6 - Democracies - Part 1
Summary
TLDRThis script explores the concept of democracy, tracing its origins to ancient Greece and examining its evolution into modern forms. It contrasts direct and indirect democracy, highlighting the importance of participation, competition, and liberty. The discussion delves into the balance between civil rights and civil liberties, using examples like the Westborough Baptist Church to illustrate the tension. The script also covers the historical development of democracy, from the Magna Carta to modern electoral systems, comparing single-member districts and proportional representation, and discussing their impact on representation and governance.
Takeaways
- 🏛️ Democracy originates from the Greek words 'demos' meaning people and 'kratos' meaning rule, embodying the concept of 'power to the people'.
- 🌍 The implementation of democracy varies, with direct democracy being rare and indirect democracy being the norm where people vote for representatives.
- 🗳️ In democracies, there is an emphasis on participation, competition between parties, and liberty, with liberal democracies particularly promoting these aspects.
- 🏢 Social democracies, such as those in Scandinavia, prioritize collective welfare over individual rights, differing from liberal democracies.
- 🏫 The central themes of democracy include public participation in elections, accountability of officials, legal limits on government authority, and guaranteed rights and freedoms.
- 📜 Civil rights focus on equality for all residents or citizens, whereas civil liberties emphasize individual freedoms, with different states focusing on one over the other.
- 🚫 In some European countries, it's illegal to deny the Holocaust, reflecting a balance between civil rights and civil liberties to prevent incitement of hatred and violence.
- 🗣️ The ACLU supports the protection of free speech, even for controversial groups like the Westboro Baptist Church, to uphold the principle of the marketplace of ideas.
- 📊 Different electoral systems like single-member districts (SMD) and proportional representation (PR) aim to balance participation and effective governance.
- 🌐 The plurality SMD system can lead to a two-party dominance and discourages voting for smaller parties, as votes for losing candidates are considered 'wasted'.
- 📈 The majority-based SMD system can allow extremist candidates to advance to the second round of voting, as seen in the 2002 French election with Jean-Marie Le Pen.
Q & A
What is the origin of the word 'democracy'?
-The word 'democracy' comes from the Greek word 'demos' meaning common people and 'kratos' meaning rule or power, essentially meaning 'power to the people'.
How did the concept of democracy evolve from its Greek model?
-The Greek model of democracy was a direct democracy limited to free men, excluding women and slaves. Over time, democracy has evolved to include various forms such as direct and indirect (representative) democracies, with a broader participation from the populace.
What is the difference between direct democracy and indirect democracy?
-Direct democracy involves citizens voting on issues directly, which is rare today, with Switzerland being a notable example. Indirect democracy, the norm, involves citizens voting for representatives who then vote on their behalf.
What are the key elements of a liberal democracy?
-A liberal democracy emphasizes participation, competition between parties for real choice, and liberty with various freedoms such as speech, movement, and assembly.
How does social democracy differ from liberal democracy?
-Social democracies, like those in Scandinavia, favor collective welfare over individual rights to a certain degree, unlike liberal democracies which tend to promote individual liberties more strongly.
What are civil rights and civil liberties, and how do they differ?
-Civil rights refer to the promotion of equality for all residents or citizens, while civil liberties are about the promotion of freedom. Some states focus more on political liberties, like the United States, while others focus more on civil rights, like Scandinavia.
Why is Holocaust denial illegal in some European countries?
-Holocaust denial is illegal in countries like Austria, Belgium, and Germany to prevent the incitement of hatred and violence. It's a balance between protecting civil liberties and ensuring civil rights for all.
What is the 'marketplace of ideas' principle mentioned in the context of the Westboro Baptist Church?
-The 'marketplace of ideas' principle suggests that all ideas, even odious ones, should be allowed to be expressed and debated openly. The belief is that good ideas will prevail and bad ones will be publicly criticized and rejected.
How did the Magna Carta influence the development of democracy?
-The Magna Carta, signed in 1215, limited the power of the king and guaranteed certain rights for free men, creating a proto-legislature. It established the rule of law and the idea that no one, not even the monarch, is above the law.
What is the difference between single-member district (SMD) and proportional representation (PR) electoral systems?
-SMD systems, either plurality or majority-based, elect one representative per constituency with the most votes. PR systems translate votes into seats based on the proportion of votes each party receives, allowing for more diverse representation.
Why might a voter be hesitant to vote for a third-party candidate in a plurality SMD system?
-In a plurality SMD system, voters may hesitate to vote for third-party candidates because they fear 'wasting' their vote. Since only the candidate with the most votes wins, voting for a candidate with less support can seem pointless.
How does the majority-based SMD system affect the chances of extremist candidates?
-The majority-based SMD system can allow extremist candidates to advance to a second round if they can consolidate a significant minority of votes, as seen with Jean Marie Le Pen in the 2002 French election. This system can potentially give a platform to extremist views.
Outlines
🌍 Introduction to Democracy
The paragraph introduces the concept of democracy, derived from the Greek words 'demos' meaning people and 'kratos' meaning rule, symbolizing 'power to the people'. It discusses the evolution of democracy from ancient Greece and Rome, where it was limited to certain classes, to modern forms that emphasize participation, competition, and liberty. Direct democracy is rare today, with Switzerland being a notable example, while indirect democracy is the norm. The paragraph also distinguishes between liberal democracy, which promotes participation and competition, and social democracy, which leans towards collective welfare. The importance of civil rights versus civil liberties is highlighted, with examples of how different countries prioritize one over the other, such as the United States focusing on civil liberties and Scandinavia on civil rights. The discussion also touches on the balance between freedom of speech and the need to prevent incitement to hatred and violence, using the example of Holocaust denial laws in Europe.
🗣️ Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties
This section delves deeper into the distinction between civil rights and civil liberties. Civil rights aim to promote equality for all residents or citizens, while civil liberties focus on individual freedoms. The United States is highlighted as a country that emphasizes civil liberties, in contrast to countries like those in Scandinavia that focus more on civil rights. The paragraph also discusses how different states balance these rights and liberties differently, using the example of the Westboro Baptist Church, which, despite its controversial views, is protected under freedom of speech in the United States. The American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) stance on protecting free speech, even for unpopular opinions, is mentioned, emphasizing the 'marketplace of ideas' where bad ideas are countered by good ones rather than being silenced.
📊 Electoral Systems and Participation
The paragraph discusses the evolution of democracy and the importance of participation through voting. It mentions the Magna Carta as a foundational document that limited the power of the king and established the concept of rule of law. The paragraph also covers the expansion of suffrage, or the right to vote, over time, with New Zealand being the first to grant women the right to vote, and the United States following in 1920. It discusses various approaches to encourage participation, such as mandatory voting in some countries. The paragraph then explains different electoral systems, including single-member districts (SMD) with a plurality or majority basis, and the implications these systems have on representation and governance. The SMD system tends to favor a two-party system and can lead to wasted votes, while majority-based SMD systems can allow for more representation but still tend to favor a few dominant parties.
🏛️ The Impact of Electoral Systems
This section compares different electoral systems, focusing on how they affect the representation and moderation of political views. It explains that a plurality SMD system tends to favor mainstream candidates due to the 'median voter theorem', where voters are less likely to waste their votes on extremist candidates. However, a majority-based SMD system can allow extremists to gain a foothold, as seen in the 2002 French election where Jean Marie Le Pen, an extremist candidate, made it to the second round. The paragraph also discusses the implications of these systems on governance and the potential for a diversity of views that can hinder effective governance. The comparison between the two systems highlights the trade-offs between representation and moderation in democratic systems.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Democracy
💡Direct Democracy
💡Indirect Democracy
💡Liberal Democracy
💡Social Democracy
💡Civil Rights
💡Civil Liberties
💡Holocaust Denial
💡Electoral System
💡Plurality System
💡Proportional Representation
Highlights
Democracy originates from the Greek words 'demos' meaning people and 'kratos' meaning rule or power.
Amand Lau in South Africa symbolizes 'power to the people' in the context of uprisings against apartheid.
Greek and Roman models of democracy were limited to certain classes of people.
Direct democracy is rare but exemplified by Switzerland where citizens vote on issues directly.
Indirect democracy is the norm where citizens vote for representatives to vote on their behalf.
Liberal democracy emphasizes participation, competition, and liberty.
Social democracies, like those in Scandinavia, prioritize collective welfare over individual rights.
Democratic states stress participation in elections, public accountability, legal limits on government authority, and guaranteed rights and freedoms.
Civil rights focus on promoting equality, while civil liberties emphasize freedom.
The United States is highlighted as a country that focuses more on civil liberties.
Scandinavian countries are noted for focusing more on civil rights, such as the right to work and housing.
Different states balance civil rights and liberties differently, with implications for freedom of speech.
Holocaust denial is illegal in several European countries, reflecting a balance towards civil rights over civil liberties.
The Westborough Baptist Church is an example of an organization that would be banned in states favoring civil rights over civil liberties.
The ACLU defends the right to free speech, even for unpopular opinions, as part of the 'marketplace of ideas'.
The 'marketplace of ideas' theory suggests that bad ideas will be countered by non-bigots in societies valuing civil liberties.
Electoral systems are designed to balance participation and effective governance.
Single Member District (SMD) systems can lead to wasted votes and a lack of representation for minority parties.
Majority-based SMD systems require a majority vote for a candidate to win, often leading to a runoff election.
Plurality SMD systems tend to favor a two-party system and discourage voting for third parties.
The majority SMD system can allow extremists to gain a foothold, as seen in Jean Marie Le Pen's 2002 French candidacy.
Proportional Representation (PR) systems are not discussed in the provided transcript but are often contrasted with SMD systems for their representation of a broader range of political views.
Transcripts
welcome back now we go from
non-democracies to democracies so
democracy comes from the Greek word
demos meaning common people and CIA
meaning rule or power so what we're
saying is power to the people so uh the
the second picture that you see down
here is actually amand Lau in South
Africa uh that means power to the people
in in the uprisings that led to the fall
of
aparte uh of course the Greek model up
on the top is a fairly poor model the
Greeks had direct democracy but no women
or slaves could actually get involved it
was basically the same with the Romans
it was for the upper classes
only implementation of democracy varies
we've got direct democracy uh very rare
but people actually vote on issues
across the board we have elements of
that here um the Swiss are the champions
of that method uh we've got indirect
democracy which is the norm where people
vote for someone to represent them and
then they vote for you on specific
issues uh but in all democracy there is
a stress on participation in terms of
voting in elections in particular on
competition in terms of uh between
parties so that you've got a real Choice
um and on Liberty so we've got various
freedoms like speech movement assembly
Etc liberal democracy is the very kind
that promotes participation competition
and Liberty um they're not necessarily
liberal I.E hands off with respect to
economics so we're not talking about
that sort of liberalism social
democracies in Scandinavia for example
uh which favor Collective welfare over
individual rights to a certain degree um
would be a case in point highly
Democratic states so the central themes
uh within democracy are that the people
participate in elections that there is
public accountability of elected
officials and that there are limit legal
limits placed on the government's
Authority and finally that certain
rights and freedoms are
guaranteed usually within a constitution
or a set of laws in the British
case so we'll start by talking about
civil rights versus civil
liberties uh understandings of these
really help determine what sort of
government structure we're talking about
so Civil Rights refer to the promotion
of equality for all the residents or
citizens in a state civil liberties are
about the promotion of Freedom some
states focus more on political rights uh
or on more on political Liberties um so
the civil Liberties a great case of uh
country that focuses more on civil
liberties would be the United States um
Scandinavia would be a set of countries
that deal more with civil rights the
promotion of equality okay the right to
work the right to housing um these are
more about civil rights than civil
liberties our own Civil Rights Movement
was giving everyone equal access to
opportunities to facilities to
institutions so that's one way of of
remembering what that
is different states balance rights and
Liberties differently some believe that
freedom of speech should occur at all
costs others believe that you have to
limit it where uh it it could incline
people towards hatred and violence so in
the name of protecting everyone equally
uh a great case of this uh the second
point on the slide here is Holocaust
denial it is illegal to deny the
Holocaust in a range of European
countries Austria Belgium the Czech
Republic France Germany Lithuania Poland
Romania Slovakia
and this has been a source of very
interesting clashes in the European
Union uh Great Britain which is much
more Pro Liberties than pro-s thwarted a
2005 EU effort to criminalize Holocaust
denial across the entire political
system in other words all the EU
countries Germany interestingly is the
one that introduces again in 2007 a year
after a British historian was jailed in
Austria for his denial
so um
this is this is an interesting case um
but we'll talk a little bit about the
rationale here so certain
anti-democratic groups and parties have
been banned in Europe where they focus
more on civil rights than on on civil
liberties on our side an interesting Cas
is the Westborough Baptist Church of
Topeka
Kansas uh they've LED somewhere between
20 and 25,000 demonstrations of radical
homophobia especially at gay funerals
and weddings um they're also
anti-Semitic IC they're anti-catholic
they're anti-protestant they're racist
there aren't a lot of people these
people like here's a quote from the
website the WBC engages in Daily
peaceful sidewalk demonstrations
opposing the homosexual lifestyle of
Soul damning Nation destroying filth we
display large colorful signs containing
Bible words and sentiments including God
hates [ __ ] [ __ ] hate God AIDS cures [ __ ]
thank God for AIDS [ __ ] burn in hell God
is Not mocked [ __ ] are nature freaks God
gave [ __ ] up etc etc oh there's America
is doomed the world is doomed God blew
up the troops uh they're not crazy about
American troops because uh they allow
for homosexuals in their
ranks so this gives you an idea of what
sort of organization we're talking about
now this is clearly the sort of
organization that in a state that that
Pride that that that uh favored civil
rights over civil liberties would not
exist illegally okay so in Europe much
of Europe This sort of uh this sort of
organization would be banned in order to
prevent violence they would say um
hatred in America we take a different
Tack and here um coming from the ACLU
which certainly does not support any of
the things that uh the Westboro Baptist
Church does but what they say is that we
need to protect free speech in response
to an attempt by New Jersey legislators
to restrict free
speech in this case the limit uh the
rights of westbo Baptist Church of uh
activists to hold their demonstrations
the ACLU reacted with this quote our Le
legislators desire to silence the WBC is
understandable but it also reflects an
unwarranted disregard for freedom of
speech and a loss of faith in the
marketplace of ideas and this is key the
marketplace of ideas in countries that
value civil
liberties back to the quote we are not a
nation that pushes bad ideas underground
we are a people who believe in allowing
ideas even Odus hurt ones to get out and
we do not hesitate to give a good public
tongue lashing to ideas that deserve it
okay so this is the idea that non bigots
will essentially counter the bigots and
make the system
work uh this shows how it's supposed to
play out so the bigots we've got the KKK
marching um and if any of you have ever
seen a KKK March what you find is that
the non- bigots uh the the anti the own
ER Marchers usually outnumber them by
large
margins incidentally the KKK actually
recently protested against West burough
guys in June of 2011 I thought that was
interesting um but all this brings up
the question of what's the best balance
excuse me civil rights and civil
liberties trying to balance these it's
matched with a question of of what's the
best system you know what's the best in
terms of the democratic system in
particular um the oldest uh is indirect
democracy see
republicanism um the focus is on
separating powers and having people
represented through elected officials so
modern democracy is representative it's
indirect with the exception of
Switzerland in particular and other
countries that occasionally allow for
direct um uh direct democracy in certain
cases we could trace modern democracy
back to England which is incidentally
the land with no
Constitution um no
forced King John way back in the 13th
century to sign the Magna Carta in 1215
what this did is it limited the rights
of the king who was forced to consult
with Barons these Nobles on particular
issues especially taxes it created a
Proto
legislature it guaranteed all
Aristocrats had due process and thus
some civil rights for example um they
could they could complain and and not be
imprisoned so what this meant is the
king bound himself and his quote hair
forever to Grant quote to all free men
of our kingdom the rights and Liberties
that were described here the King was no
longer Above the Law this is a first
where the Monarch limits himself it
didn't end end the Monarch's dreams but
it created new expectations from people
from the people RIT large more and more
of whom gradually were included in the
definition of freemen as as the the
British case evolved which we'll talk
about more in in a couple weeks um and
we had violent resistance when the king
tried to overstep his bounds English
settlers to America actually brought
copies of the Magna Carta and much later
use this document in their fight okay so
parts of our Constitution are straight
out of the Magna Carta the magn Carta
what it did is it provided for rule of
law individuals are subject to the same
system regardless of power regardless of
position now M the Magna cartter was
really about aristoc largely but over
time the Notions of participation in
democracies have expanded today there
are lots of ways that you can
participate uh you can Lobby interest
groups Lobby all the time you can write
letters to to your Congressional
officials to the executive branch we can
hold protests demonstrations rallies um
the most the most obvious one is voting
which is designed to limit the abuse of
power and increase representation you
don't like them vote them out hold them
accountable it's about accountability
suffrage is the right to vote for adults
um which has been slow and coming New
Zealand was the first to give women the
right to vote the US gave them the right
to vote in 1920 France allowed women to
vote in 1944 towards the end of the
war uh other categories we've got we've
had discriminatory uh literacy tests in
the US through the 1960s that were
efforts to to curb the participation of
African-Americans um in some cases you
actually have mandatory voting some
states like Australia Belgium Britain
will actually fine you for not voting so
there are different approaches to to
this participation make it mandatory
make it voluntary whom to allow to
participate electoral systems are
designed to balance the need for
participation and effective governance
these are the rules that decide how
votes are cast how they're counted how
they're translated into legislative or
uh executive seats okay if we're talking
about
the a presidential
system and again what they they're
trying to do is they're trying to make
it uh so that you've got an adequate
representation but not so much
representation that it allows for such a
diversity of views that you can't
actually govern and we'll get we'll come
to that in a couple
minutes there are two main forms of
electoral
systems single member districts and
proportional representation there are
also various mixes which we'll talk
about when we look at some specific
specific countries the plurality SMD
system is the first pass the post Winner
Takes all system it's the one where once
you the running candidate get a
plurality more than any other candidate
uh then you win so if there are only two
candidates and you get 50% plus one then
you win um there is in this system one
representative per constituency so you
can uh take a circle and divide it up
into a bunch of pieces
and each one of those would be a a a
constituency a district and there's only
one representative that comes out from
this so so going back to our example if
this candidate beats the other candidate
what that means is that all the other
votes are wasted okay um so if someone
gets uh 51% and the other guy gets 49%
well the the person who got 51% first
passed the post the winner is going to
win and the guy who got 49% is going to
lose and that means that all those
votes are people who are not going to be
as you know in their eyes adequately
represented okay this is a fairly rare
system we have it in the US we have it
in the UK uh in Canada India Nigeria not
so many
countries so there are some major
disadvantages of this system in terms of
representation you can have similar
percentage of the votes for different
parties but one can win many more seats
if they win more districts for example
you can have national elections in 30
districts let's say there are 30
districts in in a state and by state I
mean a
country so in this state you have 30
districts in each one the big party
let's just call it big party Big B big p
gets 51% of the seats and the sad party
big S big p gets 49% of the seats
ultimately the sad party has no
Representatives the big party has them
all okay so for representation you're
literally literally in a in a in a sense
disenfranchising uh nearly half the
country another problem with this system
is is that it tends to be more risk
averse there's a disincentive for
greater pluralism for example new
parties people are unwilling to vote for
unknowns from small parties because
that's throwing their vote away okay how
how many people vote for the the green
candidate in our country okay so the SMD
system is more likely to be a two- party
dominated legislature you go for someone
who has a
chance same thing with the presidential
elections so Ros perau scored big in
1992 uh and I can't remember I should
have this but I think it was around 20%
or so but that was that was a miracle um
most people didn't want to and have not
before and did not after want to waste
their votes on a third party candidate
because they thought this person has
very little
chance so how does the majority
based system uh this SMD sorry how does
this SMD uh system remedy this well
you've got a majority based SMD system
in this system you've got two
rounds uh the winner has to have a
majority more than 50% not just a
plurality and they can get this in the
first round but it's much less likely so
um more people are going to take a
chance on the first round on a small
Party candidate with the assumption that
probably no one's going to get more than
50% in the first round anyway and then
during the second round which is a
runoff round you can vote for the least
of of two evils or whoever you want who
made it into the second round you can
also have voters rank order their
candidates those candidates with the
fewest first preferences are are
sequentially eliminated until finally uh
one has the majority um the problem is
that with a majority based SMD system
you're still talking about lots of uh
votes that are ultimately wasted and a
couple parties tend to dominate
so we can compare the Electoral systems
a majority SMD system is good for is
good for better for representation than
a plurality SMD system okay but a
plurality system is better uh for
moderation there's something known as
the median voter theorem that extremists
are weeded out because people are afraid
of wasting their vote we might support
extremists but we think oh hardly
anyone's going to vote this extremist
candidate into power and so well let's
just vote for the next best option which
is a mainstream candidate so this is a
median voter theorem candidates are more
likely to go mainstream you're less
likely to have extremist
candidates because people are are going
to be afraid to waste their votes on you
so where a majority SMD system loses um
and the picture you see here is that of
Le Pen's 2002 uh
candidacy so France's election back in
2002 you always have some extremists in
on elections they usually have no chance
in a plurality SMD system as I just said
it's hard for them to get any votes
because people are afraid of wasting
their votes in France and many others
where you've got a majority based SMD
system not plurality based this becomes
immaterial and so here Along Comes Jean
Mar Leen a right-wing head of the
national front who had among other
things advocated for the forced
isolation from Society of all people
infected with HIV accused various French
leaders of being puppets of Jewish
interests lamented the French World Cup
team for not being white enough not an
accurate reflection of French society
campaigned on xenophobia and an
anti-muslim
message now there were lots of
contenders for the French presidency but
the biggest ones were the incumbent who
was at that time prime minister lonel
zopen and Jacques
sherak uh the incumbent prime minister I
shouldn't say not the incumbent
president of course um trailing after
that was this leader of the national
front Jean Marie Leen um now the results
of the first round zopen and sherak
split a bulk of the vote among the
mainstream voters they took that
mainstream and they split it meanwhile
Leen Consolidated his right-wing votes
so what happened is Jacques sharak got
19.9% zopen got
16.2% and Leen got
16.9% okay so uh because jopan and Shak
split the mainstream vote this extremist
with only 16.9% of the vote managed to
get
into uh the second round this led to a
huge rally by the anti- rightwing
including enormous protests in political
consolidation of the mainstream and in
the second round of the elections sharak
got 82% of the vote and Leen got just
17.8% of the vote but remember Leen
would have never gotten where he did
without this two round majority SMD
system and this had major implications
for internal the internal and external
image of France and it caused a lot of
soul
searching the smmd majority system uh is
also done in parliamentary and other
elections one person ultimately gets all
the votes but there's more room for
others to
contend uh so um before we go on I will
I will change it because I've been
talking for a long time so uh on to PR
in just a moment
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)