Researchers of uncivilized tribes

Some researchers of uncivilized tribes show that in relatively independent and cohesive communities an order may be possible when members of the community have a certain independence and when a significant number of its members, for example, elders collectively make the most important decisions regarding the whole community [1]. From this, we can conclude that some elements of democracy were characteristic of different tribes thousands of years before our era. Later, people moved from hunting and gathering plants to agriculture and commerce, which was accompanied by the growth of communities, resulting in growing economic and social inequalities, which led to the spread and dominance of authoritarian traditions [2].

After all In the 5th and 4th centuries b.c, a number of ancient Greek cities, various forms of people’s self-government began to emerge. The Athenian democracy became the most famous, which began to be formed in 507 bc, a feature of Athenian democracy was the close relationship of politics with religion. Attitude to democracy in Athens from the very beginning was ambiguous. From the point of view of the supporters, the will of the people was given legitimacy. From the point of view of critics, the people were unreliable, subordinated to momentary interests, subject to emotions and manipulated by the crowd. Thus, democracy began development. Nowadays the number of functioning democratic regimes in the world is the largest in the whole world history. [3]

Speaking about a definition of democracy. The first definition is that «democracy is a system of governance in which rulers are held accountable for their actions in the public realm by citizens, acting indirectly through the competition and cooperation of their elected representatives» [4]. The second one is that democracy means “the policies passed by the government must reflect both the preferences of the government and, most desirably, the public’s interest” [5]. The third one is very simple definition is sometimes referred to as “rule of the majority” [6]. From the political point of view the first one is the clearest definition but for ordinary people, the last one may seem more understandable. Unfortunately, the second definition may have very broad meaning, because public’s interests might be very strange and people don’t understand about policy at all. Only what people think that true politic democracy must satisfy all their needs. As the opponents of democracy in ancient Greece said that people are unreliable, subordinated to momentary interests, subject to emotions and manipulated by the crowd. I agree with them. To sum up, I think that first definition by Philippe C. and Terry Lynn Karl is the most relevant than others.

As I said earlier nowadays the number of functioning democratic regimes is really big and we can count more than 18 [4]. The first type of democracy was the Athenian democracy but now I would like to single out four most basic types of democracy: direct democracy, representative democracy, guided democracy, liberal democracy [7]. Direct democracy also called “pure” democracy is a type of democracy where people and their interests play an important role in the policy and decision-making of their country, example – Switzerland. Representative democracy is based on the decision-making of some amount of people, who was elected by others people to present their interest, example – United States of America. Guided democracy is a type based on democratic principles, free election and so on but in fact, it is unfair elections, which controlled by the government.

Of course, the government follows all norms and rules in a democracy country however they imitate it for that people can think that their country with democracy regime, example – Russia. Liberal democracy is based on representative democracy but it has its own particular qualities. Liberal democracy aims to provide equal rights for every citizen to observe proper legal procedures, private property, privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion, example – Germany.

We can see that each type based on principles of democracy, connected with people’s interests. In countries where the form of the political regime is a representative democracy or a direct democracy, the main source of power is the people, whereas in countries where the form of the political regime is a guided democracy or a liberal democracy the main source of power is some documents or something like that. Although, these types based on freedom, fair elections, impartiality of politicians but guided democracy has another basis.

I’ve heard many statements about democracy, both good and bad. Some of them were said by great politicians some of them were said by ordinary people who had nothing to do with politics. Of course, everyone who hears word “democracy” understands that is about a political regime. If we talk about the expressions spoken from politicians, the first thing that comes to mind is the expression from Winston Churchill is “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” [8] He said this, losing the elections on November 11, 1947, and then he said: “not the parliament, but the people through the parliament should rule.” From my point of view, these two expressions very well explain the essence of democracy. After that, we can look and analyze some expression by modern politicians. Alexei Navalny said about democracy: “Do you want democracy? Start with yourself!” [9]

I agree with him if every person should follow a culture of democracy and if everyone thinks in the same way then in any country it will be possible to follow the principles of democracy. Frankly speaking, a mass media plays an important role in each policy regime and especially in democratic countries. Unfortunately, we don’t know a mass media impartiality or it’s a propaganda. I found our more information about my topic and some can speak that American democracy based on the principle of “I do not like it, get a bullet in the forehead” and “freedom and democracy are mutually exclusive things” (Gurnov, 2017) [10]. I think it is a true propaganda but who knows. Moreover, people’s opinions often come from the opinions of the media.

The democratic system corresponds to a type of process in which citizens have broad rights in the ruling of the state, the rights and freedoms of the individual and citizen are respected and ensured in the state itself. Sometimes happened that people want one thing and the government of the democratic country understands that they do not need it, and сollisions begin and so on. However, people start to organize rallies and marches, for example, ‘Brexit’ or problems with Catalonia in Spain. I see this situation like 50% of people want changes and 50% don’t want. Is this a democracy way to solve the problem? Unfortunately, we don’t know what is it.

Why do I think so? Because I spoke with my friend from England and he said that a mass media told the false reasons for “Brexit”. At the same time, our news tells the people from the UK are happy but it is false. [11] As I said earlier, it is not clear which media is true or which is a propaganda. Take a recent example with Alexei Navalny. If officially our political regime is democracy, then it is not clear why Aleksey Navalny is not allowed to run for presidency of our country. The main reason is that he is under investigation but we can see that all electoral procedures are formal compliance. It is one more signal why we our county is guided democracy [12]. The media always use “democracy”, where it is appropriate and where not. We have a tendency in Russia that democracy = the USA and the USA = evil. Sometimes it happens that people want one thing and the government of the democratic country understands that they do not need it.

But I am glad that our generation has critical thinking and we are trying to analyze political processes and it seems to me that in our country there is a democratization of civil society.