0% found this document useful (0 votes)
3 views4 pages

Midterm Test

The document argues that while direct democracy is more democratic by giving power directly to citizens, it is less sufficient in modern society due to population size and individual interests. Indirect democracy is presented as a more effective system that balances individual and public interests by electing representatives who can make logical decisions. The author concludes that a more democratic system could be detrimental, as it would undermine the benefits of indirect democracy.

Uploaded by

ljamachi.nnaji
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
3 views4 pages

Midterm Test

The document argues that while direct democracy is more democratic by giving power directly to citizens, it is less sufficient in modern society due to population size and individual interests. Indirect democracy is presented as a more effective system that balances individual and public interests by electing representatives who can make logical decisions. The author concludes that a more democratic system could be detrimental, as it would undermine the benefits of indirect democracy.

Uploaded by

ljamachi.nnaji
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Lotanna Nnaji

POLISCI 1AA3

Todd Alway

October 19th 2022

Midterm Test

I believe that the indirect democracy of the modern era is not the most

democratic form of democracy possible. However, indirect democracy man-

ages to strike a balance between individual and public interest which pro-

vides the best outcome for our homogeneous society, therefore indirect

democracy is more sufficient as a whole. To understand why direct democ-

racy is more democratic but less sufficient, we must look at the Athenian Po-

litical system that practised a Direct form of democracy where “the people

(demos), participated directly in the affairs of the state” (Held,12) This

meant all the of Citizens of Athens would debate, decide and vote on all ma-

jor issues in the Assembly. However only adult males where counted as citi-

zens, which meant only them could participate in government. This excluded

most of the population which were women and slaves.

Direct democracy is more democratic because democracy means ‘power to

the people’. Direct democracy does place power directly into the hands of

the citizen, which in turn gives them the most power because each vote car-

ries the same weight as is each opinion is actually equal. Each person is di-

rectly involved in governing themselves (Alway, 2022) which leaves more


power in their own hands as opposed to having someone choose the best

rules for society in your ‘best interest’, therefore making direct democracy

more ‘democratic’ simply because it gives more political control and more

authority to the citizen by giving a bigger say and plays a bigger part in de-

ciding rules/major issues for society.

Although direct democracy is technically more democratic and works well in

terms of allowing citizens to be responsible for taking actions that improve

their quality of life and shields individuals from abuse of power from politi-

cians, where governments are unable to hide information from people and

discouraging nepotism, it will not work as well as indirect democracy works

now. Firstly due to population differences that would slow down decision

making . Direct democracy requires individual participation for everything

which means all citizens (which in todays world, more people qualify to be a

citizen, which means more citizens)

decide what actions should be taken, which would make responses much

slower as everyone has to participate and everyone’s vote is equal, which

means a slow implementation of laws and slower course of actions.

Secondly, we live in a homogeneous society with differences in wealth, opin-

ion and so much more. In ancient Athens where pure democracy is practised

“The public" and ‘the private" were intertwined. Citizens could properly fulfil

themselves and live honourably only in and through the polis.” (Held,12). In
society everyone has interests that do not align. This makes it difficult for in-

dividuals not to prioritize individual interest and satisfaction allowing for

more and more people to make the incorrect choices when voting. Most peo-

ple vote emotionally allowing for the best outcome for themselves, rather

than logically. Lastly there is often miscommunication issues involved in di-

rect democracy.

Indirect democracy is good because the public have chosen a representative

that does not have any vested interest therefore is able to make the best

and logical decisions that benefit both individual and public interests. It also

limits majority factions which increase minority factions and give individuals

temporary access to power. This makes it better as those who abuse power

may not get re elected and we are able to see who use their power correctly.

Lastly indirect democracy uses the consent of individuals which make is less

tyrannical and more democratic

Democracy is also the freedom to elect our own dictators. By allowing people

to select their own dictators it is democratic however it could be more demo-

cratic. The way we practise can become more democratic by holding more

Referendums. Which is asking for public opinion.

In conclusion, Modern Democracy should not be more democratic, otherwise

it would be detrimental to society as a more democratic form of democracy

would mean more of direct democracy which does not benefit minority fac-
tions and fails to balance individual and public interest as through a direct

democracy. Indirect democracy maintains public interest as well as individ-

ual interest making it more sufficient for our modern world although less

democratic.

Citations

Held, David. “Democracy from City-States to a Cosmopolitan Order

(1992).PDF - Political Studies {\992). XL, Special Issue, 10-39 Democ-

racy: From City-States to: Course Hero.” Political Studies {\992). XL,

Special Issue, 10-39 Democracy: From City-States to | Course Hero,

1995, [Link]/file/171817595/Democracy-From-City-

states-to-a-Cosmopolitan-Order-1992pdf/.

You might also like