Winston Churchill has been quoted, “…Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.” If democracy is the best of the worst alternatives, why do the majority of countries in the western hemisphere have a democratic system? Isn’t there a better choice out there that would benefit people? And because democracy is governed by the people, what makes the average citizen participate in government and what influences them to vote? Democracy originated in Athens, Greece around 508 B.C. The Greeks moved from a tyrannical system to a democracy to give the people a better voice in government. However, this process was a complex one and not everyone got to vote. Only males who were twenty years or over and who
…show more content…
1). The transformation also diminished the ability of political groups which caused tension amongst the people. When the people have more of a voice in their government, they will often feel more content. They assume that their making more of a difference in their communities by participating. This was crucial in Athens because at the time they changed their government, their territories and city-states were at constant war. This democracy gave the citizens a change to speak their minds and determine for themselves whether it was worthwhile to send their husbands and sons off to battle. The democratic system not only helped them with foreign problems, but also problems that were happening domestically as well. Whether or not to raise taxes, how to educate their children, or issues regarding distributing food became an opportunity for the citizens to vote for what they believe …show more content…
Take Switzerland for example. The Swiss relate to the ancient Athens government because they have a similar structure. Popular initiatives and referenda are key components of their system. The people often vote at least ten times a year and get to solve social, economic, and foreign problems because legislation is passed by the majority of public opinion. However, there can be problems with this type of government as well. It can often take a great amount of time for legislation to pass and can be a very complex process within their assemblies and parliament (Premat, pg. 37). Premat had the same dilemma with the Swiss as Aristotle did with direct democracy in ancient Athens. He said that there could be difficulties with the amount of knowledge the average citizen has about their nation’s policies (Premat, pg. 140). This is often a valid argument against the direct democracy system. However, many other political philosophers would agree that this, “complexity of the procedures allows citizens to organize themselves and learn much from the political culture of their country.” (Premat, pg.
1). The transformation also diminished the ability of political groups which caused tension amongst the people. When the people have more of a voice in their government, they will often feel more content. They assume that their making more of a difference in their communities by participating. This was crucial in Athens because at the time they changed their government, their territories and city-states were at constant war. This democracy gave the citizens a change to speak their minds and determine for themselves whether it was worthwhile to send their husbands and sons off to battle. The democratic system not only helped them with foreign problems, but also problems that were happening domestically as well. Whether or not to raise taxes, how to educate their children, or issues regarding distributing food became an opportunity for the citizens to vote for what they believe …show more content…
Take Switzerland for example. The Swiss relate to the ancient Athens government because they have a similar structure. Popular initiatives and referenda are key components of their system. The people often vote at least ten times a year and get to solve social, economic, and foreign problems because legislation is passed by the majority of public opinion. However, there can be problems with this type of government as well. It can often take a great amount of time for legislation to pass and can be a very complex process within their assemblies and parliament (Premat, pg. 37). Premat had the same dilemma with the Swiss as Aristotle did with direct democracy in ancient Athens. He said that there could be difficulties with the amount of knowledge the average citizen has about their nation’s policies (Premat, pg. 140). This is often a valid argument against the direct democracy system. However, many other political philosophers would agree that this, “complexity of the procedures allows citizens to organize themselves and learn much from the political culture of their country.” (Premat, pg.