One more go at civil society
There's a fine little op-ed piece in The Economist which tries to explain why transparency, rule of law, and civil society are essential for a democratic political system. It's something that should remind your students that oversimplification is dangerous.Down with democracy
"A democratic vote is necessary, but not sufficient...
"Democracy is a slippery concept. It has become a hooray-word, with lots of loosely defined positive associations, but it is worth remembering that it used to be a boo-word, with lots of negative ones.
"For most of the 19th century it was a synonym for mob rule (for which the lovely but little-used “ochlocracy” would be an even more precise term). Democracy as a term came into fashion during the 1930s, as a counterpoint to the then fashionable autocratic regimes in most of continental Europe. Since then it has become stretched and debased, almost to the point of uselessness.
"The trouble with democracy is that the vote in itself means so little...
"In guaranteeing good government, “democracy” is the wrong tool... The unpleasant paradox is that the countries that most need strong institutions and a law-based state are the ones least likely to have them..."
See also
- Putinism
- It's all in the name
- Needed: Better Voters
- Democracy with Chinese characteristics
- Islamic democracy
- and others you'll find in the index
Labels: civil society, concepts, theory
posted by Ken Wedding @ 6:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home