What defines a democracy?

[Jonathan]

de•moc•ra•cy[list=a][*]government by the people; especially : rule of the majority[*] a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections[/list=a]
What is democracy? Which countries are democracies?
In conjunction with the elections in Russia last year, JerseyDevil and I discussed this topic. I claimed that Russia should not be considered democratic while JD said it should (though he thinks the country is going down the opposite path of democracy and should not be called a true democracy).
Russia is not like other dictatorships where you can't vote freely. The Russians are free to vote for whatever and whoever they want, so in that perspective Russia is a democratic country. Though, as I pointed out to JD, in a democratic country other parties must be able to spread their political views and tell people that they exist. People must be informed that there are alternative parties to vote for. In Russia, the Putin's supporting party uses its power to make it very difficult for the opposition to speak out. Newspapers and TV broadcasts are being censored and only one-sided information is able to reach the Russian people. They don't hear much about the opposition, but they do hear a lot about Putin's party which is glorified. The media is all but neutral.
How are the Russians able to go to the ballot boxes and vote if they don't know what parties other than Putin's stand for? As I see it, government control over the media makes Russia an undemocratic country, there is no freedom of speech there.

A side note is that after the Russian elections, Putin's party became very powerful and can basically change the constitution after Putin’s own will. And he is expected to change it so that he doesn't have to resign after a certain amount of time, but can get re-elected over and over and over…
Though while Russia is becoming more and more undemocratic, Turkey (which like Russia has censored the opposition, at least in the past) is doing its best to democratize itself so that the country can join the EU as soon as possible.

Should countries like Russia or Turkey be looked upon as democracies? Although the people can vote freely and won't be arrested for having different opinions, there is no such thing as freedom of speech. Isn't that the most fundamental thing in a democracy?

[katya]

I think I would agree and say that it is not a democracy, if it is as you say. What that sounds like is basically the people re-affirming that Putin is the leader, to make them feel special I guess. Doesn't sound like they have much of a choice. Chosing between one guy doesn't sound like democracy.

[jerseydevil]

As I said - I think Russia is a democracy - to a point. It does seem to be going backward - instead of forward though. I was watching Russian news for about a week - it was all fluff stuff. Him opening up a library or doing an archelogical dig or something like that. Never once did they question his policies or anything or have any in depth reporting on him.

What I find interesting right now is Iran. The hardliners are preventing all the moderates - who actually currently control parliament - from running for reelection. But the hardlines have far more control over the government. There are daily demonstrations and a sit in at their parliament. The hardliners say they will relook at the moderates and see who and if any will be allowed to run. Where is Iran on the democracy scale?

[Ruinel]

Democracy is when I take over your country and you all worship me as your goddess. Don't you all want democracy?

[Dúnedain]

What defines Democracy by Dúnedain:

The fact that I can tell you to F$&* Off and then go about my business.

To me that is democracy.


Yours Sincerely,

Dúnedain

[The Gaffer]

This recalls an Anarchist poster that appeared when I was a student:

Here is your lifetime's supply of democracy:
XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
This recalls an Anarchist poster that appeared when I was a student:

I don't get it?

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Dúnedain
What defines Democracy by Dúnedain:

The fact that I can tell you to F$&* Off and then go about my business.

To me that is democracy.


Yours Sincerely,

Dúnedain

Sweet!
Dúnedain, F$&k Off .... *goes about her business*

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by Ruinel
I don't get it?

On the basis that you get to vote once every four years, there is one X for every general election in a typical lifespan.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
On the basis that you get to vote once every four years, there is one X for every general election in a typical lifespan.

Ah, I see.

[katya]

Originally posted by Dúnedain
What defines Democracy by Dúnedain:

The fact that I can tell you to F$&* Off and then go about my business.

To me that is democracy.


Yours Sincerely,

Dúnedain

That sounds like a kind of freedom to me, which isn't necessarilly democracy.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
On the basis that you get to vote once every four years, there is one X for every general election in a typical lifespan.

Actually here there are elections every year. Local and federal. Every 2 years we vote for Congressmen because they are staggered so that way we don't run the risk of voting out all the congressmen out at once and have no one with any experience (which might have been a problem before, but is nearly impossible now).

Do you have elections every year?

[Nurvingiel]

In Canada, the Prime Minister's term is up after 5 years, but usually, he calls the election when the time is right, often around 4 years.

There's also the rare federal referendum.

Provincially, I believe the Premier's term is also 5 years in length, and similar timing is employed when calling elections. (Correct me if I'm wrong. I've only been old enough to vote in 1 provincial election.) There's the odd referendum here and there. (If you're in BC, make that pointless referendum.)

Municipally, it really depends on your city. I don't know how long a mayor's term is, but I'm sure it's the same for all the cities in a province. There are votes on bylaws every now and then too. Edit: And school board members.

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Do you have elections every year?

Yes, in addition to local government elections every 4 years or so we have European parliament elections and (if you live in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland) regional assembly/parliament elections. Unfortunately, these tend to be dominated by national party politics and voter turnout is usually miserable (like, around 30-40%).

Voter apathy is an indication of how irrelevant most people regard politics to their lives. It's also undemocratic. Maybe we should be like Australia and force people to vote...

[jerseydevil]

This is what is happening in Iran...

200 Iran election bans overturned
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iranian hard-liners reversed the disqualifications of 200 candidates in next month's elections and promised more would be reinstated, but the move announced Tuesday did not allay anger among reformists.

Liberal lawmakers vowed to continue daily sit-in protests at parliament until the Guardian Council, an unelected body controlled by hard-liners, reverses all the disqualifications.

The council's decision earlier this month to bar more than 3,000 potential candidates from running -- including 80 pro-reform lawmakers -- sparked a political crisis in Iran, as liberals denounced what they called an attempt by hard-liners to regain control of parliament in the February 20 elections.

The council's move to reinstate candidates came after Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, intervened to ease the crisis and ordered members to reconsider the disqualifications.

"So far, we have approved some 200 people who had been disqualified. This trend will continue," said council member Abbas Kadkhodaei.

Kadkhodaei said in a statement on the council's Web site that the disqualifications were being re-examined on orders from Khamenei. The statement did not identify the reinstated candidates.

State media controlled by hard-liners say those disqualified failed to meet legal criteria. Most of the protesting lawmakers maintain they were disqualified because of their criticism of the unelected hard-liners in open sessions of the parliament.

Among those disqualified were some of the top leaders in parliament of the reform movement, which seeks to lift political and social restrictions under Iran's Islamic government. Hard-liners, who control unelected bodies that hold ultimate sway in the country, have stymied attempts at reform.

Khamenei chooses the Guardian Council's 12 members, and some reformist legislators have said the members would not have ordered the disqualifications without his approval.

Protesting lawmakers were not moved by the council's partial reversal Tuesday and planned to continue sit-ins in the lobby of Parliament.

"That they are reversing disqualifications is a positive step, but definitely not sufficient," Rajabali Mazrouei, one of the lawmakers barred from running for reelection, told The Associated Press.

"We don't think that a major breakthrough is developing. Either they have to reverse all politically motivated disqualifications or expect a boycott of the elections," he said.

On Saturday, reformist Deputy Interior Minister Morteza Moballegh, who is Iran's chief of elections, warned he would not allow the legislative elections to proceed unless hard-liners retracted their mass disqualifications. The reformist lawmakers holding sit-ins also began dawn-to-dusk fasts.

President Mohammad Khatami has condemned the disqualifications and warned he might resign if they are not reversed.

The February 20 elections are seen as a test for Iran's reformers, whose popularity has waned because of their perceived failure to deliver on promises of liberalization. Over 46 million Iranians are eligible to vote, more than 7 million of them young people just reaching the minimum voting age of 15.

The problem though that ABC News is reporting on right now - is how there is severe voter apathy in iran right now - and the conservatives are the ones who are very political - even though they are in the minority. For too long the reformist have been prevented in things and now many people who believe in their reforms don't see hope of any change - even if they do vote. They must vote - even if change doesn't come immediatedly. As one reformist who is at the sit in at Parliament said - this is our last chance for reform, to give the people freedom. If the hardliners win this time - freedom is lost.

The reformers, as does the majority of Iran - wants closer ties to the US. I am hoping that this will come about.

By the way - as I have pointed out many times before - why aren't the liberals outside the UN demonstrating against the hardliner tactics? Why aren't people outraged by this? Why isn't the UN saying anything to Iran? Iran is a partial democracy, on the steps of tru e democracy - the reformers can make it a true democracy and bring freedom to the people of Iran. We should be outraged by the hardliners tactics to prevent freedom and take away a vote. Instead I hear people saying about how the US has to allow a hardliner to be elected in Iraq in order for them to believe that we were not after iraq's oil. If there is such outrage at the US all over the world - why isn't there outrage at this?

Now time for French News.

[edit]It's funny - French news had about this and how the US is concerned about is going on in Iran - then they continued to state that about a couple dozen reformists are barred from the elections. Okay - is it a couple of dozen or 3,000? There is a big difference. This is the type of reporting I constantly see on French News. I have a feeling it's closer to the 200 and 3,000 number since I have seen that on multiple news sites.

[Jonathan]

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/eu...kin/index.html

With the Presidential elections in Russia nearing, the only candidate who strongly questions Putin's policies have mysteriously disappeared. Did Putin decide to get him out of the way to ensure his already more than certain victory?

[Earniel]

I was wondering about that too. His disappearance was at such a convenient time. But then yesterday I heard he was in Kiev all the time?

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally posted by Eärniel
I was wondering about that too. His disappearance was at such a convenient time. But then yesterday I heard he was in Kiev all the time?

Yeah, I read in the paper yesterdsay he was found in Kiev.

[Jonathan]

Yes, I just read he was on vacation in Ukraine, visiting some friends in Kiev. He had his cellular phone turned off . He found out he was 'missing' by reading about his disappearance in the newspapers.

[edit] It's good he wasn't assassinated or anything but it still doesn't mean much. Putin is going to win the elections and there is nothing his opponents can do since Putin controls the media.

[Jonathan]

The presidential election in Russia is over and the votes are being counted. It looks like Putin is going to win big with about two thirds of the votes. How surprising
A real surprise was that the Communist Party's candidate got quite many votes, about 15%.

When is Russia going to turn into a real democracy?