Majoritarian democracy

Majoritarian democracy is a form of democracy based upon majority rule of a polity's citizens.[1] Majoritarian democracy contrasts with consensus democracy, rule by as many people as possible.[1][2][3][4]

Characteristics

In the majoritarian vision of democracy, voters mandate elected politicians to enact the policies they proposed during their electoral campaign.[5] Elections are the focal point of political engagement, with limited ability for the people to influence policymaking between elections.[6]

Criticisms

Though common, majoritarian democracy is not universally accepted – majoritarian democracy is criticized as having the inherent danger of becoming a "tyranny of the majority" whereby the majority in society could oppress or exclude minority groups,[1] which can lead to violence and civil war.[2][3] Some argue that since parliament, statutes and preparatory works are very important in majoritarian democracies, and considering the absence of a tradition to exercise judicial review at the national level, majoritarian democracies are undemocratic.

Fascism rejects majoritarian democracy because the latter assumes equality of citizens and fascists claim that fascism is a form of authoritarian democracy that represents the views of a dynamic organized minority of a nation rather than the disorganized majority.[7]

Examples

Australia and Canada are examples of majoritarian democracies. Representatives are chosen not by proportional electoral systems, but by a system based on plurality voting. Contrary to popular belief, the USA is not a majoritarian democracy as they can have an elected individual based on points from the majority of county and further state votes. This means an individual can be in power in the USA while having a minority vote overall.

See also

References
  1. David., Arter (2006). Democracy in Scandinavia : consensual, majoritarian or mixed?. Manchester: Manchester University Press. p. 15. ISBN 9780719070464. OCLC 64555175.
  2. Reynal-Querol, Marta (2002). "Political systems, stability and civil wars". Defence and Peace Economics. 13 (6): 465–483. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.17.2796. doi:10.1080/10242690214332. S2CID 38417520. According to our model the proportional system has a lower probability of rebellion than the majoritarian system. .. Empirically, we find that countries with proportional system has the lowest probability that groups rebel and that the more inclusive is the system, the smaller the probability of suffering a civil war.
  3. Emerson, Peter (2016). From Majority Rule to Inclusive Politics (1st ed.). Cham: Springer. ISBN 9783319235004. OCLC 948558369. Unfortunately, one of the worst democratic structures is the most ubiquitous: majority rule based on majority voting. It must be emphasised, furthermore, that these two practices are often the catalysts of division and bitterness, if not indeed violence and war.
  4. Clark, Golder & Golder 2017, pp. 703
  5. Clark, Golder & Golder 2017, pp. 703–4
  6. Clark, Golder & Golder 2017, pp. 704
  7. Anthony., Arblaster (1994). Democracy (2nd ed.). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. p. 48. ISBN 9780816626014. OCLC 30069868.
  • Clark, William Roberts; Golder, Matt; Golder, Sona Nadenichek (2017). Principles of Comparative Politics (3rd ed.). Washington DC: SAGE/CQ Press. ISBN 9781506389790.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.