Democracy is the belief that people should govern themselves and that the purpose of the government
is the good of the people. It is based on a government that is chosen by the people through the voting
process, and is then obeyed by those same people.
It is difficult to find a clear present day example of democracy, like that of ancient Greece, as so
many political ideologies have stemmed and developed from the original idea eg. social democracy.
The other difficulty is that the word democracy is often used to mean different things. Democracy is
popular and the word is some what of a ‘buzz word’ that is taken out of context and used incorrectly.
People of varying ideological beliefs link or associate themselves with democracy and often its roots
and basic ideas are confused and lost.
It is thought that even the ancient world had a conception of liberalism, and indeed did the Greeks
and Romans. However Benjamin Constant, an eighteenth century French liberal writer, believed it to
be “a conception of liberty radically different from that held in modern times” (Gray 1986:1).
Nonetheless it wasn’t until the seventeenth century that we find “the first systematic expositions of
modern individualistic outlook from which the liberal tradition springs” (Gray 1986:7). Similarly
throughout the ‘early modern period’ there was evidence of liberalism in Hobbesian individualism,
Christianity, Aristotelian traditions, and during the medieval period. Nineteenth century Europe, was
regarded as “exemplifying the historical paradigm of a liberal civilization” (Gray 1986:26). A.J.P
Taylor said of the state in England during this time “It left the adult citizen alone” (Taylor:1965:1),
one of the crucial elements of liberalism.
In her book Using Political Ideas, Goodwin denotes the ‘ingredients’ of Liberalism as:
- The individual
- Contract and Consent
- Constitutionalism and Law
- Freedom of Choice
- Equality of Opportunity
- Social Justice based on Merit
- Private and Public life
Of these the first and fourth are probably the most fundamental of the seven. The individual, its
rights and freedom are the essence of liberalism. John Stuart Mill once wrote “Over himself, over
his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign”. Liberalism is the belief that we are free to
make our own mistakes, decide our own lifestyle, choose our own way of living, pursue our own
thoughts and philosophies, provided we don’t infringe on other people’s freedom. It tolerates and
respects differing views, and appreciates diversity as essential to social and political improvement.
Individual liberty rests on a presumption of human beings as national individuals, with the ability
to promote their own interest. It tries to foster this by guaranteeing equality of opportunity within
a tolerant society. Its focus is on private life rather than public life.
The opening quote of this essay shows one view that liberalism and democracy are not
compatible. True liberals, with their strong view of individualism, are simply incapable of
electing someone to represent them, Rousseau also agreed that one person cannot represent
another. Goodwin additionally stipulated that the first incompatibility “Is that of representation”
(Goodwin, 1997:292).
The incompatibilities do not rest there. “throughout most of its history, in fact, liberalism
has been more concerned with protecting people from their rulers than with establishing rule by
the people” (Ball and Dagger, 1995:89). Liberalism feels threatened by democracy as it sees
democracy as an obstacle to freedom of the individual. Democracy, the ‘public life’, is seen to
infringe on the liberals valued ‘private life’. A government capable of promoting individual
freedom is also capable of oppressing individuals, a key contradiction to the ideology of
liberalism.
What is also threatened is the ‘equality of opportunity’. To a certain extent democracy
creates a certain amount of equality through the voting process. However this generates
inequalities for those outside the political sphere, and in minority groups. Indeed some of the
minority groups can vote but against the majority their ideas are not equally heard.
However for a long time liberalism has displayed democratic tendencies, on the basis of
basic equality among people. If the government is based on the consent of people and people are
treated with equal respect then there is a basic affinity between the two ideals.
It wasn’t until the 1800s that the compatibility between the two ideologies became clear,
“when Bentham and the Utilitarians began to argue that democracy gave every citizen the chance
to protect his – and later her- interests” (Ball and Dagger, 1995:90). The process of the vote
allows every person to say what is good for him/her, an equal chance to promote his or her
interests. As a result the elected government can then promote the good of the majority.
Another compatibility is the ability for liberals to hold a government accountable and
consequently protecting the individuals interest. John Stuart Mill argued that democracy
encouraged widespread political participation, allowing individuals to develop their ‘intellectual
and moral capacities’.
Historically these two ideals have been compatible, they both oppose “autocratic forms
of rule and claim to destroy old social hierarchies” (Goodwin, 1997:295) and similarly promote
tolerance. Peace is an essential part of the liberal view, as they value life above everything else,
presently “democracy is clearly the most promising device for peaceful conflict solution”
(Goodwin, 1997:295).
It is due to these similarities and compatibility that we arrive at the conception that is
liberal democracy. Liberal democracy is characterised by the rights and liberty of the individual,
it is rule by the people but also protects the individual. It is rule by the majority, so far that the
majority do not deprive individuals of basic civil rights. It is this liberal conception of democracy
that governs much of the developed world, particularly Europe (although social democracy is also
very prominent). Often when people refer to democracy, this is what they are talking about. The
simple fact that liberal democracies exist is evidence in itself that the two ideals, liberalism and
democracy, are compatible.
Both democracy and liberalism are very old ideas, that have remained important and
practiced philosophies to the present day. Democracy is a popular idea and people of all
persuasions try to identify and associate with. Liberalism too is popular and prominent in the
global political scene with active liberals in most developed countries and certainly in the
northern hemisphere.
I have shown how the two ideas clash. The incompatibilities between the two of
representation, individual freedom and equality of opportunity. And how the two threaten and
undermine each others principles.
Contrary to this I have also displayed the compatibility of the two. How democracy can
indeed create equality, promote the interest and good of the individual and the sharing tolerance of
the two ideals. To support this I have also briefly explained how liberalism did in fact tend
towards democracy at an early stage and how today the two have formed liberal democracy, where
they clearly are compatible.
It is my belief that liberalism and democracy are compatible, or we simply would not
have successful liberal democracy. Indeed they do impinge on one another but with compromise
the two compliment one another very well.
In conclusion then, liberalism and democracy, despite their differences, are compatible.
Bibliography
-
Liberalism, John Gray, 1986, Open University Press, Milton Keynes
-
A J P Taylor, English History 1914-1945, 1965, Oxford University Press, Oxford
-
Using Political Ideas, Fourth Edition, Barbara Goodwin, 1997, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, London
-
Political Ideologies and the democratis ideal, Terrance Ball and Richard Dagger, 1995, Harper Collins College Publishers, New York
-
Politics and Human Nature, Ian Forbes and Steve Smith, 1983, Frances Printer Ltd, London
-
Modern Political Thought, Raymond Plant, 1991, Blackwell Publishers Ltd, Oxford