Introduction to Democracy: Direct and Indirect Models and Critiques

Transitioning from the Necessity of Government to the Control of Power

• After establishing the potential necessity of an institution with the power to make and enforce rules to ensure a peaceful social order, the focus shifts to the concentration of that power.

• Regardless of whether government is deemed fundamentally necessary, governmental power currently exists as a concentration of rule-making authority.

• This reality raises the critical political question: Who should control that power?

• In the early 21st century, the only acceptable answer at the level of rhetoric and moralizing is Democracy.

Democracy as a Hegemonic and Rhetorical Tool

• Democracy is the "clarion call" for discussions regarding the control of political power.

• Since the end of World War I, nearly every government in the world has claimed to be democratic, at least in form or through "lip service."

• Cold War Examples: During the Cold War, many autocratic governments labeled themselves as democratic to gain legitimacy.     * The German Democratic Republic (East Germany): Often referred to as a "people's democracy" or "workers' democracy."

• Modern Examples: Countries that appear autocratic to external observers still utilize democratic labeling.     * The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea): This nation is led by a hereditary leader but maintains the democratic label.

• The label of democracy is considered "hegemonic" in the modern era, setting the parameters for how political power is organized.

Definitional and Historical Variability of Democracy

• Etymology: The term "democracy" originates from two Greek roots:     * Demos: Meaning "the people" or "citizens."     * Kratos: Meaning "rule" or "power."     * Literal Definition: Rule of the people or power of the people.

• Variability: Democracy is not a singular, fixed practice. It is:     * Historically Variable: It has changed significantly across different time periods.     * Institutionally Variable: It is structured differently across various states.     * Ideologically Variable: It is interpreted differently across political philosophies.

• Modern Canadian democracy would be unrecognizable as "democratic" from certain historical or philosophical perspectives.

The Model of Direct Democracy

• Definition: Direct democracy is a form of governance where political power lies directly in the hands of the people affected by its use.

• The Role of the Citizen: In a direct democracy, the citizens are the ones who make rules and regulations, rather than elected politicians acting on their behalf.

• Characteristics:     * There are no "politicians" in the modern sense (Prime Ministers, Presidents, or MPs).     * Every citizen effectively functions as a politician with a direct say on every piece of legislation.     * This is a highly participatory and "hands-on" form of governance.

Case Study: Ancient Athenian Direct Democracy

• Ancient Athens (practiced around the $5th$ century BCE) is the standard historical example of direct democracy.

• Exclusionary Realities: Athenian democracy existed alongside slavery, which was common in the ancient world. It was intensely participatory for physical citizens but lacked extensivity for others.

• Key Institutions:     * The Assembly (Ecclesia): The highest decision-making body at the apex of the political process.         * The forum for making laws, deciding taxation, and declaring war.         * Open to all male Athenian citizens regardless of wealth, class, or literacy.         * Met at least $40$ times per year.         * Required a quorum of at least $6,000$ citizens for each meeting.         * Decision Mechanism: Aimed for consensus to allow the "better argument" to prevail; if consensus was impossible, votes were tallied and the majority position became law.     * The Council of Five Hundred (Boule): Managed day-to-day business and prepared the agenda for the Assembly.         * Selection by Lot (Sortition): Members were not elected; they were chosen randomly by putting everyone's name into a bin and selecting $500$.         * Democratic Rationale: Random selection ensured any citizen, regardless of wealth, popularity, or eloquence, had an equal chance to serve in leadership.

Direct Democracy Mechanisms in Modern Canada

• Modern Canadian democracy is largely passive. Participation is often described by the metaphor: five seconds of participation in a voting booth followed by four years of "sleeping."

• However, there are three mechanisms that allow for a degree of direct public input into the political process:

• 1. Referendum:     * The government consults the public directly to ascertain their opinion on a given issue.     * Frequency: Extremely rare in Canada. There have been only $3$ federal referenda in over $155$ years of history:         * 1898: Regarding the prohibition of alcohol.         * 1942: Regarding the conscription of soldiers for World War II.         * 1992: Regarding the Charlottetown Accord (a constitutional amendment package).

• 2. Voter Initiative:     * Unlike referenda (top-down momentum), voter initiatives are bottom-up and allow citizens to bypass politicians.     * Citizens create a petition; if enough signatures are gathered, the government must take action (like holding a referendum).     * Not used federally, but exists in British Columbia$($B.C.$)$ and Alberta.     * Threshold in B.C.: Requires signatures from $10\%$ of registered voters in each of the province's ridings. Only one successful initiative has occurred in B.C. ($2011$).

• 3. Recall:     * A "quasi-direct" mechanism that allows citizens to remove power from an elected representative before the next scheduled election.     * Requires a petition; if successful, the politician is recalled and a new election is held.     * Not used federally, but exists in B.C. and Alberta.     * Threshold in Alberta: Requires signatures from $40\%$ of eligible voters in the specific riding.

Critiques of Indirect and Direct Democracy

• Critique of Indirect Democracy: Critics such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau (writing in $1762$) argue that representative systems are deceptive. Rousseau stated: "The people of England regards itself as free, but it is grossly mistaken. It is free only during the election of members of parliament. As soon as they are elected, slavery overtakes it, and it is nothing."

• Historical Critique of Direct Democracy: In Athens, democracy relied on a vast underclass of non-citizens. Out of a total population of approximately $300,000$, only around $30,000$ ($10\%$) were citizens. The "surplus time" required for political participation was made possible by roughly $80,000$ slaves working in mines, agriculture, and manufacturing.

Theoretical Critiques of Direct Democracy: Plato and the Ship of State

• Many ancient Greek theorists, including Plato in The Republic ($c. 375$ BCE), were hostile to direct democracy.

• The Craft Analogy: Plato argued that political leadership is a specific skill or expertise. Just as one would trust a medical doctor rather than a random mob for a health diagnosis, a state should be governed by those with expert knowledge (Philosopher Kings).

• The Metaphor of the Ship (The Athenian Trireme):     * A Ship (of State) requires expert knowledge of navigation, weather, and currents.     * If a crew takes control by equal say, they may lack the "big picture."     * The Demagogue vs. The Truth-Teller: The mass is more likely to follow a leader who promises a "good time" (the party boat) than one who tells "hard truths" necessary for reaching a destination.     * Result: Without expert direction, the ship of state either rots at the pier or hits rocks and sinks.

• Reason vs. Rhetoric: In an assembly of $6,000$ people, someone using reason (grain statistics and charts) will likely be overshadowed by someone using rhetoric (patriotic calls to war).

• Mob Rule: The concern that direct democracy is tantamount to "mob rule," where emotion and passion drive dangerous decisions rather than reason. This leads to Demagoguery (from Demos meaning people and Agogos meaning leading).

Historical Interregnum and the Re-emergence of Democracy

• Following the Athenian period, approximately $2,000$ years (two millennia) passed without a major democratic polity in Europe.

• This era was characterized by empires and Feudalism, where power was justified by a Divine Mandate (authority belonging to God and His royal representatives).

• This Top-Down, authoritarian government persisted until the re-emergence of democracy in the $18th$ century, specifically in the form of Indirect Democracy (representative, liberal, or republican democracy).