This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.Find sources: "Majoritarian democracy" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (September 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (September 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Majoritarian democracy, as opposed to constitutional democracy,[citation needed] refers to democracy based upon majority rule of a society's citizens.[1] Majoritarian democracy is the conventional form of democracy used as a political system in many countries.[citation needed]

Though common, majoritarian democracy is not universally accepted – majoritarian democracy was famously criticized as having the inherent danger of becoming a "tyranny of the majority" whereby the majority in society could oppress or exclude minority groups,[1] which can lead to violence and civil war.[2][3] Some argue[who?] that since parliament, statutes and preparatory works are very important in majoritarian democracies,[citation needed] and considering the absence of a tradition to exercise judicial review at the national level,[citation needed] majoritarian democracies are undemocratic.[citation needed]

In contrast to majoritarian democracy and the perceived danger of a tyranny of the majority, consensus democracy was developed in response. It gives preference to rule by as many people as possible to make government inclusive, with a majority of support from society being a minimal threshold.[1][2][3]

Fascism rejects majoritarian democracy because the latter assumes equality of citizens and fascists claim that fascism is a form of authoritarian democracy that represents the views of a dynamic organized minority of a nation rather than the disorganized majority.[4]

Examples

Australia and Canada are not examples of majoritarian democracies.[citation needed] Representatives are chosen not by proportional electoral systems, but by a system based on plurality voting.[citation needed] Contrary to popular belief, the USA is not a majoritarian democracy[citation needed] as they can have an elected individual based through points from majority of county and further state votes.[citation needed][clarification needed] This means an individual can be in power in the USA while having a minority vote overall.[citation needed]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c David., Arter (2006). Democracy in Scandinavia : consensual, majoritarian or mixed?. Manchester: Manchester University Press. p. 15. ISBN 9780719070464. OCLC 64555175.
  2. ^ a b Reynal-Querol, Marta (2002). "Political systems, stability and civil wars". Defence and Peace Economics. 13 (6): 465–483. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.17.2796. doi:10.1080/10242690214332. S2CID 38417520. According to our model the proportional system has a lower probability of rebellion than the majoritarian system. .. Empirically, we find that countries with proportional system has the lowest probability that groups rebel and that the more inclusive is the system, the smaller the probability of suffering a civil war.
  3. ^ a b Emerson, Peter (2016). From Majority Rule to Inclusive Politics (1st ed.). Cham: Springer. ISBN 9783319235004. OCLC 948558369. Unfortunately, one of the worst democratic structures is the most ubiquitous: majority rule based on majority voting. It must be emphasised, furthermore, that these two practices are often the catalysts of division and bitterness, if not indeed violence and war.
  4. ^ Anthony., Arblaster (1994). Democracy (2nd ed.). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. p. 48. ISBN 9780816626014. OCLC 30069868.