What makes democracy popular

Although many people critique democratic politicians for their inauthenticity, politicians mirroring the beliefs of the people is actually positive because it ensures that that the majority of citizens' beliefs are reflected in national policies. Furthermore, it functions as a crucial check on people in positions of power because if they act in an unpopular or unethical way, they will likely be voted out of office.

Finally, living in a democracy is important because democracies are the most statistically significant factor in reducing inter and intra state conflict. Director of Policy Studies at the Kroc Institute David Cortright and his colleagues conducted a study to determine the validity of democratic peace theory and examine how regime type relates to violence. They concluded that democracies are much less likely to both engage in war with other states and to participate in civil wars.

This is likely because war, in any form, is politically unpopular as it costs human lives, which thus incentivizes democracies to avoid it at all costs. Civil wars in particular are unlikely in democracies because democratic governments function as a safety valve for discontent; while disaffected civilians living in democracies can express their grievances in the form of free speech or exercising their right to vote, citizens living in autocracies have no choice other than violence if they hope for governmental change because they lack political power.

Cortright also cites Rudolph Rummel's book Death By Government , in which Rummel finds that autocratic regimes are three and a half times more likely to commit genocide than democratic regimes. Cortright suggests this is a result of the prevalence of exclusionary ideology that is reinforced by authoritarian regimes in comparison with democratic ones. Some may argue that autocratic governments are preferable to democracies because they are more efficient.

It is true that autocratic regimes are able to pass and implement policies in a more timely manner. However, the power of democracy lies in its ability to gradually change.

Complex issues should not be swiftly and unilaterally decided by one ruler; they should be debated upon by large groups of people examining both sides of the issue until the majority is able to find a consensus. Another common criticism of democracy that proponents of autocracies present is the lack of expertise of voters.

While every voter is certainly not an expert on every topic, democracies encourage citizens to learn more about the world around them by creating a mutual responsibility between each voter and his or her nation, and by extension, his or her world.

When talking about the importance of democracy it is important to define it accurately. At its heart is the concept of the population choosing a government through regular, free, and fair elections.

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. In Europe and the English-speaking world it is often assumed democracy naturally takes the form of liberal democracy — popular sovereignty but limited by a constitution which guarantees individual freedoms such as speech and rights such as to a fair trial.

Crucially these essential freedoms are not subject to a democratic vote. In fact, democracy does not necessarily have to be liberal. Certain nations today have illiberal democracies where voting continues but liberal characteristics, such as an independent judiciary and free press, have been compromised.

Defenders of liberal democracy say this actually makes these societies inherently undemocratic, as stripping away liberal guarantees leads to intimidation and coercion by the state, undermining elections. The guarantees of liberal democracy are intended to ensure no ethnic, geographic, class, or business interest dominates or exploits others to an unreasonable degree, and that there is fair and universal consent gained for government policies.

Arguably the importance of liberal democracy is two-fold: no other system of government guarantees the right to free expression of political preference; and no other system promotes progress through peaceful competition between different interests and ideas. This question is being asked a lot more as democracy is threatened by various forces around the world.

Some question the value of the popular vote when it leads to seismic shifts such as Brexit, and the election of demagogues who threaten liberal values. Even the American system, for a long time the exemplar of democratic freedoms, seems so polarized that it is in danger of becoming impotent, its ability to endure technological, demographic, and cultural change in doubt. Meanwhile, over the last years, a more technocratic, uniform form of politics has taken hold in the European Union EU , where democracy is arguably less responsive to citizens and large elements of the population feel excluded from the process of government.

More recently, non-democratic, authoritarian governments such as China have been praised for enduring the COVID pandemic better than democracies, because they are better able to compel specific behaviour from citizens without concern for individual liberties, or dissent from a free press.

All this may question the need for democracy. Liberal democracy, in theory at least, provides a mechanism for some form of rule by proportionate representation, with citizens empowered to bring about change through participation and persuade the powerful to act for the greater good. But democracy is a process, not a state.

Countries such as the UK and the US were not true democracies until relatively recently. In the US it was not until that African-Americans in its southern states gained a guaranteed right to vote. Democracy has endured in part due to its ability to accommodate change from below through expansion of voting rights, and greater protection of civil liberties. By contrast authoritarianism is, by its nature, centralized and limiting of free thought and expression. Everyone gets the chance to vote on the outcome of a decision.

An example is the Brexit referendum in Through representative democracy. People vote to elect officials to make decisions to reflect the wishes of the people, such as the US Congress and UK Parliament. What other systems are used? However, some countries have different systems of government: Oligarchy. While democracies give power to the many, oligarchies give power to the few. Power is often passed from one group to the next without the majority of the population voting.

Some present day examples include Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia. In autocracies, a single person possesses absolute power to rule over the country. Constitutional monarchy. A constitutional monarchy is a form of government in which a singular person a monarch - usually a king or queen has agreed to share power with a constitutionally organised form of government. Monarchs usually achieve their position through hereditary succession, meaning they are born into it through their family.

Common examples include Britain, Belgium and Spain. What are the benefits of democracy? These include: Protecting the interests of citizens. People get the chance to vote on the key issues affecting their country or can elect representatives to make these decisions.

In the USA, the federal government allows members of each state to elect an official representative for their state to protect their interests at a higher government level. Promoting equality. One principle of democracy is that all people are equal in the eyes of the law, and every person gets a vote.

For example, Canada has a universal franchise decree in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which explicitly allows every citizen of Canada the right to vote in any Canadian election.

Preventing abuse of power. In democracies, people in authority are usually elected by people who vote them in. They are therefore responsible for carrying out the will of those who elected them.