When democracy is not the democratic choice - semantics and more

[Verbose]

Afaik, the democratic system in Israel works very, very well. Not to be confused with how right-wing the parties tend to be (they are very right-wing). Democracy is about representing the population.

And protecting the rights of the minority between election events.

The independent judiciary is even more important to retain than the independent legislative branch, if the executive branch comes gunning for democracy. Not doing it is what results in the tyranny of simple majorities.

 

[uppi]

Debateable. Voting without the free formation of opinion, and the right of political organization is worth nothing. Arguably the independent legal, constitutional, protection of these rights are more important than having the ballot every so-or-so many years apart.

I would define democracy as the peaceful transfer of power by the means of elections. So voting needs to happen, but it also needs to matter - have an effect. This implies a few things, like fair elections and the right to express political dissent. These conditions can be fulfilled in varying degrees, but in the end what matters is that the government will be voted out and replaced by another.

 

[Verbose]

I would define democracy as the peaceful transfer of power by the means of elections. So voting needs to happen, but it also needs to matter - have an effect. This implies a few things, like fair elections and the right to express political dissent. These conditions can be fulfilled in varying degrees, but in the end what matters is that the government will be voted out and replaced by another.

Would think it depends on whether we think of it as a mechanism for selecting government or of it as something in a kind of deeper, cultural sense – as also a set of societal norms, expectations and behaviors of both thought and action, where legislation and institutions reflect this (and if that is absent or problematic this legislation and these institutions can be expected to run into trouble and come into question). It can be, and is, both of course.

 

[Kyriakos]

Imo how humanitarian/fair/socially helpful or inclusive the system is, doesn't really diminish the fact that Israel has been having coalition governments for decades, exactly because the vote of the citizens does matter. Certainly it won't allow palestinians to return (because then they'd vote, altering the state in ways the current jewish majority does not want).
If you have a democracy, and your population is supporting extreme positions, it'd be more humanist but definitely less democratic to not express such. It can lead to disaster (like any other system), Athens voted for the sicilian expedition.

 

[Absolution]

And protecting the rights of the minority between election events.

The independent judiciary is even more important to retain than the independent legislative branch, if the executive branch comes gunning for democracy. Not doing it is what results in the tyranny of simple majorities.

These are important in order to preserve or to refine democracy and its sorrounding values.
But these are not the essense of democracy. demo, cracy.
Just as much as a military is required to defend an independent country in many cases, and without a military a country might collapse. But does having no military make a country less independent? No, unless it needs one.

These are only semantics.
I would prefer democracy to be coated with all of its accompanying characteristics - however, not in order to make it more democractic, but to make it simply better.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Debateable. Voting without the free formation of opinion, and the right of political organization is worth nothing.

Humans automatically form opinions, and voting includes forming an opinion as to who to vote for.

Voting for the person to represent oneself simply does not require any organised political parties.

Without voting, there is no democracy, therefore voting is the most important.

Independence of executive, judiciary and legislature etc are nice to have,
and it would be difficult to run a middle to large size democracy without them.

Democracy in large states has the problem that the individual vote is very diluted.
The best solution to that is to have democracy at many levels as in India and
the USA where voters can also vote for state legislatures and governors etc.
The thing about China and Russia is it is all top down rather than bottom up.

Voting also requires candidates, and there is a problem here in that many
regimes e.g. Iran may decide who is permitted to stand or not to stand.
Needless to say US democrats are desperately trying to disqualify Trump.