Editing Democracy (section)

==History==
{{Main|History of democracy}}

[[File:Discurso funebre pericles.PNG|thumb|Nineteenth-century painting by [[Philipp Foltz]] depicting the Athenian politician [[Pericles]] delivering his famous [[Pericles' funeral oration|funeral oration]] in front of the [[Ecclesia (ancient Athens)|Assembly]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/detail.php?ID=131618|title=Pericles' Funeral Oration|publisher=the-athenaeum.org}}</ref>]]

[[Popular assembly|Democratic assemblies]] are as old as the human species and are found throughout human history,{{sfn|Graeber|2013|p=184}} but up until the nineteenth century, major political figures have largely opposed democracy.{{sfn|Graeber|2013|pp=168—169}} Republican theorists linked democracy to small size: as political units grew in size, the likelihood increased that the government would turn despotic.<ref name="Deudney2008b" /><ref>{{Citation|last1=Thorhallsson|first1=Baldur|title=Small State Foreign Policy|date=2017|encyclopedia=Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics|publisher=Oxford University Press|doi=10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.484|isbn=978-0-19-022863-7|last2=Steinsson|first2=Sverrir|url=https://osf.io/7mrj9/}}</ref> At the same time, small political units were vulnerable to conquest.<ref name="Deudney2008b" /> [[Montesquieu]] wrote, "If a republic be small, it is destroyed by a foreign force; if it is large, it is ruined by an internal imperfection."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.constitution.org/cm/sol_09.htm|title=Book IX. Of Laws in the Relation They Bear to a Defensive Force|first1=Charles|last1=de Montesquieu|work=The Spirit of Laws|publisher=Constitution Society|access-date=22 December 2019|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191222201302/https://www.constitution.org/cm/sol_09.htm|archive-date=22 December 2019}}</ref> According to Johns Hopkins University political scientist [[Daniel Deudney]], the creation of the United States, with its large size and its system of checks and balances, was a solution to the dual problems of size.<ref name="Deudney2008b" /><ref>{{Cite web |title=Democratic Internationalism: An American Grand Strategy for a Post-exceptionalist Era {{!}} Council on Foreign Relations |url=https://www.cfr.org/event/democratic-internationalism-american-grand-strategy-post-exceptionalist-era |access-date=2024-10-22 |website=www.cfr.org |language=en}}</ref> Forms of democracy occurred organically in societies around the world that had no contact with each other.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Graymont|first=Barbara|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/194977|title=The Iroquois in the American Revolution|date=1972|publisher=Syracuse University Press|isbn=978-0-8156-0083-1|edition=[1st ed.]|location=[Syracuse, N.Y.]|oclc=194977}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Priestland|first=David|date=2021-10-23|title=The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow review – inequality is not the price of civilisation|url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/oct/23/the-dawn-of-everything-by-david-graeber-and-david-wengrow-review-inequality-is-not-the-price-of-civilisation|access-date=2024-03-04|work=The Guardian|issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

===Origins===

====Greece and Rome====
{{See also|Athenian democracy}}

The term ''democracy'' first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of [[Athens]] during [[classical antiquity]].<ref>John Dunn, ''Democracy: the unfinished journey 508 BC&nbsp;– 1993 AD'', Oxford University Press, 1994, {{ISBN|978-0-19-827934-1}}</ref>{{sfn|Raaflaub|Ober|Wallace|2007|p={{page needed|date=July 2014}} }} The word comes from ''dêmos'' '(common) people' and ''krátos'' 'force/might'.<ref>[[Luciano Canfora]], ''La democrazias:Storia di un'ideologia,'' [[Editori Laterza|Laterza]] (2004) 2018 pp.12–13</ref> Under [[Cleisthenes]], what is generally held as the first example of a type of democracy in the sixth-century BC (508–507 BC) was established in Athens. Cleisthenes is referred to as "the father of [[Athenian democracy]]".<ref>R. Po-chia Hsia, Lynn Hunt, Thomas R. Martin, Barbara H. Rosenwein, and Bonnie G. Smith, ''The Making of the West, Peoples and Cultures, A Concise History, Volume I: To 1740'' (Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2007), 44.</ref> The first attested use of the word democracy is found in prose works of the 430s BC, such as [[Herodotus]]' ''[[Histories (Herodotus)|Histories]]'', but its usage was older by several decades, as two Athenians born in the 470s were named Democrates, a new political name—likely in support of democracy—given at a time of debates over constitutional issues in Athens. [[Aeschylus]] also strongly alludes to the word in his play ''[[The Suppliants (Aeschylus)|The Suppliants]]'', staged in c.463 BC, where he mentions "the demos's ruling hand" [''demou kratousa cheir'']. Before that time, the word used to define the new political system of Cleisthenes was probably [[isonomia]], meaning political equality.<ref>Kurt A. Raaflaub, ''Origins of Democracy in Ancient Greece'', pp. 108, 109.</ref>
[[File:Cleisthenes.jpg|thumb|200px|Modern bust of [[Cleisthenes]], known as "the father of [[Athenian democracy]]", on view at the [[Ohio Statehouse]], Columbus, Ohio]]
Athenian democracy took the form of direct democracy, and it had two distinguishing features: the [[sortition|random selection]] of ordinary citizens to fill the few existing government administrative and judicial offices,<ref>Aristotle Book 6</ref> and a legislative assembly consisting of all Athenian citizens.<ref>{{cite book|first=Leonid E.|last=Grinin|url=http://www.socionauki.ru/book/early_state_en/|title=The Early State, Its Alternatives and Analogues|publisher=Uchitel' Publishing House|year=2004}}</ref> All eligible citizens were allowed to speak and vote in the assembly, which set the laws of the city-state. However, Athenian citizenship excluded women, slaves, foreigners (μέτοικοι / ''métoikoi''), and youths below the age of military service.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Davies|first=John K.|date=1977|title=Athenian Citizenship: The Descent Group and the Alternatives|journal=The Classical Journal|volume=73|issue=2|pages=105–121|jstor=3296866|issn=0009-8353}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.stoa.org/projects/demos/article_women_and_family?page=4|title=Women and Family in Athenian Law|website=stoa.org|access-date=1 March 2018|archive-date=1 March 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180301164428/http://www.stoa.org/projects/demos/article_women_and_family?page=4|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{Contradictory inline|Athenian democracy|date=September 2014}} Effectively, only 1 in 4 residents in Athens qualified as citizens. Owning land was not a requirement for citizenship.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Manville|first=Philip Brook|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RBcABAAAQBAJ&pg=PA94|title=The Origins of Citizenship in Ancient Athens|date=14 July 2014|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-1-4008-6083-8}}</ref> The exclusion of large parts of the population from the citizen body is closely related to the ancient understanding of citizenship. In most of antiquity the benefit of citizenship was tied to the obligation to fight war campaigns.<ref>Susan Lape, ''Reproducing Athens: Menander's Comedy, Democratic Culture, and the Hellenistic City'', Princeton University Press, 2009, p. 4, {{ISBN|978-1-4008-2591-2}}</ref>

Athenian democracy was not only ''direct'' in the sense that decisions were made by the assembled people, but also the ''most direct'' in the sense that the people through the assembly, [[Boule (ancient Greece)|boule]] and courts of law controlled the entire political process and a large proportion of citizens were involved constantly in the public business.{{sfn|Raaflaub|Ober|Wallace|2007|p=5}} Even though the rights of the individual were not secured by the Athenian constitution in the modern sense (the ancient Greeks had no word for "rights"{{sfn|Ober|Hedrick|1996|p=107}}), those who were citizens of Athens enjoyed their liberties not in opposition to the government but by living in a city that was not subject to another power and by not being subjects themselves to the rule of another person.{{sfn|Clarke|Foweraker|2001|pp=194–201}}

[[Range voting]] appeared in [[Sparta]] as early as 700 BC. The [[Ecclesia (Sparta)|Spartan ecclesia]] was an assembly of the people, held once a month, in which every male citizen of at least 20 years of age could participate. In the assembly, Spartans elected leaders and cast votes by range voting and shouting (the vote is then decided on how loudly the crowd shouts). [[Aristotle]] called this "childish", as compared with the stone voting ballots used by the Athenian citizenry. Sparta adopted it because of its simplicity, and to prevent any biased voting, buying, or cheating that was predominant in the early democratic elections.<ref>Terrence A. Boring, ''Literacy in Ancient Sparta'', Leiden Netherlands (1979). {{ISBN|978-90-04-05971-9}}</ref>
[[File:Austria Parlament Athena bw.jpg|thumb|upright|Statue of [[Athena]], the patron goddess of [[Athens]], in front of the [[Austrian Parliament Building]]. Athena has been used as an international symbol of freedom and democracy since at least the late eighteenth century.<ref>{{cite book|last=Deacy|first=Susan|author-link=Susan Deacy|title=Athena|location=London and New York|publisher=Routledge|date=2008|isbn=978-0-415-30066-7|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kIiCAgAAQBAJ&q=Athena+and+Ares+Darmon&pg=PA163|pages=145–49}}</ref>]]
Even though the [[Roman Republic]] contributed significantly to many aspects of democracy, only a minority of Romans were citizens with votes in elections for representatives. The votes of the powerful were given more weight through a system of [[weighted voting]], so most high officials, including members of the [[Roman Senate|Senate]], came from a few wealthy and noble families.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://annourbis.com/Ancient-Rome/8rome10.html|title=Ancient Rome from the earliest times down to 476 A.D|publisher=Annourbis.com|access-date=22 August 2010}}</ref> In addition, the [[Overthrow of the Roman monarchy|overthrow of the Roman Kingdom]] was the first case in the Western world of a polity being formed with the explicit purpose of being a [[republic]], although it did not have much of a democracy. The Roman model of governance inspired many political thinkers over the centuries.<ref>{{harvnb|Livy|De Sélincourt|2002|p=34}}</ref>

====Ancient India ====
[[Vaishali (ancient city)|Vaishali]], capital city of the [[Vajjika League]] (Vrijji [[mahajanapada]]) of [[Ancient India|India]], is considered one of the first examples of a [[republic]] around the 6th century BC.<ref>{{cite book|last=Bindloss|first=Joe|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=T7ZHUhSEleYC&q=Vaishali&pg=PA556|title=India: Lonely planet Guide|author2=Sarina Singh|publisher=[[Lonely Planet]]|year=2007|isbn=978-1-74104-308-2|page=556}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Hoiberg|first=Dale|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DPP7O3nb3g0C&q=Vaishali&pg=PA208|title=Students' Britannica India, Volumes 1-5|author2=Indu Ramchandani|publisher=Popular Prakashan|year=2000|isbn=978-0-85229-760-5|page=208}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Kulke|first=Hermann|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TPVq3ykHyH4C&q=Vaishali&pg=PA57|title=A history of India|author2=Dietmar Rothermund|publisher=Routledge|year=2004|isbn=978-0-415-32919-4|page=57}}</ref>

====Americas====
Other cultures, such as the [[Iroquois]] in the Americas also developed a form of democratic society between 1450 and 1660 (and possibly in 1142{{sfn|Mann|Fields|1997}}), well before contact with the Europeans. This democracy continues to the present day and is the world's oldest standing representative democracy.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lightfoot|first=Sheryl R.|date=2021|title=Decolonizing Self-Determination: Haudenosaunee Passports and Negotiated Sovereignty|journal=European Journal of International Relations|volume=27|issue=4|page=978|doi=10.1177/13540661211024713|issn=1354-0661|s2cid=237710260}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Communications|title=Government|url=https://www.haudenosauneeconfederacy.com/government/|access-date=2022-05-19|website=Haudenosaunee Confederacy}}</ref>

====Africa====
{{Main|Gadaa}}

===Middle Ages===
While most regions in [[Europe]] during the [[Middle Ages]] were ruled by [[clergy]] or [[feudal lords]], there existed various systems involving elections or assemblies, although often only involving a small part of the population. In [[Scandinavia]], bodies known as [[Thing (assembly)|things]] consisted of freemen presided by a [[lawspeaker]]. These deliberative bodies were responsible for settling political questions, and variants included the [[Althing]] in [[Iceland]] and the [[Løgting]] in the [[Faeroe Islands]].<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=d2osDwAAQBAJ&q=althing+democracy&pg=PR7|title=On Democracy: Second Edition|last=Dahl|first=Robert A.|date=1 October 2008|publisher=Yale University Press|isbn=978-0-300-23332-2}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mG7vCgAAQBAJ&q=althing+democracy&pg=PT30|title=Heritage and Identity: Shaping the Nations of the North|last1=Fladmark|first1=J. M.|last2=Heyerdahl|first2=Thor|date=17 November 2015|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-317-74224-1}}</ref> The [[veche]], found in [[Eastern Europe]], was a similar body to the Scandinavian thing. In the Roman [[Catholic Church]], the [[pope]] has been elected by a [[papal conclave]] composed of cardinals since 1059. The first documented parliamentary body in Europe was the [[Cortes of León of 1188|Cortes of León]]. Established by [[Alfonso IX]] in 1188, the Cortes had authority over setting taxation, foreign affairs and legislating, though the exact nature of its role remains disputed.<ref>{{cite book|last1=O'Callaghan|first1=Joseph F.|title=The Cortes of Castile-León, 1188-1350 |chapter=The Cortes and Taxation |date=1989 |pages=130–151|publisher=University of Pennsylvania Press |doi=10.9783/9781512819571|jstor=j.ctv513b8x.12|isbn=978-1-5128-1957-1}}</ref> The [[Republic of Ragusa]], established in 1358 and centered around the city of [[Dubrovnik]], provided representation and voting rights to its male aristocracy only. Various Italian city-states and polities had republic forms of government. For instance, the [[Republic of Florence]], established in 1115, was led by the [[Signoria of Florence|Signoria]] whose members were chosen by [[sortition]]. In the 10th–15th century [[Frisian freedom|Frisia]], a distinctly non-feudal society, the right to vote on local matters and on county officials was based on land size. The [[Kouroukan Fouga]] divided the [[Mali Empire]] into ruling clans (lineages) that were represented at a great assembly called the ''Gbara''. However, the charter made Mali more similar to a [[constitutional monarchy]] than a [[democratic republic]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=The oldest constitution in the world |url=https://www.jpic-jp.org/en/a/the-oldest-constitution-in-the-world |access-date=2024-10-22 |website=www.jpic-jp.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-09-27 |title=The World Won't Listen: The Mande "Hunters' Oath" and Human Rights in Translation |url=https://humanityjournal.org/issue13-2/the-world-wont-listen-the-mande-hunters-oath-and-human-rights-in-translation/ |access-date=2024-10-22 |website=Humanity Journal |language=en-US}}</ref>

[[File:Magna Carta (British Library Cotton MS Augustus II.106).jpg|upright=1.3|thumb|[[Magna Carta]], 1215, England]]

The [[Parliament of England]] had its roots in the restrictions on the power of kings written into [[Magna Carta]] (1215), which explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects and implicitly supported what became the English writ of [[habeas corpus]], safeguarding individual freedom against unlawful imprisonment with the right to appeal.<ref>{{cite web|title=Magna Carta: an introduction|url=http://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/magna-carta-an-introduction|publisher=The British Library|access-date=28 January 2015|quote=Magna Carta is sometimes regarded as the foundation of democracy in England. ...Revised versions of Magna Carta were issued by King Henry III (in 1216, 1217 and 1225), and the text of the 1225 version was entered into the statute roll in 1297. ...The 1225 version of Magna Carta had been granted explicitly in return for a payment of tax by the whole kingdom, and this paved the way for the first summons of Parliament in 1265, to approve the granting of taxation.|archive-date=23 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210423002539/https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/magna-carta-an-introduction|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/citizen_subject/making_history_citizen.htm|title=Citizen or Subject?|publisher=The National Archives|access-date=17 November 2013}}</ref> The first representative national assembly in [[Kingdom of England|England]] was [[Simon de Montfort's Parliament]] in 1265.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Jobson|first1=Adrian|title=The First English Revolution: Simon de Montfort, Henry III and the Barons' War|date=2012|publisher=Bloomsbury|isbn=978-1-84725-226-5|pages=173–74|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9gHWamp-TLoC}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Simon de Montfort: The turning point for democracy that gets overlooked|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30849472|access-date=19 January 2015|publisher=BBC|postscript=none|date=19 January 2015}}; {{cite news|title=The January Parliament and how it defined Britain|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11355822/The-January-Parliament-and-how-it-defined-Britain.html|archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220110/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11355822/The-January-Parliament-and-how-it-defined-Britain.html|archive-date=10 January 2022|url-access=subscription|url-status=live|access-date=28 January 2015|newspaper=The Telegraph|date=20 January 2015}}{{cbignore}}</ref> The emergence of [[Parliament of England#Emergence as an institution|petitioning]] is some of the earliest evidence of parliament being used as a forum to address the general grievances of ordinary people. However, the power to call parliament remained at the pleasure of the monarch.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/citizen_subject/origins.htm|title=Origins and growth of Parliament|publisher=The National Archives|access-date=17 November 2013}}</ref>

Studies have linked the emergence of parliamentary institutions in Europe during the medieval period to urban agglomeration and the creation of new classes, such as artisans,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Abramson|first1=Scott F.|last2=Boix|first2=Carles|date=2019|title=Endogenous Parliaments: The Domestic and International Roots of Long-Term Economic Growth and Executive Constraints in Europe|journal=International Organization|volume=73|issue=4|pages=793–837|doi=10.1017/S0020818319000286|s2cid=211428630|issn=0020-8183}}</ref> as well as the presence of nobility and religious elites.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Møller|first=Jørgen|date=2014|title=Why Europe Avoided Hegemony: A Historical Perspective on the Balance of Power|journal=International Studies Quarterly|volume=58|issue=4|pages=660–670|doi=10.1111/isqu.12153}}</ref> Scholars have also linked the emergence of representative government to Europe's relative political fragmentation.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Cox|first=Gary W.|date=2017|title=Political Institutions, Economic Liberty, and the Great Divergence|journal=The Journal of Economic History|volume=77|issue=3|pages=724–755|doi=10.1017/S0022050717000729|issn=0022-0507|doi-access=free}}</ref> Political scientist [[David Stasavage]] links the fragmentation of Europe, and its subsequent democratization, to the manner in which the Roman Empire collapsed: Roman territory was conquered by small fragmented groups of Germanic tribes, thus leading to the creation of small political units where rulers were relatively weak and needed the consent of the governed to ward off foreign threats.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Stasavage|first=David|s2cid=14393625|date=11 May 2016|title=Representation and Consent: Why They Arose in Europe and Not Elsewhere|journal=Annual Review of Political Science|volume=19|issue=1|pages=145–162|doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-043014-105648|doi-access=free|issn=1094-2939}}</ref>

In [[Poland]], [[noble democracy]] was characterized by an increase in the activity of the middle [[szlachta|nobility]], which wanted to increase their share in exercising power at the expense of the magnates. Magnates dominated the most important offices in the state (secular and ecclesiastical) and sat on the royal council, later the senate. The growing importance of the middle nobility had an impact on the establishment of the institution of the land ''[[sejm]]ik'' (local assembly), which subsequently obtained more rights. During the fifteenth and first half of the sixteenth century, sejmiks received more and more power and became the most important institutions of local power. In 1454, [[Casimir IV Jagiellon]] granted the sejmiks the right to decide on taxes and to convene a mass mobilization in the [[Nieszawa Statutes]]. He also pledged not to create new laws without their consent.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Lukowski|first1=Jerzy|last2=Zawadzki|first2=Hubert|title=A Concise History of Poland|date=January 2019|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-1-108-33399-3|edition=3rd}}</ref>

===Modern era===

====Early modern period====
[[File:House of Commons during King Charles I's reign, circa 1640-1642 from NPG.jpg|thumb|Over the centuries, the [[Parliament of England|English Parliament]] progressively limited the power of the [[History of monarchy in the United Kingdom#English monarchy|English monarchy]], a process that arguably culminated in the [[English Civil War]].]]
In 17th century England, there was [[Magna Carta#17th–18th centuries|renewed interest in Magna Carta]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/videos/from-legal-document-to-public-myth-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century|title=From legal document to public myth: Magna Carta in the 17th century|website=The British Library|access-date=16 October 2017|postscript=none|archive-date=18 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018101349/https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/videos/from-legal-document-to-public-myth-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century|url-status=dead}}; {{Cite web|url=https://www.sal.org.uk/events/2015/06/magna-carta-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century/|title=Magna Carta: Magna Carta in the 17th Century|website=The Society of Antiquaries of London|access-date=16 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180925053248/https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/videos/from-legal-document-to-public-myth-magna-carta-in-the-17th-century|archive-date=25 September 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref> The Parliament of England passed the [[Petition of Right]] in 1628 which established certain liberties for subjects. The [[English Civil War]] (1642–1651) was fought between the King and an oligarchic but elected Parliament,<ref>{{cite web|title=Origins and growth of Parliament|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/citizen_subject/origins.htm|publisher=The National Archives|access-date=7 April 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Rise of Parliament|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/rise_parliament/citizenship2.htm|publisher=The National Archives|access-date=7 April 2015}}</ref> during which the idea of a political party took form with groups debating rights to political representation during the [[Putney Debates]] of 1647.<ref>{{cite web|title=Putney debates|url=https://www.bl.uk/taking-liberties/articles/putney-debates|publisher=The British Library|access-date=22 December 2016|archive-date=22 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161222223321/https://www.bl.uk/taking-liberties/articles/putney-debates|url-status=dead}}</ref> Subsequently, [[the Protectorate]] (1653–59) and the [[English Restoration]] (1660) restored more autocratic rule, although Parliament passed the [[Habeas Corpus Act 1679|Habeas Corpus Act]] in 1679 which strengthened the convention that forbade detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence. After the [[Glorious Revolution]] of 1688, the [[Bill of Rights 1689|Bill of Rights]] was enacted in 1689 which codified certain rights and liberties and is still in effect. The Bill set out the requirement for regular elections, rules for freedom of speech in Parliament and limited the power of the monarch, ensuring that, unlike much of Europe at the time, [[royal absolutism]] would not prevail.<ref name="refNARoP" /><ref>{{cite web|title=Constitutionalism: America & Beyond|url=http://www.ait.org.tw/infousa/zhtw/DOCS/Demopaper/dmpaper2.html|publisher=Bureau of International Information Programs (IIP), U.S. Department of State|access-date=30 October 2014|quote=The earliest, and perhaps greatest, victory for liberalism was achieved in England. The rising commercial class that had supported the Tudor monarchy in the 16th century led the revolutionary battle in the 17th and succeeded in establishing the supremacy of Parliament and, eventually, of the House of Commons. What emerged as the distinctive feature of modern constitutionalism was not the insistence on the idea that the king is subject to law (although this concept is an essential attribute of all constitutionalism). This notion was already well established in the Middle Ages. What was distinctive was the establishment of effective means of political control whereby the rule of law might be enforced. Modern constitutionalism was born with the political requirement that representative government depended upon the consent of citizen subjects... However, as can be seen through provisions in the 1689 Bill of Rights, the English Revolution was fought not just to protect the rights of property (in the narrow sense) but to establish those liberties which liberals believed essential to human dignity and moral worth. The "rights of man" enumerated in the English Bill of Rights gradually were proclaimed beyond the boundaries of England, notably in the American Declaration of Independence of 1776 and in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789.|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141024130317/http://www.ait.org.tw/infousa/zhtw/DOCS/Demopaper/dmpaper2.html|archive-date=24 October 2014}}</ref> Economic historians [[Douglass North]] and [[Barry R. Weingast|Barry Weingast]] have characterized the institutions implemented in the Glorious Revolution as a resounding success in terms of restraining the government and ensuring protection for property rights.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=North|first1=Douglass C.|last2=Weingast|first2=Barry R.|date=1989|title=Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutions Governing Public Choice in Seventeenth-Century England|journal=The Journal of Economic History|volume=49|issue=4|pages=803–832|doi=10.1017/S0022050700009451|s2cid=3198200|issn=1471-6372}}</ref>
[[File:John Locke.jpg|thumb|200px|upright|[[John Locke]] expanded on [[Thomas Hobbes]]'s [[social contract theory]] and developed the concept of [[natural rights]], the [[Right to property|right to private property]] and the principle of [[consent of the governed]]. His ideas form the ideological basis of [[liberal democracy|liberal democracies]] today.]]
Renewed interest in the Magna Carta, the English Civil War, and the Glorious Revolution in the 17th century prompted the growth of [[political philosophy]] on the British Isles. [[Thomas Hobbes]] was the first philosopher to articulate a detailed [[social contract theory]]. Writing in the ''[[Leviathan (Hobbes book)|Leviathan]]'' (1651), Hobbes theorized that individuals living in the [[state of nature]] led lives that were "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short" and constantly waged a [[Bellum omnium contra omnes|war of all against all]]. In order to prevent the occurrence of an anarchic state of nature, Hobbes reasoned that individuals ceded their rights to a strong, authoritarian power. In other words, Hobbes advocated for an absolute monarchy which, in his opinion, was the best form of government. Later, philosopher and physician [[John Locke]] would posit a different interpretation of social contract theory. Writing in his ''[[Two Treatises of Government]]'' (1689), Locke posited that all individuals possessed the inalienable rights to life, liberty and estate (property).<ref name="Locke-Laslett1988">{{cite book|title=Two Treatises of Government|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge, NY|first=John|last=Locke|author-link=John Locke|editor-first=Peter|editor-last=Laslett|at=[https://archive.org/details/twotreatisesofgo00john/page/ Sec. 87, 123, 209, 222]|year=1988|orig-year=1689|isbn=978-0-521-35448-6|url=https://archive.org/details/twotreatisesofgo00john/page/}}</ref> According to Locke, individuals would voluntarily come together to form a state for the purposes of defending their rights. Particularly important for Locke were property rights, whose protection Locke deemed to be a government's primary purpose.<ref>Locke, John. ''Two Treatises on Government: a Translation into Modern English''. Quote: "Government has no other end, but the preservation of property. [https://books.google.com/books?id=d_4BGe7-pFIC&pg=PR9 There is no practical alternative to majority political rule %E2%80%93 i.e., to take the consent of the majority as the act of the whole and binding every individual." Google Books].</ref> Furthermore, Locke asserted that governments were [[legitimacy (political)|legitimate]] only if they held the [[consent of the governed]]. For Locke, citizens had the [[right of revolution|right to revolt]] against a government that acted against their interest or became tyrannical. Although they were not widely read during his lifetime, Locke's works are considered the founding documents of [[liberalism|liberal]] thought and profoundly influenced the leaders of the [[American Revolution]] and later the [[French Revolution]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Curte|first1=Merle|date=1937|title=The Great Mr. Locke: America's Philosopher, 1783–1861|journal=The Huntington Library Bulletin|issue=11|pages=107–151|jstor=3818115|issn=1935-0708}}</ref> His liberal democratic framework of governance remains the preeminent form of democracy in the world.

In the Cossack republics of Ukraine in the 16th and 17th centuries, the [[Cossack Hetmanate]] and [[Zaporizhian Sich]], the holder of the highest post of [[Hetmans of Ukrainian Cossacks|Hetman]] was elected by the representatives from the country's districts.

In North America, representative government began in [[Jamestown, Virginia]], with the election of the [[House of Burgesses]] (forerunner of the [[Virginia General Assembly]]) in 1619. English Puritans who migrated from 1620 established colonies in New England whose local governance was democratic;<ref>[[Alexis de Tocqueville|Tocqueville, Alexis de]] (2003). [[Democracy in America]]. Barnes & Noble. pp. 11, 18–19. {{ISBN|978-0-7607-5230-2}}.</ref> the hard power of these local assemblies [[Salutary neglect|varied greatly throughout]] the [[Colonial history of the United States|colonial time period]] however officially they held only small amounts of devolved power, as ultimate authority belonged to the Crown and Parliament. The [[Puritans]] ([[Pilgrim Fathers]]), [[Baptists]], and [[Quakers]] who founded these colonies applied the democratic organisation of their congregations also to the administration of their communities in worldly matters.<ref>[[Allen Weinstein]] and David Rubel (2002), ''The Story of America: Freedom and Crisis from Settlement to Superpower'', DK Publishing, Inc., New York, {{ISBN|978-0-7894-8903-6}}, p. 61</ref><ref>Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), ''History of Religion in the [[United States]]'', Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 63–65, 74–75, 102–05, 114–15</ref><ref>Christopher Fennell (1998), [http://www.histarch.uiuc.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html ''Plymouth Colony Legal Structure''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120429000512/http://www.histarch.uiuc.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html |date=29 April 2012 }}</ref>

====18th and 19th centuries====
[[File:The House of Commons 1793-94 by Karl Anton Hickel.jpg|thumb|[[William Pitt the Younger]] addressing the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom]]]]
The [[first Parliament of Great Britain]] was established in 1707, after the merger of the [[Kingdom of England]] and the [[Kingdom of Scotland]] under the [[Acts of Union 1707|Acts of Union]]. Two key documents of the [[Constitution of the United Kingdom|UK's uncodified constitution]], the English [[Declaration of Right, 1689]] (restated in the [[Bill of Rights 1689]]) and the Scottish [[Claim of Right 1689]], had both cemented Parliament's position as the supreme law-making body and said that the "election of members of Parliament ought to be free".<ref>{{cite book|last1=Chavetz|first1=Josh|title=Democracy's Privileged Few. Legislative Privilege and Democratic Norms in the British and American Constitutions|date=2007|publisher=Yale University Press|page=274}}</ref> However, Parliament was only elected by male property owners, which amounted to 3% of the population in 1780.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/struggle_democracy/getting_vote.htm|title=Getting the vote|publisher=The National Archives|access-date=22 August 2010}}</ref> The first known British person of [[African diaspora|African]] heritage to vote in a general election, [[Ignatius Sancho]], voted in 1774 and 1780.<ref>{{cite news|title=Record of Ignatius Sancho's vote in the general election, October 1774|url=https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/record-of-ignatius-sanchos-vote-in-the-general-election-october-1774|access-date=2 October 2020|agency=British Library|archive-date=30 September 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200930142733/https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/record-of-ignatius-sanchos-vote-in-the-general-election-october-1774|url-status=dead}}</ref>

During the [[Age of Liberty]] in Sweden (1718–1772), [[civil rights]] were expanded and power shifted from the monarch to parliament.<ref>Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Sweden". ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. Vol. 26 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 188–221.</ref> The taxed peasantry was represented in parliament, although with little influence, but commoners without taxed property had no suffrage.

The creation of the short-lived [[Corsican Republic]] in 1755 was an early attempt to adopt a democratic [[constitution]] (all men and women above age of 25 could vote).<ref>{{cite book|title=The ungovernable rock: a history of the Anglo-Corsican Kingdom and its role in Britain's Mediterranean strategy during the Revolutionary War, 1793–1797|first=Desmond|last=Gregory|year=1985|publisher=Fairleigh Dickinson University Press|location=London|page=31|isbn=978-0-8386-3225-3}}</ref> This [[Corsican Constitution]] was the first based on [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] principles and included [[female suffrage]], something that was not included in most other democracies until the 20th century.

[[File:Declaration of Independence (1819), by John Trumbull.jpg|thumb|upright=1.0|The [[Thirteen Colonies|Thirteen British Colonies]] on the east coast of North America issued a [[United States Declaration of Independence|Declaration of Independence]] in 1776]]
[[Colonial history of the United States|Colonial America]] had similar property qualifications as Britain, and in the period before 1776 the abundance and availability of land meant that large numbers of colonists met such requirements with at least 60 per cent of adult white males able to vote.<ref>Donald Ratcliffe,  "[http://jer.pennpress.org/media/26167/sampleArt22.pdf The right to vote and the rise of democracy, 1787—1828]". ''Journal of the Early Republic'' 33.2 (2013): 219–254.</ref> The great majority of white men were farmers who met the property ownership or taxpaying requirements. With few exceptions, no blacks or women could vote. [[Vermont]], which, on declaring independence of Great Britain in 1777, adopted a constitution modelled on Pennsylvania's citizenship and democratic suffrage for males with or without property.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Dinkin|first=Robert|url=https://archive.org/details/votinginrevoluti00dink/page/37|title=Voting in Revolutionary America: A Study of Elections in the Original Thirteen States, 1776–1789|publisher=Greenwood Publishing|year=1982|isbn=978-0-313-23091-2|location=US|pages=[https://archive.org/details/votinginrevoluti00dink/page/37 37–42]}}</ref> The [[United States Constitution]] of 1787 is the oldest surviving, still active, governmental [[codified constitution]]. The Constitution provided for an elected government and protected civil rights and liberties, but did not end [[Slavery in the United States|slavery]] nor extend [[voting rights in the United States]], instead leaving the issue of suffrage to the individual states.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ratcliffe|first=Donald|date=Summer 2013|title=The Right to Vote and the Rise of Democracy, 1787–1828|url=https://jer.pennpress.org/media/26167/sampleArt22.pdf|journal=Journal of the Early Republic|volume=33|issue=2|pages=231|doi=10.1353/jer.2013.0033|s2cid=145135025|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230602005114/https://jer.pennpress.org/media/26167/sampleArt22.pdf|archive-date=2 June 2023}}</ref> Generally, states limited suffrage to white male property owners and taxpayers.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ratcliffe|first=Donald|date=Summer 2013|title=The Right to Vote and the Rise of Democracy, 1787–1828|url=https://jer.pennpress.org/media/26167/sampleArt22.pdf|journal=Journal of the Early Republic|volume=33|issue=2|pages=225–229|doi=10.1353/jer.2013.0033|s2cid=145135025|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230602005114/https://jer.pennpress.org/media/26167/sampleArt22.pdf|archive-date=2 June 2023}}</ref> At the time of the first [[1788–89 United States presidential election|Presidential election in 1789]], about 6% of the population was eligible to vote.<ref>{{cite web|title=Expansion of Rights and Liberties – The Right of Suffrage|url=https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/charters_of_freedom_13.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160706144856/http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/charters_of_freedom_13.html|archive-date=6 July 2016|access-date=21 April 2015|website=Online Exhibit: The Charters of Freedom|publisher=National Archives}}</ref> The [[Naturalization Act of 1790]] limited U.S. citizenship to whites only.<ref name="Schultz">{{cite book|last=Schultz|first=Jeffrey D.|title=Encyclopedia of Minorities in American Politics: African Americans and Asian Americans|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WDV40aK1T-sC&pg=PA284|page=284|year=2002|publisher=Oryx Press|access-date=8 October 2015|isbn=978-1-57356-148-8}}</ref> The [[United States Bill of Rights|Bill of Rights]] in 1791 set limits on government power to protect personal freedoms but had little impact on judgements by the courts for the first 130 years after ratification.<ref>{{cite web|title=The Bill of Rights: A Brief History|url=https://www.aclu.org/bill-rights-brief-history|publisher=ACLU|access-date=21 April 2015}}</ref>

[[File:Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in 1789.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Inspired by [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] philosophers, the ''[[Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen]]'' had a significant impact on the development of popular conceptions of [[individual liberty]] and democracy in Europe and worldwide.]]
In 1789, [[Revolutionary France]] adopted the [[Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen]] and, although short-lived, the [[National Convention]] was elected by all men in 1792.<ref>{{cite web|title=The French Revolution II|url=http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/wc2/lectures/rev892.html|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080827213104/http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/wc2/lectures/rev892.html|archive-date=27 August 2008|access-date=22 August 2010|publisher=Mars.wnec.edu}}</ref> The [[Constitution of 3 May 1791|Polish-Lithuanian Constitution]] of 3 May 1791 sought to implement a more effective [[constitutional monarchy]], introduced political equality between townspeople and nobility, and placed the peasants under the protection of the government, mitigating the worst abuses of [[serfdom]]. In force for less than 19 months, it was declared null and void by the [[Grodno Sejm]] that met in 1793.<ref name="Davies1992" /><ref name="Ligeza2017" /> Nonetheless, the 1791 Constitution helped keep alive Polish aspirations for the eventual restoration of the country's sovereignty over a century later.

In the United States, the [[1828 United States presidential election|1828 presidential election]] was the first in which non-property-holding white males could vote in the vast majority of states. Voter turnout soared during the 1830s, reaching about 80% of the adult white male population in the [[1840 United States presidential election|1840 presidential election]].<ref>William G. Shade, "The Second Party System". in Paul Kleppner, et al. ''Evolution of American Electoral Systems'' (1983) pp 77–111</ref> North Carolina was the last state to abolish property qualification in 1856 resulting in a close approximation to universal white male suffrage (however tax-paying requirements remained in five states in 1860 and survived in two states until the 20th century).<ref name="Engerman2005">{{Cite web|first1=Stanley L.|last1=Engerman|first2=Kenneth L.|last2=Sokoloff|title=The Evolution of Suffrage Institutions in the New World|date=2005|url=http://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Workshops-Seminars/Economic-History/sokoloff-050406.pdf|pages=14–16|ref=refEngerman2005|access-date=12 October 2020|archive-date=11 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111211244/http://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Workshops-Seminars/Economic-History/sokoloff-050406.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="Scher2015">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=POzqBgAAQBAJ&pg=PR9|title=The Politics of Disenfranchisement: Why is it So Hard to Vote in America?|last=Scher|first=Richard K.|date=2015|page=viii–ix|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-317-45536-3}}</ref><ref name="NHLTS2009">{{Cite web|date=2009|title=Civil Rights in America: Racial Voting Rights|url=https://www.nps.gov/nhl/learn/themes/CivilRights_VotingRights.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150702010008/http://www.nps.gov/nhl/learn/themes/CivilRights_VotingRights.pdf|archive-date=2015-07-02|url-status=live|publisher=A National Historic Landmarks Theme Study}}</ref> In the [[1860 United States census]], the slave population had grown to four million,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.itd.nps.gov/cwss/manassas/social/introsoc.htm|title=Introduction – Social Aspects of the Civil War|publisher=Itd.nps.gov|access-date=22 August 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070714073725/http://www.itd.nps.gov/cwss/manassas/social/introsoc.htm|archive-date=14 July 2007}}</ref> and in [[Reconstruction era of the United States|Reconstruction]] after the Civil War, three constitutional amendments were passed: the [[Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|13th Amendment]] (1865) that ended slavery; the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|14th Amendment]] (1869) that gave black people citizenship, and the [[Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|15th Amendment]] (1870) that gave black males a nominal right to vote.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url=http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G2-3425000965.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140610193453/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G2-3425000965.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=10 June 2014|title=Fifteenth Amendment: Framing and ratification|author=Gillette, William|year=1986|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of the American Constitution|access-date=23 June 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Black voting rights, 15th Amendment still challenged after 150 years|url=https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/02/03/black-voting-rights-15th-amendment-still-challenged-after-150-years/4587160002/|access-date=18 November 2020|newspaper=USA Today}}</ref>{{refn|group=nb|The [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution]] in 1868 altered the way each state is represented in the [[United States House of Representatives|House of Representatives]]. It counted all residents for apportionment including slaves, overriding the [[three-fifths compromise]], and reduced a state's apportionment if it wrongfully denied males over the age of 21 the right to vote; however, this was not enforced in practice. Some poor white men remained excluded at least until the passage of the [[Voting Rights Act of 1965]]. For state elections, it was not until the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6–3 in ''[[Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections]]'' (1966) that all state poll taxes were unconstitutional as violating the [[Equal Protection Clause]] of the Fourteenth Amendment. This removed a burden on the poor.}} Full enfranchisement of citizens was not secured until after the [[civil rights movement]] gained passage by the US Congress of the [[Voting Rights Act of 1965]].<ref>[http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=100&page=transcript Transcript of Voting Rights Act (1965)] US National Archives.</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20090214180002/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,897070,00.html The Constitution: The 24th Amendment] Time.</ref>
[[File:Suffrage universel 1848.jpg|thumb|1850s lithograph marking the establishment of [[universal male suffrage]] in France in 1848]]
The voting franchise in the United Kingdom was expanded and made more uniform in a [[Reform Acts|series of reforms]] that began with the [[Reform Act 1832]] and continued into the 20th century, notably with the [[Representation of the People Act 1918]] and the [[Equal Franchise Act 1928]]. [[Universal male suffrage]] was established in [[France]] in March 1848 in the wake of the [[French Revolution of 1848]].<ref>{{cite web|author=French National Assembly|title=1848 " Désormais le bulletin de vote doit remplacer le fusil "|url=http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/histoire/suffrage_universel/suffrage-1848.asp|access-date=26 September 2009}}</ref> During that year, several [[Revolutions of 1848|revolutions broke out in Europe]] as rulers were confronted with popular demands for liberal constitutions and more democratic government.<ref>"[http://www.iun.edu/~hisdcl/h114_2002/democracy.htm Movement toward greater democracy in Europe] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100804213940/http://www.iun.edu/~hisdcl/h114_2002/democracy.htm|date=4 August 2010}}". Indiana University Northwest.</ref>

In 1876, the Ottoman Empire transitioned from an [[absolute monarchy]] to a constitutional one, and held two elections the next year to elect members to her newly formed parliament.<ref>Hasan Kayalı (1995) [http://psi203.cankaya.edu.tr/uploads/files/Kayali, Elections in the Ott Empire (1995).pdf "Elections and the Electoral Process in the Ottoman Empire, 1876–1919"] ''International Journal of Middle East Studies'', Vol. 27, No. 3, pp 265–286</ref> Provisional Electoral Regulations were issued, stating that the elected members of the Provincial Administrative Councils would elect members to the first [[Parliament of the Ottoman Empire|Parliament]]. Later that year, a new constitution was promulgated, which provided for a [[Bicameralism|bicameral]] Parliament with a [[Senate of the Ottoman Empire|Senate]] appointed by [[Abdul Hamid II|the Sultan]] and a popularly elected [[Chamber of Deputies (Ottoman Empire)|Chamber of Deputies]]. Only men above the age of 30 who were competent in [[Turkish language|Turkish]] and had full civil rights were allowed to stand for election. Reasons for disqualification included holding dual citizenship, being employed by a foreign government, being bankrupt, employed as a servant, or having "notoriety for ill deeds". Full universal suffrage was achieved in 1934.<ref>{{cite book|title=Reconstructing Gender in Middle East: Tradition, Identity, and Power|date=1995|publisher=Columbia University Press|page=101}}</ref>

In 1893, the self-governing colony [[New Zealand]] became the first country in the world (except for the short-lived 18th-century Corsican Republic) to establish active [[universal suffrage]] by recognizing women as having the right to vote.<ref>{{cite book|last=Nohlen|first=Dieter|author-link=Dieter Nohlen|date=2001|title=Elections in Asia and the Pacific: South East Asia, East Asia, and the South Pacific|page=14|publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref>

====20th and 21st centuries====
[[File:Number of nations 1800-2003 scoring 8 or higher on Polity IV scale.png|thumb|The number of nations 1800–2003 scoring 8 or higher on [[Polity IV]] scale, another widely used measure of democracy{{Update inline|date=March 2024}}]]

20th-century transitions to liberal democracy have come in successive "[[waves of democracy]]", variously resulting from wars, revolutions, [[decolonisation]], and religious and economic circumstances.<ref name="NYTimes20150915">{{cite news|last1=Diamond|first1=Larry|title=Timeline: Democracy in Recession|url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/09/13/opinion/larry-diamond-democracy-in-recession-timeline.html|access-date=25 January 2016|work=The New York Times|date=15 September 2015}}</ref> Global waves of "democratic regression" reversing democratization, have also occurred in the 1920s and 30s, in the 1960s and 1970s, and in the 2010s.<ref name="Bloomberg20170511" /><ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/authoreditor/yascha-mounk|title=The Signs of Deconsolidation|last=Mounk|first=Yascha|date=January 2017|access-date=16 May 2017|journal=Journal of Democracy}}</ref>

[[File:Opening of the first parliament.jpg|thumb|right|Painting depicting the opening of the first Australian Parliament in 1901, one of the events that formed part of the [[Waves of democracy#First|first wave of democracy]] in the early 20th century]]

[[World War I]] and the dissolution of the autocratic [[Ottoman empire|Ottoman]] and [[Austria-Hungary|Austro-Hungarian]] empires resulted in the creation of new nation-states in Europe, most of them at least nominally democratic. In the 1920s democratic movements flourished and [[Timeline of women's suffrage|women's suffrage]] advanced, but the [[Great Depression]] brought disenchantment and most of the countries of Europe, Latin America, and Asia turned to strong-man rule or dictatorships. [[Fascism]] and dictatorships flourished in [[Nazi Germany]], [[Italy]], [[Spain]] and [[Portugal]], as well as non-democratic governments in the [[Baltics]], the [[Balkans]], [[Brazil]], [[Cuba]], [[China]], and [[Japan]], among others.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.snl.depaul.edu/contents/current/syllabi/HC_314.doc|title=Age of Dictators: Totalitarianism in the inter-war period|access-date=7 September 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060907220746/http://www.snl.depaul.edu/contents/current/syllabi/HC_314.doc|archive-date=7 September 2006}}</ref>

[[File:Lev Trotsky 1906-3.3 V1.jpg|250x250px|thumb|left|The [[Saint Petersburg Soviet|Soviet of Workers' Deputies of Saint Petersburg]] in 1905: [[Leon Trotsky]] in the center. The [[soviet (council)|soviets]] were as an early example of a [[workers council]].]]

[[World War II]] brought a definitive reversal of this trend in Western Europe. The [[democratisation]] of the [[Allied Control Council|American, British, and French sectors of occupied Germany]] (disputed<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=599|title=Did the United States Create Democracy in Germany?: The Independent Review: The Independent Institute|work=The Independent Institute |publisher=Independent.org|access-date=22 August 2010}}</ref>), Austria, Italy, and the [[occupied Japan]] served as a model for the later theory of [[government change]]. However, most of [[Eastern Europe]], including the [[German Democratic Republic|Soviet sector of Germany]] fell into the non-democratic [[Eastern Bloc|Soviet-dominated bloc]].

The war was followed by [[decolonisation]], and again most of the new independent states had nominally democratic constitutions. [[India]] emerged as the world's largest democracy and continues to be so.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/country_profiles/1154019.stm|title=World &#124; South Asia &#124; Country profiles &#124; Country profile: India|publisher=BBC News|date=7 June 2010|access-date=22 August 2010}}</ref> Countries that were once part of the [[British Empire]] often adopted the British [[Westminster system]].<ref>{{cite book|editor1-last=Arjomand|editor1-first=Saïd Amir|title=Constitutionalism and political reconstruction|date=2007|publisher=Brill|isbn=978-90-04-15174-1|pages=92–94|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kYmmnYKEvE0C&pg=PA94|author1=Julian Go|chapter=A Globalizing Constitutionalism?, Views from the Postcolony, 1945–2000}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=How the Westminster Parliamentary System was exported around the World|url=http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/how-the-westminster-parliamentary-system-was-exported-around-the-world|publisher=University of Cambridge|access-date=16 December 2013|date=2 December 2013}}</ref>

In 1948, the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]] mandated democracy:

{{Blockquote|text=3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.|multiline=yes|source=[https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 21, United Nations, 1948]}}

By 1960, the vast majority of country-states were nominally democracies, although most of the world's populations lived in nominal democracies that experienced sham elections, and other forms of subterfuge (particularly in [[Communist state|"Communist" states]] and the former colonies). A subsequent wave of [[democratisation]] brought substantial gains toward true liberal democracy for many states, dubbed "third wave of democracy". Portugal, Spain, and several of the military dictatorships in South America returned to civilian rule in the 1970s and 1980s.{{refn|group=nb|[[Portuguese transition to democracy|Portugal in 1974]], [[Spanish democratic transition|Spain in 1975]], [[Argentine transition to democracy|Argentina in 1983]], [[History of Bolivia|Bolivia]], [[History of Uruguay|Uruguay in 1984]], [[History of Brazil (1985–present)|Brazil in 1985]], and [[Chilean transition to democracy|Chile in the early 1990s]]}} This was followed by countries in [[East Asia|East]] and [[South Asia]] by the mid-to-late 1980s. Economic malaise in the 1980s, along with resentment of Soviet oppression, contributed to the [[History of the Soviet Union (1985-1991)|collapse of the Soviet Union]], the associated end of the [[Cold War]], and the democratisation and [[liberalisation]] of the former [[Eastern bloc]] countries. The most successful of the new democracies were those geographically and culturally closest to western Europe, and they are now either part of the [[European Union]] or [[Potential enlargement of the European Union|candidate states]]. In 1986, after the toppling of the most prominent Asian dictatorship, the only democratic state of its kind at the time emerged in the [[Philippines]] with the rise of [[Corazon Aquino]], who would later be known as the mother of [[Democracy in Asia|Asian democracy]].

[[File:Corazon Aquino inauguration.jpg|thumb|right|[[Corazon Aquino]] taking the Oath of Office, becoming the first female president in Asia]]

The liberal trend spread to some states in Africa in the 1990s, most prominently in South Africa. Some recent examples of attempts of liberalisation include the [[Indonesian Revolution of 1998]], the [[Overthrow of Slobodan Milošević|Bulldozer Revolution]] in [[Federal Republic of Yugoslavia|Yugoslavia]], the [[Rose Revolution]] in [[Georgia (country)|Georgia]], the [[Orange Revolution]] in Ukraine, the [[Cedar Revolution]] in Lebanon, the [[Tulip Revolution]] in [[Kyrgyzstan]], and the [[2010–2011 Tunisian revolution|Jasmine Revolution]] in [[Tunisia]].

[[File:Age of democracies at the end of 2015, OWID.svg|thumb|Age of democracies at the end of 2015<ref>{{cite web|title=Age of democracies at the end of 2015|url=https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/age-of-democracies|access-date=15 February 2020|website=Our World in Data|archive-date=15 February 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200215230538/https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/age-of-democracies|url-status=dead}}</ref>{{Update inline|date=March 2024}}]]

According to [[Freedom House]], in 2007 there were 123 electoral democracies (up from 40 in 1972).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=368&year=2007|title=Tables and Charts|publisher=Freedomhouse.org|date=10 May 2004|access-date=22 August 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20090713213025/http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=368&year=2007|archive-date=13 July 2009}}</ref> According to ''World Forum on Democracy'', electoral democracies now represent 120 of the 192 existing countries and constitute 58.2 per cent of the world's population. At the same time liberal democracies i.e. countries Freedom House regards as free and respectful of basic human rights and the rule of law are 85 in number and represent 38 per cent of the global population.<ref>{{Cite web|title=List of Electoral Democracies|url=http://www.fordemocracy.net/electoral.shtml|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131016184935/http://www.fordemocracy.net/electoral.shtml|archive-date=16 October 2013|website=World Forum on Democracy}}</ref> Also in 2007 the [[United Nations]] declared 15 September the [[International Day of Democracy]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/ga10655.doc.htm|title=General Assembly declares 15 September International Day of Democracy; Also elects 18 Members to Economic and Social Council|publisher=United Nations|access-date=22 August 2010}}</ref>

[[File:Nordiska radets presidium haller mote med de nordiska statsministrarna under session i Helsingfors 2008-10-28.jpg|thumb|Meeting of the Grand Committee of the [[Parliament of Finland]] in 2008]]

Many countries reduced their [[voting age]] to 18 years; the major democracies began to do so in the 1970s starting in Western Europe and North America.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Bingham|first=Adrian|date=25 June 2019|title='The last milestone' on the journey to full adult suffrage? 50 years of debates about the voting age|url=https://www.historyandpolicy.org/index.php/policy-papers/papers/the-last-milestone-on-the-journey-to-full-adult-suffrage|access-date=2022-12-31|website=History & Policy}}</ref>{{Failed verification|date=January 2023|reason=This is about the 1960s, not the 1970s.}}<ref>{{Cite web|title=Archives of Maryland, Volume 0138, Page 0051 – Constitutional Revision Study Documents of the Constitutional Convention Commission, 1968|url=https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/000001/000138/html/am138--51.html|access-date=2023-01-03|website=msa.maryland.gov}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Sanders|first=Mark|title=Your Right To Vote|date=2000|publisher=Raintree Steck- Vaugh company|location=United States}}</ref> Most electoral democracies continue to exclude those younger than 18 from voting.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wall|first=John|date=October 2014|title=Democratising democracy: the road from women's to children's suffrage|url=https://johnwall.camden.rutgers.edu/files/2014/10/Democratising-Democracy-The-Road-from-Womens-to-Childrens-Suffrage1.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170420200500/http://johnwall.camden.rutgers.edu/files/2014/10/Democratising-Democracy-The-Road-from-Womens-to-Childrens-Suffrage1.pdf|archive-date=2017-04-20|url-status=live|journal=The International Journal of Human Rights|volume=18|issue=6|pages=646–59|doi=10.1080/13642987.2014.944807|s2cid=144895426|via=Rutgers University}}</ref> The voting age has been lowered to 16 for national elections in a number of countries, including Brazil, Austria, Cuba, and Nicaragua. In California, a 2004 proposal to permit a quarter vote at 14 and a half vote at 16 was ultimately defeated. In 2008, the German parliament proposed but shelved a bill that would grant the vote to each citizen at birth, to be used by a parent until the child claims it for themselves.

According to Freedom House, starting in 2005, there have been 17 consecutive years in which declines in political rights and civil liberties throughout the world have outnumbered improvements,<ref name="freedom-world-2017" /><ref>{{Cite news|date=2023-07-16|title=Biden Says Democracy Is Winning. It's Not That Simple.|publisher=Bloomberg|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-07-16/is-biden-right-that-us-democracy-is-beating-china-and-russia|access-date=2023-07-19}}</ref> as [[Populism|populist]] and [[Nationalism|nationalist]] political forces have gained ground everywhere from Poland (under the [[Law and Justice]] party) to the Philippines (under [[Rodrigo Duterte]]).<ref name="freedom-world-2017" /><ref name="Bloomberg20170511" /> In a Freedom House report released in 2018, Democracy Scores for most countries declined for the 12th consecutive year.<ref>[https://www.voanews.com/a/freedom-house-reports-decrease-in-democratic-principles/4209557.html "Freedom House: Democracy Scores for Most Countries Decline for 12th Consecutive Year"], VOA News, 16 January 2018. Retrieved 21 January 2018.</ref> ''[[The Christian Science Monitor]]'' reported that [[nationalist]] and [[populist]] political ideologies were gaining ground, at the expense of [[rule of law]], in countries like Poland, Turkey and Hungary. For example, in Poland, the President [[2015–present Polish constitutional crisis|appointed 27 new Supreme Court judges]] over legal objections from the [[European Commission]]. In Turkey, thousands of judges were removed from their positions following a [[2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt|failed coup attempt]] during a [[2016–present purges in Turkey|government crackdown]] .<ref>{{Cite news|issn=0882-7729|title=As populism rises, fragile democracies move to weaken their courts|work=The Christian Science Monitor|access-date=14 November 2018|date=13 November 2018|url=https://www.csmonitor.com/World/2018/1113/As-populism-rises-fragile-democracies-move-to-weaken-their-courts}}</ref>

[[File:Countries democratizing or autocratizing substantially and significantly 2010–2020.svg|thumb|Countries autocratising (red) or democratising (blue) substantially and significantly (2010–2020). Countries in grey are substantially unchanged.<ref>Nazifa Alizada, Rowan Cole, Lisa Gastaldi, Sandra Grahn, Sebastian Hellmeier, Palina Kolvani, Jean Lachapelle, Anna Lührmann, Seraphine F.    Maerz, Shreeya Pillai, and Staffan I. Lindberg. 2021. Autocratization Turns Viral. Democracy Report 2021. University of Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute. https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/74/8c/748c68ad-f224-4cd7-87f9-8794add5c60f/dr_2021_updated.pdf {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210914030243/https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/74/8c/748c68ad-f224-4cd7-87f9-8794add5c60f/dr_2021_updated.pdf|date=14 September 2021 }}</ref>{{Update inline|date=March 2024}}{{Relevant|discuss=This map, at a glance, might be mistaken for countries that are or are not democracies (like all other maps) as opposed to trends|date=March 2024}}]]

"[[Democratic backsliding]]" in the 2010s were attributed to economic inequality and social discontent,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Greskovitz|first=Béla|date=2015|title=The Hollowing and Backsliding of Democracy in East-Central Europe|journal=Global Policy|volume=6|issue=1|pages=28–37|doi=10.1111/1758-5899.12225}}</ref> personalism,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Rhodes-Purdy|first1=Matthew|last2=Madrid|first2=Raúl L.|date=27 November 2019|title=The perils of personalism|journal=Democratization|volume=27|issue=2|pages=321–339|doi=10.1080/13510347.2019.1696310|s2cid=212974380|issn=1351-0347}}</ref> poor government's management of the [[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on politics|COVID-19 pandemic]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.idea.int/news-media/multimedia-reports/global-overview-covid-19-impact-elections|title=Global overview of COVID-19: Impact on elections|website=idea.int|access-date=28 January 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Democracy under Lockdown|publisher=Freedom House|url=https://freedomhouse.org/report/special-report/2020/democracy-under-lockdown|access-date=28 January 2021|first1=Sarah|last1=Repucci|first2=Amy|last2=Slipowitz}}</ref> as well as other factors such as manipulation of civil society, "toxic polarization", foreign disinformation campaigns,<ref name="2019VDem">{{Cite report|url=https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/99/de/99dedd73-f8bc-484c-8b91-44ba601b6e6b/v-dem_democracy_report_2019.pdf|title=Democracy Facing Global Challenges: V-Dem Annual Democracy Report 2019|publisher=V-Dem Institute at the [[University of Gothenburg]]|date=May 2019|access-date=26 April 2021|archive-date=5 June 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190605230333/https://www.v-dem.net/media/filer_public/99/de/99dedd73-f8bc-484c-8b91-44ba601b6e6b/v-dem_democracy_report_2019.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> racism and nativism, excessive executive power,<ref>{{Cite book|last=Mettler|first=Suzanne|url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/1155487679|title=Four Threats: The Recurring Crises of American Democracy|publisher=St. Martin's Press|year=2020|isbn=978-1-250-24442-0|location=New York|oclc=1155487679}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|title=History tells us there are four key threats to U.S. democracy|author=Farrell, Henry|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|date=14 August 2020|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/14/history-tells-us-there-are-four-key-threats-us-democracy/}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Lieberman|first=By Suzanne Mettler and Robert C.|date=10 August 2020|title=The Fragile Republic|url=https://reader.foreignaffairs.com/2020/08/10/the-fragile-republic/content.html|access-date=15 August 2020|website=Foreign Affairs}}</ref> and decreased power of the opposition.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Haggard|first1=Stephan|last2=Kaufman|first2=Robert|date=2021|title=Backsliding: Democratic Regress in the Contemporary World|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/backsliding/CCD2F28FB63A56409FF8911351F2E937|access-date=21 January 2021|publisher=Cambridge University Press|doi=10.1017/9781108957809|isbn=978-1-108-95780-9|s2cid=242013001}}</ref> Within English-speaking Western democracies, "protection-based" attitudes combining cultural conservatism and leftist economic attitudes were the strongest predictor of support for authoritarian modes of governance.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Malka|first1=Ariel|last2=Lelkes|first2=Yphtach|last3=Bakker|first3=Bert N.|last4=Spivack|first4=Eliyahu|date=2020|title=Who Is Open to Authoritarian Governance within Western Democracies?|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/who-is-open-to-authoritarian-governance-within-western-democracies/0ADCD5FFE5B7E9267E8283C7561FB6BE|journal=Perspectives on Politics|volume=20|issue=3|pages=808–827|doi=10.1017/S1537592720002091|s2cid=225207244|issn=1537-5927}}</ref>