10 Direct Democracy vs Representative Democracy

Direct Democracy vs Representative Democracy

Athens vs. Alberta

The Athenian democracy evolved over several decades. There was no single event that set it off and it certainly did not involve any referendums. During the 450's several constitutional changes had an impact on its final formation. In 457/6 chief magistracy was extended to another class of citizens. At the same time the importance of the chief magistrate (archon) was receding in front of the significance of the generals (strategoi). The generals were ten and could hold their post for years. Secondly, in 453/2 thirty travelling justices could decide on minor lawsuits. In 451 Perikles, the famous Athenian politician, put forward a law that limited Athenian citizenship to men who were born of an Athenian mother as well as an Athenian father. The reason was that the number of citizens was increasing fast. The development of Athens as a hub of economic and political activity attracted many foreigners. These moves may have caused the consternation of the true Athenians who came from old and distinguished families. The law was enforced in 445 when Psammetichus (an Egyptian ruler) sent a gift of grain to Athens to be distributed to its citizens. A check of the Athenian records indicated that 10% of the citizen population were wrongly registered and they were immediately excluded from the distribution of grain.

During the fifth century BC only Athenian males over 18 years of age and of Athenian descent owned land within the territory of the city. These could vote, they could participate in the government, while they joined the army. Foreigners (metics) could be awarded citizenship in exceptional circumstances for their services to the city. In Athens resided also large numbers of slaves, who did not have a right to citizenship. We do not have any information about their overall number but we do know that 20,000 of the slaves who worked in the mines of Lavrion deserted their post, when the Spartans entered Attica in 413 BC. (Thucydides, 27.5). Women and children were also excluded from voting. But how did the Direct Democracy system work in practice? A Council of Five Hundred citizens prepared the decrees. These were voted by the Assembly, the gathering of all Athenian citizens. There were no political parties, no Labour and no Torys. The Assembly met four times a year, while the Council met daily; apart from the major religious holidays (and there were a LOT of them!) The Council publicised the agenda in advance of the meeting of the Assembly. Decisions were not taken instantly and sometimes the process could last for days. Unsurprisingly not all of the citizens attended the Assembly. The space was restricted and so was personal availability. In order to make things more efficient, citizens divided the state’s work in small boards of ten. None could be appointed in the same board in the future. For the system to work, all citizens should have held some post during their lifetimes. The citizens who did not participate in government or, in fact, voted regularly were considered idiotes (meaning privates/ and idiots).

Evidently, the Athenians understood very well that in order for Direct Democracy to work they needed two essential elements. The first one was the existence of a large ruling body with executive powers. They preferred to rely on the judgement of a number of generals, instead of an individual archon. And this is why they provided a small salary to thirty traveling judges who would give their judgement across the Athenian territory (a territory that probably was no bigger than London, if we exclude the colonies). And this is why they elected a council of 500 citizens that would oversee the agenda on a daily basis. It looks as if all of the above bodies would supervise the everyday issues as they arose. Secondly, they understood that Direct Democracy cannot exist without the participation of a vast numbers of citizens. At the height of Athenian power, the citizen body did not exceed a few hundred thousand citizens. All of them were expected to take active part in the decisions of the state. The issues were probably not as complicated as they are today, so the average citizen could provide an educated opinion on the issues at hand. Even if not all of them were present simultaneously at the quarterly assembly, the vast majority of them would have been there at one point or another. Otherwise, they would have been shamed into doing so.

Pros

Cons

Practice

DirectDemocracy

Representative Democracy

Choosing representatives using a lottery

Choosing representatives by nominating

Making decisions based on how someone speaks

There aremany waysa democracycan bepracticed.Most havetheir pros & cons.Fill in the chart totell about them

There are many ways that democracy can be practiced. Complete the pros and cons Matching activity to review each

Cons

Pros