In his article, Democracy as a Universal Value, Amartya Sen asserts that democracy is a universal value. In order to develop his argument Sen needs to state his definition of democracy and define what he means by universal value. In the course of Sen's argument he gives his view of the relationship between democracy and the economy. He then defends his view of democracy as a universal value against a main argument that deals with cultural differences between regions. Amartya Sen uses a maximum definition of democracy. Sen believes that a democracy has more qualities than just rule by the majority. "Democracy is a demanding system, and not just a mechanical condition (like majority rule) taken in isolation" (Sen 5). Sen believes …show more content…
Sen considers something a universal value if "people anywhere may have reason to see it as valuable" (6). Some people have argued that democracy is not a universal value because not everyone agrees that democracy is valuable and important. However, according to Sen, complete, unanimous approval by all people is not needed for something to be considered a universal value. Using this definition Sen successfully defends his claim that democracy is a universal value, despite the fact that some people may not agree on the value of democracy. In his argument on the universal value of democracy Amartya Sen discusses the relationship between democracy and economic development. He notes that it is often claimed that nondemocratic systems are better at bringing about economic development than democratic ones. Sen disagrees with this claim. He asserts that this hypothesis is based on "very selective and limited information" (3). He admits that it is true that some disciplinarian states, like South Korea, Singapore, and postreform China, have had faster rates of economic growth than many less authoritarian ones, like India, Jamaica, and Costa Rica (3). However, he points out that this very selective evidence cannot be used to establish the general hypothesis that nondemocratic systems are better at bringing about economic development (3). "There is no convincing evidence that authoritarian governance and the suppression of political and civil rights are
Before pondering the extent of democracy one must determine what the term “democracy” means. Democracy is a “means of selecting
The idea represents how democracy has always been considered to be an inferior system in which one tosses aside without giving much thought. No one has raised democracy or corrected its wrongs as it was forced to grow on its own similar to a child with no parents. While many seemed ignorant of its possibilities, democracy was still able to grow and find its own source of power and strength. While it is the responsibility of the legislators to educate and correct democracy, the legislators will often attempt to destroy the idea of its
I argue that when it comes to developing our capabilities, Roosevelt’s argument that the main purpose for freedom is to benefit the community is the most viable because it helps maintain democratic processes, while also providing a higher quality of life for all. While Sen and Roosevelt are similar because they both believe that a society can only develop if the people are given equal opportunity to develop their capabilities, they differ when it comes to the purpose of fulfilling those capabilities. In this essay, I will outline Sen’s argument as to why development should be viewed in terms of maximizing our freedoms to achieve our desired lives, in contrast to Roosevelt’s argument. Then, I will advance my own argument as to why Roosevelt’s
“Democracy, like liberty or science or progress, is a word with which we are all so familiar tht we rarely take the trouble to ask what we mean by it.”
The authors also argue that the greatness of the government driven by democracy is the right to
The general understanding of democracy is that it is a state of leadership where citizens of a country participate equally either directly or by representative individuals in the establishment of laws, which run the society. However, like many other forms of leadership, democracy has its cons and may not give the citizens the necessary freedoms that they think they have. Different philosophers have different insights on democracy in terms of concepts such as liberty, which they embraced. This paper will look at Benjamin Barber and Joseph Schumpeter’s idea of democracy contrasting their definition in terms of citizenship, obligation, rights and duties of each individual in the society declaring whose idea of democracy creates a compelling vision (Terchek & Conte, 2001).
In his argument on the universal value of democracy Amartya Sen discusses the relationship between democracy and economic development. He notes that it is often claimed that nondemocratic systems are better at bringing about economic development than democratic ones. Sen disagrees with this claim. He asserts that this hypothesis is based on "very selective and limited information" (3). He admits that it is true that some disciplinarian states, like South Korea, Singapore, and postreform China, have had faster rates of economic growth than many less authoritarian ones, like India, Jamaica, and Costa Rica (3). However, he points out that this very selective evidence cannot be used
Democracy, as a word, has many interpretations. Communist countries define themselves as economic democracies. Clearly the opposite is true due to the definition that the Founding Fathers of The United States used. Democracy is defined as having five key characteristics. These principles are the following: majority rule, equality, liberty, necessity of compromise, and individual worth. Majority rule, principle number one, can be broken down into two distinct categories, popular majority and representative majority. Popular majority, in its root definition, means that the majority of all the citizens or all voters are taken into account in the election of governmental offices. The second type of majority rule is representative majority. This
Through the study of human history it is evident authoritative and monarch governments prevailed as legitimate authorities but with careful considerations these political systems were seen as inaccurate by many. New political systems, functions and responsibilities soon began to surface. Democracy was among these new political systems and argues for the influence of citizens in politics and the protection of rights (Dahl, 1998, p. 44). Democracy can be found through many political systems around the world particularly in first world countries such as Canada and the United States of America. Fortunately the notions of democracy can also be found in some developing countries such as India. ¬¬¬Although democratic views and notions are found throughout Indian politics and its associated practices India does not prove to be completely democratic in relation to Robert Dahl’s criteria of democracy highlighted in his book, On Democracy. Robert Dahl, a political scientist and professor, sets up 5 criteria of democracy that includes effective participation, voting equality, enlightened understanding, inclusion and control of agenda (Dahl, 1998, p. 36-7). He argues that a sense of true democracy is founded when all 5 criteria of democracy are fulfilled (Dahl, 1998, p. 36). Unfortunately India is unable to accommodate the criteria of voting equality and effective participation due to its
The second benchmark of democracy is Political Equality which is, “the idea that each person, being of equal intrinsic value as other human beings carries the same weight in voting and other political decision making.” (Chapter 1 pg. 11) This states how each
Certain values define a democratic society, and this may include life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, the common good, justice, diversity, equality, truth, popular sovereignty, patriotism, equality, general accord among others. This paper discusses each of these values and also determines which of these values represent the highest level of a democratic society. These democratic values represent the fundamental beliefs as well as the basic principles of the constitution which unit all people in a given nation (Christman 242).
Democracy and its critics is a political science book written by Robert Dahl In 1989 and published by Yale University Press in America. The book looks at the assumptions of the democratic theory and is able to test them in relation to the questions raised by critics. Thereafter, Dahl suggests the ways in which the states must move towards improving their democracy.
Additionally, in more precarious democratic governments such as India’s, peoples right to power is still recognized. Ronojoy Sen remarks of India’s 2009 elections that, “a handful of successful professionals and entrepreneurs even ran”(cite). Despite implying that only successful peoples were exercising their liberties, elucidated in this article is the potential of any citizen to attain political power, demonstrating true liberal democracy in its purest form. Communism does not give its people these liberties, the party is the “agent for creating political development” (Janos, pg. 2) and there is little need for elections as the outcome is pre-determined. In the case of Nazism, while Hitler utilised democracy to attain power, once in control democracy was replaced with autocracy.
one essential conviction, expressed in the word democracy itself: that power should be in the hands of the people. Although democracy today has been slightly inefficient in this idea, with the wealthy, elite class challenging this right, “it nevertheless claims for itself a fundamental validity that no other kind of society shares….” To completely understand the structure of democracy, one must return to the roots of the practice itself, and examine the origins in ancient Greece, the expansion in the Roman Empire, and how these practices combined make what we recognize as today’s democratic government.
It has also been suggested that a basic feature of democracy is the capacity of eligible voters to participate freely and fully in the life of their society.[14] With its emphasis on notions of social contract and the collective will of the eligible voters, democracy can also be characterized as a form of political collectivism because it is defined as a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.[15]