Anti-Democratic Thought

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Modern criticism of democracy usually comes from outside the political mainstream. Some anarchists, communists, fascists and monarchists dislike democracy for various reasons though none of these ideologies reject democracy altogether. There are few heads of state who openly oppose democracy nowadays but there are still countries like Saudi Arabia, Bhutan, Burma and Oman whose governments do not claim to be democratic.^[1] Forms of social organization besides democracy have a long history. The idea of democratic government did not become known to most of the worlds people until a few centuries ago. During the Enlightenment many citizens of Western countries became disillusioned with monarchy and saw democracy as a desirable and practical form of government. In the early 20th century ideologies such as communism and fascism, which are not in direct contradiction to democracy, became popular in many countries and as a result totalitarian regimes emerged in Germany, Italy and Russia. The end of the Cold War saw the rise of democratic capitalist governments in Eastern Europe. By the mid-1990s most countries around the world had a democratic form of government to some degree. Some political analysts are now saying that democracy is on the decline because of the growth of far-right groups in Europe, Third World poverty, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and Western governments use of mass surveillance and torture to combat terrorism.^[2] Authoritarian policies may be used by governments as a way of maintaining order during times of hardship caused by climate change, war, economic difficulty or political unrest.

[edit] Specific arguments against democracy

Criticism of democracy from the left usually states that democracy by itself will not guarantee human rights while the far-right argues that democracy can get in the way of goals like preserving cultural/ethnic purity, the divine right of kings or following religious commandments. In Marxist theory "dictatorship of the proletariat" refers to the transitional stage between capitalism and communism when the proletariat (working class) rules over the bourgeoisie (upper class) while a forcible redistribution of wealth occurs. After the wealth was equally spread out among the population a classless society could be achieved. It does not mean rule by a dictator. Some anarchists argue against democracy because it cannot satisfy the desires of everyone only the majority instead they seek a consensus decision making system. Asian elites say that authoritarian rule is preferable to democracy because countries that are authoritarian are more successful economically. They refer to Singapore, Taiwan, China, Malaysia and South Korea as examples of countries that were authoritarian and now have strong economies as a result. This is the argument put forth by the Communist Party of China. ^[3] Military juntas sometimes justify their rule by saying their country would be in a chaotic situation without strong government. During the Cold War many junta leaders, like Augusto Pinochet, said the country was threatened by communism before they took power. Despite human rights violations elements of the U.S. government such as the CIA supported many authoritarian regimes around the world during the Cold War as long as they remained loyal to the United States.^[4] Supporters of these authoritarian regimes worried that communists would be elected in countries like Chile, Greece and the Philippines if there was a democratic government. A similar argument is made today in the case of the Middle East that if a country such as Saudi Arabia were to actually become democratic anti-American leaders would be voted into power since most of the population is thought to have a negative opinion of the United States. During the Middle Ages Christian philosophers justified absolute monarchies because a king or queen owes their rule to the allegiance to God not to their subjects, a constitution or anyone else. To make the rule of a particular monarch legitimate the monarchs family was traced back to King David of the Old Testament. The European royal families were said to be divine and thus fit to rule over the masses. This doctrine is called the Divine Right of Kings. An elitist argument against democracy states that if a population does not know whats best for themselves then decisions should be made for them by an enlightened ruler. ^[5] Thomas Hobbes wrote that people, voluntarily or by force, should give up a measure of freedom to a government in return for protection and a more functional society. Some people on the far-right oppose democracy because it would allow the majority in a society that wants diversity at the expense of cultural preservation to go ahead with their wishes. Various far-right groups have long been opposed to people of color, immigrants, homosexuals and religious minorities having the right to vote. Muslims who desire sharia law have a very different idea of what a society should be like compared to those who promote Western style democracy. Fundamentalist Muslims worry that religious commandments meant to improve society and secure each person a place in heaven will not be followed by everyone in a secular democracy.