Democracy as a Way to Social Compromise

Author(s): Zhen Han and Lihe Dong

Source: Frontiers of Philosophy in China , Jan., 2006, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Jan., 2006), pp. 1-5
Published by: Brill

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/30209945

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Frontiers of
Philosophy in China

This content downloaded from

122.161.67.7 on Sat, 30 Sep 2023 07:14:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Front. Philos. China (2006) 1:1-5
DOI 10.1007/sl 1466-005-0009-9

Han Zhen

Democracy as a Way to Social Compromise

Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag 2006

Abstract In modern society, democracy as a symbol of social civilization and progress is

cherished. Any government or organization, whether truly democratic or not, will claim that
it is democratic while its opponents are not. However, as a historical notion, democracy does
not possess the quality of absoluteness. In my view, democracy, in its original meaning,
should be understood as a way to social compromise, whose aim is to guarantee a relatively
fair political life.

Keywords democracy, compromise, historicity

The English word democracy is derived from the classical Greek word demokratia, which
means "people" (demos) "ruling" (kratos). In its proper sense, democracy is not finished
reality, but exists as potentiality. But, indeed, people are obviously acquiring more and more
democratic rights. Thus considered, democracy is reality.
In modern society, democracy as a symbol of social civilization and progress is cherished.
Any government or organization, whether truly democratic or not, will claim that it is
democratic while its opponents are not. However, as a historical notion, democracy does not
possess the quality of absoluteness. On one hand, in the past, democracy did not work as
positively as today; on the other hand, in reality, democracy has never been fully realized and
every community enjoys only limited democracy. From my point of view, democracy, in its
original meaning, should be understood as a way to social compromise, whose aim is to
guarantee a relatively fair political life. This conclusion gets some support from two western
scholars.

Translated from New Eyesight, 2004(3) by Dong Lihe

Han Zhen (E)

School of Philosophy and Sociology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China

This content downloaded from

122.161.67.7 on Sat, 30 Sep 2023 07:14:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2 Front. Philos. China (2006) 1: 1-5

In Western Political Theory in the Face of the Fut

democracy: real democracy and ideal democracy. Acc
a utopian ideal and a practical arrangement, although t
simultaneously in any political activity. In On De
conclusion. Dahl argues that democracy means som
different times and places. For instance, in ancient
free men; in the early period of US political history
white males in colonies; today, although all citizens h
really have in political life, in fact, are voting rights
However, there exist some differences between
democracy. Dunn is not so confident in the realiz
democracy cannot be fulfilled in a postindustrial soci
enjoying the liberty and self-cultivation that ideal dem
opinion, the best democratic system is no more tha
while the worst democratic system is a meaningless
Dunn. He insists that democracy can be realized
democracy has been widening its fields. Poor women
rights and have shared more rights to express the
democracy performs as a standard by which real de
The gap between ideal democracy and practical demo
people's effort, it is expected to become narrower an
In my view, both Dunn and Dahl are extremists
between them. Dunn takes too pessimistic a view of
achieve democracy to some degree. Dahl goes too far
democracy. In my opinion, the ideal itself is always
goes too far from its historical conditions, will dege
the ideal consists in value judgments and the desc
judgment, then value judgments should always be
judgment isolated from empirical judgments will be
Hence, it follows that any form of democracy d
therefore, is not perpetual. Democracy is a comprom
members of a community.
Firstly, from the perspective ofontology, human bein
different individuals. It is the individuals, not the peo
subject that exerts power is not the people in general
held by all individuals will no longer be called pow
Ideal democracy means that every individual sh
however, is impractical. It is impossible for all mem
agreement, especially today when labor division and
more complex. In practical life, the tension between di
the balance or compromise of different interests is
common understanding may be reached. Here, co
complete agreement among all members, but refer
members can accept. A complete agreement does not
may give rise to the opposite of democracy-totalita

This content downloaded from

122.161.67.7 on Sat, 30 Sep 2023 07:14:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Front. Philos. China (2006) 1:1-5 3

In political life, it is the number of votes that det

majority or is the representative of the majority. O
through the number of votes. But even after cou
necessary; otherwise, the majority will degenerate d
political elite is empowered by the majority, but t
interest of that very majority. The group in power m
The interests of the minority must also be prote
needed. Any individual or any group in power with
the voices of different interest groups.
Secondly, a proper democracy must be able to hel
space to go into public life. Democratic politics sho
members (or at least most of them) feel that they a
authorizing their representatives to participate in
promise, can help achieve their sense of presence. T
democracy is characterized by representatives from d
political decision making. The American Constitutio
For instance, the lower house of the US Congress, i
each state is decided by its population, and the upper
from each state, constitute the Great Comprom
American democracy makes steady progress.
Compromise itself is a historical notion and sho
circumstances. In the early developing period of m
most concerned with was the ruling class not offendi
participating in democracy. In feudal ages, democrac
power between the nobles and the emperor. As a re
arose. With the development of capitalism in a feu
in the city. From a long-term point of view, the f
class should be taxed but cannot be overtaxed, so t
on taxation policy. This was the starting point of
Thirdly, the vigor of democracy lies on its ability
aspire for democracy not because it provides absolu
but because it can achieve compromise and harm
conspicuous distinctions between democracy and tyra
the state of differences while the latter tries to est
dissenting voices.
Different from some traditional theories of democ
in the way to realizing genuine democracy, some ad
insist that the state of differences as an unavoidable
strive for equality and democracy. In a sense, dem
interest groups can freely express their voices an
mocracy is an equal dialogue among different intere
a way to compromise.
Not only the democracy within a society but als
must be based on tolerating different voices. The w
which each nation must compromise with other
Whichever nation preaches its culture as the only
upon others, will surely be condemned.

This content downloaded from

122.161.67.7 on Sat, 30 Sep 2023 07:14:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
4 Front. Philos. China (2006) 1:1-5

Lastly, the development of democracy is an ev

ancient Greece, democracy was a disgrace to some
the cousins. Aristotle gave little credit to democr
worst among good polities, although the best amo
French Revolution did democracy really become o
However, Jacobin's terror and Napoleon's military
democracy. In the USA, democrats were, for a t
progress of world history and the development
beginning to be accepted by more and more peo
The ups and downs of democracy show that po
tyranny and democracy, but a mutual molding pro
Today, the idea of democracy as the opposite of f
in our souls. It is no longer a utopian dream, but
over the world. This is not to say that democracy
contrary, democracy still has a long way to go. B
compromise, will lead to a brighter future.
The compromise alone is far from being democra
are also necessary. In practical politics, decision
according to vote number, so authoritative proceedi
vote counting and authorizing process. If there ar
might unconscionably alter some proceedings to a
undermine the whole democratic system. It is by f
is empowered. Next, let me further explicate the n
Firstly, the proceedings are likely to compel the g
way, thereby avoiding radical or extreme actions
some people, it is somewhat conservative, but it seem
to deal with important political issues in an order
when considering that the world is full of uncerta
Secondly, proceedings can help protect the inter
poor have no obligation to obey their government if
weak must be given opportunities to voice thei
exercised through compromise or proceedings; o
political rights by strong people in power.
Thirdly, the proceedings of compromise are likel
minority. If the proceedings were absent, the min
and they would fall victim to the majority, henc
proceedings available, the majority may be com
minority, and something like a common agreeme
Lastly, a democracy with credible proceedings is
possible, which is expected to produce a democr
political life, any law that is not supported by
instance, a policy is supported by 90% and opposed
policy maker to make a concession to the 10% t
democracy should be a way to compromise, suppo

This content downloaded from

122.161.67.7 on Sat, 30 Sep 2023 07:14:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Front. Philos. China (2006) 1:1-5 5

References

1. Dunn J., Western Political Theory in the Face of the F

1979

2. Dahl R., On Democracy, New Haven, CT: Yale Univer

3. Sartori G., The Theory of Democracy Revisited, Chat
4. Takashi Inoguchi M l 1 et al., The Changing Nature o
People Publishing House, 1999
5. Reeves R., Traveling with Tocqueville in Search of De
Commercial Press, 1997
6. Russia, France and Germany do not want "New-Yalta

This content downloaded from

122.161.67.7 on Sat, 30 Sep 2023 07:14:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms