Changes

== Debate over the merits of democracy ==

== Debate over the merits of democracy ==

While a [[direct democracy]] in the manner of the Athenians is probably infeasible in a modern [[nation-state]] comprised of millions of citizens, there continues to be debate among conservatives as to whether [[representative democracy]] is a desirable system.  [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], who could be considered the father of both modern democracy and [[totalitarianism]], believed that in a democracy the government should be guided only by what he called the [[General Will]].  Other thinkers of the [[French]] [[Enlightenment]] described a [[republic]] as a system in which the law applies equally to the government and the people, a concept abbreviated in the [[21st century]] by the phrase [[rule of law]]. Most contemporary thinkers would identify [[universal suffrage]] and the right of any citizen to argue for a change in existing law as desirable features of democracy; but there is some question as to whether the rule of law can be indefinitely sustained in a system with these features.  [[Thomas Jefferson]] believed that it could so long as the people were educated, and thus devoted his post-presidency to founding the [[University of Virginia]]. Nonetheless, property continued to be a proxy for education throughout the [[antebellum period]] and Jefferson's home state of [[Virginia]] only abolished [[property qualifications for voting]] in 1851, years after any other state. Another (probably apocryphal) quote attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler says that a republic can only last until the people find out that they can vote themselves public funds. This would be considered a [[welfare state]], which most conservatives feel is an abuse of the [[U. S. Constitution]]'s [[Necessary and Proper Clause]]. In some cases, such as the French Revolution, democracy is depicted as little more than [[mobocracy]], like with the [[September Massacres]] and various other murders that were happening at the time. This particular event caused most of the Founding Fathers to be wary of democracy, with Ben Franklin in particular specifically comparing democracy to "wolves debating with a lamb regarding supper." In worst cases, democracy can also be comparable to totalitarian movements such as socialism, if not being directly the same, then at the very least being on the path to the latter, as Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin infamously mentioned.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20050306035722/http://www.libertocracy.com/Webessays/state/democracy/Communist_Manifesto.htm] </ref><ref>[http://www.marx.be/sites/default/files/documents/EN/texts/sr_and_sq.PDF The State and Revolution] by Vladimir Lenin<br />"...at a certain stage in the development of democracy, it first welds together the class that wages a revolutionary struggle against capitalism -- the proletariat -- and enables it to crush, smash to smithereens, wipe off the face of the earth the bourgeois, even the republican-bourgeois, state machine -- the standing army, the police and the bureaucracy -- and to substitute for it a more democratic state machine, but a state machine nevertheless, in the shape of the armed masses of workers who develop into a militia in which the entire population takes part."</ref><ref>[https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/iii.htm What Is To Be Done?] by Vladimir Lenin<br />"...the Social-Democrat’s [Communist's] ideal should not be the trade union secretary, but the tribune of the people, who is able to react to every manifestation of tyranny and oppression, no matter where it appears, no matter what stratum or class of the people it affects; who is able to generalise all these manifestations and produce a single picture of police violence and capitalist exploitation; who is able to take advantage of every event, however small, in order to set forth before all his socialist convictions and his democratic demands, in order to clarify for all and everyone the world-historic significance of the struggle for the emancipation of the proletariat."</ref>

While a [[direct democracy]] in the manner of the Athenians is probably infeasible in a modern [[nation-state]] comprised of millions of citizens, there continues to be debate among conservatives as to whether [[representative democracy]] is a desirable system.   

 

[[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], who could be considered the father of both modern democracy and [[totalitarianism]], believed that in a democracy the government should be guided only by what he called the General Will.  Other thinkers of the [[French]] [[Enlightenment]] described a [[republic]] as a system in which the law applies equally to the government and the people, a concept abbreviated in the [[21st century]] by the phrase [[rule of law]].  

 

Most contemporary thinkers would identify universal suffrage and the right of any citizen to argue for a change in existing law as desirable features of democracy; but there is some question as to whether the rule of law can be indefinitely sustained in a system with these features.  [[Thomas Jefferson]] believed that it could so long as the people were educated, and thus devoted his post-presidency to founding the [[University of Virginia]].  

 

Nonetheless, property continued to be a proxy for education throughout the antebellum period and Jefferson's home state of [[Virginia]] only abolished property qualifications for voting in 1851, years after any other state. Another (probably apocryphal) quote attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler says that a republic can only last until the people find out that they can vote themselves public funds. This would be considered a [[welfare state]], which most conservatives feel is an abuse of the [[U. S. Constitution]]'s [[Necessary and Proper Clause]].  

 

In some cases, such as the French Revolution, democracy is depicted as little more than [[mobocracy]], like with the [[September Massacres]] and various other murders that were happening at the time. This particular event caused most of the Founding Fathers to be wary of democracy, with Ben Franklin in particular specifically comparing democracy to "wolves debating with a lamb regarding supper."  

 

In worst cases, democracy can also be comparable to totalitarian movements such as socialism, if not being directly the same, then at the very least being on the path to the latter, as Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin infamously mentioned.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20050306035722/http://www.libertocracy.com/Webessays/state/democracy/Communist_Manifesto.htm] </ref><ref>[http://www.marx.be/sites/default/files/documents/EN/texts/sr_and_sq.PDF The State and Revolution] by Vladimir Lenin<br />"...at a certain stage in the development of democracy, it first welds together the class that wages a revolutionary struggle against capitalism -- the proletariat -- and enables it to crush, smash to smithereens, wipe off the face of the earth the bourgeois, even the republican-bourgeois, state machine -- the standing army, the police and the bureaucracy -- and to substitute for it a more democratic state machine, but a state machine nevertheless, in the shape of the armed masses of workers who develop into a militia in which the entire population takes part."</ref><ref>[https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/iii.htm What Is To Be Done?] by Vladimir Lenin<br />"...the Social-Democrat’s [Communist's] ideal should not be the trade union secretary, but the tribune of the people, who is able to react to every manifestation of tyranny and oppression, no matter where it appears, no matter what stratum or class of the people it affects; who is able to generalise all these manifestations and produce a single picture of police violence and capitalist exploitation; who is able to take advantage of every event, however small, in order to set forth before all his socialist convictions and his democratic demands, in order to clarify for all and everyone the world-historic significance of the struggle for the emancipation of the proletariat."</ref>

Democracy may have its problems; an uneducated populace, for example, is the bane of any democracy, since unless people know what they need, they can not properly elect people to serve these needs.  Other problems emerge from a capricious electorate, which caused [[Winston Churchill]] to remark that, "Democracy is the worst form of government... except for all the other forms that have been tried," a quote which eloquently notes that, despite its problems, democracy almost universally provides for peace and prosperity.  

Democracy may have its problems; an uneducated populace, for example, is the bane of any democracy, since unless people know what they need, they can not properly elect people to serve these needs.  Other problems emerge from a capricious electorate, which caused [[Winston Churchill]] to remark that, "Democracy is the worst form of government... except for all the other forms that have been tried," a quote which eloquently notes that, despite its problems, democracy almost universally provides for peace and prosperity.