The Pros And Cons Of Liberal Democracy

In his book, The Origins of Political Order, Fukuyama considers Liberal Democracy (Fukuyama, 2011) to be the most stable form for a state to adopt. To be considered a Liberal Democracy a state must balance the principle of popular consent, the need for limited government intervention and the protection of individual liberties. The model of separation of powers and a series of checks and balances ensures that no branch of government can dominate the political agenda. Similarly, the rule of law preserves the authority of law over all, protecting civil liberties and individual rights. The Constitution and the existence of an independent judiciary act as a restraint on government. In line with this free, frequent, and competitive election, promoting universal suffrage and political equality assures that government can be held to account; and thus the citizens remain sovereign. The classical depiction of liberty originated from the individual rights of ‘life, liberty and property’ (Wintrop, 1987, p.12), as states have developed, these rights have expanded countering the growing state, franchise and economy. In addition human nature and voter apathy remain as threats in preventing the fulfillment of the democratic process. The fundamental weakness of a Liberal Democracy

However, in essence the incompatibility of a limited government and the desire to protect individual rights by providing equality of opportunity makes it impossible for both to be completely applied to a state. Thus, while individual weaknesses such as limited participation; the need to disperse power; to control the economy and the dominating elite can be overcome individually; the solutions are contrasting in either expanding the role of government or protecting individual rights. These weaknesses cannot be overcome without threatening the states position as a Liberal