|
|
|
|
The development of democracy in modern historyThe development of democracy during modern history plays an essential part in understanding modern forms of democracy and their problems. This section looks at the creation of modern democracy from different perspectives:
Thoughts about natural law progressed to thoughts about human and civil rights which were
Overview:
The emancipation of people from social and religious bonds began during the 17th century. During the "age of reason" philosophy dealt with the existence of people as rational beings (René Descartes [1596 to 1650]: cogito ergo sum, I think, therefore I am). This new image of man inevitably led to thoughts about the sort of political structure that might combine individual freedoms within a system of public order, while at the same time being neither authoritarian in nature nor having a suppressive effect upon society. The individual work carried out by John Locke (1632 to 1704), Charles de Secondat Montesquieu (1689 to 1755) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 to 1778) all shared a commitment to a singular goal, yet all reached different conclusions as to how a rational and reasonable political structure might be achieved. [Back to top of page] [Back to overview]
In his publication entitled "Two Treaties of Government" from 1690, John Locke objected to the justification of an absolute monarchy. As far as he was concerned, political structures should be based on full equality and freedom limited only by the need to respect others and the necessity to live together in peace. He thought that the state should be formed by its citizens, who would unite to protect their property
John Locke's work had a massive impact on political thinking over the following centuries. His concepts about limiting power and control, about the responsibility of those in power to the people and about the importance of private property made him one of the forerunners of liberal democracy, even if such terms were not familiar to him or his generation. [Back to top of page] [Back to overview]
Montesquieu: Separation of powers Montesquieu regarded England as being a shining example when he wrote, it is the "nation..., whose constitution's direct purpose is political freedom". In his main work entitled "De l'Esprit des Lois" (The Spirit of Laws, 1748) he wrote that despotism was the worst of all forms of government. The best form of government, according to Montesquieu, was a system of freedom in which the citizen has the right to do anything not forbidden by law. But he also clearly recognized the threat to freedom even in a democracy. Much like the conclusions reached by John Locke, he saw the necessity of separating powers and installing controls to counter an inherent human tendency towards the abuse of power.
While Locke and Montesquieu are regarded as being the spiritual fathers of representative democracy, Rousseau was responsible for the theoretical foundation of direct democracy. He was one of the most controversial thinkers and his theories still have an impact today. Critics of parliamentary democracy were still citing him in the sixties to support their arguments for a direct democracy and their fight against group interests. Others regard Rousseau as a forerunner of modern totalitarianism, a system that claims to know what is best for people. [Back to top of page] [Back to overview]
Rousseau's political theory is based on the assumption that man is fundamentally good by nature and so must act virtuously in matters of public office. He regarded human society as preventing the individual from taking care of his own affairs in an appropriate manner; man is "alienated" from himself by society, its institutions and conventions. While Rousseau did not use the term alienation, which was formed by Hegel and popularised by Marxism, the idea did come from him. Rousseau's political and educational publications are aimed at creating a system of freedom, equality and justice.
Political parties, trade unions and other associations would have been incompatible under Rousseau's concept. His concept would have meant people being forced into wanting what is right and good, since they are not always able to recognize it for themselves. Individuals would have to adapt their own opinions to that of reason in order that cooperation among all could exist. Rousseau's ideal was based on a system of direct democracy which did not include the separation of powers or representation, which he regarded as being inhibiting. It is obvious that this concept is very controversial in the modern day. On the one hand, the free citizen is required to follow the law that he/she has set him/herself, but on the other hand Rousseau's ideas might well have led to a political system in which (a.) the state had a claim on citizens and (b.) carried out checks to ensure that its citizens were thinking in the "right" way [Back to top of page] [Back to overview]
17th and 18th century theories about the state and society - with all their contradictions - encouraged the movement toward democracy and provided it with a sound theoretical basis. These theories were first reflected in the American Declaration of Independence on 4th July 1776. Thomas Jefferson's wording of the Declaration of Independence closely followed the ideas expressed by John Locke. Thomas Jefferson (1743 to 1826) later became president of the USA. The basic principle that no government can exist without the approval of the people formed the foundation for the American constitution in 1787/91. The idea about a fundamental right arose from natural law philosophy during the 17th and 18th centuries. John Locke's work encouraged thought and deliberation into a morally founded autonomy and the intrinsic value of the person and led to the demand for constitutional rights and freedoms for the individual independent of state authority. The British government had already passed the Habeas Corpus Act in 1679, which protected personal freedoms against state arbitrariness. Further milestones along the road to democracy were the British "Declaration of Rights" (1689), the American Declaration of Independence (1776), the American constitution (1787/91) and "Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen" by the French National Assembly (1789). [Back to top of page] [Back to overview]
This declaration of the rights of man and the citizen was motioned by Lafayette (1757 to 1834), commander of the National Guard and popular because of the active part he had played in the American Revolution. This declaration formed one of the most important cornerstones of liberal and democratic thought throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
In order to differentiate between these basic rights, they can be categorized into three main groups:
Basic rights are today guaranteed in many national and international documents in the form of positive laws. (...) The "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" by the United Nations in 1948 and the (European) "Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Basic Freedoms" from 1950 both represent internationally valid documents. The basic rights guaranteed in these documents, however, says nothing about their actual implementation on an international scale. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that international law has few effective sanctions to counter human rights violations. [Hans-Helmuth Knütter, taken from: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung: Demokratie, Informationen zur politischen Bildung Nr. 165, Neudruck 1992] [You will find more detailed information about human rights, civil rights and natural law within the framework of the advanced subject of human rights on D@dalos; you will also find a collection of relevant documents including the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" by the United Nations in 1948]
|
|
Subjects: Human
Rights I Democracy I Parties
I Examples I
Europe
I
Globalisation
I United Nations
I Sustainability
|
