The origin and evolution of democracy is one that has been discussed and debated throughout the years excessively. The Athenian Democracy the suspected, ‘first known democracy in the world’ was developed around the fifth century BC in the Greek state of Athens. Other cities attempted to set up their own democracies, most following the Athenian model they are not, however, as well documented as Athens.
The Athenians followed a system of direct democracy. Citizens voted directly on executive bills and legislation. Participation was not available to all residents of the country. In order to vote citizens had to be an adult male. Women, a metric (one who did not have citizen rights in the Greek-city state), or a slave were not allowed to participate in voting.
Athens was not the only polis (city-state or community) in Greece that established a democratic regime. The philosopher Aristotle referred to other cities that adapted governments in a democratic style.
However, “it is only with reference to Athens that we can attempt to trace some of the specific sixth-century events that led to the institution of democracy at the end of the century”.
The Greek word “Demokratia” meaning ‘people-power’ has been described by Abraham Lincoln as meaning a ‘Government of the people, by the people, for the people’. Demos, the word for people, refers to the units of people belonging to the 30 trittyes, regional divisions of Athens. There has been a great debate in regards to when the term demokratia first appears as a description of Athens or any other regime. Many have found references to the term in the tragedies of the first half of the century in language that describes power as belonging to the many, while “others note the relative absence from the literature until near the end of the century”.
Herodotus, the Greek writer and geographer used the word demokratia three times in his early plays. Herodotus became quite the celebrity as he gave readings in public places and collected fees for the appearances he made. The people of Athens voted in 445 B.C, to give him a prize of almost £152,340.00 in today’s money for his contributions to the intellectual life of Athens.
The Athenian system, demokratia, as previously mentioned, only allowed the inclusion of male citizens, nevertheless, it was still much more inclusive than any of the previous systems of rulings. The most important difference between the Athenian system and the system of the 21st century is that, despite the fact all those over the age of 18 have the power to vote, voting is made for people who take up positions in the government and then proceed to make most of the decisions that govern the countries of today.
The Athenians went to considerate amounts to stop one specific person from gaining large amounts of power or popularity. The council would occasionally hold an ostracism where citizens had the ability to vote for a specific man and that man would then be sent away from, the city for an approximate period of 10 years. This was an attempt by the Athenians to uphold and encourage equality amongst its citizens despite, however, only allowing men to participate in the voting.
When one is assessing the Athenian Democracy, it is very important to remain aware and not impose any current views on the society of Ancient Greece. Slavery was an institution and it was very rarely questioned, it was accepted in Greece as part of the fabric of existence.
Plato, for example, simply assumed there would be slaves in his ideal state and no citizen of Ancient Greece would have thought otherwise. It is important to remember that Plato’s ideal state is not a democracy. The thought of slaves having any kind of citizen rights did not occur to Greeks.
Women in Athens also did not have any political rights and barely had any legal rights. Women were also regarded in law as being under the guardianship of a male family member. Plato proposed in the Republic that, in his ideal state women will be equal in status to men.
However, Plato also believed that even if women are trained the same as men it would be better and more beneficial for them to do to do easier tasks; “…they will receive lighter duties than the men, because of the weakness of their sex”.
In an ideal state of Plato’s both capable women and men would be allowed to act as guardians of the state. Both sexes would be trained in the same skills as human nature allows the possibility for either sex to carry out most of the things that are taught; “after all it is the same nature the educational system takes on in both cases”.
The main argument against the Athenian Democracy in this form is that the people, or in this case, men who made the decisions, that affected the entire population could, unfortunately, be very ignorant about the decisions they were making. It is very likely that a typical adult male in Ancient Greece would have thought his slaves were politically irrelevant and that his family were well represented as his “immediate male adult relatives could attend the assembly and could from time to time hold some office, and the metrics could leave if they did not like it”.
On the contrary, this system of government would be one of the few that would allow people from all walks of life to have an equal say in what happens if it were to be implemented in the 21st century.
Chapter Two: Democracy in the 21st Century
Direct democracy and representative democracy are the two types of democracy that are present in the 21st century, it is possible for both to exist side by side despite being very different in the way they operate.
Direct democracy, also referred to as ‘pure democracy’ is where people are given the ability to govern directly and it is based on the sovereignty of the people. This can take place in the form of an assembly democracy or by initiative and referendum with the use of using ballot votes to directly vote on issues instead of voting for candidates or parties.
In a true direct democracy, citizens have the ability to vote on all laws, bills and even court decisions. Direct democracy is what existed in ancient Athens. Despite the exclusion of women, slaves and metrics in voting, all citizens were required to vote on all major issues of government. The verdicts of all court cases in ancient Greece were determined by the result of the votes made by all people.
Today, Switzerland is a country that practices direct democracy in the 21st century. Any law that is enacted by the legislative branch that has been elected can be dismissed by a vote of the public. Citizens also have the ability to place votes on amendments of national legislature they wish the Swiss constitution to consider. The citizens of Switzerland have the last word on all constitutional changes that are made, even the ones that are proposed by parliament and the government including, international treaties.
The origins of the modern system of direct democracy in Switzerland is owed to the experimental phase in the 19th century at a time when Switzerland was surrounded by monarchies who showed small amounts of enthusiasm for democracy on the European continent.
There are both negatives and positives surrounding the use of direct democracy. Allowing citizens to have such high levels of control over government affairs does sound very enticing for some. No other form of democracy allows for a wider scope of lucidity between citizens and their governments.