Formation and Development of Democratic Model

The formation of democratic model has already evolved over the centuries especially in relation to governing economics and politics in different context. Admittedly, the democratic model has been adaptive throughout the years as it is employed in different group of people with different perspective and cultural backgrounds. Democracy, in itself, has been shaped by times in relation to the current economic and political situation of certain state. Defining Democracy

Abraham Lincoln once defined democracy as a “government by the people, of the people and for the people. ” With that definition, we can derive that each group of people can have their own concept of what democracy is in their own right as subjects of a democratic model. They have, in their own capacities, their own definition on what bounds their free will in a democratic government. Democracy is actually putting in the arms of the institution of the government the terms of freedom of the people.

“Democracy is indeed a set of ideas and principles about freedom, but it also consists of a set of practices and procedures that have been molded through a long, often tortuous history (“Defining Democracy”). ” However, in this sense, since the people “own” the terms in their government, all the rights are employed upon them to change the conditions of their freedom in many forms such as constitutional amendments, elections, plebiscite and the like in which they can invoke their direct governance among themselves depending on their circumstances in politics, culture and economics.

Formation of Different Models As previously said, over the years, the democratic model has been adaptive to the situation of the people concern in certain localities. Author Adrienne Heritier discussed the elements of democratic ligitimation in Europe in her paper. According to her, the nature of democratization has been slow thus they needed to compromise with the people to speed up the terms. They began the process by a transparency programme which attempted to bridge the gap of the government and the citizens hence leading to the development of networks.

Accountability was also strengthened. In the case of Europe, the people had developed their own process to come up with the democratic model that fits their diverse culture and to compete with the existing authorities. They had to negotiate with the existing policies to move on toward their desired form of government. In some regions, reforms are needed to unleash the democratic model for the people. Politically, democracy as been corrupted in many Asian and Middle East nations where people are no longer respected by the ruling party of the government.

In the Philippines, from a former democratic country patterned after the United States, the power of the President Ferdinand Marcos in 1970s has subjugated the people in the form of a military government. In that way, a people power revolution needed to happen after a lot of political killings and human rights violence toward the restoration of democracy and the development of a constitution that embodies the rights of the people. Parallel event also happened in the Middle East in 2005.

The military coup in Mauritania has overthrown a tyrant and paved way in giving reforms for better economic state of the people and a more sustainable country under a constitution. In terms of authority on the democratic model, the United States of America has always been in the position of imposing on the replication of the model that they currently have; it is because they have tested their democratic effectiveness over the centuries of their government and has emerged to have drawn power into economics and politics all over the world.

Undoubtedly, the American system has been instrumental in the transformation and reformation of many countries toward democracy where the power is being brought back to the people from the hands of a single ruling family or party in certain cases. However, though the US has its authority, Onselen and Errington made a good observation what they wrote that when the model is being exported to other context, more often than not, it failed in the first try. This is to prove that democracy works differently in different cultures and context of economy and politics.

It is never the same in the US and the rest of the democratic countries because a democratic model is also dependent as to how the government is being run by the leaders and in terms of economic sustainability where the masses can benefit. It is not always dependent on the people’s capacity to hold on to their freedom of producing their own living but also to the programs of the government that paves way on how these people move on. On the other hand, the rules and laws that bounds the government and the people should also be mutual in understanding; and in some, it is not always the case.

References Heritier, A. (1999). “Elements of democratic legitimation in Europe: an alternative perspective. ” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 256-282. Routledge Publishing. Mayer, R. (2007). “The Middle East’s new democratic model. ” Publius Pundit. Retrieved on October 15, 2008 from http://publiuspundit. com/articles/2007/03/the_middle_easts_new_democrati. php Onselen, P. and Wayne Errington. (2005). “Which democratic model should we export? ” On Line Opinion. Retrieved on October 15, 2008 from http://www. onlineopinion. com. au/view. asp? article=3023&page=0