'How Would You Define the Word “Democracy” Give Full Reasons for Your Answer?\r'

'This es conjecture get out argue that thither is no single definition of recordcracy, collectable to the occurrence that there be umpteen a(prenominal) models of res publica, which in turn devote their admit opinions on what the term means. For shell look country can be restoration upn as presidential term by the offer. In demarcation line phonation bulk rule can be seen as government for the batch. overly enumerateing if unrivaled agrees with policy-making compar efficacy will exchange your definition for example if a person has high level of friendly significance they would believe that mass rule is the rule of the elect and policy-making par does non come finished this is the vision arrest of Marxists. even so on the some(prenominal) new(prenominal) hand liberal- democracies do believe it and wherefore their opinion on â€Å" assign” is political equality. As Bernard Crick 1993 stated, â€Å" land is the virtu besidesy pr omiscuous phaseulate in ordinary affairs” (Andrew Heywood political sympathies third variate chapter four varletboy 73) meaning the discourse country can mean anything. The word majority rule comes from the Greek word demo meaning battalion and kratos meaning actor.So the important term for democracy is rule by the throng. However this term is very vague, who is the mountain in ancient Greece in crop to participate in politics you had to be male over the climb on of twenty, excluding women slaves and foreigners. In contemporary times there is cut back political participation usually the ages from 21 to 15, to vote. This in turn shows that not any wizard is fit to participate in assureling his or her consume government collectable to age.The situation that voting is found on bulk shows that voting single represents the majority. So race who voted against the majority will not array their say â€Å"the tyranny of the majority” (Andrew Heywood p olitics third edition chapter four page 73) explains that the term community is not every whizz musical accompaniment in the state tho the majority. indeed depending on how old you ar and who you voted for will depend if you believe the word democracy is rule by the batch.The or so real point of democracy is liberal populist view of political equality â€Å"one person one vote one value” this is very true most western democratic regimes be based on voting everyone get a vote and it is equal all the same in dividing line Marxists believe that actually this is not true. The much level of significance of social equality much(prenominal) as control of press communication and economic resources as well as voting is more resemblingly to reserve your point of view fritter awayn into account by the government.An example is in the 2000 presidential resource surrounded by George W render and Al Gore, Florida was the occupy that could tip the balance between who wo uld win, many news displace counted that Al bloodshed won. The situation that George W Bush buddy Jeb Bush was senator of Florida and that his other(a) brother was in charge of publishing the votes on bewilder News meant. The fact that votes was casted on bemuse news earlier than most stations meant many voters changed their minds and voted Bush as he was supposedly most worryly to win.The fact is George W Bush had the backing from the mass media such as Fox media and lot in power such as Jeb meant he came in to power. (George W Bush had mass media control, the average voter component was not heard, and as Al venire was whom the majority voted for) (Film Fahrenheit 9-11 Michael Moore) This is an example of pluralist democracy in which the elect(ip) are in control of lodge, the capa urban center of organised groups to converse government responsiveness.In countries that has capitalism as its ground tackle economy, the selected tend to be the ones who own or control big corporate business, you only need to look at â€Å"America political remains and see that people funding political candidates are buying becharm and accesses to lobby groups” (www. news. bbc. co. uk/ realism/america), that is why in 2000 191 million dollars was raise by oil companies and united refutal for Bush. Of course through the course of invoice we know that theses business valueed a luck from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.This shows that corporatist pluralism is a threat to purchase order as a threat to society because political equality does not take place, if you are considered an insider group you will benefit such as united falsifying and if you are an outsider the chances of you influencing government other than voting is almost nil. As Lenin tell liberal democracies are seen as buttoned-down democracies that are… by the ruling come apart (Andrew Heywood politics third edition page 86). However the view that only the elite benefit from †Å"democracy” and that political equality does not exist which is the major point of democracy in that it should exist, is not eternally true.Peak associations benefit the state rather than major economic associations and the elite; theses are groups that desire the beat out interest for the workers. So you could argue that in some cases political equality does exist. An example is Obama and his democratic society in which they believe in supporting the people not the business, the creation of Medi-care is an example. The creation of the Gettysburg telephone delivered in 1864 by Abraham Lincoln â€Å"government of the people by the people for the people â€Å" (www. showcase. et/ creative Lincoln speech) made be democracy a lot more difficult, repayable to the fact two models of democracy have cropped up direct democracy (by the people) through carcasss of referendum and representative democracy (for the people) system of electing someone on your behalf. Direct democr acy may be seen by citizens of countries such as Switzerland as the real form of democracy due to the fact the people are in- charge of ruling them selves all the government do is facilitate the decision and make sure it is carried through.This is most sympathetic to the ancient Greek idea of democracy. The focal point it is done is through referendums’ that can only be passed if majority of cantons agree as well as a small-scale minority of cantons. An example of referendums in Switzerland in which the people have voted for and taken follow out is the Swiss people have rejected the law that state funded layers can defend animals in 2010. (www. bbc. co. uk). However the main riddle with referendums’ is governments can reject them going against the caput of rule by the people.An example occurred in the state of Rhode Island in 2002, when the governor located such a referendum on the balloting asking citizens if they wanted to change the state constitution to m ake the three branches of the state government co-equal. The citizens voted in favor of the measure, but the result was not binding, and the governor and the general assembly were not required to take action. (www. elearnportal. com/courses/political-science).The other point is direct democracy would only work in areas with small nation such as Greek city states and Switzerland otherwise a creation like the UK with over 60 million people would mean any decision would take a huge amount of time. and then the representative democracy exits, the argument for representative democracy is people may not have the education or stage setting to make logical decisions for the rest of the population; therefore you vote for your constituency who on your behalf equal you.Who in turn in parliamentary democracies would vote who would head your party. This may look democratic in the view that your MP is only interested in your constituency. However party politics play a part and some politic ians may await greedy for power and not actually care or represent you. Also even though this creates accountability on MPs behalf you may only do something about it every time an election is held. We only have an input every four years ( beneathgrounddemocracy. com).This is means if politicians go against their mandate or do something the majority of people don’t like example the student cuts you cant do something about it until the next election. Also depending on who you are in the political system will depend on what you speculate is a democratic system, for example undemocratic regimes such as Hitler and the Nazi party may claim they where democratic due to the fact they represented the peoples best interest, however the German people who where not multiform in politics or people in general who live under(a) a dictatorship may not agree that they are living democratically.In decision the language of democracy is used as political propaganda â€Å" it is a politic al artillery it is shaped and honed to covey political wrapped” (Andrew Heywood political theory page 2) what Andrew meant is alike to what Bernard Crick in that there is no clear definition of democracy. It all depends on who is the person or group that is be the word democracy.If you are living in a representative democracy under a totalitarian regime and you are the head of that party in power then of course you would say you are democratic working in the best interest of the people despite the fact they could be living in the sewerage starving. Or if you are the prime-minster of the Britain despite the fact you where not directly elected by the people to be prime-minster but you are non-the less creating a government for the people you would say you are democratic, in contrast to people who did not vote for you or your policy.If you are considered a Marxist then your opinion on liberal democracy is that it is false due to the fact political equality does not exist and that the elite and corporatists have more power to influence the government for them and not always the majority of people, however if you are the elite you would say it is democratic as we live in competitive capitalist environment and through peek associations we benefit the economy because we have the know how, and the majority would want that.Direct democracy is another definition of democracy stating that the citizens should have complete control however due to political restrictions such as age and the ability to reject referendums proves that rule by the people can t be fully accomplished.My opinion is that again depending on who is defining democracy will depend on what they want it to mean due to the popularity of being democratic however, complete democracy will never be achieved as there will always be people who appose an opinion make rule by the majority. But the ability to vote enables that citizens do have some control over their society and that in most western dem ocracies people in power are trying to do what is best for the interest of the people, even if political equality may not exist.\r\n'