The direct democracy is a political regime in which the people exert the power directly. Applied to the only economic sector, the direct democracy is often called Autogestion .

The three sources of the direct democracy are:

  • the history which gives examples of companies or social groups organized in direct democracy, particularly Athens with the {{S|VI|E}} before J. - C.;
  • the philosophy : certain philosophers, whose Jean-Jacques Rousseau, considers democracy only direct, basing their reflections in particular on the natural Right of the human beings and the social pact which binds them;
  • the political , particularly a criticism of the Representative democracy showing that this system which characterizes the modern democratic States appeared since the 18th century present of many defects and which actually the sovereign people are dispossessed there of his capacity. The direct democracy then seems an alternative to the existing systems.

Many countries have mechanisms (Référendum, local assemblies, popular Initiative) which concern the direct democracy or semi-direct.

History of the direct democracy

The Démocratie étymologiquement indicates the capacity ( kratos ) of the people ( demonstrations ) and refers to the mode in force in Athens after the reforms carried out by Solon (-594) and Clisthène (-508). The citizens (between a sixth and a quarter of the male population) deliberated and voted the laws. Judges and magistrates were elected because their work was rather complex and exercised only one year mandates. Daily allowances of presence were even granted poorest to enable them to provide their civic functions.

The tribes of the most remote times often practiced the direct democracy. The equality was the rule between the families and the clans the more so as the grounds were managed often collectively. The creation of a particular group of warriors, profiting from grounds with personal capacity on which worked like slaves or serfs the prisoners of other tribes, involved the creation of the first social differences. The inequality involved the abandonment of the direct democracy and the advent of the government of feudal on the peasants. In the countries of culture germano-Scandinavian, the Thing or its equivalent, was the assembly of free people of a country, a province or an administrative subdivision. There was thus a hierarchy of the things, so that each thing local is represented with the thing province, and so on. The place of the thing was often that of the religious rites and that of the trade. The arguments were regulated on this occasion, and the political decisions were made there.

The European Moyen-âge sees the appearance and the reinforcement of the Féodalité until the apogee of the Absolutisme at the 17th century. Forms of local democracy develop however at the same time, in particular in the country cantons of Suisse. It was the same, at least at their beginning, in the commercial republics of the the Mediterranean and with Novgorod. When the Cosaques gather they adopt the rules of the direct democracy. Particularly original for the company of Old Mode based on separation between Nobility, Clergy and Tiers state these systems are judged severely by the partisans of the first two orders which denounce a harmful domination of the rabble.

The contemporary time is marked out experiments of direct democracy:

Philosophers in favor of the direct democracy

At the 18th century, Europe redécouvre the democratic ideal but with share Jean-Jacques Rousseau, theorist of the popular Sovereignty, the Lumières privilege a parliamentary mode. The author of Of the social contract (1762) started even an outline of constitution of direct democracy for Corsica in 1764.

However, the modes of direct democracy are extremely difficult to set up. Rousseau authorizes to it in Of the Social Contract : “ If there were God's people, it would be controlled democratically. A so perfect mode is not appropriate for men. ”

The modern modes Démocratique S, which gradually set up in the wake of the French revolution and of the American Constitution of 1787 are mainly based on the representation and the election.

In 1792, Maximilien de Robespierre, Jean-François Varlet and the Marquis de Sade. This last writing Idea on the mode of the sanction of the Laws and defends in a primary assembly the direct democracy.

Later on of other philosophers, such Proudhon or Kropotkine, will found or affirm the political current anarchistic of which one of the bases is the direct democracy.

Controversies about the direct democracy

Abstentionism

The Abstention, which one sometimes describes as “disease of the democracy” perhaps a mark of disinterest for the policy of his country, but also a protest against the means of expression or the choices offered to the voter, (to be brought closer to the blank vote).

The rate of abstention due to the lack from interest is likely to be higher in a direct democracy where the civic duties are requested and sometimes minor questions. On the other hand the protest against the insufficiency of the means of expression will be inevitably more marginal. With final and in all the cases, the citizen will express himself more, especially if it is considered that data-processing technology allows today the vote made safe remotely. With the remainder one can consider that it did not require there so that a person expresses herself on a subject which it indiffère. The important thing is that it can make it if it wishes it.

It is necessary to distinguish of course between the elections and the votes which have other objects, and not to compare both directly. The abstentionism in the case of elections could be more limited by changing the Way of voting, which is today mainly the system of Uninominal system majority to two turns, suffering of problems which can be avoided by a vote of the type Méthode Condorcet.

Practical limits

The fact of voting for or against a law implies by no means well to know all the environment and the consequences that can cause. On the contrary it is recommended to consider only its own point of view, as that is explained relevance of the Autogestion. The risk of handling of the opinion cannot however be a priori more isolated that elsewhere, and the plurality of the press is obviously a prérequis.

The direct democracy is generally regarded as practicable only within the limit of a small number of subjects expressly envisaged by the constitution, or following petitions of popular initiative joining together a sufficient number of signatures. The systematic organization of a vote for the vote of each law would practically amount making to each citizen a deputy. Out of the context of all small countries like the Greek Quoted ancient or the Landsgemeinde, that is hardly possible. The possibility of control citizen seems sufficient in the majority of the cases.

Representativeness

The elected people tend not to be representative of the electorate, so much on the level of the incomes, the social classes and the educational levels. The direct democracy would be definitely more representative of the whole of the citizens, from the fact of the vote for all. What without being a guarantee of freedom would more easily allow the expression of minorities, traditionally oppressed by the majority in a democratic system.

Instruments of direct democracy

If one usually joins together the whole of the instruments described here under the label “direct democracy”, one also employs the terms of Participative democracy or semi-direct democracy which stresses that these mechanisms are at our time generally combined with elements of representative democracy.

Popular initiative and petition

See also: popular Initiative

Very near to the ideal of direct involvement of the people in the political decisions, the popular initiative is particularly developed in Suisse, California and in other American States. This mechanism makes it possible to the citizens to propose laws which are then voted by the whole of the voters. Various mechanisms also make it possible to be opposed to a law by petition or to propose an amendment of the constitution. In Switzerland, the federal authorities can moreover propose a counter-project and the voters can choose to vote for one or the other of the projects or for or against the two projects.

Another mechanism of direct democracy is the recall which is practiced in certain American States. This recall ( recall ) allows a number sufficient citizens to claim a referendum to stop the mandate of an elected official or a civil servant. An example particularly mediatized is the recall of the governor of California Gray Davis in 2003.

In all the cases the political parties, the lobbies or the groups of citizens play a great part in the formulation of the proposals and the collection of the signatures necessary to start the procedure of referendum.

Referendum and plebiscite

See also: Referendum

Sometimes attached to the idea of direct democracy, the referendum exists in many countries. It is however a government or an elected assembly which in general preserve the initiative of the referendum and the control of the questions put like that of the alternatives suggested to the voters. In certain countries, the constitution imposes the recourse to the referendum for certain decisions. This kind of procedure was spread in Western Europe during second half of the 20th century.

Local assemblies and general meetings

See also: Participative democracy

Also related to the direct democracy, the assemblies are essential to discuss and make decisions, in particular at the local level or at the time of social movements.

Many areas of the world have local assemblies where any citizen can take a big part with the debates and the decisions.

One of the examples more striking is the Landsgemeinde which exists since the Middle Ages in some Swiss Cantons and remains today with Glaris and in Appenzell Rhodos-Interior. The whole of the citizens have to meet in the open air once to per annum elect the magistrates charged to manage the canton and to vote the laws. In Glaris each one can speak, raise a question or propose an amendment.

Among the important and recent examples of direct democracy in the social movements, one can quote:

Drawing lot of the representatives

See also: Stochocratie

When it is necessary to designate delegates carrying a mandatory instruction or to name magistrates, the drawing lot constitutes the paramount principle which allows the equality of the citizens. As noted it Montesquieu in Of the spirit of the laws, “the vote by the fate is of the nature of the democracy. The vote by the choice is of that of the aristocracy. The fate is a way of electing which does not afflict anybody; it leaves with each citizen a hope reasonable to serve its fatherland. ”

This system indicated under the term of stochocratie, had practical applications which remain limited. ancient Athens practiced the drawing lot for magistrates and the legislative representatives, via the council of the 500 members of the " boulé". Only " stratèges" were elected in l'" ecclésia". The Anglo-Saxon formula of sworn drawn with the fate to judge out of criminal matter was spread in many countries, of which in France on the level of the Court of Assizes.

Partisans of the integral direct democracy

The conseillists, some anarchistic trade unionist-revolutionists and some are in favor of the direct democracy for all the decisions. For the conseillists (also called communist of councils ), the direct democracy must take the form of working Conseils. For the anarchist-trade unionists and some trade unionist-revolutionists, in fact the trade unions must be the structures of the direct democracy. Some communist libertarians are not recognized in the Anarcho-syndicalisme and prefer forms of direct democracy of communal type. On a Pan-European scale, the PCN (Left Community national-European) and the MEDD (European Movement for the direct democracy) of Luc Michel propose the theory and the concept of a direct democracy on a European scale. The PCN-NCP militates in favor of unit and Community political Europe.

Theoretical debate

Is a political system exclusively founded on the direct democracy possible? It seems a priori that a mode of integral direct democracy cannot be founded in States such as we know them. Indeed their too big size prevents the existence of a real debate between each citizen, and the frequent mobilization of an important population for the votes would generate certainly seemingly insoluble problems of organization. Some consider today that the e-voting in residence could remove this practical limit. However others think that such a system by standardizing the vote could bring to the introduction of laws liberticides, even of Dictature S under the influence of media of Propagande and of demagogs. The solution imagined by partisans of the direct democracy, whose Rousseau, was the following one:

First of all for technical considerations a vote of all the nation does not seem possible that in a State with weak population, however the model of the direct democracy wants to be universal.

The problem is thus soluble only if one postulates the introduction of democratic communities including/understanding to the 500  maximum; 000 inhabitants, but being able to be of size much more reduced. Such official entities would have the additional advantage to be closest to the needs for the citizen, in particular in terms of town and country planning and Infrastructure S.

However the birth of these democratic communities seems unrealistic for many political economists owing to the fact that it implies the dissolution of the existing States and would thus go against the basic right of the people to have themselves.

For the current defenders of the direct democracy, this judgment would be hasty and come from an incomprehension of the objective of these communities, which is not to replace the national identity for their theorists. The culture and the own language with each people would not be called into question in this new organization, since nothing prevents federal solutions , or if not co-operations reinforced between various democratic communities, since these co-operations respect the principles of this direct democracy, i.e. would have been subjected to approval citizens and would be repealable by petition.

The second attack which this model undergoes aims its supposed military weakness which the partisans of the direct democracy answer by the creation of military alliances between traditional” and direct democracies the “, controls by the most strict democratic principles. This structure should thus be with variable geometry, function only of the will of each nation.

Random links:Championship of the world of basketball masculine 2006 | Ourches | Milk Inc. | Tachanka | Massimo Colomba