Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Since the end of the Cold War, democracy has become the unrivaled form of government in the world. Acceptance of a country as a full partner in the global community of nations is considerably facilitated by its being characterized as a political democracy; international military interventions, as in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan, state their goal as the building of democracy; less democratic countries are asked to improve the quality of their democracy to gain esteem; and countries that hardly possess the attributes of democratic governance claim to be democratic because such characterization is thought to bestow prestige on them.

Among democracies, there is no single mode of organizing a polity as a political democracy. Institutional arrangements of democratic governance have varied across time and countries. Furthermore, democratic systems have evolved and operated in countries that have, among others, different histories, cultures, traditions, economies, demographic compositions, and socioeconomic characteristics. These factors have all put their imprint on how democratic institutions are organized and operate in specific countries. Attempts at presenting and discussing types and typologies of democracies are several. Some types and typologies, not widely employed by students of democracy thus far, have not been included in this entry. But before presenting the most well-known analyses, a methodological “warning” is necessary.

The word type may be used in two different senses. First, it may be used to define the necessary set of characteristics that need to be present to identify certain phenomena as distinct from others and give it a name. The word model is also sometimes employed to convey the meaning of type in this sense. Second, it may be a category that emerges from classifying phenomena according to certain criteria. In this second sense, “type” emerges as a subcategory—that is, as the product of an effort at generating a typology. One may, for example, identify all political systems that satisfy the criteria for being a democracy (model) but then group them according to some key features (variables) along which they may differ from each other. This exercise, which aims at developing a typology, generates subcategories that are also called “types.” Types as subcategories of a typology include all attributes of democracy and then some that make them unique, helping us distinguish them from others.

This entry is a discussion of the types of democracy. The first section focuses on the two fundamental models of democracy, direct and liberal representative, as major concerns of political thought. This section on normative models introduces the fundamental philosophical underpinnings of actual democratic systems as they have developed in different societies. The second section offers a typology of democratic systems as they operate in the world today. Here the scheme of classification is based on whether minimum or maximum possible majorities are sought in making decisions since such a distinction constitutes a major variable along which contemporary democracies differ from each other. Some types based on the empirical study of how systems function are also offered here. Finally, normative models critical of the outcome of the operation of contemporary democracies are taken up.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading