Illiberal Democracy

900 Words4 Pages
Fareed Zakaria’s The Rise of Illiberal Democracy expresses the views he has on the differences between liberal democracy and illiberal democracy, and which one causes civil war. He also explains how both types of democracy go hand in hand with other in the formation of the United State government and it constitution. Zakaria also talks about how majority of the countries in the world are democratic, but majority of which are an illiberal democracies. His ideals could also be reflected during the civil rights movement.
To begin democracy simply is defined as being for the people, but Zakaria explains how western countries governments version of democracy has meant liberal democracy, a system that has the qualities where there is not only fair and free election, but also constitutional limitation of power that the government has, separation of powers and protection of basic rights such as freedom of speech, assembly, religion and property. Liberal Democracy avoided civil war by providing protection of its citizens and their rights. This form of democracy differs from the historical and theoretical form of democracy. There are many different forms of government besides liberal democracy, in fact, many countries goes through many types of government before becoming a liberal democracy. Countries tend to start of with self-elected ruler that do not protect its people rights, this form of government is an Illiberal Autocracy, then they go on to become a Liberal Autocracy, still self elected but protects its peoples rights, and then finally become Liberal Democracy. Another form of government is illiberal democracy; this government is not free and fair.
Majority of the democratic countries in the world are an illiberal democracy and th...

... middle of paper ...

...oycott began when Rosa Parks, an educated person who attended Alabama State College, was arrested for refusing to giving up her seat to a white person who saw that the first few rows where full and wanted her seat. The boycott lead to the United State Supreme court ruled that the segregation law in Montgomery was unconstitutional.
By the early 1960, another Civil Right movement began, Sit-Ins. Four college students, Ezell Blair, Franklin McCain, Joseph McNeil and David Richmond walked in to establishments to be served but by the end of the night they were never served. They would later come back with larger group and sit once again. They did so with rules to prevent any trouble from the authorities, just by not talking to anyone, never blocking the entrances and by simply being nice. The movement picked up momentum being done by many throughout the north and south.
Open Document