What's the cornerstone of democracy?

[Taliesin]

I would define democracy as rule by legitimate public discourse characterised by constant spiritual striving and rebellion. To equate democracy with voting is like equating parenting with the sex act.

Furthermore, I think a public education system of some kind is the most important institution of democracy, aside from Parliament.

 

[Ayatollah So]

I would define democracy as rule by legitimate public discourse characterised by constant spiritual striving and rebellion. To equate democracy with voting is like equating parenting with the sex act.

Finally some sanity.

Democracy as a moral ideal fits the etymology of "democracy": demos kratia, the people rule. Freedom of speech is vital to the ability of people to actually rule via voting. Of course, this doesn't immediately extend to the right to wear religiously mandated clothing/symbols/etc. in school. But in a broader sense, the values necessary to make democracy flourish do require broad liberty rights for each citizen.

The denial of a right to all citizens does not make it OK, although it might make it more tolerable to Muslims if Christians are also prohibited from wearing the clothing in school that their religion dictates them to wear. But then, to my knowledge, few if any Christian sects get burned by such a rule, because they do not have any special religiously mandated dress code. And somehow, I doubt that the happy compatibility of mainstream Christian religious requirements and the rules of "secular" French schools is 100% coincidental.

There are plenty of institutional arrangements that are optional, that have multiple democratic solutions. This isn't one of them. There are institutional features, like money in politics, that France manages more democratically than the US. This isn't one of them.

 

[cgannon64]

The cornerstone of democracy is relativism.

 

[amadeus]

A sound economy; it seems like poor countries tend to do poor jobs with democracy.

 

[bhsup]

An armed citizenry is the cornerstone of any free society, whether you call it a democracy or more properly a republic (as a true democracy would mean everyone voted on everything directly).

 

[Drewcifer]

The cornerstone of democracy is having a military that swears it's allegiance to the institutions of a popularly elected government rather than the individuals who hold the power currently. This is the thing that seperates democratic nations from popular regimes.

Think about it. As Mao said power resides in the barrel of the gun. It is still true today. Bonapartism had it's moment in the west. That time is past. In modern democracies militaries pledge their allegience to the institutions that govern countries rather than the individuals that govern countries.

To use the US as an example the military oath is to the constitution rather than the President. It is an oath that everybody in the military takes seriously. As a result the President at their worst could never be more than a temporary autocrat. If they tried to launch a Presidential coup a la Fujimori they would find the mechanisms of power to be non-cooperative.

Edit: a friend of mine was a minor officer in the Brazilian military when Brazil was in the process of abandoning the old style and becomming a full democracy. This was how he described the change in the Brazilian military mentality in embracing democracy. I think it works as a basic necessary mentality needed for the beginning of real democracy anywhere.

 

[Stylesjl]

An armed citizenry is the cornerstone of any free society, whether you call it a democracy or more properly a republic (as a true democracy would mean everyone voted on everything directly).

So places like Britian, France, and Austrailia are not real democracies?

 

[Erik Mesoy]

An informed, caring, debating populace. (TV is destroying all three.)

 

[bhsup]

So places like Britian, France, and Austrailia are not real democracies?

I didn't say that, I just said the cornerstone of one is an armed citizenry. Any nation without that is more at risk of losing its freedom.

But then again there is no real and true democracy in the world if you want to be really technical (hey, I get blasted for calling the USSR communist ).

 

[IglooDame]

For me I do not think that freedom of speech is the cornerstone of a democracy for the simple reason that I have yet to see a country truly having freedom of speech. There is always some form of censorship. Freedom of speech is essential but people need to realize it's an ideal that will never be truly upheld.

To me, the cornerstone of a democracy is when the people has the power to change the bodies in charge of the executive, legislative and judiciary branches.

This is a broader definition than Steph, I believe (not meaning that's it's better, of course )
And the difficult part of a democracy is to find a compromise between the whimsical desires of the people and the need for stability at the heads of the branches in order to have some kind of efficiency.

I'm broadly in agreement with this, but the people having the power to change the bodies without a basic level of free speech/free press is a bit like the right to own firearms while ammunition is banned. People having the power to change the bodies in a systemic organized way having a full awareness of current events and the candidate positions, is how I'd amend your democracy cornerstone definition. And despite various countries chipping at free speech and free press in their own special ways, I'd still label the US, France, UK, and Australia democracies at this point.