How democratic is the British government?

Résumé du document

In fact, we could set a few provisional requirements to the evaluation of a government as democratic in order to analyze the British particular case. These requirements would be of different natures, and would be related first to the institutional system, then to the society itself. Indeed, the legal frame should be the one of a representative system, in which the different powers would be separate and independent, and in which free elections open to the society with a diversity of candidates could be celebrated. On the social scale, there should be a civil society, autonomous and active, a civil control of the national and local security forces and independent media towards the political power and the economic and pressure groups. These characteristics can be modified throughout this essay, as its purpose is to consider whether the British government is democratic in the light of a non static definition of democracy in today's political world. In order to do so, it will first be examined that the tradition of government in the United Kingdom was not built on democracy, but rather on Parliamentary and Liberalism aspects.

Extraits

[...] Bibliography - Judge, D (2004), “Whatever Happened to Parliamentary Democracy in the Parliamentary Affairs 57 - Rosenberg, D (2007), “Re-Thinking Democratic Deliberation”, Polity 39 - Byrne, I and Weir, S (2004), “Democratic Audit: Executive Democracy in War and Peace”, Parliamentary Affairs 57 - Hurst, P (1990), “Representative Democracy and its Limits”, Polity - Hall, P (1999), “Social Capital in Britain”, British Journal of Political Science 29 D. Judge, (2004), Whatever Happened to Parliamentary Democracy in the UK? Parliamentary Affairs 57 Cited by Judge in D. Judge, (2004), Whatever Happened to Parliamentary Democracy in the UK? [...]

[...] The first assumption is that it is inevitable for the British government to become more democratic, the second is that the current system is accurate and does not need to become more democratic. In practice, both answers join. To begin with, the globalisation has been responsible of major shifts in politics and policy in the world. In the British case, it is represented by a certain loss of responsibility by the government, to the hands of non state actors on the international sphere. Indeed, states in general have been fragile by the exponential growth of influential groups. But how can this evolution be a step towards more democracy? [...]

[...] Another remark could be the one regarding the two party systems, which leaves very little space to the plurality of political opinions. Indeed, the two parties ruling the political sphere in the United Kingdom share a very similar vision of society and politics, and therefore offer an almost inexistent choice for electors. There is no doubt that the British government lacks a certain degree of democracy. However, is this suitable system for this particular state? How could the United Kingdom become more democratic without confusing its institutions, its tradition and its people? III. Is an evolution towards democracy necessary? [...]

[...] Another condition to democracy could be found in The Spirit of the Laws, published in 1748 by Montesquieu. In this treaty on political and constitutional theory, he develops a typology of regimes, including Republic, Monarchy and Despotism. Although the two notions of democracy and republic are not equivalent, and although Montesquieu could not really be characterized as a democrat, in a sense that he was more favourable to an aristocratic government, his vision of the separation of the three powers, the executive, the legislative and the judicial, is now a characteristic of modern democracies. [...]

[...] To conclude, it seems clear that the British government does not fulfil all the characteristics of a democratic government. However, its practice of politics seems to actually practice policy-making in a more democratic way than it could have or had in the past. Therefore, what would be the need to evolve through a more formal kind of democracy? What is more, is a more radical form of democracy really suitable for any government? Is it the majority dictatorship? Can the majority be wrong? [...]