Despite the fact that democracy presupposes the idea truth as consensus, it is still the most viable political option available.

When we observe the global scenario today we could hear the cry for democracy in many places especially in the troubled Arab world and at the same time we could sense a popular distrust in democratic governments. At this juncture, we are at the cross-roads of opinions for and against democracy. Abraham Lincoln defines democracy as “rule of the people, for the people and by the people.” Very often democracy is considered to be the golden standard of governance. 

However, those of us who live in democratic socio-political countries are aware how far it has taken us forward – corruption and violence, to name a few, thrive. Everything is not well with democracy and we could never accept that consensus as truth (It allows special interest groups to gains subsidies and regulations beneficial to them but harmful to the society. Some call it the tyranny of the majority). All the same it is the best viable political option.

History – West

Ancient Greece: Democracy, literally, rule by the people. The term is derived from the Greek dēmokratiā, which was coined from dēmos (people) and kratos (rule) in the middle of the 5th century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens. In ancient Greece a democracy was a city-state ruled by the people rather than by the few (oligarchy), or by one person (monarchy). Ancient Athens is usually considered a model of democracy, though it would be wrong to think of it as run by the people as a whole, since women, slaves, and many other non-citizens were not allowed to participate. This was a primitive form of democracy and was made possible by the fact that such cities were small.

Socrates, Plato and Aristotle: Within the Athenian democratic environment many philosophers from all over Greece gathered to develop their theories. Socrates was the first to raise the question, and further expanded by his pupil Plato, about what is the relation/position of an individual within a community (The Republic). Aristotle continued the work of his teacher, Plato, and laid the foundations of political philosophy. Aristotle systematically analyzed the different systems of rule that the numerous Greek city-states had and categorized them into three categories based on how many ruled; the many (democracy/polity), the few (oligarchy/aristocracy), a single person (tyranny or today autocracy/monarchy). For Aristotle, the underlying principles of democracy are reflected in his work Politics. The fundamental principle of democracy is liberty – governing oneself.

Roman Republic: Even though Rome is classified as a Republic and not a democracy, its history has helped preserve the concept of democracy over the centuries. The Romans invented the concept of classics and many works from Ancient Greece were preserved. Additionally, the Roman model of governance inspired many political thinkers over the centuries, and today's modern (representative) democracies imitate more the Roman than the Greek models.

Renaissance and democracy: The humanist philosophers looked for secular principles on which society could be organized, as opposed to the concentration of political power in the hands of the Church. Prior to the Renaissance, religion had been the dominant force in politics for a thousand years. Humanists looked at ancient Greece and found the concept of democracy. In some cases they began to implement it (to a limited extent) in practice.

Modern Thinkers

Edmund Burke: He is the one of the examples for conservative tradition. Burke more than any thinker of eighteenth century approached the political tradition with a sense of religious reverence. The conservative view of politics is known as politics of tradition. The state in particular and society in general must operate with respect to traditions and customs. The rights of the groups are acknowledged in that particular society. Conservative perspective works within the limits of the given order accepting forms of political action within the structural framework of existing institutions. Conservative theory of politics is known as politics of imperfection. It finds limitations with human beings and believes that human beings will be unable to create a social order through their own spontaneous efforts. People are inherently greedy and selfish. To restrain them there is a need for a state. The power is state. State plays a central role in conservative thought.

John Locke: He adopted the essential elements of the Aristotelian classification of constitutions in his Second Treatise of Civil Government (1690). Unlike Aristotle, however, Locke was an unequivocal supporter of political equality, individual liberty, democracy, and majority rule.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau: When compared with Locke, Rousseau sometimes seems the more radical democrat, though a close reading of his work shows that, in important respects, Rousseau’s conception of democracy is narrower than Locke’s. Indeed, in his most influential work of political philosophy, The Social Contract (1762), Rousseau asserts that democracy is incompatible with representative institutions (The sovereignty of the people can be neither alienated nor represented). “But if representation is incompatible with democracy, and if direct democracy is the only legitimate form of government, then no nation-state of Rousseau’s time or any other can have a legitimate government. Furthermore, according to Rousseau, if a political association that is small enough to practice direct democracy, such as a city-state, were to come into existence, it would inevitably be subjugated by larger nation-states and thereby cease to be democratic. For these and other reasons, Rousseau was pessimistic about the prospects of democracy.

John Dewey: According Dewey, democracy is the most desirable form of government because it alone provides the kinds of freedom necessary for individual self-development and growth—including the freedom to exchange ideas and opinions with others, the freedom to form associations with others to pursue common goals, and the freedom to determine and pursue one’s own conception of the good life. Democracy is more than merely a form of government. Democracy should be constantly subjected to criticism and improvement as historical circumstances and the public interest change.

History – East

Ancient India: Although it is generally believed that the concepts of democracy and constitution were created in one particular place — identified as Ancient Athens— there is evidence to suggest that democratic forms of government, in a broad sense, may have existed in several areas of the world before the turn of the 5th century.

A serious claim for early democratic institutions comes from the independent "republics" of India, sanghas and ganas, which existed as early as the sixth century BCE and persisted in some areas until the fourth century CE. The evidence is scattered and no pure historical source exists for that period. Diodorus - a Greek historian writing two centuries after the time of Alexander the Great's invasion of India - without offering any detail, mentions that independent and democratic states existed in India.

The main characteristics of the gana seem to be a monarch, usually called raja and a deliberative assembly. The assembly met regularly in which at least in some states attendance was open to all free men, and discussed all major state decisions. It had also full financial, administrative, and judicial authority. Other officers, who are rarely mentioned, obeyed the decisions of the assembly. The monarch was elected by the gana and apparently he always belonged to a family of the noble K'satriya Varna. The lack of the concept of citizen equality across caste system boundaries lead many scholars to believe that the true nature of ganas and sanghas would not be comparable to that of truly democratic institutions. It should be noted that parliamentary/representative democracy is a recent phenomenon in India.

Modern and Contemporary thinkers

1. Gandhi: He holds that the essence of democracy is the representation of the varied interests of the nation. It is bottom-upward movement. Democracy becomes successful when and only when everyone partakes. He speaks of decentralization of power. People’s will must rule however, in matters of conscience majority is not the norm. Democracy must foster the attitude of tolerance. Without tolerance it is unlikely to achieve the national goals.

2. Ambedkar: He considers democracy essentially as a form of society of a more associated living and a social conscience is the only safe guard of all rights. He defined democracy as a form and method of government whereby revolutionary changes in the economic and social life of people are brought about without bloodshed. The roots of democracy are to be searched in social relationships, in terms of associated life among the people who form a society. For him, social relationships are the key to democracy. Ambedkar is a social democrat in spirit and practice. His special contribution to political thought lies in his linking up liberty, equality and fraternity to the concept of social democracy, which in turn, he relates to democracy as a form of government. Ambedkar’s central theme is social reformism. He often debated and confronted on the issue of precedence of social over political issues. Politics have to be necessarily connected to the social issues. The very foundations of democracy lie in associated living in society.

3. Nehru: He was a firm believer in the parliamentary democracy (democratic-socialism). He had full faith on the ruling party and healthy opposition. He believed on universal adult suffrage (voting) for the success of democracy. For the success of parliamentary democracy, he put emphasis on the rule of majority, methods of discussion, negotiation, persuasion and so on. The press, judiciary and public opinion will have a check on the legislators and will be the guard in checking corruptions in parliamentary democracy.

Various forms of Government and Democracy

Before we could state reasons as to why democracy is the most viable political option, let us look at the different forms of government that existed down the ages.

1. Dictatorship: Absolute administrative power is vested in the hands of one person. The dictator is the head of the state and he holds the supreme power (one country, one people, and one leader – somewhat like North Korea). The dictator is not accountable to anybody whomsoever. Political decisions are taken quickly and progress could be made faster. Dictatorship gives no personal freedom to the individuals and the ruler is above all criticism – Hitler and Mussolini.

2. Absolute Monarchy: the monarch is the ultimate authority of the subjects. Transmission of power is either hereditary or marital. Though the monarch wields complete power he is counter balanced by groups within the land such as interest groups, regional leaders. Freedom is at issue in a monarchy. There is no guarantee of authentic and competent political leadership.

3. Autocracy: In this form of governance a particular individual possesses the absolute power. Although similar in definition to despot, tyrant and dictator, it has neither positive nor positive connotations.

4. Totalitarianism: a single faction or class of the society regulates the life of the entire society with unlimited power in hand. It is similar to authoritarianism. Totalitarian regimes stay in power through indoctrination and controlling the freedom of the individuals. It is committed to certain ideals it thinks that every one should pursue.

5. Fascism: Fascists seek to organize a nation according to radical corporatist (racial/religious) values – Hitler’s Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, BJP/RSS in India. They advocate the creation of a single-party that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation and the creation of an ideal citizen. The fascists believe that a nation requires a strong leadership to become a strong nation. For this to happen, the collective unity of the citizens is a paramount importance. It does not appreciate differences in the society.

6. Communist State: it pledges its allegiance to communist principles. It may have many legal parties but communist party is privileged. The community has replaced individual. Marxist theory aims at the radical change in society and its human relations. Human society has seen from the perspective of the class considers human being as primarily a producer. His relations are determined by his involvement in social production.

7. Oligarchy: in this form of governance political power rests with a small number of people. The state is controlled by a few prominent families who pass their influence from one generation to the next – the warlords of Africa, Afghanistan, to name a few.

8. Tyranny: Plato and Aristotle call a tyrant as “one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics against his own people and others.” Tyrants were a group of people who took over many Greek city-states during the uprising of the middle classes in the sixth and seventh centuries BC.

9. Democracy: It means rule of the people. Power is vested in people and their representatives are responsible to people. In short, the opinion of the people is valued most and administration is conducted by their representatives. Democracy can be divided into: 1. Direct/pure democracy 2. Indirect/Representative democracy.

1. Direct Democracy

Early democratic states were direct democracies; that is, those who were eligible to vote discussed and voted on each issue rather than electing representatives. It is feasible with a small number of participants or when relatively few decisions have to be made (Athenian city-states).

2. Indirect/Representative Democracy

In a representative democracy elections are held in which voters elect their representatives. These representatives take part in the day-to-day decision-making process of the government. Today’s democracies are representative ones. Representative democracy holds consensus as truth.

Consensus theory of truth: The consensus theory holds that whatever we accept as truth is dependent on the community in which we participate. There is no absolute truth rather it is relative to the community. Since democracy is based on consensus theory of truth participation of people in the process of decision-making is very important.

The Merits of Democracy: 1. Attention is given to the interests of the people. People take the central stage and elect their representatives who are accountable to them.  2. Principle of equality is the characteristic of democracy. Every one can give his opinion. Differences are welcomed. 3. It is the most stable form of government we can think of. Unlike the other forms of government it allows free enquiry.

Objections and answers

1.      Democracy is ineffective because it is slow and complicated in decision making.

Many Leftist thinkers blame democracy for the slow progress. To reach a consensus that is satisfying takes time. Though democracy is slow it is steady. Unlike the communist and totalitarian regimes democracy is a responsible system that should address the concerns of all. Progress is as important as that of individual freedom.

2.                    Democracy, especially in the form of representative democracy, is no less than plutocracy (mob rule).

Those who say that democracy is no less than a mob-rule must remember its fundamental commitment of those who govern. Power is decentralized and it is not absolute. At least in theory, no one individual holds much power. This advantage can be reduced to some degree by control of information; the media for example wields a great deal of political power in most democracies.

3. In large countries there is no difference between democracy and authoritarianism. The democrats are equally corrupt and criminals.

Recent socio-political upheavals in the largest democratic country such as ours or elsewhere in the world do not undermine the power of democracy. Democracy has not failed us rather we have failed democracy without taking active part in the process of governance. Perhaps what we need is enlightened and informed participation in the process of democracy rather than opting for totalitarianism or communism much worse for fascism.

Conclusion/Personal synthesis

History shows that the fall of communism (USSR) and the spreading of democratic states were accompanied by dramatic decline in warfare. Democracy is preferable to other forms of governments not because it results in truth, but because it provides for equal participation and the avoidance of tyranny. No doubt there will be enough critics of democracy for as long as democratic governments exist. The extent of their success in winning adherents and promoting the creation of nondemocratic regimes will depend on how well democratic governments meet the new challenges and crises that are certain to occur. Education of the citizens to authentic citizenship and participation is vitally important for the functioning of democracy. Since democracy holds consensus as truth the authenticity of the society matters. Democracy cannot fail us only we could fail democracy by our inauthentic participation!