Disagreements amongst scholars have led to a proliferation of different conceptualizations of democracy, ranging from procedural minimalist definitions quoting singularly sufficient components, i.e. Schumpeter’s competitive elitism, to  multifaceted maximalist definitions, i.e. those used by Freedom House. While I see the merit in minimalist definitions of democracy in terms of differentiation, especially in the conduction of quantitative research, if I were given a chance to talk about what democracy is at a dinner party I would utilize a wholesome, albeit idyllic, maximalist approach.  It is common in mainstream thought to define democracy ‘government of the people, by the people and for the people.” This provides a straightforward framework for my basic ‘dinner party definition’ of democracy.

When I speak of democracy in this way, I think of a variety of necessary conditions that must be satisfied; government of the people speaks to the concept of representation; things like universal adult suffrage, free and fair elections, and one vote per person come to mind; this is also interrelated to government ‘by the people,’ which implies that we, as citizens, are a sovereign body, holding the ultimate decision-making powers. ‘By the people’ also makes me think about the concept of contestation; both in the presence of multiple parties, and in the right of ordinary citizens, under limited restrictions, to run for office.  To me, government ‘for the people’ revolves around the concept of accountability; elected governments must reflect the wants and needs of their electorate, and they must be willing to peacefully give up office if the people vote them out. That is to say, incumbents must be accountable to the public; i.e. when the MP in your district does a poor job, and does not vote according to his or her platform, you have the ability to remove them from his or her position at the next election.

“So, what is democracy anyway?” In sum, democracy is ‘government of the people, by the people and for the people,’ which evokes the correlative concepts of representation, contestation and accountability…a definition which for academic purposes could be problematic, but, for dinner party purposes, would more than suffice.