Why Is There Democracy?

Nothing emerges out of a vacuum. Everything exists because it is needed or has a practical function. The concept of numbers, for instance, arose and eventually became widely used because it was necessary for recording the number of livestock, goods, and so on thousands of years ago.

With that principle in mind, we can pose the question: why is there democracy? Why do humans implement democracy so that a country is "forced" to have leaders who are not intelligent and act arbitrarily? Would it not be better to apply a system of appointment to produce higher quality leaders? So, what is the true benefit of democracy?

An intriguing response to such questions is provided by Professor Steven Pinker, a liberal thinker and expert in cognitive psychology, a field that studies mental processes such as thinking and language. According to him, democracy is fundamentally unrelated to the form of government. Democracy essentially demands that a government be capable of protecting its citizens from anarchy or chaos.

This line of thought arises because, for Pinker, since the first government was established thousands of years ago, humanity has consistently struggled to find a balance between violence resulting from anarchy and violence resulting from tyranny (absolute authoritarian rule).

It is not uncommon for humans to prefer tyranny because the death toll it causes is still less than anarchy. In other words, it is better to live under tyranny than to suffer in the chaos of the absence of a ruler (Pinker, Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism and Progress, 2018).

Therefore, the most important thing is to prevent anarchy or chaos. That is the practical function of democracy. This system must be able to prevent anarchy. If it fails, society will easily turn to the idea of a strongman who can solve various problems.

The idea of the benefits of democracy in preventing anarchy aligns with the concept of democracy according to political scientist Robert Dahl. According to him, an essential component of democracy is the competition between the government and the opposition.

Democracy must be able to ensure that competition is fair (the consequence is that there should be no suppression of opposition media). Therefore, the opposition needs to be guaranteed to live. On the other hand, the party that wins the competition or election must be ensured to be able to govern calmly (Dahl, Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, 1971).

With this concept, democracy is nothing more than the formalization and domestication of political struggles. Political forces may compete, but they must be regulated so as not to lead to physical violence. There should be no anarchy or chaos resulting from political competition.

Therefore, do not be surprised or overly immersed in disappointment if the open, honest, and fair elections ultimately produce leaders who are far from satisfactory. The decisions made create chaos, leaving business actors confused, and even citizens of other countries feeling anxious.

Democracy is not meant to satisfy human beings' absurd obsession with perfection. Democracy "only" ensures that political competition takes place fairly, openly, and with dignity. There should be no anarchy.

Even if the unsatisfactory leader makes an inappropriate decision, democracy ensures that there are other forces that can balance it. The judiciary can annul it.

This is happening in the United States. The court overturned President Donald Trump's executive order. The judiciary is indeed the last bastion against autocratization efforts by the executive who "plays slyly" with the legislative body.

Such corrections are important to prevent a revolution or a major explosion due to prolonged accumulated dissatisfaction. Once again, it is evident that the democratic system must ensure that anarchy does not occur.

So, democracy does not emerge to pursue perfection. Democracy only ensures that political competition is controlled and fair. Happy democracy.