Indirect democracy is more effective given the size of society. Therefore it is impossible (currently) to take into considerations the views of all members of society on all decisions.
Once the representative is chosen he is given a certain amount of time to do his or her job, in the UK this is 5 years although the PM can choose to call elections at anytime. There is a peaceful transition of power which goes to show that the system is a peaceful one.
Indirect democracy relieves the “ordinary” citizen of decision making and leaves it to the “”experts” in govt. posts.
Society is stable in this type of democracy as compromises are sought and the govt. acts on majority desires. There is evidence that this type of system works: westerns economy has flourished under this type of democracy. It provides certain amounts of freedom and equality i.e. freedom of speech and equal rights for men and women. There is a widespread toleration of beliefs; there is no discrimination i.e. you will be treated in the same way what ever colour of skin you have or what ever religion you follow.
However there are things that show that indirect democracy although effective is not as fair as it seems. It gives power to few people; this increases the chances of corruption and abuse of power by the government. The members of the House of Lords in the UK are unelected, they have inherited their positions. This means that people who may be unsuitable for the job are in power.
There is limited freedom in that an average adult only votes 11 times in the whole of his or her life. Government secrecy leads to belief that the public is being denied the right to know various things such as where in the UK you are most likely to be affected by cancer
C) How democratic is the UK?
I think the UK is a fairly democratic state. It has an extensive franchise meaning that almost all adults over the age of 18 have the right to vote. There are no barriers of class, race or gender. Everybody has ONE vote i.e. everyone ideally has the same amount of power. Everybody has the chance to express their views as long as it is done peacefully and it is not rare to see people protesting from things ranging from fox hunting to the war on Iraq. This goes to show that everybody’s’ freedoms are protected. All elections are fairly conducted: There are secret ballots so nobody can be threatened to vote in favour of a certain party. Mohammed Sarwar of Glasgow was cleared of bribing people to vote for him which shows that there are measures in place to prevent corruption. Also there is a limit on party spending so political parties can only spend a certain amount of money on there campaigns. This will mean that parties will not be able to win only because they have superior money power. New parties can also form which means that everyone who believes they can do a better job than the existing party has the right to form a party e.g. UKIP and SDP. There is free press so that the political parties can be praised and criticised publicly and the view of the general public can be shared with everyone. Then there is Apathy which means that you do not have to vote. Some people think that if you do not vote you are content with the current system. Finally the peaceful transition of power that takes place goes to show that the UK is a democratic state as whoever is elected to govern the state does so without the current MP trying to stop this taking place.
However some people including myself believe that the UK is not as democratic as it may seem. There are many reasons which make me think this. I do not think that the election system is fair as the percentage of votes gained is not equivalent to the percentage of seats held by a party e.g. in 2001 labour gained 41% of the votes but held 63% of the seats. This is obviously unfair representation. The prime minister has the advantage of calling the election whenever he or she likes within a 5 year period. This may not be undemocratic but it is a sort of a flaw in the system. Personally I think that Apathy show the lack of legitimacy because just because people do not vote does not mean that they are ok with the current system. The fact that an average adult can only vote 11 times in his life time proves that the freedom of choice is very limited. There is no Bill OF Rights, this means that the always can be changed with each changing government. Government secrecy allows the state to keep facts about matters such as public health issues secret for up to 30 years. There is also the chance of corruption as has been proven with the conviction of 2 cabinet ministers in the 1990’s.
Finally I think that UK is one of the more democratic states in the world although it does not fully fit into the criteria of a real democratic state.