Democracy has long been championed as the ultimate political system, a utopia in which

power is vested in the hands of the people. However, despite its lofty ideals and promises,
democracy has proven to be largely unattainable in practice. This essay argues that
democracy is an unachievable ideal due to a range of factors, including the inherent flaws of
human nature, the influence of money in politics, the proliferation of misinformation, and the
limitations of representative systems. While some may argue that progress has been made
towards a more democratic society, the evidence suggests that these gains are often temporary
and that true democracy remains an elusive goal, forever out of reach.

Democracy is a political system in which power is held by the people, either directly or
through elected representatives. According to the United Nations (2023), democracy is based
on the principles of popular sovereignty, political equality, and majority rule. In a democratic
society, individuals have the right to participate in the decision-making process and to express
their opinions without fear of persecution. Elections are a fundamental aspect of democracy,
allowing citizens to choose their leaders and hold them accountable for their actions,
(OHCHR, 2022). Additionally, democracy requires the rule of law, protection of human
rights, and freedom of speech and the press. The ultimate goal of democracy is to create a
government that is responsive to the needs and desires of the people, promoting the well-
being and flourishing of the society as a whole. Disagreements over what democracy truly
means can make it difficult to achieve and sustain democratic governance. This is because
different regions and societies have their own unique cultural and historical contexts, which
can shape their understanding of democracy. In the Western context, democracy is often
defined as a system of government where citizens have the right to vote, express their
opinions freely, and hold their leaders accountable, (Rosenburg, 2020). However, in other
regions of the world, such as the Middle East or Africa, there may be different expectations of
democracy, including an emphasis on social justice and economic equality.

These differences in understanding can lead to conflicts and tensions over the implementation
of democratic principles. For example, in some countries in the Middle East, the
implementation of democratic governance has been challenged by the dominance of religious
institutions and the difficulty of reconciling Islamic values with Western-style democracy,
(George W. Bush Presidential Center, 2020). In other regions, such as Latin America, debates
over the meaning of democracy have revolved around the role of the state in promoting social
welfare and protecting marginalized communities, (Foreign Affairs, 2022). Also,
disagreements over the meaning of democracy can hinder the full realization of democratic
governance. This is because they can create misunderstandings, mistrust, and even conflicts
between different groups in society. In some cases, they may also be used as a pretext for
authoritarian leaders to undermine democratic institutions and consolidate their own power.

In addition to disagreements over the meaning of democracy, the legacy of colonialism can
also make it difficult to achieve democratic governance in some regions of the world. Many
countries in Africa and Asia, for example, were colonized by Western powers, which often
imposed authoritarian systems of governance and suppressed democratic movements,
(Foreign Affairs, ibid). These colonial legacies of disenfranchisement and exclusion can
continue to shape political systems and social attitudes long after the end of colonial rule. In
many post-colonial countries, the legacy of authoritarianism and repression has made it
difficult to establish democratic governance. For example, in countries like Sudan, Algeria,
and Zimbabwe, authoritarian leaders have used violence and repression to maintain their grip
on power, despite the aspirations of democratic movements, (Lee & Paine, 2019). Similarly,
in some countries in Southeast Asia, like Myanmar, military rule has long suppressed
democratic institutions and prevented the peaceful transfer of power.

Colonial legacies can also manifest themselves in more subtle ways, such as through
economic inequalities and exclusion. Many post-colonial countries have inherited economic
systems that perpetuate inequality and exclusion, making it difficult for marginalized groups
to participate fully in democratic processes, (Lee & Paine, ibid). For example, in many
African countries, the legacy of colonialism has resulted in a concentration of wealth and
power among a small elite, while the majority of the population lives in poverty and is
excluded from political participation.

Thirdly, corruption in elections is a significant threat to democratic governance as it

undermines the fundamental principle of fair and free elections. According to the UNODC
(2022), when elections are corrupted, the will of the people is not accurately reflected, and
the democratic process is subverted. This makes democracy unattainable as it robs the people
of their power to participate in the decision-making process and choose their leaders. One
example of how corruption in elections makes democracy unattainable is in the case of
Nigeria. In the 2011 presidential election, there were widespread allegations of electoral
malpractice, including vote rigging, ballot box stuffing, and voter intimidation, (UNODC,
ibid). The ruling party was accused of manipulating the election in its favour by bribing
officials, falsifying results, and using state resources to campaign. These actions undermine
the credibility of the election and cast doubt on the legitimacy of the government. Another
example is the 2004 Ukrainian presidential election. The election was marked by allegations
of voter fraud and vote rigging, leading to protests and demonstrations. The incumbent
government was accused of falsifying results to ensure its victory, leading to a political crisis
that ultimately resulted in a revote. The election was a clear example of how corruption can
undermine the legitimacy of the democratic process and create instability.

These incidences show that corruption in elections makes democracy unattainable by

undermining the fundamental principle of fair and free elections. It robs people of their power
to participate in the decision-making process and choose their leaders. The examples of
Nigeria, Ukraine, and the United States demonstrate how corruption can undermine the
legitimacy of the democratic process and create instability. To attain democratic ideals, it is
essential to address corruption in elections and ensure that the democratic process remains
fair and transparent.

Political greed, particularly among liberation war parties in Africa, makes democracy largely
unattainable as it undermines the principles of democratic governance. These parties
prioritize their interests over the interests of the people and the country, leading to a lack of
accountability, corruption, and economic mismanagement. One example of political greed
undermining democracy is in Zimbabwe. The ruling party, ZANU-PF, has been in power
since independence in 1980. Robert Mugabe, the party's late former leader, was accused of
enriching himself and his inner circle at the expense of the country's development, (Moore,
2014). Corruption, lack of accountability, and economic mismanagement led to Zimbabwe's
economic decline, and the country's democracy was undermined as Mugabe and his party
clung to power. In South Africa, the African National Congress (ANC) has been in power
since the end of apartheid in 1994. According to Brooks et al. (2020), while the party is
credited with the country's transition to democracy, it has faced criticism for its corruption
and failure to address issues like inequality, poverty, and unemployment. The party's leaders
have been accused of using their positions for personal enrichment, while the country's
economy has struggled. The ruling party in Angola, the People's Movement for the Liberation
of Angola (MPLA), has been in power since independence in 1975. The party has been
accused of widespread corruption, nepotism, and economic mismanagement. While the
country is rich in resources, the citizens continue to live in poverty. This is due to the MPLA's
prioritization of its own interests over those of the people.
Overall, political greed among liberation war parties in Africa can make democracy
unattainable. These parties prioritize their interests over those of the people and the country,
leading to a lack of accountability, corruption, and economic mismanagement. The examples
of Zimbabwe, South Africa, Angola, and Mozambique demonstrate how this political greed
has undermined democracy in these countries. It is crucial to address political greed and
prioritize the interests of the people and the country to attain democratic ideals.

Furthermore, flawed political systems, particularly those with partisan electoral management
bodies, can have a significant impact on democratic governance. According to Repucci and
Slipowitz (2021), these systems can limit political competition, suppress dissent, and enable
the abuse of power, ultimately making democracy difficult to attain. Partisan electoral
management bodies can be particularly problematic, as they can be easily manipulated to
favour one political party over another. This can involve biased voter registration, vote
counting, and the manipulation of electoral boundaries. In some cases, the partisan
management of elections can lead to electoral fraud, which can undermine the legitimacy of
the democratic process. Over time, these flaws can have long-term impacts on democratic
institutions, particularly when they become institutionalized. For example, when a political
party is in power for a long time, it can create a system of patronage, where loyal supporters
are rewarded with government jobs and contracts. This can lead to a culture of corruption,
where political leaders prioritize their own interests over the public good. These flaws have
been observed in various countries across Africa, where some liberation war parties have held
power for decades. In such cases, the ruling party may use its influence over the electoral
management body to manipulate the democratic process and maintain its grip on power. This
can lead to a lack of political competition, which stifles dissent and limits public
accountability.

Finally, the inherent flaws of human nature make democracy unattainable, as they undermine
the fundamental principles of democratic governance. For example, humans are subject to
cognitive biases, such as confirmation bias and groupthink, which can distort decision-
making processes and lead to flawed policies, (Jones et al., 2020). These biases can be
particularly pronounced in democratic systems, where decision-making is often based on
majority rule, and minority opinions can be disregarded. The Brexit referendum is an
example of this. The campaign was characterized by misinformation and lies, which led to a
narrow majority vote in favour of leaving the European Union, a decision that has since been
widely criticized for its negative economic and political consequences.
However, while there are certainly challenges to achieving democracy, Boston and Berman
(2017) argue that it is important to note that progress has been made in many parts of the
world. There are examples of countries that have successfully transitioned from authoritarian
rule to democratic governance, and democratic institutions continue to evolve and adapt to
new challenges. For example, in countries like South Africa and Brazil, democratic
institutions have emerged after decades of authoritarian rule. These countries have made
significant progress in consolidating democratic governance, despite the challenges they have
faced. Similarly, in countries like Indonesia and the Philippines, democratic institutions have
been strengthened over time, despite initial setbacks and challenges.

The emergence of social media and digital communication platforms has revolutionized the
way people engage with politics and participate in democratic processes. According to Welzel
(2021), these tools have enabled citizens to mobilize and organize in ways that were
previously impossible, amplifying their voices and empowering them to hold governments
accountable. Social media has been instrumental in facilitating mass mobilizations such as
the Arab Spring protests, which led to the overthrow of authoritarian regimes in Tunisia and
Egypt. In addition to enabling citizen mobilization, social media and other digital
communication platforms have also created new spaces for political expression and debate.
Citizens can now engage with political actors and debate issues in real-time, and can use
these platforms to challenge and hold governments accountable. This has led to increased
transparency and accountability and has created new opportunities for citizen engagement in
democratic processes.

It is also worth noting that the fact that there is no one-size-fits-all model of democracy offers
hope for the achievement of democracy. According to Cilliers (2016), the Western model of
democracy, which emphasizes liberal values such as individual rights and free-market
capitalism, may not be suitable for all societies. For example, some African countries have
emphasized communal values and social justice over individualism, resulting in different
approaches to democracy. South Africa's post-apartheid democracy, which emphasizes
reconciliation and affirmative action, is an example of this. In addition, some countries have
developed hybrid models of democracy, combining elements of authoritarianism and
democracy. For example, China's system of "consultative democracy" involves consultation
with citizens on policy matters, but ultimate decision-making power rests with the
Communist Party. While these models may not fit the traditional definition of democracy,
they represent attempts to reconcile local values and political realities with democratic
principles.

In conclusion, the inherent flaws of human nature, colonial legacies, flawed political systems,
and disagreements over the meaning of democracy make it difficult to fully achieve
democratic governance. Corruption, political greed, and flawed electoral systems all serve to
undermine the principles of democratic governance. However, the rise of social media and
the diversity of approaches to democracy offer hope for the future. While democracy may
never be fully achieved, it remains a worthwhile ideal to strive towards. It is up to citizens,
activists, and policymakers to continue to work towards creating more inclusive, transparent,
and accountable democratic systems. Only then can we hope to build a world where
democratic governance is a reality for all.

References

Boston, J., & Berman, E. (2017) Governing for the future: Designing democratic institutions
for a better tomorrow, Bingley: Emerald.

Brooks, H., Ngwane, T., & Runciman, C. (2020) ‘Decolonising and re-theorising the meaning
of democracy: A South African perspective’, The Sociological Review, 68(1), 17-32.

Cilliers, J. (2016) ‘The future of democracy in Africa’, Institute for Security Studies Papers,
2016(19), 1-32.

Foreign Affairs (2022) ‘Why Democracy Stalled in the Middle East’, at

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2022-02-22/why-democracy-stalled-
middle-east (Accessed on 15 March 2023)

George W. Bush Presidential Center (2020) ‘When It Comes to Democratic Transitions, the
Middle East Is a Desert’, at https://www.bushcenter.org/publications/when-it-comes-to-
democratic-transitions-the-middle-east-is-a-desert (Accessed on 15 March 2023)

Lee, A. and Paine, J. (2019) ‘British colonialism and democracy: Divergent inheritances and
diminishing legacies’, Journal of Comparative Economics, 47 (3), p. 487-503
Moore, D. (2014) ‘Death or dearth of democracy in Zimbabwe?’, Africa Spectrum, 49(1),
101-114.

OHCHR (2022) ‘About democracy and human rights’, at

https://www.ohchr.org/en/democracy#:~:text=Democracy%20is%20one%20of%20the,the
%20essential%20elements%20of%20democracy. (Accessed on 15 March 2023)

Repucci, S., & Slipowitz, A. (2021) ‘Democracy in a Year of Crisis’, Journal of

Democracy, 32(2), 45-60.

Rosenburg, J. H. (2020) ‘Democracy, respect for judgement and disagreement on democratic

inclusion’, at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13698230.2020.1772604
(Accessed on 15 March 2023)

United Nations (2023) ‘Democracy’, at https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/democracy

(Accessed on 15 March 2023)

UNODC (2022) ‘Corruption and Democracy’, at https://www.unodc.org/e4j/en/anti-

corruption/module-3/key-issues/corruption-and-democracy.html (Accessed on 15 March
2023)