The link between democracy and human rights has been recognized by many scholars. For example O’Donnell (2004) summarized the quality of democracy as: Quality of Democracy = human rights + human development. This viewpoint indicates that democracy encapsulates human rights. Several research findings strongly support the idea that states with higher levels of democracy, regardless of their election rules, are more respectful of human rights (Davenport 1997; Poe, Tate, and Keith 1999).
Implied in the common understanding of democracy is the idea that democratic regimes respect the individual rights of their citizens. According to Cingranelli and Richards (1999:513), “most findings in previous empirical human rights research indicate that the governments of democratic countries tend to have more respect for physical integrity rights than the governments of authoritarian countries”. Proponents of this argument contend that democracy reduces government oppression, because democracy empowers the masses. The masses, so empowered, use their power to prevent those in authority from abusing their human
…show more content…
This is because democratic governance is expected be based on consensus and respect for the wishes and aspirations of the people. A political system where the government depends on repression as a way of increasing regime strength cannot be described as democratic.
As has been aptly observed, human rights abuses are “products of particular processes in the economic, social, cultural, and political systems of a country” (Usman, 2010:2). A clearer and deeper understanding of these goes a long way to facilitate informed analyses and recommendations on how best to address these issues. Similarly, understanding these contexts and dynamics is crucial to understanding the state of human rights in Nigeria, and the ranges of violations that have occurred over
Although the United States has been celebrated as a pioneering democracy, the nation’s constitution formulates a system of government that deviates from purely democratic principles. That is, when assessing the intentions of the framers, the Constitution’s calculated deviations from an absolute popular rule establishes a system of governance in which the security of American liberties is prioritized. Moreover, by examining the nuances of the Constitution from the framers’ lenses, the divergence from purely democratic ideals becomes all the more apparent. However, despite paving the road for democracies to come, emerging democracies around the world have broken away from the American system of governance outlined by the constitution through
Democracy is designed to concentrate the power of government in the hands of the people and protect against autocracy and oligarchy. It presupposes societies need a modicum of rule, as they cannot function if there is anarchy. In this way, democracy is a virtue, or a mean between two vices. However, democracy has a sliding scale, the metric of which is the citizens who rule it. Citizens ultimately dictate the laws to be agreed upon, codified and enacted. These laws not only govern behavior and maintain order, but also provide citizens with a mechanism to seek relief through the courts should they be aggrieved.
When we hear of the word democracy we think of a system of government where the people are in control or have most of the power. Most system of government tend to use the democratic way of leadership today around the world because of how popular it became in America. There are many influences that lead to this change in democracy that helps to shape it in the way it is used today. many social movements and interest groups has influenced and impacted a positive change in this new and reformed way of leadership. I will further elaborate and discuss what has led to this new democracy in the U.S.
"Democracy" means, to many Americans, a system in which they choose their own leaders, voice their opinions to representatives in government, and human rights and freedoms are respected by the state. But in practice, "democracy," when applied abroad by the United States, means subjugating native peoples to the will of American corporations, and in the process, the destruction...
We live in the 21st century where no human right is an equal right. We were issued human rights to be treated equal but everyday life situations show me that society is so unfair. Human rights are made to be inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is entitled to do because he or she is a human being. Human rights are meant to be natural rights to anyone who takes part in America's population. Human rights can be defined as rights that are believed to belong justifiably to every person. World War I and World War II of the twentieth century is what led to the development of the human rights. The human rights were derived from 18 members of many various political, cultural and even religious backgrounds. Authors consisted of those from John Peters Humphrey, Charles Malik, Peng Chun Chang, William Hodgson and Eleanor Roosevelt to name just a few. At the time that human rights were created it was for the people who faced such horror. I put myself in society shoes and I notice that the Human Rights are more of a dream than reality. When stating my opinion, each state has its own violation of the human rights of some kind. Tortured or abused in at least 81 countries, unfair trials in at least 54 countries, and lastly but definitely not the least restriction in freedom of expression in at least 77 countries.
In comparing the average citizen in a democratic nation, say the United States, to that of a non-democratic nation, for instance Egypt, it will be found that the citizen in the democratic nation is generally better off – free of persecution, free from fear of the authorities, and free to express his opinions on governmental matters. And while national conflicts occur everywhere, incidents like violent revolts have shown to be more prevalent in nations where citizens are not allowed to choose who governs them. It is slightly paradoxical that democracy, so inherently flawed in theory, can lead to such successful outcomes in practice. The question, then, becomes: “If democracy has so many weaknesses, why does it work?”
There have been enormous efforts to spread democracy as a political system throughout the world by the developed democratic countries and the international development organizations including the World Bank. By the late 1990s the United States alone spent over a half billion dollars to promote democratic expansion throughout the world (Diamond, 2003). These were done considering that the democratic system leads towards development. As a result in the late 20th century we saw a huge political transformation towards democracy. During the last few decades a huge number of countries adopted democracy as their political system. However, it retain a big question how far democracy is successful in bringing development of a country? At this stage, some people also criticizes the effort of democratization arguing that it is done without considering the context of a country, sometimes democracy is not ideal for all countries and it is an effort to extinct diversity of political system. In studying the literature regarding the debate, we found a paradoxical relationship between democracy and development. Some argue that democracy has failed to ensure expected outcomes in terms of development. While others confronted that democracy has a considerable impact on development. Another group of people argue that form of political system actually does not have any impact on development process. On the verge of these debates, some development institutions and academics throw light on why democracy is not working properly, and what measure should be taken to make it more successful in bringing effective development of developing countries. Consequently, this writing is an effort of revisiting the different views about impact of democra...
Firstly, K. Isbester mentions that democracy has a different meaning for everyone, as some can define democracy as a good aspect for development, on the contrary other believe that it is nothing more than voting after several years. Although, Latin America see democratic g...
A memorable expression said by President Abraham Lincoln reads, “Democracy is government of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Democracy, is a derived from the Greek term "demos" which means people. It is a successful, system of government that vests power to the public or majority. Adopted by the United States in 1776, a democratic government has six basic characteristics: (i) established/elected sovereignty (where power and civic responsibility are exercised either directly by the public or their freely agreed elected representative(s)), (ii) majority rule(vs minority), (iii) (protects one’s own and reside with) human rights, (iv) regular free and fair elections to citizens (upon a certain age), (v) responsibility of
...a voice and a choice. They have the feeling of being secure and free something which is only achieved through national security. Democracies also share similar beliefs and political ideologies which prevent them from engaging in warfare in the event of an arising conflict. The democratic peace theory states that democratic countries do not engage in interstate wars against each other. This theory has been proven true from time and time again in history. There has never been a case of an independent democratic country raging war on another democratic regime. So definitely when it comes to solving conflict through war regime type does matter since democratic states are 99 percent less likely to engage in a fight with autocracies and 100 prevent less likely to declare war on fellow democracy. Democracy is a preventer of conflict on all levels of human interactions.
In turn, democracy provides the natural environment for the protection and effective realization of human rights. (Democracy and Human rights)
In addition, democracy maintains the right of choice. These characteristics are the most appealing and dominate because people can formulate decisions based on their cultural, religious, interpersonal, intrapersonal beliefs that outline who...
Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the discourse of international human rights and its importance has increasingly become indoctrinated in the international community. In the context of political and economic development, there have been debates on how and which rights should be ordered and protected throughout different cultures and communities. Though there is a general acceptance of international human rights around the globe, there is an approach that divides them into civil and political rights and social and economic rights, which puts emphasis where it need not be.
The concept of political freedom is sharply relevant to the concept of civil liberties and human rights. The base of democratic society is that the state has to stand for every citizen`s freedom with any available resource, such as institutional, legal or moral. Liberalism has a set of Justice is about giving someone what he deserves (Heywood, 2012). According to Heywood(2012), “Justice is a moral standard of fairness and impartiality…” (Heywood, 2012, p. 33).
The current challenges of democracy around the world should prioritize each encounter that should be addressed through networks, global gatherings, and various activities. As a continuous concern, the progress of democracy discusses various strategies and activities. These various strategies and activities lead to lessons that are learned in advancing democracy, making democracy deliver, strengthening democratic fundamentals, and more current challenges. Democracy faces threats from every spectrum as the threats surge the need to reinforce democratic forces through aid and greater international solidarity. Each country reflects on a certain assessment towards the current status of democracy.