Representative Democracy Research Paper

Greek philosopher Aristotle defined democracy as a majority, which has a control and power to rule the state, despite their poorness and not having their own property (Thomas R.Martin 2013). By majority Aristotle meant a middle class who is between rich and poor and only with the middle class democracy can work properly. However, the modern form of representative democracy differs from the direct democracy which was suggested by Aristotle. In that essay, I will argue that Aristotle would not approve a modern form of representative democracy as a real democracy for 3 reasons. Firstly, representative democracy is not based on crowd-power, then not always middle class rules the country and lastly representative democracy is not just.

Main Body

Representative democracy is when citizens of one country select a person to represent them in different decision-making processes connected to the government and nation. After elections, only representatives are involved in some decision-making processes, but not whole citizens of a country. It means that only a few chosen people make a decision for an entire nation and representatives are more likely to have a less experience about the life of ordinary people that is why sometimes they cannot make a best choice for their nation. Except that, by using power which is given them by nation they are able to create a law within partnership with other representatives that ordinary people would be against. So, it can be said that modern representative democracy is not based on the power of majority; it is based on people, who work for a government. In addition, as politician Mu’ammer al Gaddafi expressed that “True democracy exists only through the direct participation of the people, and not through the activity of their representatives. People are left with only a façade of democracy, manifested in long queues to cast their election ballots.” (From democracy to freedom, n.d). From this quote, it is evident that democracy without a participation of majority cannot be considered as a real democracy, because true democracy in

He argued that democracy would work properly when every citizen obeys a law which is based on reason, because obeying a law means being just. (Clayton, n.d ) Also, Aristotle in his book “Politics” discusses the relation between equality and justice by proving that everyone should be equally allowed to take part in electives, voting and politics as it is considered to be a foundation of justice. However, it is difficult to say today’s modern society as a just society because problem of corruption and bribery are becoming one of the most concerned issues of democratic countries. It is evident that corruption is not in a list of political virtues of Aristotle, as corruption leads to the extinction of democracy by forming citizen’s’ passion and appetite to wealth. Baron de Montesquieu who is an enlightenment philosopher said that: “The misfortune of a republic…happens when the people are gained by bribery and corruption: in this case they grow indifferent to public affairs, and avarice becomes their predominant passion.” (Cole 2014). Predominance of a passion and appetite causes the ignorance to reason; finally reason disappears, because reason cannot exist when passion dominates. It is completely opposite to Aristotle’s vision of true democracy that is why Aristotle would not accept a modern representative