DEMOCRATIC REGIME - a state regime based on the recognition of the people as a source of power, their right to participate in managing the affairs of society and the state and endowing citizens with a fairly wide range of rights and freedoms. D.r... is based on the principles of democracy, freedom and equality of citizens. In conditions D.r... the people exercise power both directly and through the bodies of representative power formed by them.
Human rights and democracy texts
It's hard for you to be right and admit that there has been a change in Guatemala; we are opaque to understand what's new, but elementary. We are referring to a phenomenon that is hidden in the background of prejudices that grips us, the perception of which is subjective in nature, depends on a certain personal sensitivity. We have a subjective confidence that the moment of democracy has come.
In the civil and political climate that we live in Guatemala during these times, it is crucial that we can reasonably determine what kind of state we want to have, namely what kind of regime Guatemala and its people need. First, we all want to combine the democratic, the material and the adjective. With more certainty, we must well define the democratic state in which we think. Not only an idea is the state that we want to build here and now, and even more so since this is a state project in which we are in a state of struggle.
Characteristic features of a democratic regime: 1) Sovereignty of the people: it is the people who elect their representatives of power and can periodically replace them. Elections must be fair, competitive and regularly held. 2) Periodic election of the main bodies of the state. The government is born from elections and for a certain, limited period. 3) Democracy protects the rights of individuals and minorities. The majority opinion, expressed democratically in elections, is only necessary condition democracy, however, is by no means insufficient. Only a combination of majority rule and the protection of minority rights constitute one of the basic principles of a democratic state. 4) Equality of citizens' rights to participate in information management and to participate in competitive struggle per lesson leadership positions in the state.
Let's call it strong modern state... These are the points that are proposed in the process, from thought to action: it is not enough to talk about democracy, as if it can be built with its only mention. It is necessary to create a structure of organizations, institutions, hierarchies, norms that organize social relations aimed at maintaining order, development and the common good.
The state is a manifestation of specific projects and social relations, which are produced as a political struggle, processes of alliances with parties or political, economic and social forces. Through these processes, the state refers to such key issues as legitimacy, hegemony, consensus, which explains the links between civil society and the state. It has already been said that a democratic state will be stronger when it receives pacts, and its work reflects the interests of citizens.
Signs of democracy:
1. Guarantee of fundamental human rights to each individual in relation to the state and authorities, any social group (especially religious institutions), and another individual. 2. Separation of powers:
Executive power
Legislature
Judicial branch
3 ... Freedom of speech and expression of one's own opinion, freedom of assembly, free press. 4 ... Freedom of religion. 5. The right to elect and be elected (one person, one vote). 6. Equality of all before the law.
The current state of affairs
We conclude these considerations with two remarks that clarify the above. It was a chimera of the state idea. Also associated with the state as a manifestation social interests - social contract incomplete as they did not have Peace Agreements; and state institutionswhich began to be built. Civilian governments were incapable of institution building, supported by patrimonial electoral bases, corrupt administrative structures, improvisation for lack of long-term historical direction.
Democracy in Russia has gone through a series of ups and downs and is still in development. The first rise refers to the early stage of feudalism, when direct democracy spread in many cities of Novgorod Rus, and in them critical decisions were taken at the veche. In the Russian state, the tsars often sought support from various estates, for which there was a boyar duma and zemstvo councils were convened. Reforms second half of XIX century and the beginning of the XX century contributed to the development of zemstvo, estate, peasant, workers and nationwide elected bodies. Established after revolutions and civil war the communist regime had the external attributes of democracy, although in fact it was authoritarian. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, large-scale democratic reforms were carried out. Today, the majority in the country views democracy positively and sees a need for it.
This stage, in which we still have an unfortunate dynamic, a state unable to provide fundamental political goods such as physical security, legitimate political institutions, economic management, social security and others.
Two paths of origin
The second comment refers to the three types of conditions that have escaped from the bottom of backwardness in Guatemala over the past 30 years, a tradition that is breaking down, as Weber says: and they have become obstacles. They were a generic state, a parallel state, and an authoritarian state. The homeland is characteristic of traditional structures, forces of low legitimacy, which tend to develop familiar traits of personalism, patronage, patronage.
5. The political regime of modern Russia.
After a decade soviet history, the domination of an authoritarian and totalitarian political regime, in the second half of the 80s - early 90s in Russia began a transition to a democratic political regime.
With formal legal points of viewAccording to the 1993 Constitution, Russia is a democratic federal rule of law with a republican form of government. A person, his rights and freedoms are declared the highest value, which the state is obliged to guarantee. The people are declared the only source of power.
We are moving with the idea of \u200b\u200ba democratic state. It cannot be discarded in the direction of human development; therefore, there are various circumstances in which the state is an active subject, a central axis, an inevitable reference to everything that is said about human development... Regardless of the definition used, the concept of the state resembles two central ideas: order and power. The state is an organism - or a collection of institutions, which by their very nature have ordered the ordering of society.
Democratic state structure
To order to integrate the human set requires the use of force, which, according to Weber, is legitimate violence because it commands, because it rallies. It is wise to distinguish between state and government, concepts that are often confused. The concept of government belongs to the empirical level, where commanders have first and last names. The state is a set of social relations, the purpose of which is to streamline human society - a society that lives in a geographic space.
In the presidential republic of Russia, there is no clear legal consolidation of the powers of each of the branches of state power, which erodes the principle of separation of branches in matters of organizing the structures and mechanisms of functioning of the state as a whole.
For instance, legislature Federal Assembly is limited, firstly, by the president's right to issue decrees that have the force of laws, and, secondly, by the practice of issuing numerous bylaws by the executive branch. Due to the concentration of power in the hands of the executive bodies, the head of state and government, parliament recedes into the background.
It is common knowledge to hear free proposals about a "weak" or "strong" state when it comes to modernizing the state or its oligarchic version. An important difference is what we call a Strong political power, which obeys anywhere and to anyone. A strong state does not need violence to govern. He relies on the legitimacy of his power and uses the method of hegemony. A state is weak if it does not have powers or it is insufficient. A democratic state is strong in terms of its quality of command.
The absence of a "middle class" leads to an increase in authoritarian sentiments, confrontation between various groups of the population and the government, causes a massive violation of the basic rights and freedoms of Russian citizens, their right to life, satisfaction of basic rights and needs for food, clothing, and housing.
The formation of democracy in Russia does not always go along an ascending line and is due to many circumstances:
What were you fighting for?
Namely, a state with political powerwhich satisfactorily fulfills its democratic functions, such as maintaining the order of society, security, justice and the well-being of all citizens who form the nation, promoting development and protecting sovereignty.
This is a weak state, the presence of which as government body is neither visible nor functional. Generally, because he "penetrates" into the private interests that dominate him. By virtue of private economic or political groups, and by the way, they were created, the co-opted state makes the state a weak actor serving private interests that do not take into account the demands of the majority. The state necessarily impedes the democratic experience.
First of all, our country did not have serious historical, political traditions of democracy, constitutionalism and parliamentarism, and at the same time possessed quite strong traditions of domination of authoritarian, totalitarian power.
Secondly, the transition to democracy was carried out from a totalitarian regime that dominated the country for decades, in the conditions of a systemic crisis of Russian society and permanent attempts to reform it for 20 years.
Complex political structure
The solution to the political and economic crisis that Italy is suffering is democratic populism, bringing together citizens who do not feel reprehensible at this time and involve them in creating a freer and more just country. Some say Donald Trump's vote was a bunch of stupid ones. We want to get rid of this interpretation. Trump's election, as well as Brexit and other political phenomena that are considered "abnormal", are nothing more than symptoms of the worldwide disaster of the institution of representation.
Thirdly, In the process of reforms, the country's leadership repeatedly violated the principles of a democratic, legal, social state - the shooting of the parliament building in 1993, the war in Chechnya in 1994-1996, default, non-payment of wages, unpopular social reforms.
Finally, the mentality of the Russian people still retains the utopian expectation that someone from the outside will come and put things in order, change life for the better.
Trump didn't win because the American people were necessarily rediscovered more racist or sexist than four years ago, even though this is the ideological instrumental horror from which he emanated. Most likely Trump won because the left liberal renounced the role of guarantor of interests of the middle and popular classes, dropping the concept of conflict and ending up the best representative elites. Trump won because he instinctively personified dissatisfaction with the status quo, suggesting the paradoxical role of the anti-system in the play of the parties.
Possessing signs of democracy, it is not yet democratic. IN political system Russia exist contradictions between formal legal democratic foundations and reality.
In the history of the formation of any state, there are examples of people who fought for the freedom of the people, equality before the law and a culture of government. Democratic orders were established in different countries in my own way. Many scientists and researchers pondered over it.
In safe hands
He is a billionaire realtor. Trump, Brexit, but also the assertion of completely opposite ideological orientations such as Syriza and Podemos - as well as the partial success of Bernie Sanders in the primates of American Democrats - report a crisis of institutional participants, separates traditional parties from problem populations from traumatic economic and social events. This does not mean that these different responses to the system are the same.
This means that in times of crisis, the need for a new vote of the excluded is much more important than the specific content in which it is rejected. In the absence of a popular, progressive and democratic alternative, it would be an authoritarian right to heal the area of \u200b\u200bdiscontent.
They looked at this term both from a political point of view and from a philosophical one. And they were able to give an empirical description of a variety of practices. Nevertheless, the theory did not always bear fruit. Most often, the formation of the concept was influenced by the practice of states. Thanks to her, it was possible to establish and create normative models of a democratic order. Today in political science it is difficult to find a single definition of this or that concept. Therefore, before we know which democratic countries have remained on the world map, let's deal with general terms.
But we do not want to talk about the United States and about global political phenomena, about how they are developing in our country. Italy is essentially not represented. The split is deep: it signals the withdrawal of political institutions by economic and financial opportunities, makes political equality a purely formal post-war situation, gradually polarizes society in two areas, economic and political elite, one side, ordinary people - with another. The economic and existential insecurity that destabilizes the lives of population groups, once theoretically protected by surprises, is not the worst manifestation of this dichotomy.
Power to the people
Democracy is an ancient Greek term that literally means "the rule of the people." In political science, this concept denotes a regime, the foundation of which is the adoption of a collective decision. Moreover, the impact on each member should be equal.
In principle, this method is applicable to a variety of organizations and structures. But its most important application to this day is power. This is due to the fact that the state has a lot of power, and therefore it is difficult to organize and cope with it.
Meanwhile, behind the technocratic rhetoric “ difficult choices"," He asks for Europe "and" the logic of markets ", institutions hide their own mistake and their significant lack of interest in cases of change. Thus, parts of sovereignty, that is, whole parts of control over the fate of our society, are transferred to supranational entities, depriving democratic institutions of their standard democracies and turning them into transmitting belts of the oligarchic system. But this is a dull requirement for reality. Strains caused by economic crisiscreate conditions for radical political changes.
So, democratic countries in this aspect should be characterized by the following criteria:
- The exercise by people of honest and compulsory elections of their leader.
- The legitimate source of power is the people.
- Self-government by society occurs for the sake of satisfying interests and establishing the common good in the country.
Each member of society has his own rights, which are necessary to ensure the people's government. A whole spectrum of values \u200b\u200bis often referred to democracy, which is a "litmus test" in political experiences:
The inadequacy of Italian politicians
These conditions can be used in a regressive and authoritarian way, as well as in a democratic and progressive sense. The game is open: not declining would mean abandoning changes in conservative and reactionary forces. The existing political and social actors did not cope with this task. Heightened transformational practice characterized the entire course of the Second Republic and left its mark on the third of the third. It does not matter if more and more constituent electoral systems became a simulacrum of an alternation democracy.
- Equality, both political and social.
- Freedom.
- Legality;
- Human rights.
- The right to self-determination, etc.
Inaccuracies
This is where inaccuracies begin. The ideal of democracy is difficult to achieve, so the interpretation of "democracy" varies. Already from the 18th century, types, more precisely, models of this regime appeared. The most famous is direct democracy. This model assumes that citizens make decisions by consensus or by subordinating the minority to the majority.
The political regime of modern Russia
Transformism found its rise in the democracy of alternation. The changing political class passed to the government, finding no alternative answers to questions arising in the bosom of society: instead, it simply chose the elected classes to manage the elections of the oligarchs. Berlusconi was busy with the first dissemination and represented the most authentic verb of neoliberal restoration, while the left center left the most reliable technical staff.
However, it would be wrong to resort to categories such as “betrayal”. Thus, he found himself defending an empty shell that was then easily swept away by the interests and cohesion of the oligarchy. Thus, the divorce between democracy and conflict, the space of social and political opposition, was occupied in Italy by the 5-star movement. But his potential for change soon collapsed, failing to devise appropriate political outlets for the social institutions that poured into him.
Alongside, you can indicate and This type involves the adoption of a decision by the people through their elected deputies or other persons with certain positions. In this case, these persons make a choice based on the opinion of those who trusted them, and then they are responsible for the result to them.
What were you fighting for?
You need to understand that such political regime, as a democracy, works to limit arbitrariness and abuse of power. This has always been difficult to achieve, especially in countries where civil liberties and other values \u200b\u200bwere not recognized by the government and remained defenseless in the political system.
Now the concept of "democracy" has two sides of the coin. Democracy has now come to be identified with liberal governance. Thanks to this type of democracy, along with fair and open periodic elections, there is the rule of law, the division and limitation of power established by the constitution. 
On the other hand, many economists and political scientists believe that it is impossible to realize the right to make decisions related to politics, as well as the influence of the people on the state system, without the formation of social rights, a low level of inequality in the socio-economic aspect, as well as equality of opportunities.
Threats
Democratic countries always face the threat of an authoritarian regime. The main problem for such a system of government, there is always separatism, terrorism, growing social inequality or migration. Despite the fact that there are many organizations in the world that defend the freedom and rights of citizens, history is not devoid of cases when controversial political conflicts were provoked.
The current state of affairs
Before we look at the most democratic countries in the world, we should look at the big picture of the current situation. Despite the diversity of democracy regimes, now the number of democratic countries is the largest in history. More than half of the total population the globe can participate in elections. Moreover, even such a regime as a dictatorship can easily exist on behalf of the people. 
It is known that those countries that operate under have endowed almost the entire adult population with the right to vote. But later they faced such a problem that interest in political life began to fall sharply. For example, in the United States, 30-40% of the population takes part in elections.
There are several reasons for this. To fully understand the politics of your country, you need to stock up not only with patience, but also with a train of time. Some citizens believe that politicians devote more time to the political race and their own interests. Others do not even see the differences between the opposing parties. One way or another, the current state of affairs leads to a renewed interest in the direct form of democracy.
Analytics
Many political scientists worked to ensure that each state in the world received its own definition. The British Research Center has calculated a methodology that could determine the ranking of the world's countries in terms of democracy. Now 167 countries can be classified. Each of them has its own democracy index.
Now it is difficult to say how objective the selection of states can be considered based on this principle. There are 5 categories of 12 indicators in total. The index was first used in 2006. During this time, there were several amendments related to changes in the political picture of the world. And even after 10 years, it is not known who is on the commission: perhaps they are employees of the research center, or maybe independent scientists. 
Principle
So, in order to rank the state into four categories, it is necessary to measure the level of democracy within the country. You also need to research expert assessments and the results of public opinion polls. Each country is characterized by 60 indicators, which are grouped into several categories:
- Electoral process and pluralism.
- Government work.
- Participation of citizens in the politics of their state.
- Political culture.
- Civil liberties.
Categories
According to this principle, countries can be divided into several categories. The first is complete democracy. Many people still believe that this mode is an unattainable theoretical ideal. And yet, at the moment, this category includes 26 countries - this is 12% of the total population. It is believed that almost half of all countries can be attributed to this type, but expert opinion is slightly different. They classify 51 states as “insufficient democracy”.
The third category is considered to be a hybrid regime, which is a symbiosis of democracy and authoritarianism. There are 39 powers in the world with this type. The remaining 52 countries still retain authoritarian regime... By the way, the fourth category includes a third of the world's population - more than 2.5 billion people.
First of the first
The last known indexing took place in 2014. In total, 25 countries can be classified as a full-fledged democracy. The top ten includes Iceland, New Zealand, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Canada, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Australia.
Norway has been the leader for several years in a row. This constitutional monarchy received an index of 9.93. This state in Northern Europe occupies part of the Scandinavian Peninsula. Today, the king of Norway is Harald V. The unitary state is based on the principle of parliamentary democracy.
Homeland of Pippi Longstocking
Sweden ranks second (9.73). This state is adjacent to Norway. It is also located on the Scandinavian Peninsula. The state is governed The form of government is also built on the principle of parliamentary democracy in symbiosis with constitutional monarchy.
Small state
Iceland ranks third with an index of 9.58. On the map, this country can be found next to Europe. It is an island state. 
The President is Gvudni Jouhannesson, who took office in June this year. He is an independent candidate. Also famous for having a scientific degree - professor historical sciences... Despite the fact that Iceland is barely visible on the map, this country is not only in the top three leaders of democratic countries, but also famous for its other records. For example, as the most big Island volcanic origin.
In safe hands
New Zealand ranked fourth (9.26). This state is located in Polynesia, in the southwestern part The Pacific... As in Norway, it is dominated by a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy. This country is ruled by the famous Queen Elizabeth II. By the way, in addition to the fact that she is the head of the British Commonwealth of Nations and Britain itself, she is also the queen of 15 independent states, including Canada, Belize, Barbados, Grenada, etc. Directly in New Zealand itself there is Governor-General Jerry Mateparai.
Women's care
Denmark also got into democratic countries and took fifth place in the ranking (9.11). Another state located in Northern Europe. This power is also ruled by a woman - Margrethe II. Therefore Denmark is a constitutional monarchy. The Queen is assisted by a unicameral parliament called the Folketing.
Complex political structure
Switzerland ranks sixth (9.09). it federal Republic, a confederation that works with a bicameral parliament and a semi-direct democracy. Switzerland has a challenging President Johann Schneider-Ammann is the chairman of the Federal Council, but in fact he is not the head of state. This role is assigned to all council members. Although in the case of difficult political decisions, his vote will be decisive. 
The President is considered the first among equals and has no authority to lead the members of the Federal Council. Elected only for a year. And it is not the people who do this, but the members of the council. There are only seven of them. Besides the fact that they collectively manage the state, each of them has its own department. For example, the current president is responsible for the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research.
Multinational country
Canada ranked seventh (9.08). This state is in North America... As mentioned earlier, the head of state is the Queen of Great Britain. But internally, Governor General David Johnston rules. Canada is a federation with a parliamentary monarchy and parliamentary democracy.
The state consists of 10 provinces. The most popular is Quebec. This is where most of the French-speaking population lives. The rest of the provinces are mostly "English".
Stability
Finland took the eighth place with an index of 9.03. The country's characterization is mainly based on the country's assessment as the most stable. In 2010, the state became the best in the world. It is located in the north of Europe. It is a parliamentary-presidential republic based on parliamentary democracy. Since 2012, the head of state has been Sauli Niinistö. 
Mainland state
Australia ranks 9th in the ranking of the world's democratic countries (9.01). This power is located in the neighborhood of New Zealand and occupies the continent of the same name. The head of the country is the Queen of the British Commonwealth of Nations. Governor General - Peter Cosgrove. Australia is one that exists like all the dominions of Great Britain. The government's activities are directly related to Elizabeth II and the Privy Council.
Australia is recognized as one of the most developed countries the world. It has a stable economy, high GDP per capita. It ranks second in the Human Development Index and could easily have become the first in the ranking of democratic countries.
Top 10
Rounding out the top ten countries with a full-fledged democracy is the Netherlands (8.92). This state is a constitutional monarchy. At the moment, the head of the kingdom is Willem-Alexander. The Netherlands has a bicameral parliament, which is based on parliamentary democracy. The capital of the state is considered to be Amsterdam. It is here that the monarch takes the oath of allegiance to the kingdom. But there is also the actual capital of The Hague, where the seat of the government is located.
Other leaders
The 26 states with full-fledged democracy also include Great Britain, Spain, Ireland, USA, Japan, South Korea, Uruguay, Germany, etc. But, perhaps, it is worth mentioning the last places of the rating, about those countries that are subject to an authoritarian regime. The 167th place is occupied by North Korea with an index of 1.08. The Central African Republic, CHAD, Syria, Iran, Turkmenistan and Congo are slightly higher in the ranking.
Russia ranks 117 with a rating of 3.92. Cameroon is in front of it, after Angola. Belarus is even lower than Russia, at 139th place (3.16). Both countries are categorized as "authoritarian regime". Ukraine is in 79th place in the transition regime category and with an index of 5.94.
No development
In a few recent years the democratic countries of Europe have lost their positions. This is especially true for the eastern territory. Together with Russia, the rest of the CIS countries fell in the ranking. Some gave up their positions insignificantly, some - by 5-7 steps.
Since 2013, global democracy has stopped. This regime has no regression, but there is no progress either. This situation belongs to the general picture of the world. In some examples, regression is still noticeable. Many states are losing their democratic processes. This is especially influenced by the economic crisis. 
By contrast, authoritarian regimes have become even more powerful. Thus, democracy, which has been building up in the world since 1974, is now recessive in nature. In addition to the beginning of a decline in confidence in political institutions, this is especially true for Europe. Also, the very process of democracy does not bring the population the desired result.