You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

The IP address or range 52.91.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪JJMC89‬ for the following reason(s):

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider or colocation provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts and colocation providers may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host or colocation provider because it hides your IP address, much like a proxy or VPN.
We recommend that you attempt to use another connection to edit. For example, if you use a proxy or VPN to connect to the internet, turn it off when editing Wikipedia. If you edit using a mobile connection, try using a Wi-Fi connection, and vice versa. If you are using a corporate internet connection, switch to a different Wi-Fi network. If you have a Wikipedia account, please log in.
If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

How to appeal if you are confident that your connection does not use a colocation provider's IP address:
If you are confident that you are not using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is _______. Place any further information here. ~~~~)). You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined here. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. There are several reasons you might be editing using the IP address of a web host or colocation provider (such as if you are using VPN software or a business network); please use this method of appeal only if you think your IP address is in fact not a web host or colocation provider.

Administrators: The IP block exemption user right should only be applied to allow users to edit using web host in exceptional circumstances, and requests should usually be directed to the functionaries team via email. If you intend to give the IPBE user right, a CheckUser needs to take a look at the account. This can be requested most easily at SPI Quick Checkuser Requests. Unblocking an IP or IP range with this template is highly discouraged without at least contacting the blocking administrator.

This block will expire on 05:26, 2 September 2024.

Even when blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page, as well as email administrators and other editors.

For information on how to proceed, please read the FAQ for blocked users and the guideline on block appeals. The guide to appealing blocks may also be helpful.

Other useful links: Blocking policy · Help:I have been blocked
Your IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis. The block was made by ‪Jon Kolbert‬. The reason given is Open proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are affected .
- Start of block: 04:57, 27 November 2021
- Expiry of block: 04:57, 27 November 2024
Your current IP address is 52.91.194.66. The blocked range is 52.91.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

You can view and copy the source of this page:

((Short description|Critiques of democratic political systems))
((copyedit|date=February 2024))
((Broader|Democracy))
((Use mdy dates|date=May 2016))
((Democracy))

'''Criticism of democracy''', or '''debate on democracy''' and the different aspects of how to implement democracy best have been widely discussed. There are both internal critics (those who call upon the constitutional regime to be true to its own highest [[principle]]s) and external ones who reject the values promoted by [[Liberal democracy|constitutional democracy]].<ref>((Cite journal |last=Ober |first=Josiah |author-link=Josiah Ober |date=2005 |title=Democratic Athens as an Experimental System: History and the Project of Political Theory |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1426841 |journal=Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics Paper No. 110512 |language=en |location=Rochester, NY |doi=10.2139/ssrn.1426841 |s2cid=146975709 |ssrn=1426841))</ref>

Criticism of democracy has been a key part of democracy, its functions, and its development throughout history. [[Plato]] famously opposed democracy, arguing for a 'government of the best qualified'; [[James Madison]] extensively studied the historic attempts at and arguments on democracy in his preparation for the [[Constitutional Convention (United States)|Constitutional Convention]]; and [[Winston Churchill]] remarked that "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."<ref name=":02">((Cite web|url=https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1947/nov/11/parliament-bill#column_206|title=Parliament Bill|date=11 November 1947|website=api.parliament.uk|language=en|access-date=2018-04-22))</ref>

Critics of democracy have often tried to highlight democracy's inconsistencies, paradoxes, and limits by contrasting it with other forms of government, such as a less democratic [[Noocracy|epistocracy]] or a more democratic [[Sortition|lottocracy]]. They have characterized most modern democracies as democratic [[Polyarchy|polyarchies]]<ref name=":12">((Cite book|title=Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition|last=Dahl|first=Robert A.|publisher=Yale University Press|year=1972|isbn=978-0300015652|location=New Haven|pages=1–16))</ref> and democratic [[Aristocracy|aristocracies]];<ref name=":22">((Cite book|title=The Principles of Representative Government|url=https://archive.org/details/principlesrepres00mani|url-access=limited|last=Manin|first=Bernard|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1997|isbn=978-0521458917|location=Cambridge|pages=[https://archive.org/details/principlesrepres00mani/page/n12 2], 67–93, 132–160))</ref> they have identified [[Fascism|fascist]] moments in modern democracies; they have termed the societies produced by modern democracies as [[Neo-feudalism|neo-feudal]];<ref>Thom Hartmann, "[http://www.commondreams.org/views/2002/11/06/time-remove-bananas-and-return-our-republic-democracy Time to Remove the Bananas...and Return Our Republic to Democracy]," ''CommonDreams.org'', 6 November 2002</ref> and they have contrasted democracy with [[fascism]], [[anarcho-capitalism]], [[theocracy]], and [[absolute monarchy]].

== Historical debates ==
=== Classical antiquity ===
[[File:Plato Silanion Musei Capitolini MC1377.jpg|thumb|Plato is considered one of the most important opponents of democratic rule in [[Ancient Greece]].]]
As [[Robert Dahl]] writes, "Although the practices of modern democracy bear only a weak resemblance to the political institutions of [[classical Greece]]...[[Athenian democracy|Greek democratic]] ideas have been more influential...[and] what we know of their ideas comes less from the writings and speeches of democratic advocates, of which only fragments survive, than from their critics".<ref name=":3">((Cite web|title=Democracy and Its Critics ((!)) Yale University Press|url=https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300049381/democracy-and-its-critics|access-date=2022-02-19|website=yalebooks.yale.edu))</ref>

[[Aristotle]] was a mild critic who "disliked the power that he thought the expansion of democracy necessarily gave to the poor."<ref name=":3" /> [[Plato's political philosophy]] was skeptical of democracy and advocated for "government by the best qualified".<ref name=":3" /> Modern [[liberal democracy]] incorporated some of these critiques.<ref name=":2">((Cite journal|last=Arnhart|first=Larry|date=2015-06-01|title=Leo Strauss and Anglo-American Democracy: A Conservative Critique, by Grant N. Havers|url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/682033|journal=American Political Thought|volume=4|issue=3|pages=513–516|doi=10.1086/682033|issn=2161-1580))</ref> For example, [[James Madison]] "trained rigorously in...ancient learning" as a young man, and the ideas of ancient authors explain a "facet of Madison's recorded attitude on the [[Human nature|nature of man]]".<ref name="Ketcham 1958 62–76">((Cite journal|last=Ketcham|first=Ralph L.|date=1958|title=James Madison and the Nature of Man|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2707952|journal=Journal of the History of Ideas|volume=19|issue=1|pages=62–76|doi=10.2307/2707952|jstor=2707952|issn=0022-5037))</ref> The influence of the ancient critiques of democracy is seen in how Madison spent the months before the [[Constitutional Convention (United States)|Constitutional Convention]] "studying many centuries of [[political philosophy]] and histories of past attempts at republican forms of government".<ref>((Cite web|title=The Life of James Madison|url=http://www.montpelier.org/learn/the-life-of-james-madison|access-date=2022-02-21|website=www.montpelier.org))</ref>

According to Dahl, Aristotle and Plato would agree with most advocates of modern democracy that an aim of the society is "to produce good [[Citizenship|citizens]]" and "[[Virtue]], [[justice]], and [[happiness]] are companions...[in] developing citizens who seek the [[common good]]".<ref name=":3" />

[[Thucydides]], the famous ancient Greek historian of the [[Peloponnesian War]], witnessed the fall of Athenian democracy and applied [[Historical method|scientific history]] in his critique of the democratic government.<ref name=":7">((Cite journal |last=Ober |first=Josiah |date=1993-01-01 |title=Thucydides' Criticism of Democratic Knowledge |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264838793 |journal=[[Nomodeiktes]]))</ref> At the heart of his critique were how democracy failed "in the search for [[truth]]" and how leaders and citizens attempted "to impose their own [[Speech act|speech]]-dependent meanings on [[reality]]".<ref name=":7" /> Thucydides blamed "[[Public Orator|public orators]]" and [[demagogue]]s for a failure of [[Epistemology|epistemic knowledge]], allowing most Athenians to "believe silly things about their past and the institutions of their opponents".<ref name=":7" />

[[Confucius]] greatly influenced East Asian societies over time, and political leaders, such as [[Lee Kuan Yew]], in [[Singapore]] and [[China]] today often say [[Confucianism]] provides a more "coherent ideological basis for a well-ordered Asian society than Western notions of individual liberty".<ref>((Cite journal|last=Fukuyama|first=Francis|date=1995|title=Confucianism and Democracy|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/16670|journal=Journal of Democracy|volume=6|issue=2|pages=20–33|doi=10.1353/jod.1995.0029|s2cid=11344823|issn=1086-3214))</ref> Nonetheless, East Asian countries employ forms of Democracy and Communism, political systems developed in [[Western world|the West]].((citation needed|date=February 2023)) The notion of "well-ordered Asian" society is more compatible with Communism, employed by China and [[Vietnam]],((citation needed|date=February 2023)) both rapidly growing and globalized economies in the 21st century, but also in [[North Korea]] which follows [[isolationism]] which hampers the improvement of lives of average citizens.((Citation needed|date=February 2023))

=== Post-classical period ===
From 500 to 1500&nbsp;AD, philosophers and political leaders around the world often advocated for traditional systems of governing society, which were critical of democracy.((Citation needed|date=June 2023))

Italian philosopher and theologian [[Thomas Aquinas]] advocated for "a [[mixed government]] combining elements of democracy, aristocracy and kingship...[which] is reminiscent of Aristotle's preference for mixed government over either democracy or oligarchy."<ref>((Citation|last1=Kilcullen|first1=John|title=Medieval Political Philosophy|date=2019|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/medieval-political/|encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|edition=Winter 2019|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|access-date=2022-02-19|last2=Robinson|first2=Jonathan))</ref> Scholars also consider "the substantial medieval literature in support of the Inquisitions" as opposed to modern ideas of democracy.<ref name=":4">((Cite journal|last=Sen|first=Amartya Kumar|date=1999|title=Democracy as a Universal Value|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/16979|journal=Journal of Democracy|volume=10|issue=3|pages=3–17|doi=10.1353/jod.1999.0055|s2cid=54556373|issn=1086-3214))</ref>

Democracy existed in a few "[[city-state]]s of medieval Italy...[which] were ultimately submerged in [[Imperialism|imperial]] or [[Oligarchy|oligarchic rule]]."<ref name=":3" /> The idea of [[Representation (politics)|"representation]] was not invented by democrats but developed instead as a medieval institution of [[Monarchy|monarchical]] and [[Aristocracy|aristocratic]] government," and had its beginnings in "[[Deliberative assembly|assemblies]] summoned by the monarch, or sometimes the nobles themselves, to deal with important matters of state."<ref name=":3" /> The "state of military technology and organization" in medieval Europe was "highly unfavorable in its effects" on democracy.<ref name=":3" />

Medieval Jewish political philosophy was influenced by Plato, Muslim thought, and [[Halakha|Halakhic]] concepts and was "monarchist, and inherently anti-democratic."<ref>((Cite journal|last=Melamed|first=Avraham|title=The Attitude Towards Democracy in Medieval Jewish Philosophy|date=1993|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/25834254|journal=Jewish Political Studies Review|volume=5|issue=1/2|pages=33–56|jstor=25834254|issn=0792-335X))</ref>

As [[Amartya Sen]] wrote about traditional Asian societies, "It is not hard, of course, to find [[Authoritarianism|authoritarian]] writings within the Asian traditions. But neither is it hard to find them in Western classics: One has only to reflect on the writings of Plato or Aquinas to see that devotion to [[discipline]] is not a special Asian taste."<ref name=":4" />

Since the post-classical period, [[Islam]] has been an important pillar of society for much of the world, and some critics have defended this tradition from "the [[Secularity|secular]] assumptions of the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]]" and an "uncritical [[universalism]]," which "erodes [[Change and continuity|historical continuity]] and the sense of [[community]] that sustains [[Traditional society|traditional societies]]."<ref name=":5">((Cite journal|last=Majid|first=Anouar|date=1995|title=Can the Postcolonial Critic Speak? Orientalism and the Rushdie Affair|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1354529|journal=Cultural Critique|issue=32|pages=5–42|doi=10.2307/1354529|jstor=1354529|issn=0882-4371))</ref> In many societies today, people of faith challenge the idea of "secularism as the only '[[Rationalism|rational]]' way to deal with the challenges of life."<ref name=":5" />

=== Early modern period ===
[[Thomas Hobbes]], one of the first philosophers of the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]], published ''[[Leviathan (Hobbes book)|Leviathan]]'' in 1651 in defense of "absolute [[sovereignty]]" and supporting the [[royalist]]s in the [[English Civil War]].<ref>((Citation|last=Duncan|first=Stewart|title=Thomas Hobbes|date=2021|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/hobbes/|encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|editor-last=Zalta|editor-first=Edward N.|edition=Fall 2021|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|access-date=2022-02-20))</ref> Hobbes was a critic of democracy because "the sovereign in a democracy (i.e. the people) can only exercise its power when it is actually assembled together...Only in a [[monarchy]] is the capacity to govern always exercised."<ref name=":6">((Cite journal|last=Apperley|first=Alan|date=1999|title=Hobbes on Democracy|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9256.00101|journal=Politics|language=en|volume=19|issue=3|pages=165–171|doi=10.1111/1467-9256.00101|s2cid=143030006|issn=1467-9256))</ref> Hobbes also thought democracy would lead to instability, conflict, glory seeking, mistrust, and undermining the [[social contract]].<ref name=":6" /> Later Enlightenment thinkers, such as [[James Madison|Madison]] who shared Hobbesian concerns about "the strongest passions and most dangerous weaknesses" of [[human nature]], would use some of these critiques to improve modern democracy.<ref>((Cite book|last=Coleman|first=Frank|url=https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.3138/9781442652989/html|title=Hobbes and America|date=2017-06-12|publisher=University of Toronto Press|isbn=978-1-4426-5298-9|language=en|doi=10.3138/9781442652989))</ref><ref name="Ketcham 1958 62–76"/>

=== Romantic era ===
[[Romanticism|Romantic]] critics of democracy include [[Thomas Carlyle]], [[John Ruskin]], [[Matthew Arnold]], [[James Fitzjames Stephen]], [[Henry Maine]], and [[William Lecky]]. In his study, [[Benjamin Evans Lippincott]] wrote that "they opposed democracy fundamentally for the same reason as Plato—that democracy led to disorder." Their unique historical contribution was to critique democracy under capitalism in modern [[industrial society]]. They believed that democracy produced anarchy in society, not simply anarchy within the individual as Plato believed.<ref>((Cite book |last=Lippincott |first=Benjamin Evans |url=http://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.505455 |title=Victorian Critics of Democracy |publisher=The University of Minnesota Press |year=1938 |pages=5))</ref>

Lippincott proposed that their three leading doctrines were "the common man's inferiority, the title of the few to rule, and authority". The main sources of these ideas were [[Puritans|Puritanism]], middle-class ideas of power, and the classical education that they received in their youth. The three doctrines were "most perfectly represented in [[Plato's Republic|Plato's ''Republic'']]," while classical history seemed to provide examples of "the common man's inferiority" as in the cases of Athens and Rome, "which showed the populace turning to disorder". The three doctrines were developed during the [[Reformation]] and the Enlightenment by writers like [[John Calvin]], [[Edmund Burke]] and [[David Hume]].<ref>Lippincott, Benjamin Evans (1938). ''[[iarchive:in.ernet.dli.2015.505455/page/n269/mode/2up|Victorian Critics of Democracy]]''. The University of Minnesota Press. p. 257.</ref>

==Arguments for further democratization==
((Main|Sortition|Deliberative democracy|Democratization))These arguments support more [[political egalitarianism]] by improving [[representative democracy]] or relying more on mechanisms like [[Citizens' assembly|citizens' assemblies]] to delegate power more directly and unfiltered through the election process.

=== Not democratic enough ===
((See also|Post-democracy|Democratic backsliding))
[[Robert Dahl|Robert A. Dahl]] defines democracies as systems of government that respond nearly fully to every one of their citizens. He then poses that no such, fully responsive system exists today.<ref name=":12">((Cite book|title=Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition|last=Dahl|first=Robert A.|publisher=Yale University Press|year=1972|isbn=978-0300015652|location=New Haven|pages=1–16))</ref> However, this does not mean that ''partially'' democratic regimes do not exist—they do. Thus, Dahl rejects a democracy dichotomy in favor of a democratization spectrum. To Dahl, the question is not whether a country is a democracy or not. The question is to what extent a country is experiencing democratization at a national level. Dahl measures this democratization in terms of the country's endorsement and reception of public contestation. Polyarchy, or "rule of the many people," is the only existing form of democratized government; that is, it is within polyarchies that democratization can flourish. Countries do not immediately transform from hegemonies and competitive oligarchies into democracies. Instead, a country that adopts democracy as its form of government can only claim to have switched to polyarchy, which is conducive to, but does not guarantee democratization. Dahl's polyarchy spectrum ends at the point in which a country becomes a full polyarchy at the national level and begins to democratize at the subnational level, among its social and private affairs. Dahl is not deeply concerned about the limits of his polyarchy spectrum because he believes that most countries today still have a long way before they reach full polyarchy status.<ref>((Cite book |last=Dahl |first=Robert A. |title=After the Revolution? Authority in a Good Society |publisher=Yale University Press |year=1970 |location=New Haven))</ref> For Dahl, whatever lies beyond full polyarchy is only possible, and thus only a concern, for advanced countries like those of Western Europe.((Citation needed|date=June 2023))

According to [[Boaventura de Sousa Santos]], "democracy is being so emptied of content that it can be instrumentally defended by those who use it in order to destroy it," saying that individuals calling for increased democratization and protection from fascism are labeled as leftists.<ref name=":9">((cite journal |last1=De Sousa Santos |first1=Boaventura |title=Silence of the Intellectuals |journal=[[Journal of World-Systems Research]] |date=21 March 2023 |volume=29 |issue=1 |pages=219–226 |doi=10.5195/JWSR.2023.1177|doi-access=free |hdl=10316/113738 |hdl-access=free ))</ref> De Sousa Santos says that while the [[Western world]] displays its support for democracy, its approval of governments being overthrown is a double standard.<ref name=":9" />

=== Elections give oligarchs too much power ===

==== Manin ====
Bernard Manin believes that both [[Representative democracy|representative]] and [[direct democracy|direct]] democracy promote "rule of the people," but that elections lead to the "rule of the aristocratic". Manin explains that in [[direct democracies]], virtually every citizen has the chance to be selected (sometimes [[Sortition|at random]]) to populate the government but in modern republics, only [[elite]]s have the chance of being elected.

Manin draws from [[James Harrington (author)|James Harrington]], [[Montesquieu]], and [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] to suggest that the dominant form of government, representative as opposed to direct, is effectively [[aristocratic]].<ref name=":22">((Cite book|title=The Principles of Representative Government|url=https://archive.org/details/principlesrepres00mani|url-access=limited|last=Manin|first=Bernard|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1997|isbn=978-0521458917|location=Cambridge|pages=[https://archive.org/details/principlesrepres00mani/page/n12 2], 67–93, 132–160))</ref> He says that modern representative governments exercise political power through aristocratic elections which, in turn, contradicts "rule of the people". As far as Montesquieu is concerned, elections favor the "best" citizens who Manin notes tend to be wealthy and [[upper-class]]. As far as Rousseau is concerned, elections favor the [[incumbent]] government officials or the citizens with the strongest personalities, which results in [[hereditary aristocracy]]. Manin further evinces the aristocratic nature of representative governments by contrasting them with the ancient style of [[selection by lot]]. Manin notes that [[Montesquieu]] believed that lotteries prevent jealousy and distribute offices equally (among citizens from different ranks), while [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau|Rousseau]] believed that lotteries choose indifferently, preventing self-interest and partiality from polluting the citizen's choice (and thus prevent hereditary aristocracy).

However, Manin also provides criticism of the Athenians' experiment with direct democracy, or selection by lot.<ref name=":22"/> Manin reflects on Montesquieu's interrogation of the extent to which [[Athenian democracy|Athenian direct democracy]] was truly direct. Montesquieu finds that citizens who had reason to believe they would be accused as "unworthy of selection" commonly withheld their names from the lottery, thereby making selection by lot vulnerable to [[self-selection bias]] and, thus, aristocratic. Manin does not dwell on direct democracy's potentially aristocratic elements, perhaps because he shares Montesquieu's belief that nothing is alarming about the exclusion of citizens who may be incompetent; this exclusion may be inevitable in any method of selection.

Additionally, Manin is interested in explaining the discrepancy between 18th-century American and French revolutionaries' ''declaration'' of the "equality of all citizens" and their ''enactment'' of (aristocratic) elections in their respective democratic experiments.<ref name=":22"/> Manin suggests that the discrepancy is explained by the revolutionaries' contemporary preoccupation with one form of equality over another. The revolutionaries prioritized gaining the equal right to consent to their choice of government (even a potentially aristocratic democracy), at the expense of seeking the equal right to be the face of that democracy. And it is elections, not lots, that provide citizens with more opportunities to consent. In elections, citizens consent both to the procedure of elections and the product of the elections (even if they produce the election of elites). In lotteries, citizens consent only to the procedure of lots, but not to the product of the lots (even if they produce the election of the average person). That is, if the revolutionaries prioritized consent to be governed over equal opportunity to serve as the government, then their choice of elections over lotteries makes sense.

====Michels====
A major scholarly attack based on democracy was made by German-Italian political scientist [[Robert Michels]] who developed the mainstream political science theory of the [[iron law of oligarchy]] in 1911.<ref name="hyland">James L. Hyland. ''Democratic theory: the philosophical foundations''. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press ND, 1995. Pp. 247.</ref> Michels argued that [[oligarchy]] is inevitable as an "[[iron law of oligarchy|iron law]]" within any organization as part of the "tactical and technical necessities" of organization and on the topic of democracy, Michels stated: "It is organization which gives birth to the dominion of the elected over the electors, of the mandataries over the mandators, of the delegates over the delegators. Who says organization, says oligarchy" and went on to state "Historical evolution mocks all the prophylactic measures that have been adopted for the prevention of oligarchy".<ref name="hyland" /> Michels stated that the official goal of democracy of eliminating elite rule was impossible, that democracy is a [[façade]] legitimizing the rule of a particular elite, and that elite rule, that he refers to as oligarchy, is inevitable.<ref name="hyland" /> Michels had formerly been a Marxist but became drawn to the syndicalism of Sorel, Eduoard Berth, [[Arturo Labriola]], and Enrico Leone and had become strongly opposed parliamentarian, legalistic, and bureaucratic socialism of [[social democracy]] and in contrast supported an activist, voluntarist, anti-parliamentarian socialism.<ref name=":8" /> Michels would later become a supporter of fascism upon Mussolini's rise to power in 1922, viewing fascism's goal to destroy liberal democracy sympathetically.<ref name=":8">((cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nvD2rZSVau4C&pg=418|title=World Fascism: a Historical Encyclopedia|author=Blamires, Cyprian|publisher=ABC-CLIO, Inc.|year=2006|volume=1|location=Santa Barbara, California|pages=418–419|isbn=9781576079409))</ref>

====Lagardelle====
French revolutionary [[Syndicalism|syndicalist]] [[Hubert Lagardelle]] claimed that French revolutionary syndicalism came to being as the result of "the reaction of the [[proletariat]] against idiotic democracy," which he claimed was "the ''popular form'' of [[bourgeois]] dominance". Lagardelle opposed democracy for its universalism, and believed in the necessity of class separation of the proletariat from the bourgeoisie, as democracy did not recognize the social differences between them.

==== Van Reybrouck ====
[[David Van Reybrouck]], the author of ''Against Elections: The Case for Democracy'', argues that allocating power through [[sortition]], such as in [[citizens' assemblies]], fixes many of the shortcomings of [[representative democracy]]. "Democracy is not government by the best in our society, because such a thing is called an [[aristocracy]], elected or not...Democracy, by contrast, flourishes precisely by allowing a diversity of voices to be heard. It's all about having an equal say, an equal right to determine what political action is taken."((sfn|Reybrouck|2016|p=133))

==== Pareto and Mosca ====
The 20th-century Italian thinkers [[Vilfredo Pareto]] and [[Gaetano Mosca]] (independently) argued that democracy was illusory, and served only to mask the reality of elite rule. Indeed, they argued that elite oligarchy is the unbendable law of human nature, due largely to the apathy and division of the masses (as opposed to the drive, initiative and unity of the elites), and that democratic institutions would do no more than shift the exercise of power from oppression to manipulation.((sfn | Femia | 2001))

==== Martin Gilens ====
A 2014 study led by Princeton professor Martin Gilens of 1,779 U.S. government decisions concluded that "elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence."<ref>"Testing theories of American politics: Elites, interest groups, and average citizens," M. Gilens and B. I. Page (2014), ''Perspectives on politics'' '''12''', 564–581, [https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B/S1537592714001595a.pdf/testing_theories_of_american_politics_elites_interest_groups_and_average_citizens.pdf]</ref>

=== Arguments for full democratization ===

====Corruption====
((See also|Elite theory))
The inability of governments around the world to successfully deal with corruption is causing a global crisis of democracy.<ref name="Transparency International">((cite web |title=How Corruption Weakens Democracy |url=https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/cpi_2018_global_analysis |access-date=1 January 2020 |website=Transparency International))</ref> Whilst countries that have high levels of democracy tend to have low levels of different forms of corruption, it is also clear that countries with moderate levels of democracy have high corruption, as well as countries with no democracy having very little corruption.<ref name="Relationship between democracy and corruption">((cite journal |last1=McMann |first1=Kelly M. |last2=Seim |first2=Brigitte |last3=Teorell |first3=Jan |last4=Lindberg |first4=Staffan |date=July 2019 |title=Why Low Levels of Democracy Promote Corruption and High Levels Diminish It |journal=Sage |volume=73 |issue=4 |page=1 |doi=10.1177/1065912919862054 |s2cid=203150460))</ref> Varying types of democratic policies reduce corruption, but only high levels of, and multiple kinds of democratic institutions, such as open and free elections combined with judicial and legislative constraints, will effectively reduce corruption. One important internal element of democracy is the electoral process which can be considered easily corruptible. For example, it is not inevitable in a democracy that elections will be free and fair. The giving and receiving of bribes, the threat or use of violence, treatment, and impersonation are common ways that the electoral process can be corrupted,<ref name="Electoral corruption">((cite journal |last1=Ward |first1=Norman |date=February 1949 |title=Electoral Corruption and Controverted Elections |journal=The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=74–86 |doi=10.2307/137956 |jstor=137956))</ref> meaning that democracy is not impenetrable from external problems and can be criticized for allowing it to take place.

[[M. S. Golwalkar]], in his book ''[[Bunch of Thoughts]]'', describes democracy as "...to a very large extent only a myth in practice...The high-sounding concept of 'individual freedom' only meant the freedom of those talented few to exploit the rest".((citation needed|date=September 2020))

==== Voter turnout ====
[[Voter turnout]] being lower than desired in some democracies has been attributed to several causes, with examples including reduced trust in democratic processes, lack of [[compulsory voting]], [[political efficacy]], include [[wasted vote]]s,<ref>((cite journal |last1=Park |first1=Chang Sup |year=2019 |title=The mediating role of political talk and political efficacy in the effects of news use on expressive and collective participation |journal=Communication and the Public |volume=4 |pages=35–52 |doi=10.1177/2057047319829580 |s2cid=150474892 |doi-access=free))</ref> [[Gridlock (politics)|gridlock]] and high [[barriers to entry]] for new political movements.<ref>((cite journal |last1=Tullock |first1=Gordon |year=1965 |title=Entry Barriers in Politics |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/1816288 |journal=The American Economic Review |volume=55 |issue=1/2 |pages=458–466 |jstor=1816288))</ref>

==== Coase theorem ====
[[Daron Acemoglu]] argues that the [[Coase theorem]] is only valid in politics while there are "rules of the game," so to speak, that are being enforced by the government. But when there is nobody there to enforce the rules for the government itself, there is no way to guarantee that low transaction costs will lead to an efficient outcome in democracies.<ref>((cite journal |last=Acemoglu |first=Daron |author-link=Daron Acemoglu |date=2003 |title=Why Not A Political Coase Theorem? Social Conflict, Commitment, And Politics |journal=Journal of Comparative Economics |volume=31 |issue=4 |pages=620–652 |citeseerx=10.1.1.199.8045 |doi=10.1016/j.jce.2003.09.003))</ref> 

Anthony Downs argued that the political market works much the same way as the economic market and that there could potentially be an equilibrium in the system because of the democratic process.<ref name=":0">((cite journal |last=Downs |first=Anthony |date=April 1957 |title=An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy |journal=Journal of Political Economy |volume=65 |issue=2 |pages=135–150 |doi=10.1086/257897 |jstor=1827369 |s2cid=154363730))</ref> However, he argued that imperfect knowledge in politicians and voters prevented the full realization of that equilibrium.<ref name=":0" />

====Manipulation of the opposition====
((Further|Suppression of dissent))

Various reasons can be found for eliminating or suppressing political opponents. Methods such as [[false flag]]s, [[Anti-terrorism legislation|counterterrorism-laws]],<ref>((cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5VYIAQAAMAAJ |title=Chronicles |publisher=Rockford Institute |year=2003 |language=en |access-date=22 January 2017))</ref> planting or creating compromising material and perpetuation of public fear may be used to suppress dissent. After a failed [[2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt|coup d'état]] over 110,000 people have been purged and nearly 40,000 have been imprisoned in Turkey, which is or was considered to be a democratic nation, during the [[2016 Turkish purges]].<ref>((cite news |date=October 4, 2016 |title=Turkey's crackdown on dissent has gone too far |newspaper=Financial Times |url=https://www.ft.com/content/269f0b22-8a27-11e6-8aa5-f79f5696c731 |access-date=22 January 2017))</ref><ref>((cite web |last1=Norton |first1=Ben |date=2016-11-02 |title=Turkey's ruthless, slow-motion coup: 110,000 purged as Western ally cracks down on dissent, journalism |url=https://www.salon.com/2016/11/02/turkeys-ruthless-slow-motion-coup-110000-purged-as-western-ally-cracks-down-on-dissent-journalism/ |access-date=22 January 2017 |work=Salon))</ref>

Fake parties, phantom political rivals, and "scarecrow" opponents may be used to undermine the opposition.<ref>((cite book |last1=Wilson |first1=Andrew |title=Virtual politics : faking democracy in the post-Soviet world |date=2005 |publisher=Yale Univ. Pr. |isbn=9780300095456 |edition=1st |location=New Haven [u.a.]))</ref>

== Debated aspects of democracy==
===Majoritarianism===
((Main|Tyranny of the majority))Unlike in a [[consensus democracy]] or majoritarian democracies that embrace [[political egalitarianism]], democratic theorists worried about conditions where a majority could become tyrannical. Plato and James Madison, for example, were concerned about [[tyranny of the majority]].<ref>Michels, Robert. [http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/MicPoli.html ''Political Parties – A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy,''] Jarrold & Sons. London, 1916.</ref><ref name="Federalist10">((cite web |date=December 29, 1998 |title=The Federalist Papers: No. 10 |url=https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed10.asp |access-date=January 7, 2022 |work=[[Avalon Project]]))</ref> Professors Richard Ellis of [[Willamette University]] and Michael Nelson of [[Rhodes College]] argue that much constitutional thought, from Madison to Lincoln and beyond, has focused on "the problem of majority tyranny". They conclude, "The principles of republican government embedded in the Constitution represent an effort by the framers to ensure that the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would not be trampled by majorities".<ref>Richard J. Ellis and Michael Nelson, ''Debating the presidency'' (2009) p. 211</ref> [[Thomas Jefferson]] warned that "an elective despotism is not the government we fought for".<ref>David Tucker, ''Enlightened republicanism: a study of Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia'' (2008) p. 109</ref> A [[constitution]]<ref>Lowell, A. Lawrence. [https://archive.org/stream/essaysongovernm01lowegoog#page/n70/mode/2up ''"Democracy and the Constitution,"''] Essays on Government, Houghton Mifflin & Co. New York, 1890.</ref> would limit the powers of what a simple majority can accomplish.<ref>[[James Madison]], [http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa10.htm Federalist No. 10]</ref> [[Liberal democracy]] safeguards against the tyranny of majority through [[Individual rights|rights of the individual]], [[liberty]], [[consent of the governed]], [[political equality]], [[right to property|right to private property]] and [[equality before the law]].<ref>"liberalism In general, the belief that it is the aim of politics to preserve individual rights and to maximize freedom of choice." ''Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics'', Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan, Third edition 2009, ((ISBN|978-0-19-920516-5)).</ref><ref>((cite book |last=Young |first=Shaun |year=2002 |title=Beyond Rawls: An Analysis of the Concept of Political Liberalism |location=Lanham, MD |publisher=[[University Press of America]] |isbn=978-0-7618-2240-0 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/beyondrawlsanaly0000youn|page=36))</ref>

Fierlbeck (1998) believes that a majority rule that may not be in the best interest of all its citizens is not necessarily due to a failure in the democratic process, but rather, "because democracy is responsive to the desires of a large middle class increasingly willing to disregard the muted voices of economically marginalized groups within its own borders".<ref>Shrag, P. (1956), "India elected anarchy." ''nehru'', 289(1734), 50-9.</ref>

===Stability===
[[Majoritarian democracy]] has been criticized ((Who|date=February 2024)) for not offering enough political stability.((Citation needed|date=February 2024)) As governments are frequently elected on and off there tends to be frequent changes in the policies of democratic countries both domestically and internationally.((Citation needed|date=February 2024)) Reason Wafawarova argued in 2008 that rigid approaches to democracy may undermine that ability for a developing country to achieve long-term stability and democracy.<ref>((cite news |last=Wafawarova |first=Reason |date=16 October 2008 |title=Opinion: Head to head: African democracy |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7671283.stm |access-date=1 April 2010 |work=BBC News))</ref>((Update needed|date=February 2024))

Media has been accused((Who|date=February 2024)) of causing political instability and undermining democracy.<ref>''The Review of Policy Research, Volume 22, Issues 1–3'', Policy Studies Organization, [[Potomac Institute for Policy Studies]]. Blackwell Publishing, 2005. p. 28</ref>((Verification needed|date=February 2024))

===Winner-take-all elections===
((See also|Political polarization))
By the [[median voter theorem]], only a few people hold the balance of power in an [[two-party system]], and many may be unhappy with their decisions. In this way, they argue, Two-party democracies are inefficient.<ref>((cite journal |last1=Meltzer |first1=Allan H. |last2=Richard |first2=Scott F. |date=October 1981 |title=A Rational Theory of the Size of Government |url=http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1749&context=tepper |journal=Journal of Political Economy |volume=89 |issue=5 |pages=914–927 |doi=10.1086/261013 |jstor=1830813 |s2cid=13083878 |access-date=April 28, 2014))</ref> Such a system could result in a wealth disparity or racial discrimination. 

[[Arrow's impossibility theorem]] suggests that winner-take-all elections (unlike [[Multiwinner voting|multi-winner voting]] such as [[proportional representation]]) can be logically incoherent. This is based on a certain set of criteria for democratic decision-making being inherently conflicting, i.e., these three "fairness" criteria: 

((blockquote|1) If every voter prefers alternative X over alternative Y, then the group prefers X over Y.
2) If every voter's preference between X and Y remains unchanged, then the group's preference between X and Y will also remain unchanged (even if voters' preferences between other pairs like X and Z, Y and Z, or Z and W change).
3) There is no "dictator": no single voter possesses the power to always determine the group's preference.))

[[Kenneth Arrow]] summarised the implications of the theorem in a non-mathematical form, stating that "no voting method is fair," "every ranked voting method is flawed," and "the only voting method that isn't flawed is a dictatorship".<ref>((cite book |last1=Raghunathan |first1=Viswanathan |title=The Corruption Conundrum and Other Paradoxes and Dilemmas |date=2010 |publisher=Penguin Books |isbn=978-0-670-08356-5 |author-link=Viswanathan Raghunathan))</ref>((Context needed|date=February 2024))((Verify source|date=February 2024)) However, Arrow's formal premises can be considered overly strict, and with their reasonable weakening, the logical incoherence of democracy looks much less critical.<ref name="Tangian2020Book">((Cite book |last=Tangian |first=Andranik |title=Analytical Theory of Democracy: History, Mathematics and Applications |date=2020 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-030-39690-9 |series=Studies in Choice and Welfare |location=Cham, Switzerland |doi=10.1007/978-3-030-39691-6 |s2cid=216190330))</ref>

This situation was metaphorically characterized by [[Charles Plott]]: 
((blockquote|The subject began with what seemed to be a minor problem with majority rule. "It is just a mathematical curiosity," said some...But intrigued and curious about this little hole, researchers, not deterred by the possibly irrelevant, began digging in the ground nearby...What they now appear to have been uncovering is a gigantic cavern into which fall almost all of our ideas about social actions. Almost anything we say and/or anyone has ever said about what society wants or should get is threatened with internal inconsistency. It is as though people have been talking for years about a thing that cannot, "in principle," exist, and a major effort now is needed to see what objectively remains from the conversations. |[[Charles Plott]] (1976) Axiomatic social choice theory, p. 511<ref name="Plott1976">((Cite journal |author=Plott, Charles R
|year=1976
|title= Axiomatic social choice theory
|journal= American Journal of Political Science
|volume= 20
|issue=3
|pages=511–596
|doi=10.2307/2110686
|jstor=2110686
|s2cid=143366620
))</ref> |source=))

===Rule of law ===
((Undue weight section|views of the Chinese Communist Party|date=February 2024))

The [[Chinese Communist Party]] political concept of [[whole-process people's democracy]] criticizes liberal democracy for excessively relying on procedural formalities or [[rule of law]] without, in the party's view, genuinely reflecting the interests of the people.<ref name=":82">((Cite book |last=Wang |first=Zhongyuan |title=CPC Futures The New Era of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics |date=2022 |publisher=[[National University of Singapore Press]] |isbn=978-981-18-5206-0 |editor-last1=Pieke |editor-first1=Frank N |location=Singapore |pages= |chapter=Democracy with Chinese Adjectives: Whole-Process Democracy and China’s Political Development |doi=10.56159/eai.52060 |oclc=1354535847 |editor-last2=Hofman |editor-first2=Bert |doi-access=free))</ref>((Rp|pages=60-64)) According to Wang Zhongyuan of [[Fudan University]], this critique arises as part of a post-1990s trend in which various countries have sought to redefine "democracy" in ways that differ from Western multi-party democratic systems.<ref name=":82" />((Rp|page=61)) Under the framing of whole-process people's democracy, the most important criteria for democracy is whether it can "solve the people's real problems," while a system in which "the people are awakened only for voting" is deemed not truly democratic.<ref name=":82" />((Rp|pages=60-64)) The concept is thus both a way of criticizing liberal democracy and deflecting criticism of the Chinese system.<ref name=":82" />((Rp|page=64))

===Long-term thinking===
((Undue weight section|views of the Chinese Communist Party|date=February 2024))

Different voting systems lead to different levels of [[short-termism]] in politics.<ref>((Cite journal |last1=Ferrín |first1=Mónica |last2=Hernández |first2=Enrique |date=May 2021 |title=Preferences for consensus and majoritarian democracy: long- and short-term influences |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-political-science-review/article/preferences-for-consensus-and-majoritarian-democracy-long-and-shortterm-influences/865BE64CC6B0369D96145514186B84FA |journal=European Political Science Review |language=en |volume=13 |issue=2 |pages=209–225 |doi=10.1017/S1755773921000047 |issn=1755-7739|hdl=2183/27899 |hdl-access=free ))</ref> 

Chinese policymakers argue that policy under democratic systems is largely restricted to ad hoc interventions which leaves social development vulnerable to market forces.<ref name=":423">((Cite book |last=Heilmann |first=Sebastian |title=Red Swan: How Unorthodox Policy-Making Facilitated China's Rise |date=2018 |publisher=[[The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press]] |isbn=978-962-996-827-4 |doi=10.2307/j.ctv2n7q6b |jstor=j.ctv2n7q6b |author-link=Sebastian Heilmann |s2cid=158420253))</ref>((Rp|page=144)) According to this view, policy-making in democratic systems is limited to ad hoc policy interventions.<ref name=":423" />((Rp|pages=144-145)) Chinese planners argue that such interventions are incapable of coping with fundamental challenges such as environmental degradation, dysfunction in capital markets, and demographic change.<ref name=":423" />((Rp|page=145)) 

===Influence of the media===
((Off topic|date=January 2019))
((Original research section|reason=looks like synthesis for many of the sources - don't specifically look at democracy in the context of other systems, just at this aspect of democracy|date=February 2024))
((See also|Crowd manipulation|Media manipulation|Post-truth politics))

Malleability of [[public opinion]] is cited by [[Joseph Schumpeter|Schumpeter]] as a reason to prefer [[technocracy]] to democracy, while others concerned about the sway of the public argue for limiting the ability of money to play a role in democracy.<ref>((cite journal|last1=Jacobs|first1=Lawrence R.|date=1 December 2001|title=Commentary: Manipulators and Manipulation: Public Opinion in a Representative Democracy|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/15635|journal=Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law|volume=26|issue=6|pages=1361–1374|issn=1527-1927|access-date=22 January 2017|doi=10.1215/03616878-26-6-1361|pmid=11831584|s2cid=5716232))</ref><ref>((cite journal|title=Manipulating Citizens: How Political Campaigns' Use of Behavioral Social Science Harms Democracy|journal = New Political Science|volume = 38|last1=Gorton|first1=William A.|date=2 January 2016|pages=61–80|doi=10.1080/07393148.2015.1125119|s2cid = 147145163))</ref> Critics((Who|date=February 2024)) claim that mass media actually shapes public opinion, and can therefore be used to "control" democracy.

Dan Slater and Lucan Ahmad Way criticized the FBI for announcing that the agency would examine potentially incriminating evidence against Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server just 11 days before the election.<ref name="wash1">((cite news |last1=Slater |first1=Dan |last2=Way |first2=Lucan Ahmad |date=January 12, 2017 |title=Was the 2016 U.S. election democratic? Here are 7 serious shortfalls. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/01/12/was-the-2016-u-s-election-democratic-we-see-7-serious-shortfalls/ |access-date=22 January 2017 |newspaper=Washington Post))</ref> The argue that [[misinformation]] − such as [[fake news]] − has become central to elections around the world.<ref name="wash1" /> In December 2016 United States' intelligence agencies made allegations of [[Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections|Russian interference in the 2016 United States Elections]] by working "to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary [Hillary] Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency" − including passing material against the Democrats to [[WikiLeaks]] to discredit the election and favor [[Donald Trump]].<ref name="wash1" />((Synthesis inline|date=February 2024)) 

[[Social bot]]s and other forms of [[online propaganda]] as well as [[search engine]] result algorithms may be used to alter the perception and opinion of voters.<ref>((cite web |last=Copley |first=Caroline |date=24 November 2016 |title=Merkel fears social bots may manipulate German election |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-merkel-socialbots-idUSKBN13J1V0 |access-date=22 January 2017 |publisher=Reuters))</ref><ref>((cite web |last=Gaycken |first=Sandro |date=18 October 2016 |title=The new power of manipulation |url=http://www.dw.com/en/the-new-power-of-manipulation/a-36074925 |access-date=22 January 2017 |publisher=Deutsche Welle |language=en))</ref> In 2016 [[Andrés Sepúlveda]] disclosed that he manipulated public opinion to rig elections in Latin America. According to him, with a budget of $600,000, he led a team of hackers that stole campaign strategies, manipulated [[social media]] to create false waves of enthusiasm and derision, and installed [[spyware]] in opposition offices to help [[Enrique Peña Nieto]], a right-of-center candidate, win the election.<ref>((cite news |last1=Robertson |first1=Jordan |last2=Riley |first2=Michael |last3=Willis |first3=Andrew |date=March 31, 2016 |title=How to Hack an Election |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-how-to-hack-an-election/ |access-date=22 January 2017 |newspaper=Bloomberg.com |publisher=Bloomberg))</ref><ref>((cite web |last=Staufenberg |first=Jess |date=2 April 2016 |title=Man claims he rigged elections in most Latin American countries over 8 years |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/political-cyberhacker-andres-sepulveda-reveals-how-he-digitally-rigged-elections-across-latin-a6965161.html |access-date=22 January 2017 |work=The Independent))</ref> Televised debates<ref>((cite journal |last1=Davis |first1=Colin J. |last2=Bowers |first2=Jeffrey S. |last3=Memon |first3=Amina |date=30 March 2011 |title=Social Influence in Televised Election Debates: A Potential Distortion of Democracy |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=6 |issue=3 |pages=e18154 |bibcode=2011PLoSO...618154D |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0018154 |issn=1932-6203 |pmc=3068183 |pmid=21479191 |doi-access=free))</ref> and, according to George Bishop, inaccurate [[opinion poll]]s<ref>((cite web |last=Bishop |first=George |date=November 30, 2015 |title=Polls Can Create an Illusion of Public Opinion |url=https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/11/30/does-polling-undermine-democracy/polls-can-create-an-illusion-of-public-opinion |access-date=23 January 2017 |work=The Opinion Pages - The New York Times))</ref> may also be able to shift election outcomes.((Synthesis inline|date=February 2024))

== Anti-democratic thought ==
((See also|Autocratization|Dark Enlightenment|Plutocracy))These critiques largely see people as incapable of self-rule, preferring the empowerment of religious or secular elites.

=== Religion ===
((Main|Theocracy))
Theocracies view deities as supreme ruling authorities, not the people.<ref>((cite dictionary |url=http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/theocracy |title=Theocracy, n. |dictionary=[[Oxford English Dictionary]] |date=2015 |access-date=28 June 2015 |archive-date=21 July 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130721163810/http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/theocracy |url-status=dead ))</ref> [[Theodemocracy]] combines authority by both deity and the people.<ref name="Times and Seasons, 5:510">''[[Times and Seasons]]'', 5:510.</ref>

==== Salafism (Islam) ====
((Main|Salafism))

The practice of orthodox Islam in the form of Salafism can clash with a democratic system. The core precept of Islam, that of "[[Tawhid|tawheed]]" (the "oneness of God"), can be interpreted by fundamentalists to mean, among other things, that democracy as a political system is incompatible with the purported notion that laws not handed down by God should not be recognized.<ref>((Cite book |url=https://english.aivd.nl/binaries/aivd-en/documents/publications/2015/09/24/salafism-in-the-netherlands-diversity-and-dynamics/salafism-in-the-netherlands.pdf |title=Salafism in the Netherlands: Diversity and dynamics |publisher=General Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD) National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism (NCTV) |year=2015 |pages=12 |access-date=January 5, 2019 |archive-date=January 5, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190105145451/https://english.aivd.nl/binaries/aivd-en/documents/publications/2015/09/24/salafism-in-the-netherlands-diversity-and-dynamics/salafism-in-the-netherlands.pdf |url-status=dead ))</ref>

=== Voter literacy tests ===
((See also|Literacy test|Democracy: The God That Failed|Voter suppression|))

[[Plato]] believed it's reckless to allow common men to vote. The vote of an expert has equal value to the vote of 'an incompetent'.<ref>((Cite web |date=January 23, 2021 |title=Plato &#124; Criticism of democracy &#124; the Gallerist |url=https://thegallerist.art/plato-criticism-of-democracy/ |website=[[The Gallerist]]))</ref> [[Jason Brennan]] believes that the [[Low information voter|low information voters]] is a major problem in America and is the main objection to democracies in general because the system does not incentivize being informed.((sfn | Brennan | 2016 | p=)) Brennan cites a study where less than 30% of Americans can name two or more of the rights listed in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.((sfn | Brennan | 2016 | p=)) He believes an informed voter should have extensive knowledge of the candidate's current and previous political beliefs/tendencies. He proposes an [[epistocracy]], which would only give a vote to those with an elite political understanding.((sfn | Brennan | 2016 | p=))

[[Charles Maurras]], a supporter of the [[Vichy France|Vichy regime]] and member of the far-right FRS of the ''[[Action Française]]'' movement believed in biological inequality and natural hierarchies, and claimed that the individual is naturally subordinated to social collectivities such as the family, the society, and the state, which he claims are doomed to fail if based upon the "myth of equality" or "abstract liberty". Maurras criticized democracy as being a "government by numbers" in which quantity matters more over quality and prefers the worst over the best. Maurras denounced the principles of [[liberalism]] as described in ''[[The Social Contract]]'' by [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] and in ''[[Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen]]'' as based upon the false assumption of liberty and the false assumption of equality. He claimed that the [[parliamentary system]] subordinates the national interest, or common good, to private interests of a parliament's representatives where only short-sighted interests of individuals prevail.((Citation needed|date=February 2024))

== See also ==
((columns-list|colwidth=30em|
* [[Collective problem solving]]
* [[Group decision-making]]
* ((section link|General will|Criticisms))
* ((section link|Liberal democracy|Issues and criticism))
* [[Illiberal democracy]]
* [[Neo-feudalism]]
* [[Political warfare]]
* ''[[The Myth of the Rational Voter]]''
* [[Democracy in China]]))

==References==
((reflist|2))

===Cited works===

* ((cite book | last=Brennan | first=Jason | author-link=Jason Brennan | title=Against Democracy: New Preface | publisher=Princeton University Press | date=2016 | isbn=978-1-4008-8839-9 | doi=10.2307/j.ctvc77mcz | title-link=Against Democracy | oclc=942707357))
* ((Cite book |last=Reybrouck |first=David Van |title=Against Elections: The Case for Democracy |date=2016 |publisher=The Bodley Head |year=2016 |isbn=978-1-84792-422-3 |location=London |pages=133 |translator-last=Waters |translator-first=Liz |author-link=David Van Reybrouck))
* ((Cite book |last=Femia |first=Joseph V. |title=Against the masses : varieties of anti-democratic thought since the French Revolution |date=2001 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-828063-7 |location=Oxford |oclc=46641885))

==Further reading==
((Too much further reading|date=March 2024))

((refbegin|30em))

* ((cite book | last=Benoist | first=Alain de | author-link=Alain de Benoist | title=The Problem of Democracy | publisher=Arktos | publication-place=London | date=2011 | isbn=978-1-907166-16-7 | oclc=713181908))((Importance inline|reason=Only 34 citations between 2011-2024|date=March 2024))
* ((cite book | last=Lukacs | first=John |author-link=John Lukacs| title=Democracy and Populism | publisher=Yale University Press | date=8 March 2005 | isbn=978-0-300-10773-9))
* ((cite book | last=Mann | first=Michael | author-link=Michael Mann (sociologist) | title=The Dark Side of Democracy | publisher=Cambridge University Press | publication-place=Cambridge | date=2004 | isbn=978-0-521-53854-1))
* ((cite book | last=Graham | first=Gordon | author-link=L. Gordon Graham | title=The Case Against the Democratic State | publisher=Imprint Academic | publication-place=Thorverton | date=2002 | isbn=978-0-907845-38-6 | oclc=ocm50581619))((Importance inline|reason=only 38 citations since 2002|date=March 2024))
* ((cite book | last=Hoppe | first=Hans-Hermann |author-link=Hans-Hermann Hoppe| title=Democracy - the God That Failed | publisher=Transaction Publishers | publication-place=New Brunswick, [NJ] | date=2001 | isbn=978-0-7658-0868-4))
* ((cite book | last=Schmitt | first=Carl | author-link=Carl Schmitt| title=The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy | publisher=MIT Press | publication-place=Cambridge, Mass. | date=22 June 1988 | isbn=978-0-262-69126-0))
* ((cite book | last=Briggs | first=Asa | author-link=Asa Briggs | title=Victorian People | publisher=University of Chicago Press | publication-place=Chicago | date=1975-04-15 | isbn=978-0-226-07488-7 | chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/victorianpeoplea000327mbp/page/n9/mode/2up|chapter=Robert Lowe and the Fear of Democracy in late 19th century British politics))
* [[Eustace Percy, 1st Baron Percy of Newcastle|Newcastle, Lord Percy of]]. [https://archive.org/stream/heresyofdemocrac00perc ''The Heresy of Democracy,''] Henry Regnery Co, 1955.((Importance inline|reason=seems like there are very few citations to be found - seems to not be relevant enough for inclusion|date=March 2024))
* [[Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn|Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Erik von]]. [http://library.mises.org/books/Erik%20von%20Kuehnelt-Leddihn/Liberty%20or%20Equality%20The%20Challenge%20of%20Our%20Time.pdf ''Liberty or Equality,''] The Caxton Printers, 1952.((Importance inline|reason=56 citations on Google Scholar since 1952 - may not be relevant enough for this page|date=March 2024))
* ((cite book | last=Mencken | first=H. L. | title=Notes on democracy | publisher=Knopf | publication-place=New York | year=1926 | oclc=182664 |author-link=H. L. Mencken|title-link=Notes on Democracy))
* [[Halford Mackinder|Mackinder, Sir Halford J]]. [http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/009604357 ''Democratic Ideals and Reality,''] Henry Holt & Company. New York, 1919.
* [[Edwin Lawrence Godkin|Godkin, Edwin L]]. [https://archive.org/stream/problemsmodernd01godkgoog ''Problems of Modern Democracy,''] Charles Scribner's Sons. New York, 1896.((Importance inline|reason=cited only 54 times since 1896|date=March 2024))
* [[Henry James Sumner Maine|Maine, Sir Henry Sumner]]. [https://archive.org/stream/cu31924030448413#page/n7/mode/2up ''Popular Government,''] John Murray. London, 1886.
((refend))



[[Category:Authoritarianism]]
[[Category:Totalitarianism]]
[[Category:Criticism of democracy| ]]
[[Category:Criticisms of political philosophy]]
[[Category:Democracy]]
[[Category:Political philosophy]]

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

Criticism of democracy (edit)
Template:Ambox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Blockquote (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Blockquote/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Broader (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Catalog lookup link (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Category handler (view source) (protected)
Template:Citation (view source) (protected)
Template:Citation needed (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite book (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite dictionary (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite encyclopedia (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite journal (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite news (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite web (view source) (protected)
Template:Columns-list (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Comma separated entries (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Context inline (edit)
Template:Context needed (edit)
Template:Copy edit (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Copyedit (view source) (protected)
Template:DMCA (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (articles) (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Delink (view source) (protected)
Template:Democracy (edit)
Template:Democracy sidebar (edit)
Template:Div col (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Div col/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:FULLROOTPAGENAME (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Fix (view source) (protected)
Template:Fix/category (view source) (protected)
Template:Further (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Further reading cleanup (edit)
Template:Hlist (view source) (protected)
Template:Hlist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:ISBN (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:If empty (view source) (protected)
Template:Importance inline (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Main (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Main other (view source) (protected)
Template:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Template:Off topic (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Original research (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Original research section (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Template:Politics series sidebar (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Portal-inline (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:R/superscript (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:R/where (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Refbegin (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Refbegin/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Refend (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Reflist (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Rp (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:SDcat (view source) (protected)
Template:Section link (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:See also (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Sfn (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Short description (view source) (protected)
Template:Short description/lowercasecheck (view source) (protected)
Template:Sidebar with collapsible lists (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Synthesis inline (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Too much further reading (edit)
Template:Undue weight section (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Update inline (view source) (extended confirmed protected)
Template:Update needed (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Use mdy dates (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Verification needed (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Verify source (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Who (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Yesno (view source) (protected)
Template:Yesno-no (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Yesno-yes (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Broader (view source) (semi-protected)
Module:Catalog lookup link (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Category handler (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/blacklist (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/shared (view source) (protected)
Module:Check for unknown parameters (view source) (protected)
Module:Check isxn (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Citation/CS1 (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/COinS (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:DecodeEncode (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Delink (view source) (protected)
Module:Disambiguation/templates (view source) (protected)
Module:Footnotes (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Footnotes/anchor id list (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Footnotes/anchor id list/data (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Footnotes/whitelist (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Format link (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:GetParameters (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Hatnote list (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:If empty (view source) (protected)
Module:InfoboxImage (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Labelled list hatnote (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:List (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/ambox.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Navbar/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/disambiguation (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/setindex (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/softredirect (view source) (protected)
Module:Plain text (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal-inline (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal/images/p (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:SDcat (view source) (protected)
Module:Section link (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Separated entries (view source) (protected)
Module:Sidebar (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Sidebar/configuration (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Sidebar/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:String (view source) (protected)
Module:String2 (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:TableTools (view source) (protected)
Module:Template wrapper (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Unsubst (view source) (protected)
Module:Wikitext Parsing (view source) (protected)
Module:Yesno (view source) (protected)

Return to Criticism of democracy.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_democracy"