"Democracy may, after all, turn out to have been a historical accident, a brief parenthesis that is closing before our eyes." With those words, French philosopher Jean-Francois Revel sounded an alarm as the ramparts of democratic conviction were under attack by the political left. Revel, one of the most important conservative thinkers in France, saw European intellectuals and the political left in America undermining the very foundations of democracy.
"Democracy tends to ignore, even deny, threats to its existence because it loathes doing what is needed to counter them," explained Revel. "It awakens only when the danger becomes deadly, imminent, evident. By then, either there is too little time left for it to save itself, or the price of survival has become crushingly high."
To any insightful observer of the European scene in the early 1980s, Revel's analysis was prophetic. Leftist intellectuals were pointing to the United States as the source of all oppression in the world, while praising the Soviet Union as the liberator of human kind. In How Democracies Perish, Revel aimed his sights at the self-destructive hypocrisies of liberal thought. As he knew, the very intellectuals who should have been supporting the United States were instead hoping for its downfall. "What we end up with in what is conventionally called Western society is a topsy-turvy situation in which those seeking to destroy democracy appear to be fighting for legitimate aims, while its defenders are pictured as repressive reactionaries."
As Revel lamented, at times the democracies seemed to find strange comfort in calls for their own destruction. As he observed, "Democratic civilization is the first in history to blame itself because another is power is working to destroy it." Were democracies doomed to self-destruct?
Jean-Francois Revel is well known as a shining light of reason in the French academy. Long a columnist, editor, and director of L'Express, Revel is also the author of a multi-volume history of philosophy. He sprang to Western attention with the publication of his controversial book, Without Marx or Jesus. Revel's later volumes would include The Totalitarian Temptation and Democracy Against Itself.
Throughout his career, Revel has been known as a stalwart defender of democracy. He does not take this matter lightly, for he understands all too well that the basic structure of government determines the achievement or loss of human freedom within a society. In Democracy Against Itself, Revel argued that "every society which has worked more or less well, which achieved any sort of viability, and which produced civilizations men found tolerable, have been--or are--societies that in some sense are democratic.
were not as radical as the transformation to democratic thought. It is here that Wood points out the “uncontrolla...
1. Janda, Kenneth. The Challenge of Democracy. Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston, MA. 1999. (Chapter 3 & 4).
...ed. As quoted by Nash, “it produced the greatest flow of energy since the Puritan Movement a century before”. Followers believed a new source of authority was needed, and the actions many took led to revitalization of mind and body. Inadvertently, this led to the creation of new branches of religion, and each citizen was able to make the individual choice to believe what they wanted to believe. This led to a more extensive sense of individualization. The masses had, over time been building up a sense of needing something new, a restoration of how they lived their lives. They knew that in order to obtain change, they needed to take action themselves, determined by the ideology of democracy. Gary Nash’s essay entitled “The Transformation of European Society” delineated how the “democratic personality” effectively impacted social, economic, and religious conditions.
Janda, Kenneth. Berry, Jeffrey. Goldman, Jerry (2008). The Challenge of Democracy (9th ed.). Boston; New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
...re importantly, it tries to give democracy a good name at a time when democracy, rule by the people, was feared in Europe and the rest of the world. Democracy in America shows us how each society has certain habits that contribute to its definition of democracy. These habits, some of which are good and some bad, check each other to a balance of normalcy in which everyone has opportunity, safety, and potential progress in society. It shows us that democracy incorporates many “habits of the heart” and aggregates them to a common equality, making it an irresistible force in the world. Conversely, the “habits” of the people change over time. So, what Democracy was in America when Tocqueville visited may not be the same as that today or in the future. However, materialism and religion still play key roles in American democracy as a passion and a temper to that passion.
Hudson, William E. American Democracy in Peril: Eight Challenges to America's Future. Washington, DC: CQ, 2010. Print.
Dye, T. R., Zeigler, H., & Schubert, L. (2012). The Irony of Democracy (15th ed.).
Hudson, William E. American Democracy in Peril: Eight Challenges to America’s Future – Fourth Edition. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2004.
middle of paper ... ... This comment suggests that the current idea, liberalism, may just be a phase in human ideology that has spread worldwide. Though he made a compelling argument and posed thought provoking questions that supported his argument, the flaws in his argument, after stringent analysis, contradict his main points. Works Cited Ferguson, C. (Director).
In making this argument this essay seeks to five things. Firstly, to define democracy within the contemporary context offering the key characteristics of a modern re...
Barry, Brian. "Is Democracy Special?" in Philosophy, Politics, & Society, 5th Series, ed. Peter Laslett & James Fishkin. Hew Haven: Yale University Press, 1979.
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?”
Human history is pock-marked with innumerable wars and revolutions. The cause for most of the revolutions has been the choice of freedom. The opportunity to live a life without physical, mental or emotional restrictions has been and still is of supreme importance to man. This has resulted in the most widely followed discipline of political governance: Democracy.
... and fascism offered bold new approaches to modern politics. These ideologies maintained that democracy was effeminate and that it wasted precious time in building consensus among citizens. Totalitarian leaders’ military style made representative government and the democratic values of the United States, France, and Great Britain appear feeble- a sign that these societies were on the decline. Totalitarianism put democracies on the defensive as they aimed to restore prosperity while still upholding individual rights and the rule of law”(Hunt & Martin, 852).
Rousseau describes democracy as a form of government that “has never existed and never will”. Yet twenty-six countries in the world are considered to be full democracies. How can this be possible? Rousseau’s concept of democracy supports the most fundamental and basic premise of democracy – one in which all citizens directly participate. While his idea of democracy cannot be considered an effective indictment of what passes for democracy today, it is not Rousseau’s account which is flawed, but that in modern society it would be practically impossible to achieve this idea of democracy.