When asked how in the real world I distinguish a democratic from a nondemocratic state, I answer with a single question: who is the leader of the opposition? For without a political opposition, and the commotion it produces, no state that calls itself democratic deserves the name. I mean by this commotion, of course, not the turbulence engineered by violence, whether spontaneous or directed, but the gentler yet easily visible agitation brought about by the normal activities of constitutionally sanctioned and articulate opposition parties.
Historically, men have generally identified democracy with the notion that the people shall rule—either directly or through representatives chosen and ...
Print + Online
Already a subscriber? Log in: