system allows for some
disadvantages. As we have seen, political sovereignty is one of
foundations of democracy. In order to guarantee this sovereignty, everyone must
participate in the decisions of the State, particularly through voting. For a citizen, voting
is a right but also a duty, this is indeed the first thing one learns
to children within the framework of civic education. However, several problems arise.
First of all, political disinterest seems to be worsening these days:
Abstentionism is taking alarming proportions and how to ensure the
sovereignty of a state when half of the French do not vote? A problem
perhaps the reason lies deeper: if one does not take an interest in politics, it is difficult
to know why, for whom, how we vote. Thus, our minister of
Christine Lagarde explained that her sons had 'not voted' in the first round.
regional elections tour because, they told him, "we don't understand anything about it"
regions". We can also mention the issue of citizenship status: all the
the world cannot vote and women's suffrage in France was granted in
only sixty-five years old.
Then, when we vote, we vote for our personal interest, we vote according to
our way of seeing things. It is evident that in an individualistic society, the
the common good takes a back seat for the average citizen. Furthermore, a politician cannot
represent or satisfy as many divergent viewpoints as those of all the
existing parties. The population is in any case attracted by a majority,
supported by a mass media that conveys demagoguery of proportions
different according to the parties. However, information must be free for citizens
make informed decisions. In a work entitled
On Democracy in America, Tocqueville offers an analysis of democracy
American. He speaks to us about democracy as the dictatorship of the majority.
which according to President James Madison "The rules are too often decided
not according to the rules of justice and the rights of minorities, but by the force of a
interested and authoritarian majority." This may evoke the notion of prisoners.
from the cave of the philosopher Plato. These prisoners represent the part of the people
who prefers not to question themselves or challenge an established order. They
do not take into account the requests and needs of the minority. However, this
minority is an integral part of society. Thus, according to Winston Churchill, the
3
the best critique of democracy is a five-minute interview with a voter
means.” Indeed, nothing can allow us to affirm that the majority is right: a
Democratic choice is not necessarily a good choice for the future of a society.
Another criticism of democracy is that its foundations have not
have never been respected either yesterday or today. It is enough to take as an example the fact
In 2002, the gap between the average monthly salaries of women and men
was 25.3%! Part of it is explained for natural reasons but the rest
falls under discrimination. More broadly, no 'democratic' society is
reached the very ideal of democracy, an ideal that is meant to be universal: number
among them have witnessed slavery, colonization, segregation,
apartheid or more generally discrimination. This violates the founding element of
democracy is the first article of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of
Citizen: "All men are born and remain free and equal in rights."
Despite struggles, like that of Martin Luther King in civil rights
Americans, discrimination is still present, which leads us to think
that personal interest can take precedence over the common good to the detriment of
certain minorities.
Democracy today is the most legitimate system that exists and has.
imposed as the guarantor of freedoms and equality, but also of a law by all and
for all that prevents totalitarian regimes. But governments are
composed of human beings, who make promises that they do not always keep
and who sometimes perhaps forget the interest of all. The solution might be to
listen to the citizen, in order to avoid a disinterest in politics or even
drifts that do not respect certain foundations of democracy including
the equality of all. Moreover, democracy, even in a legitimate way, can leave the
the place for extremes, one only needs to remember the election of the NSDAP in Germany during
the elections of 1933