Liberal Democracy vs Social Democracy Essay

AbstractThe probe to follow will discuss what is meant by unsubtle state. The terminus will be delimit and march on discussed. In addition, it will be billeted with that of a collectivized country. This democratic ashes will be defined in policy-making basis with reference to valid examples as too will liberal state.The side by side(p) essay is based on a contrast amid liberal and heartyist democracy from a political perspective. An analysis of the terms, concepts and the question will then follow. In addition, reference will be make to current examples such as that of the USA, corking Britain, and Chile as evidence for each type of democracy that is being examined. Furthermore, key issues that will be discussed in this paper consist of democracy as a whole, negative and positive emancipation within a liberal democracy, and the failure of collectivism in the tertiary solid ground. Furthermore this essay will prove that Sweden is non a collectivized democracy.In order to contrast liberal and socialist democracy ane must first hold an under(a)standing of what each term means. In order to go about understanding these terms, it is important to first understand what democracy. In uncomplicated terms, democracy tin can be defined as the rule of the throng. A democracy is about the the great unwashed who come together to decide on laws. And according to Abraham Lincolns Gettysburg Address of 1863, democracy associate controlment to the people as he stated that democracy is a goernment of the people, by the people, and for the people (Heywood, 2014). Universal suffrage plays a character in deciding these laws. This term is understood as the right of al most(prenominal) tout ensemble adults to ballot in political elections. Depending on the country, there ar different requirements which confound to be fulfilled. In the Philippines, citizens know to be at least(prenominal) eighteen years of age, and ache to have resided in the Phili ppines for at least one year and in the region wherein they wish to vote, for at least six months prior to the election (Castillo, 2011).There is not always collective decision-making within every democracy. Zimbabwe for one claims to be a democracy based on the will of the peoplewith a leader who claims to a monopoly of ideological wisdom but there isnt collective decision making. Whereas it really is a undemocratic democracy in which there is absolute dictatorship that pretends to be a democracy. Also here, which is a commonwealth version of democracy, where you elect representatives to make decisions on your behalf.The scope of a democracy defines what should fall under the sovereignty of life, and divides the liberals from the socialists. Heywood (2013) states that liberalism is the ideology of the industrialized West. By this Heywood means that liberalism is a classical ideology that supports social increase and the changing of laws through reform rather than through a rev olution. The individual is the primary focus of liberalism, not of revolution. Consequently we can understand liberal democracy as a modern form of brass section that denies that popular rule is the ultimate political rule. Leaders are elected by the collective to govern the entity on behalf of the community. In South Africa not all leaders declare voted for by the collective referable to the fact that there are provisional elections that are only open to those citizens residing in that province, such as you could not vote in Cape Town if you live in Gauteng. But you lead to vote for an overall party during the elections based on the rule of the law and therefore the election is free and light (Yufo, 2008).Great Britain is an example of a state which has a liberal democracy even though it is overly a monarchy (Evolution News, 2014). It is considered a laissez-faire liberalism in that the Government are free to do as they choose for up to 5 years sooner the next free and fair de mocratic election The British declaration political settlement of 1688 is evidence that Great Britain became the first liberal state in 1614. other liberal democratic state is the United States of America according to the American Declaration of Independence of 1776 as freedoms such as that of thought, speech, association and religion are all basic liberties that take priority over popular rule (Gutmann, 1993). Liberal freedom within this democracy is a characteristic of negative freedom as individuals are equally free and nourished from collective decisions. Negative freedom has no outside(a) constraints on the individual or the collective due to the freedomsavailable to them and the fact that there is no halt in decision-making and a lack of forces which prevent individuals from doing as they please.Although in South Africa, governance has implemented the seclusion Bill. This bill is somewhat a farewell to democracy, as the freedom of speech is no all-night a right, as bot h(prenominal) citizens and the media have been censored by government. The purpose of the secrecy bill is to protect state information (SABC, 2013) and many people would argue that this silencing is due to the self-interest of politicians that are involved in activities such as corruption. Laws such as this contradict democratic freedoms such as that of speech. Positive freedom can be defined as having some control over your decisions. This is an autonomous state which gives you as the individual an education for example in order for you to reach your full potential. The government in any case provides grants and subsidies to instigate individuals in achieving this potential. The formation of free and compulsory education, customary health systems limit the freedom of the capitalists to exploit workers, but give worker the opportunity to develop as homosexual beings. Positive freedom has been built up due to the struggle of the working class which in which the legislation limite d the hours of work per day, per person and abolished pincer labor ( bolshy, 2014). In the words of J.S Mill the only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own erect in our own way and this is exactly what Liberal democracy aims at achieving as American and Great Britain citizens have individual and property rights which are both a principle of classical liberalism (Heywood, 2014, p32).Socialist democracy in essence is a modern version of communism. All these notions were integrated but there are small distinctions between them. Social democracy takes some of its principles from socialism such as free opening move and the focus on societal framework. Whereas capitalism, private enterprise and maximization of life opportunities are more democracy than socialism. In surmisal South Africa is an example of democracy as the constitution states that RDP housing is provided by government (Rabbani, 1994), due to the fact that government provide grants and education in order to correct the ills of Apartheid. Socialism, by definition, is a systemmarked by the common ownership of the means of production (Legon, 2013).Having said so, we can precisely understand it is a democracy that uses socialist reforms in their referendum. It is pivotal to make this distinction between socialism and socialist democracy as they are not the same concept and often the two terms are confused. A social democracy is a government that uses democratic process but also consists of characteristics that resemble those of a socialist society as mentioned in the above. Social democrats popularly are committed to acting for the common good. In a government that is a social democracy, the government plays an active role in regulating certain political and economic conditions (Jablonsky, 2014). A socialist democracy is a Marxist organisation which believes that the poverty and misery and the oppression and exploitation that marks their society is the result of control of the pieces wealth and productive resources by a tiny class that exploits the vast majority of society. This leads to human beings crippled by the reality and ideology of capitalist society.In the Soviet Union, China, Vietnam and Eastern Europe socialist democracy is the dominant system. The trouble of the people in liberal democratic countries is not as wretched as it is in socialist countries, due to the fact that in communist countries, political and economic system are imposed on society by party officials therefore resulting in untold human suffering and severe psycho-economic exploitation. Both liberal democracy and socialist democracy may be considered forms of political democracy because these systems are based on economic and political centralization (Evolution news, 2014). Many would argue that socialism has failed and that the Cuban economy is a disaster and when Cuba found itself caught in disagreement therefore facing both the merciless US axiskade and enduring the susp ension of all trade with the former members of the socialist bloc, leaders of the Cuban revolution told the people either we stand our ground or we lose everything we have achieved under socialism (Legon, 2013).This brings us to discuss the failure of socialist democracy in third base world countries. This democracy promised prosperity, equality and security. Yet it is evident that it rather delivered poverty, misery and autocracy. Equalitywas achieved only in the horse sense that everyone was equal in his or her misery. Socialism is now a bankrupt, discredited, and flawed nineteenth century theory that has failed miserably in countries around the world (Perry, 2014).We can agree that Socialism has collapsed because of its failure to operate under a competitive, profit- and-loss system of bookkeeping. A profit system is a very effective monitoring bastard which frequently assesses the economic performance of every enterprise (Perry, 2014). The firms that are the most efficient an d most prospering at serving the public interest are rewarded with profits. Evidence of a socialist democracy can be seen in Chile as their limitingover to democracy has still not been achieved. After a decade of non-combatant rule, the state remains under the military dictatorships 1980 constitution. According to the writings of Alejandro Reuss The death chair has made sure to not aggravate the still-powerful Armed Forces. He has insisted that his relations with the Armed Forces are delicate and that they can work together for Chile. The Chilean Socialist leader Ricardo Lagos has declared that Chileans should stop lamentable about the past, concentrating instead on their future together (Reuss, 2001). The above clearly proves that socialism has failed in the third world.The question of whether Sweden is or is not a socialist democracy has risen many times before in the past within the left internationally, with regards to the politics and economy of the Nordic state or if Swed en is an ersatz to neo-liberal capitalism (Olsson, 2009). Sweden has never been a socialist society as it is based merely on public ownership of production, workers control and management, social equality and a democratic plan of production which are characteristics of a socialist entity according to Olsson (2009). Neither has Sweden been a mixed economy. In fact it is one of the most well off countrys to date. It is evident that the social democrats and the trade union movement in Sweden are facing a historic crisis as they have lost roots, influence and support, with no panorama of regaining their old ground as their policy and methods mean further attacks on what is left of the general welfare system. The social democratic party has baffle an empty shell (Olsson, 2009) but that doesnt change the fact that Sweden is not a socialist democracy.In conclusion, there is a major contrast between liberal democracy and social democracy. Evidently a liberalist democracy is built on the foundations of organic social solidarity with private ownership of production, empirical (demonstrable, verifiable reasoning), scientific, reflective and constructivism. The pursuit of the greatest possible welfare for all is a major view of liberal democracy. It considers the State as an association like any other, broadly speaking managed no better and no more efficient than others and wishes the abolition of all monopolies as well as the disappearance of classes and that there should be no more proletariats (Lesigne, 1887). Liberals wish to leave each in monomania of its own and desires everybody to be a proprietor. The latter promises liberty and makes the State the employee of the citizen. Whereas socialist democracy is based on collective ownership of the means of production, political restrictions, and is dogmatic, meaning that the government is inclined to lay down principles as undeniably true as well as being destructive. Socialist democracy wishes for the governed class to become the governing class and that that there should be none but proletariats. The most obvious distinction is that socialist democracy wishes to take everything and all positions away from everyone and impound them (Lesigne, 1887). The greatest contrast between both democracies is that liberal democracy is the future, while socialist democracy is the past.Bibliography1.Gutmann, A (1993). a companion to contemporary political philosophy. second ed. Australia Blackwell Publishing. p413. 2.Heywood, A. (2013). Political Ideas and Ideologies. In Heywood, A Politics. 4th ed. United Kingdom Palgrave Macmillan. 31, 32. 3.Kuttner,R. (2005). Liberalism, Socialism, and Democracy. available http//prospect.org/article/liberalism-socialism-and-democracy. Last accessed 13 contact 2014. 4.Legon E D. (2013). Cuba and the Alleged Failure of Socialism. forthcoming http//www.havanatimes.org/?p=99148. Last accessed 17 walk 2014. 5.Lesigne, E (1887). Liberty V. p5.6.Olsson, P. (2009). Sweden Is Sweden Socialist?. Availablehttp//www.socialistworld.net/doc/3752. Last accessed 15 March 2014. 7.Perry, M. (2014). Why Socialism Failed. Available http//spruce.flint.umich.edu/mjperry/socialism.htm. Last accessed 15 March 2014. 8.Rabbani, F. (1994). SA ANCS RECONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT PLAN. Available http//www.africa.upenn.edu/Govern_Political/ANC_Recon.html. Last accessed 16 March 2014. 9.Reuss, A. (2001). Thirty Years of Chilean Socialism. Available http//www.thirdworldtraveler.com/South_America/30Years_ChileanSocialism.html. Last accessed 15 March 2014. 10.SABC. (2013). National Assembly approves info Bill. Available http//www.sabc.co.za/news/a/8612bb8041cd7c3e8bd9cb5393638296/National-Assembly-approves-Info-Bill-20131211. Last accessed 16 March 2014. 11.Unknown. (2009). Political Liberalism. Available http//www.123helpme.com/preview.asp?id=74492. Last accessed 13 March 2014. 12.Unknown. (2014). Liberal Democracy. Available http//evolutionnews.co.nz/liberal-democracy/. Last a ccessed 16 March 2014. Unknown. (1688). Bill of Rights 1688. Available http//www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2/introduction. Last accessed 17 March 2014. 13.Unknown. (1776). The Declaration of Independence. Available http//www.ushistory.org/DECLARATION/DOCUMENT/index.htm. Last accessed 17 March 2014 14.Unknown. (2014). Glossary of terms FR. Available http//www.marxists.org/glossary/terms/f/r.htm. Last accessed 16 March 2014. 15.Yufo. (2008). http//www.studymode.com/essays/Liberal-Democracy-140567.html?utm_campaign=transactionalEmail&utm_source=sendgrid&utm_medium=email. Available http//www.studymode.com/essays/Liberal-Democracy-140567.html?utm_campaign=transactionalEmail&utm_source=sendgrid&utm_medium=email. Last accessed 17 March 2014.