UNIVERSITY OF GUJRAT

ASSIGNMENT NO. 1

CAN PEOPLE ALWAYS RULE IN DEMOCRACY?

DEPARTMENT: COMPUTER SCIENCES. SUBJECT: PAKISTAN STUDIES. SUBMITTED TO: MISS KALSOOM FATIMA. SUBMITTED BY:
HASSAN AKHTAR (10070619-030) KASHAN ALI (10070619-071) ALI FAISAL (10070619-078) MARYAM ASHRAF (10070619-011) HINA AKRAM (10070619-008) JAWAHER KHALID (10070619-013)

AMIR MUSHTAQ (10070619-031)

SECTION: D. DATE OF SUBMISSION. 22/05/2011.

CAN PEOPLE ALWAYS RULE IN DEMOCRACY?

What is Democracy?
Democracy:
A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any other form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is comunistic-negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate. whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism license, agitation, discontent, anarchy. Democracy is the "direct" rule of the people and has been repeatedly tried without success. A certain Professor Alexander Fraser Tytler, nearly two centuries ago, had this to say about Democracy: " A Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of Government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote

themselves largess out of public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that Democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a Dictatorship." A democracy is majority rule and is destructive of liberty because there is no law to prevent the majority from trampling on individual rights. Whatever the majority says goes! A lynch mob is an example of pure democracy in action. There is only one dissenting vote, and that is cast by the person at the end of the rope.

Republic:
Authority is derived through the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward property is respect for laws and individual rights, and a sensible economic procedure. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment, and progress.

Is the "standard form" of government throughout the world. A republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of: 1. an executive and 2. a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create 3. a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize 4. certain inherent individual rights. Take away any one or more of those four elements and you are drifting into autocracy. Add one or more to those four elements and you are drifting into democracy. Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They "made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic."

A republic is a government of law under a Constitution. The Constitution holds the government in check and prevents the majority (acting through their government) from violating the rights of the individual. Under this system of government a lynch mob is illegal. The suspected criminal cannot be denied his right to a fair trial even if a majority of the citizenry demands otherwise.

Difference between Democracy and Republic, in brief:

Democracy: a: government by the people; Republic a: a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who modern times is usually a

especially : rule of the majority.

b: a government in which the in

supreme power is vested in the president : a political unit (as a people directly and or exercised indirectly by them nation) having such a form of a government.

through

system of representation usually b: a government in which supreme involving elections. Attitude toward law is that the will of responsible to them and governing the majority shall regulate, whether according to law. it be based upon deliberation or periodically held free power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives

governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences

Democracy and Republic are often taken as one of the same thing, but there is a fundamental difference. Whilst in both cases the government is elected by the people, in Democracy the majority rules according to their whims, whilst in the Republic the Government rule according to law. This law is framed in the Constitution to limit the power of Government and ensuring some rights and protection to Minorities and individuals.

The difference between Republic and Righteous Republic is that in the Republic the Government rules according to the law set up by men, in the Righteous Republic the law is the Law of God. Only in the Righteous Republic it can truly be said "One nation under God" for it is governed under commandments of the only One True God and there is no pluralism of religions.

Democracy consists of four basic elements:

I want to begin with an overview of what democracy is. We can think of democracy as a system of government with four key elements:

1. A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections. 2. The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life. 3. Protection of the human rights of all citizens. 4. A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens. I want to talk about each of these four elements of what democracy is. Then I will talk about the obligations and requirements of citizens in a democracy.

The highest measure of democracy is neither the 'extent of freedom' nor the 'extent of equality', but rather the highest measure of participation. A. d. Benoist Then I will conclude by talking about the obligations that we, the international community, have to the people of Iraq as you seek to build the first true democracy in the Arab world.

I. Democracy as a Political System of Competition for Power

Democracy is a means for the people to choose their leaders and to hold their leaders accountable for their policies and their conduct in office.

The people decide who will represent them in parliament, and who will head the government at the national and local levels. They do so by choosing between competing parties in regular, free and fair elections. Government is based on the consent of the governed. In a democracy, the people are sovereignthey are the highest form of political authority. Power flows from the people to the leaders of government, who hold power only temporarily. Laws and policies require majority support in parliament, but the rights of minorities are protected in various ways. Democracy is not something you believe in or a place to hang your hat, but it's something you do. You participate. If you stop doing it, democracy crumbles. AbbieHoffman

The people are free to criticize their elected leaders and representatives, and to observe how they conduct the business of government. Elected representatives at the national and local levels should listen to the people and respond to their needs and suggestions.

Elections have to occur at regular intervals, as prescribed by law. Those in power cannot extend their terms in office without asking for the consent of the people again in an election. For elections to be free and fair, they have to be administered by a neutral, fair, and professional body that treats all political parties and candidates equally. All parties and candidates must have the right to campaign freely, to present their proposals to the voters both directly and through the mass media. Voters must be able to vote in secret, free of intimidation and violence. Independent observers must be able to observe the voting and the vote counting to ensure that the process is free of corruption, intimidation, and fraud. There needs to be some impartial and independent tribunal to resolve any disputes about the election results. This is why it takes a lot of time to organize a good, democratic election.

Any country can hold an election, but for an election to be free and fair requires a lot of organization, preparation, and training of political parties, electoral officials, and civil society organizations who monitor the process.

II. Participation: The Role of the Citizen in A Democracy

The key role of citizens in a democracy is to participate in public life. Citizens have an obligation to become informed about public issues, to watch carefully how their political leaders and representatives use their powers, and to express their own opinions and interests. Voting in elections is another important civic duty of all citizens. A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the publictreasury. Alexander Tytler

But to vote wisely, each citizen should listen to the views of the different parties and candidates, and then make his or her own decision on whom to support. Participation can also involve campaigning for a political party or candidate, standing as a candidate for political office, debating public issues, attending community meetings, petitioning the government, and even protesting.

A vital form of participation comes through active membership in independent, non-governmental organizations, what we call civil society. These organizations represent a variety of interests and beliefs: farmers, workers, doctors, teachers, business owners, religious believers, women, students, human rights activists. It is important that women participate fully both in politics and in civil society. This requires efforts by civil society organizations to educate women about their democratic rights and responsibilities, improve their political skills, represent their common interests, and involve them in political life. In a democracy, participation in civic groups should be voluntary. No one should be forced to join an organization against their will. Political parties are vital organizations in a democracy, and democracy is stronger when citizens become active members of political parties. However, no one should support a political party because he is pressured or threatened by others. In a democracy, citizens are free to choose which party to support.

Democracy depends on citizen participation in all these ways.

But

participation must be peaceful, respectful of the law, and tolerant of the different views of other groups and individuals.

III. The Rights of Citizens in a Democracy

In a democracy, every citizen has certain basic rights that the state cannot take away from them. These rights are guaranteed under international law. You have the right to have your own beliefs, and to say and write what you think. No one can tell you what you must think, believe, and say or not say.

There is freedom of religion. Everyone is free to choose their own religion and to worship and practice their religion as they see fit. Every individual has the right to enjoy their own culture, along with other members of their group, even if their group is a minority.

Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people. Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)

There is freedom and pluralism in the mass media. Freedom is when the people can speak, democracy is when the government listens. Alastair Farrugia You can choose between different sources of news and opinion to read in the newspapers, to hear on the radio, and to watch on television. You have the right to associate with other people, and to form and join organizations of your own choice, including trade unions. You are free to move about the country, and if you wish, to leave the country. You have the right to assemble freely, and to protest government actions. However, everyone has an obligation to exercise these rights peacefully, with respect for the law and for the rights of others.

Elections belong to the people. It is their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters. Abraham Lincoln

IV. The Rule of Law

Democracy is a system of rule by laws, not by individuals.

Laws, like houses, lean on one another. Edmund Burke In a democracy, the rule of law protects the rights of citizens, maintains order, and limits the power of government. All citizens are equal under the law. No one may be discriminated against on the basis of their race, religion, ethnic group, or gender. No one may be arrested, imprisoned, or exiled arbitrarily. If you are detained, you have the right to know the charges against you, and to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the law. Anyone charged with a crime has the right to a fair, speedy, and public trial by an impartial court. No one may be taxed or prosecuted except by a law established in advance. No one is above the law, not even a king or an elected president. The law is fairly, impartially, and consistently enforced, by courts that are independent of the other branches of government. Torture and cruel and inhumane treatment are absolutely forbidden.

The rule of law places limits on the power of government. No government official may violate these limits. No ruler, minister, or political party can tell a judge how to decide a case. Office holders cannot use their power to enrich themselves. Independent courts and commissions punish corruption, no matter who is guilty.

V. The Limits and Requirements for Democracy

If democracy is to work, citizens must not only participate and exercise their rights. They must also observe certain principles and rules of democratic conduct. People must respect the law and reject violence. Nothing ever justifies using violence against your political opponents, just because you disagree with them. Every citizen must respect the rights of his or her fellow citizens, and their dignity as human beings. No one should denounce a political opponent as evil and illegitimate, just because they have different views.

People should question the decisions of the government, but not reject the governments authority. A democrat need not believe that the majority will always reach a wise decision. He should however believe in the necessity of accepting the decision of the majority, be it wise or unwise, until such a time that the majority reaches another decision. Bertrand Russell Every group has the right to practice its culture and to have some control over its own affairs, but each group should accept that it is a part of a democratic state. When you express your opinions, you should also listen to the views of other people, even people you disagree with. Everyone has a right to be heard. Dont be so convinced of the rightness of your views that you refuse to see any merit in another position. view. When you make demands, you should understand that in a democracy, it is impossible for everyone to achieve everything they want. Consider different interests and points of

Democracy requires compromise. Groups with different interests and opinions must be willing to sit down with one another and negotiate. In a democracy, one group does not always win everything it wants. Different combinations of groups win on different issues. Over time, everyone wins something. If one group is always excluded and fails to be heard, it may turn against democracy in anger and frustration. Everyone who is willing to participate peacefully and respect the rights of others should have some say in the way the country is governed.

VI. What the International Community Owes *PAKISTANI* Democracy

Today, Pakistan is neither sovereign nor independent. It is a rentier state, an American lackey, ill-led, ill-governed by a corrupt, power-hungry junta supported by Washington. Everyone is criticising democracy and corrupt politicians. From the media to those who are part of the so-called corrupt government and people in the opposition, everyone wants sincere military generals to save the country from the corrupt politicians.

I have heard some people argue that the people of Pakistan are not ready for democracy and only a dictator can handle this mob of illiterate and unorganised people. I agree with the MQM, Imran Khan and Pir Sahib Pagaro. The present government is corrupt. It is not following democratic norms. Governance is not visible. Prices are rising by the day. Thousands daily circulate messages criticising the present government. And as critics rile against the setup, I start praying for another general who would safeguard Pakistan. Yet, I have to ask myself, even if the politicians are corrupt, how much of the countrys finances are they managing? President Asif Ali Zardari and company only control 25 per cent of the countrys finances. The remaining 75 per cent is with the military. The bloody civilians might be corrupt, but they at least deserve to be given their five years before we start the accountability. We also look at Western democracies as case studies. But interestingly, we dont study their histories. Democracy in the West became strong through an evolutionary process. Our bloody civilians have yet to learn. If we want to progress we will have to be patient. Nations are not made in hours and neither can democracy be strengthened and purified through military coups.

So just before I fall asleep, I decide to support the bloody civilians and their corrupt government. I might not be able to see Pakistan as a strong nation while these corrupt people lead, but I am sure, 40 years from now, my children will see it. PPP, PML and ANP might not be ideally democratic, but they are part of a system that is going through evolution. As a case in point, my mother did not let me buy clothes for myself while I lived at home. Since moving to Karachi, I have started shopping for myself. She scolds me for paying too much for what she calls bad quality clothes. I argue that she never gave me a chance to learn.

HISTORY OF DEMOCRACY
Ancient origins
The term democracy first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought. The philosopher Plato contrasted democracy, the system of "rule by the governed", with the alternative systems of monarchy (rule by one individual), oligarchy (rule by a small lite class) and timocracy (ruling class of property owners). Today Classical Athenian democracy is considered by many to have been a direct democracy. Originally it had two distinguishing features: first the allotment (selection by lot) of ordinary

citizens to the few government offices and the courts, and secondarily the assembly of all the citizens. All citizens were eligible to speak and vote in the assembly, which set the laws of the city-state. However, Athenian citizens were all-male, born from parents who were born in Athens, and excluded women, slaves, foreigners ( / metoikoi) and males under 20 years old. Of the perhaps 250,000 inhabitants only a small plurality were citizens. The (elected) generals often held influence in the assembly. Pericles was, during his many years of defacto political leadership, once elected general 15 years in a row. A possible example of primitive democracy may have been the early Sumerian city-states. A similar proto-democracy or oligarchy existed temporarily among the Medes (ancient Iranian people) in the 6th century BC, but which came to an end after the Achaemenid (Persian) Emperor Darius the Great declared that the best monarchy was better than the best oligarchy or best democracy. Although the term "democracy" is not often used for civilizations outside of Europe in ancient times there were organizations of government very akin to democracy in some African societiessuch as the Igbo nation of what is now Nigeria. A serious claim for early democratic institutions comes from the independent "republics" of India, sanghas and ganas, which existed as

early as the 6th century BC and persisted in some areas until the 4th century AD. The evidence is scattered and no pure historical source exists for that period. In addition, Diodorus (a Greek historian at the time of Alexander the Great's excursion of India), without offering any detail, mentions that independent and democratic states existed in India. However, modern scholars note that the word democracy at the 3rd century BC and later had been degraded and could mean any autonomous state no matter how oligarchic it was. The lack of the concept of citizen equality across caste system boundaries has led many scholars to believe that the true nature of ganas and sanghas would not be comparable to that of truly democratic institutions. Even though the Roman Republic contributed significantly to certain aspects of democracy, only a minority of Romans were citizens with votes in elections for representatives. The votes of the powerful were given more weight through a system of Gerrymandering, so most high officials, including members of the Senate, came from a few wealthy and noble families. However, many notable exceptions did occur.

Middle Ages
During the Middle Ages, there were various systems involving elections or assemblies, although often only involving a small amount of the population, the election of Gopala in Bengal, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the

Althing in Iceland, the Lgting in the Faroe Islands, certain medieval Italian city-states such as Venice, the tuatha system in early medieval Ireland, the Veche in Novgorod and Pskov Republics of medieval Russia, Scandinavian Things, The States in Tirol and Switzerland and the autonomous merchant city of Sakai in the 16th century in Japan. However, participation was often restricted to a minority, and so may be better classified as oligarchy. Most regions in medieval Europe were ruled by clergy or feudal lords. The Kouroukan Fouga or Kurukan Fuga is purported to be the constitution of the Mali Empire (mid-thirteenth century to c. 1645 CE), created after the Battle of Krina by an assembly of notables to create a government for the newly established empire. It was first alluded to in print in Djibril Tamsir Niane's book, Soundjata, ou la Epoupe Mandingue. The Kouroukan Fouga divided the new empire into ruling clans (lineages) that were represented at a great assembly called the Gbara. However, the charter made Mali more similar to a constitutional monarchy than a democratic republic. A little closer to modern democracy were the Cossack republics of Ukraine in the 16th17th centuries: Cossack Hetmanate and Zaporizhian Sich. The highest post the Hetman was elected by the representatives from the country's districts. Because these states were very militarised, the right to participate in Hetman's elections was largely restricted to those who served

in the Cossack Army and over time was curtailed effectively limiting these rights to higher army ranks.

The Parliament of England had its roots in the restrictions on the power of kings written into Magna Carta, explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects, whether free or fettered and implicitly supported what became English writ of habeas corpus, safeguarding individual freedom against unlawful imprisonment with right to appeal. The first elected parliament was De Montfort's Parliament in England in 1265. However only a small minority actually had a voice; Parliament was elected by only a few percent of the population, (less than 3% as late as 1780), and the power to call parliament was at the pleasure of the monarch (usually when he or she needed funds). The power of Parliament increased in stages over the succeeding centuries. After the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the English Bill of Rights of 1689 was enacted, which codified certain rights and increased the influence of Parliament. The franchise was slowly increased and Parliament gradually gained more power until the monarch became largely a figurehead. As the franchise was increased, it also was made more uniform, as many so-called rotten boroughs, with a handful of voters electing a Member of Parliament, were eliminated in the Reform Act of 1832.

Democracy was also seen to a certain extent in bands and tribes such as the Iroquois Confederacy. However, in the Iroquois Confederacy only the males of certain clans could be leaders and some clans were excluded. Only the oldest females from the same clans could choose and remove the leaders. This excluded most of the population. An interesting detail is that there should be consensus among the leaders, not majority support decided by voting, when making decisions. Band societies, such as the Bushmen, which usually number 20-50 people in the band often do not have leaders and make decisions based on consensus among the majority. In Melanesia, farming village communities have traditionally been egalitarian and lacking in a rigid, authoritarian hierarchy. Although a "Big man" or "Big woman" could gain influence, that influence was conditional on a continued demonstration of leadership skills, and on the willingness of the community. Every person was expected to share in communal duties, and entitled to participate in communal decisions. However, strong social pressure encouraged conformity and discouraged individualism.
18th and 19th centuries

Number of nations 18002003 scoring 8 or higher on Polity IV scale, another widely used measure of democracy. Although not described as a democracy by the founding fathers, the United States founders shared a determination to root the American experiment in the principle of natural freedom and equality
.

The United States

Constitution, adopted in 1788, provided for an elected government and protected civil rights and liberties for some. In the colonial period before 1776, and for some time after, only adult white male property owners could vote; enslaved Africans, free black people and women were not extended the franchise. On the American frontier, democracy became a way of life, with widespread social, economic and political equality.[ However, slavery was a social and economic institution, particularly in eleven states in the American South, that a variety of organizations were established advocating the movement of black people

from the United States to locations where they would enjoy greater freedom and equality. During the 1820s and 1830s the American Colonization Society (A.C.S.) was the primary vehicle for proposals to return black Americans to freedom in Africa, and in 1821 the A.C.S. established the colony of Liberia, assisting thousands of former African-American slaves and free black people to move there from the United States.By the 1840s almost all property restrictions were ended and nearly all white adult male citizens could vote; and turnout averaged 6080% in frequent elections for local, state and national officials. The system gradually evolved, from Jeffersonian Democracy to Jacksonian Democracy and beyond. In the 1860 United States Census the slave population in the United States had grown to four million, and in Reconstruction after the Civil War (late 1860s) the newly freed slaves became citizens with (in the case of men) a nominal right to vote. Full enfranchisement of citizens was not secured until after the African-American Civil Rights Movement (19551968) gained passage by the United States Congress of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The establishment of universal male suffrage in France in 1848 was an important milestone in the history of democracy. In 1789, Revolutionary France adopted the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and, although short-lived, the National Convention was elected by all males in 1792. Universal male suffrage was definitely established in France in March 1848 in the wake of the French Revolution of 1848. In 1848, several revolutions broke out in Europe as rulers were confronted with popular demands for liberal constitutions and more democratic government. The Australian colonies became democratic during the mid-19th century, with South Australia being the first government in the world to introduce women's suffrage in 1861. (It was argued that as women would vote the same as their husbands, this essentially gave married men two votes, which was not unreasonable.)

New Zealand granted suffrage to (native) M ori men in 1867, white men in 1879, and women in 1893, thus becoming the first major nation to achieve universal suffrage. However, women were not eligible to stand for parliament until 1919. Liberal democracies were few and often short-lived before the late 19th century, and various nations and territories have also claimed to be the first with universal suffrage.

20th and 21st centuries

20th century transitions to liberal democracy have come in successive "waves of democracy," variously resulting from wars, revolutions,

decolonization, religious and economic circumstances. World War I and the dissolution of the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires resulted in the creation of new nation-states from Europe, most of them at least nominally democratic. In the 1920s democracy flourished, but the Great Depression brought disenchantment, and most of the countries of Europe, Latin America, and Asia turned to strong-man rule or dictatorships. Fascism and dictatorships flourished in Nazi Germany, Italy, Spain and Portugal, as well as nondemocratic regimes in the Baltics, the Balkans, Brazil, Cuba, China, and Japan, among others.

World War II brought a definitive reversal of this trend in western Europe. The successful democratization of the American, British, and French sectors of occupied Germany (disputed]), Austria, Italy, and the occupied Japan served as a model for the later theory of regime change. However, most of Eastern Europe, including the Soviet sector of Germany was forced into the non-democratic Soviet bloc. The war was followed by decolonization, and again most of the new independent states had nominally democratic constitutions. India emerged as the world's largest democracy and continues to be so. By 1960, the vast majority of country-states were nominally democracies, although the majority of the world's populations lived in nations that experienced sham elections, and other forms of subterfuge (particularly in Communist nations and the former colonies.)

This graph shows Freedom House's evaluation of the number of nations in the different categories given above for the period for which there are surveys, 19722005

A subsequent wave of democratization brought substantial gains toward true liberal democracy for many nations. Spain, Portugal (1974), and several of the military dictatorships in South America returned to civilian rule in the late 1970s and early 1980s (Argentina in 1983, Bolivia, Uruguay in 1984, Brazil in 1985, and Chile in the early 1990s). This was followed by nations in East and South Asia by the mid-to-late 1980s. Economic malaise in the 1980s, along with resentment of communist oppression, contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the associated end of the Cold War, and the democratization and liberalization of the former Eastern bloc countries. The most successful of the new democracies were those geographically and culturally closest to western Europe, and they are now members or candidate members of the European Union. Some researchers consider that in contemporary Russia there is no real democracy and one of forms of dictatorship takes place. spread to some nations in Africa in the 1990s, most prominently in South Africa. Some recent examples of attempts of liberalization include the Indonesian Revolution of 1998, the Bulldozer Revolution in Yugoslavia, the Rose Revolution in Georgia, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon, the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan, and the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia.

According to Freedom House, in 2007 there were 123 electoral democracies (up from 40 in 1972). According to World Forum on Democracy, electoral democracies now represent 120 of the 192 existing countries and constitute 58.2 percent of the world's population. At the same time liberal democracies i.e. countries Freedom House regards as free and respectful of basic human rights and the rule of law are 85 in number and represent 38 percent of the global population. As such, it has been speculated that this trend may continue in the future to the point where liberal democratic nation-states become the universal standard form of human society. This prediction forms the core of Francis Fukayama's "End of History" controversial theory. These theories are criticized by those who fear an evolution of liberal democracies to postdemocracy, and others who point out the high number of illiberal democracies.

CONCLUSION.
Now I will like to conclude by saying that a fundamental principle of the democratic form of constitution is libertythat is what is usually asserted, implying that only under this constitution do men participate in liberty, for

they assert this as the aim of every democracy. But one factor of liberty is to govern and be governed in turn; for the popular principle of justice is to have equality according to number, not worth, and if this is the principle of justice prevailing, the multitude must of necessity be sovereign and the decision of the majority must be final and must constitute justice, for they say that each of the citizens ought to have an equal share; so that it results that in democracies the poor are more powerful than the rich, because there are more of them and whatever is decided by the majority is sovereign. This then is one mark of liberty which all democrats set down as a principle of the constitution. And one is for a man to live as he likes; for they say that this is the function of liberty, inasmuch as to live not as one likes is the life of a man that is a slave. This is the second principle of democracy, and from it has come the claim not to be governed, preferably not by anybody, or failing that, to govern and be governed in turns; and this is the way in which the second principle contributes to equalitarian liberty ____________________________________________________________