History of democracy

Modern democracy, as the government of the majority of the population, began to appear in the second half of the 17th - 18th century along with universal suffrage, after the widespread abolition of slavery and the sanction of constitutions that did not recognize human rights.

Ancient Greece

The Greek word "Democracy" ("the power of the people") was invented by the Athenians to define a system of city government in which decisions were made by the assembly of citizens (citizens were neither women nor slaves nor foreigners) and not by a king or emperor as in other cities or empires of the antiquity. However, the majority of the population of Athens was made up of slaves. For this reason, Athenian democracy has few similarities with modern democracy, linked to the abolition of slavery and human rights. Democracy is a word of Greek origin that was coined by the Athenians to refer to their form of government, established in the last years of the VI< century. /span> a. c.

Although it is always difficult to determine the exact moment in which a word comes into use, the term appears in Herodotus, a historian and geographer of the V a. C. as the name of a form of government already then under debate. In its etymology, it means government “of the people” or “popular.”

Athenian democracy was based on the selection of representatives by lot and decisions in other cases by majority. The assembly was made up of all the male citizens of Athens and voted directly. The elected did not make the decisions; The Athenians considered that giving decision-making power to elected representatives was up to the people, turning the state into an oligarchy. Democracy meant (and for some it still means) equality before decisions and before the election of decisions and not the election of people in charge of deciding (see representative democracy). There were few mechanisms to control or limit the power of the assembly, with the exception called Graphe Paranomon (also voted on by the assembly), which made it illegal to pass a law that was contrary to another.

One of the reasons this system was viable was the small population of Athens compared to today's states – about 300,000 inhabitants. In addition, there were rigid restrictions on who had the right to participate as citizens, because only those who lived in Sparta or Athens could be called citizens, which excluded more than half of the total population. Citizenship rights were limited to male, adult, free (not slaves) citizens, natives of Athens. Consequently, women, children, slaves, and foreigners—groups that made up the majority of the city's population—had no right to participate in the assembly, and the majority of the population had no other way to access those rights than < i>join a family that had rights.

Modern democracy has some limitations compared to the old model, since for most citizens it is reduced to voting, and the act of voting is limited to a single occasion every certain number of years, voters can only elect their representatives in the legislative or executive spheres (with the occasional exception of a referendum) and it is those representatives and not the voters who have the power to decide the affairs of State. However, in his time and for Eurasian societies, such a large proportion of people participating in the government had never been achieved, so that this expansion of people participating in political power was visualized as a democracy.

During the golden age of classical Athens, in the 5th century a. C., in what was the hegemonic city-state in Hellas, the Athenians promoted democracy abroad. This led to the adoption of democratic or quasi-democratic forms of government in several cities allied or dependent on Athens. However, the century V a. C. saw the division of the Greek world due to the Peloponnesian Wars, in which Athens faced a league of cities led by Sparta, which emerged victorious and democracy was abolished in all Greek polis. Although the Athenians restored their democracy in less than a year, they were no longer in a position to promote it abroad and democracy began to decline.

Shortly after, the Roman Republic elected its leaders and approved laws through popular assemblies. However, the system had been manipulated in favor of the rich and noble^{[citation needed]}, so it is not usually considered democracy.

Ancient Rome

Roman democracy was similar to Athenian democracy, although it sometimes granted citizenship to those who were not of Roman origin. Roman Stoicism, which defined the human species as part of a divine principle, and the Jewish and Christian religions, which defended the rights of the less privileged and the equality of all before God, contributed to the development of modern democratic theory.

The Roman Republic degenerated into the despotism of the Empire. The free cities of present-day Italy, Germany, and the Netherlands continued to apply democratic principles during the Middle Ages, especially during the self-government of the people through municipal institutions. Slaves ceased to constitute a majority part of the national populations. As feudalism disappeared, a wealthy, commercial middle class emerged that had the resources and time necessary to participate in the affairs of government. Its result was the revival of a spirit of freedom based on ancient Greek and Roman principles. The concepts of equal political and social rights were further defined during the Renaissance, in which the development of humanism was enhanced, and later, during the Protestant Reformation, in the fight for religious freedom.

Ancient India democracy

Since before our era it has been documented that democratic republics existed in ancient India. Many would have existed before the beginning of Athenian democracy. The Indian republics flourished in the north of present-day India. However, by 400 AD. C. these republics disappeared due to the conquest of militarist monarchies. Thus, later Brahmanical literature would glorify royalty and be favorable to its role, as seen in the writings of legislators such as Manu, the author of the Manu-Smrti composed among the 200 BC C. and the 200 d. C. Sources on ancient democratic republics are documented outside the Brahmanical tradition, for example in Kautilya's Arthaśāstra (c. 300 BC), which describes states where The kings had a subsidiary role and their functions referred more to the maintenance of peace, justice or stability than to the government of the nation.

Evidence of non-monarchical governments, for example, is documented in the Vedas, so it can be assumed that the organization in the form of a democratic republic was the most common form in the north of today. India between the 7th centuries BC. C. and II d. C. During that period there was a significant increase in urbanization in the region. Some of the cities organized as democratic republics included Vaiśālī (century V a. C.) and important figures such as Ambaplai are identified by name, whose achievements contributed significantly to the prosperity and reputation of the republic. Also the cities of Kapilavatthu and Kusavati would have been organized as republics in that period.

Also in the story of the conquests of Alexander the Great (327-324 BC) Indian states are mentioned that are not monarchies but democracies and sometimes oligarchies. However, the study of the Buddhist canon written in Pali has allowed us to recognize that the veracity of the republican and democratic form of organization in India before the century V a. C. Perhaps the most reliable Greek source on India is the Anabasis of Alexander by Flavius Arrian, which describes Alexander's campaigns in great detail. The Anábasis, which is based on direct testimonies from Alexander's companions, mentions 18 localities in India that wanted 'free and independent', this expression seems to be illustrated by the situation in the case of Nyasa, a city located near the current border between Afghanistan and Pakistan that was governed by a certain Acuphis elected leader of a council made up of 300 members. After surrendering to Alexander, Aculphis used the city's supposed relationship with the god Dionysus to seek just peace terms with the Macedonian king:

The Niseos ask you, or respectful king of Dinios, to allow them to remain free and independent, because when Dioniso subjugated the nation of the Indians... he founded this city with soldiers that were no longer suitable for military service... from that those who live in Nyasa, a free city, and we ourselves are indebted, and we carry our government with a constitutional order

The conversation between Alexander and Aculphis shows that Nyasa was a city-state whose territory did not extend much beyond the city, that is, it was internal. However, another example mentioned by Flavius Arrian is that of the republic of Mallia which consisted of 20 cities. Quintus Curtius and Diodorus Siculus in their works on Alexander's conquests mention a people called sabarcas (sabarcae) or sambastas (sambastai) among whom the government was democratic and not monarchical type: The sabarcas or sambastas, like the mallianos, dominated a large territory. His army consisted of 60 thousand infantry, 6000 knights and about 500 chariots. These data show that the Indian republics of the [[IVth century BC. C.]] in fact they were much larger than the contemporary Greek polis. It appears that in northwestern India, republican organization was the norm, as Alexander historians only mention a handful of kings and many other non-monarchical states. The prevalence of democratic republics was pointed out by Diodorus Siculus, who after describing legendary monarchs who faced the god Dionysus says:

In the end, however, when the years have passed most of the cities has adopted a form of democratic government, although a few still retained their kings for the time of Alexander's invasion.

Haudenosaunee and the Great Law of Peace

In the mid-18th century, five North American nations, Seneca, Cayuga, Oneida, Onondaga and Mohauwk, joined by Tuscarora in 1720, formed a large democratic league called the Haudenosaunee. Its capital was where Syracuse, New York State is today.^{[citation needed]}

This democratic regime was regulated by a constitution of 117 articles known as the Great Law of Peace and governed by a Parliament or Council of representatives of the population, considered the second oldest in the world after the Althing of Iceland.

The Great Law of Peace established a rule of law with strict limits and restrictions on the power of rulers. It also established a division of power between men and women, establishing that no man could preside over a clan and no woman could be a military leader or sachem. It was up to the heads of the clans to elect the military leaders.

Haudenosaunee had a direct influence on both democracy and constitutionalism, and on the idea of equality of women and men in modern society. Especially Benjamin Franklin, who had direct contact with Haudenosaunee in 1754, stood out in his works that the degree of individual autonomy enjoyed by the inhabitants of the league was unknown in Europe and published the Indian treaties, considered one of his most important works.

Local popular institutions

Most of the procedures used by modern democracies are very old. Almost all cultures have elected or at least accepted their leaders through some popular referendum system at some point in their history. Likewise, these rulers have changed the laws only after consulting with the popular assembly or their representatives. These institutions existed before the Iliad and the Odyssey and the institutions of modern democracies derive from or are inspired by them. However, the direct result of such institutions was not always a democracy. It was often an oligarchy as in Venice or an absolute monarchy as in Florence.

Among these institutions are:

• The Germanic tribal system described by Tácito in his German work.
• The Althing, an Icelandic parliament, founded in 930 and considered the oldest in the world.
• The Tuatha system in medieval Ireland.
• The cities-state of medieval Italy, among which stand out Florence and Venice.
• Similar cities in Switzerland, Flanders and the Hanseatic League
• Parliamentary institutions in other European countries: Cortes de Castilla.

Rise of democracy for the government of modern nations

16th-17th centuries

One of the first democratic countries in Europe was the Polish-Lithuanian Republic of the Two Nations with a political system of the commonwealth, called Democracy of the Nobles or Golden Freedom, It was characterized by the limitation of the monarch's power by laws and the legislative chamber (Sejm) controlled by the Polish Nobility (Szlachta). This system was the precursor to the modern concepts of democracy, constitutional monarchy, and federation.

18th and 19th centuries

1780: development of social movements that identified themselves with the term democracy: Political conflict between aristocrats and democrats in the Benelux countries, which changed the negative connotation of the word democracy in Europe, considered synonymous with anarchy, opposite of aristocracy.

From the late 1770s: new Constitutions described and limited the powers of rulers, based on the Magna Carta (1215) and the Bill of Rights (1689), such as the Virginia Declaration of Rights, of 1776 (based in the British Bill of Rights) and the Constitution of the United States, ratified in 1789.

Between 1789-1799: during the French Revolution, the National Assembly promulgates:

• The Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen on August 26, 1789.
• The universal male suffrage in September 1792.
• The abolition of slavery in the French colonies on 4 February 1794.

Beginning of the century 19th century: appearance of political parties that competed for votes.

Extension of political rights to various social classes: suppression of wealth, property, sex, race and similar requirements for voting and introduction of the secret ballot.

Democracy in the 20th century

In the course of the XX century, historical events of great importance occurred that imposed democracy as the dominant form of government in the world.

• Disappearance or weakening of monarchies after the First World War; of the subsistent, the majority have remained in mitigated forms with scarce real political powers.
• Recognition of vote to the poor or non-owners, forming the concept of universal suffrage;
• The recognition of the right to vote and to be voted on by women, integrating the concept of universal suffrage;
• The decolonization of most of Africa and Asia, governed by European powers and the universal recognition of the right to self-determination of peoples. In the vast majority of cases the new independent nations established democratic forms of government. In the case of America, the process had begun in the centuryXVIII and generalized during the centuryXIX.
• The Civil Rights Movement in the United States and the consequent protection of the right to vote for racial minorities in 1964. Just now, you can talk about the existence of a democratic government in the US. U.S.
• The widespread fall of the Latin American military dictatorships in the 1980s and 1990s to give way to democratic regimes guaranteed by international anti-dictatorial agreements of a subregional and regional character.

The American political scientist Samuel Huntington has developed the idea of waves of democracy. For Huntington there have been three waves of democratization:

• Ascense after World War I (1914-1919)
• Rest during the Great Depression (1929)
• Ascense after World War II (1939-1945)
• Rest after the 1973 energy crisis
• Later ascense.

The main rival government systems of democracy are:

• Monarchy (with some decline after World War I)
• Soviet Fascism and Communism (Fascism declined after World War II and Communism after the fall of the Soviet bloc)
• Military dictatorship (declined after 1990).

Although democracy has become the dominant form of government, existing real democracies often suffer from defects that limit and even nullify them in practice, such as plutocracy (power of the rich), oligarchy (power of certain minority groups) and aristocracy (existence of certain groups with privileges or advantages over the rest of the population).

Explanations about the origin of democracies can be divided into two aspects:

• The explanations that investigate the internal phenomena of a country. Socio-economic transformations, mobilizations for social movements and civil society organizations, challenges and revolutions, elite agreements and concessions would be the causes.
• The explanations that investigate the external phenomena of a country. The defeat of the regimes involved in the war, the role of the contagion of the processes of democratization in the neighbouring states, the diffusion of democratic values through the processes of globalization, the support to, prays to the groups of civil society, or the nascent political parties, or the construction of the state, or the institutionalization and the specification of the criteria for appropriate and accepted forms of democracies would be the causes.