Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs: A Collection of Essays

WHAT DOES DEMOCRACY MEAN TO ME?

Edited by: Martin Palouš and Prachi Lalwani

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

INTRODUCTION

For the last several years, during each spring semester, I have taught CPO 4737, a course with a long name: Democratic Transitions and Human Rights: The Basic Ideas and Concepts in Historical Context.

It has three main objectives:

1. The students should realize that ideas put into action in concrete circumstances have their own past— it is in the field of spirit and its “life” in the span of millennia where these ideas originated and from where they until today draw their enlightening and mobilizing power.

2. The students should also appreciate the following “triviality”: academic and practical approaches to political processes differ substantively, and observing those processes is quite different from being involved in them as an actor! What is at stake here is not just a comparative political “science” or historically informed political “theory” but also the following: a contemporary classical philosophy that is actively engaged in political matters; a political anthropology that is aware, first and foremost, of human limitations, incompleteness, and deficiencies; a political conception stemming from the elementary existential reality that human deeds, no matter whether big or small, futile or successful, always correspond to the nature of humans as finite beings and are based on “situational,” “experience-driven,” and “action-oriented” human understanding!

3. The students, at the end of this course, should understand better the dynamic role of human rights in democratic transitions, be able to differentiate among their various actors and their specific goals and strategies (relating to international society and its institutions and mechanisms, governments, and civil society), and be able to articulate with greater precision their own opinions about the future of democracy in their own country, region, and globally.

The final assignment is to write a personal essay answering a simple question: What does democracy mean for me today?

I asked one of my brightest students in my 2021 course, Prachi Lalwani, an international student at FIU from Venezuela whose family is from India, to work with me on the following project: to select from the more than 150 responses to this question that I received over the years a dozen or so of the most interesting ones and prepare them for publication. I would like to thank her for excellent work on this project.

It is a great pleasure for me to present these contributions of my students to the debate on the state of democracy in our world. These do not reflect their academic analyses of this topic but rather their personal opinions based on their unique experiences. I am proud of them and strongly convinced that they can provide some reasons to be hopeful that democracy, whose roots are deep indeed, has a chance to resist all the current challenges and be resilient enough to remain the main political power in our world—to be able to secure human freedom in our national societies and to lead humankind, who are ever more and more interconnected and interdependent, to our open and thus principally unknown future.

Martin Palouš Director, Václav Havel Program for Human Rights and Diplomacy, Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs Florida International University

Selected Readings from CPO 4737

The main sources for the course are two classic books in the field of democratic theory: Robert A. Dahl’s Democracy and Its Critics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989) and The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century by Samuel P. Huntington (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991).

Additional texts were assigned for each class; the ones below were cited by several students. All these works informed the students’ essays. For the full reading list, please contact Prachi Lalwani at plalw001@fiu.edu.

Arendt, Hannah. 1963. On Revolution. New York: Viking Press.

Arendt, Hannah. 1998. The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,.

Morris, I. 1996. “The Strong Principle of Equality and Archaic Origins of Greek Democracy.” In DEMOKRATIA. A Conversation on Democracy, Ancient and Modern, edited by Josiah Ober and Charles Hedrick, 19–48. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ober, Josiah. 1998. Political Dissent in Democratic Athens: Intellectual Critics of Popular Rule Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Ober, Josiah. 2005. Athenian Legacies: Essays on the Politics of Going on Together. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Palouš, Martin. 2002. What Does Democracy Mean Today? Brussels: International Debate Education Association, 2002.

Palouš, Martin. 2021. Once upon a Time of Transition. Washington, DC: Academica Press.

Tocqueville, Alexis de. 2000. Democracy in America, Vol. II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000

Wallace, R. W. 1996. “Law, Freedom and the Concept of Citizens’ Rights in Democratic Athens.” In DEMOKRATIA. A Conversation on Democracy, Ancient and Modern, edited by Josiah Ober and Charles Hedrick, 105–19. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Andres Eskenazi*

Democracy has evolved throughout history, taking on multiple meanings and perspectives and affecting varied types of civilizations around the world. To understand the concept of democracy, we must analyze its meaning and intention. Demos refers to the people or population of a certain state or civilization, and kratia means rule by. Thus, democracy refers to the government of the people or the rule of the majority

The word was first used to refer to the people and government of the Greek state. The democracy founded in the Greek empire represents a completely different system from the one that we practice today. Then, women and non-Greek citizens were not allowed to vote. Thus, the democratic process has evolved to more fully embody equality.

Today, the state of democracies around the world is one of the main topics in international politics because of democracy’s relationship with development, progress, stability, and peace. Multiple scholars argue that democracy around the world is in a period of retreat. For this reason, the expansion of democratic ideas and values has become more important in the current global sphere. In this essay, I explore the perspectives of recognized scholars and how those ideas interact with real-life examples. Additionally, I use my personal experiences to highlight the importance of democratic values around the world. I compare and contrast the ideas of Robert Dahl, Alexis de Tocqueville, Professor Palouš, and the class guest lecturers and reflect on my own experiences with democracy.

Throughout the semester, we discussed the essential role of democracy in different societies and civilizations.

Robert Dahl holds that democracy is built on five principles: “effective participation, voting equality at the decisive stage,

Democracy is the worst form of government except all others.”

—Winston Churchill

“There is nothing more dangerous than allowing one citizen to be in power for a long time. The people get used to obeying him. And he becomes used to ruling the people; that’s where usurpation and tyranny originate.”

—Simón Bolívar, Congress of Angostura

enlightened understanding, control of the agenda, and inclusiveness.” These are the pillars for a third democratic transformation. Is it possible or a utopian dream?

Dahl discusses the conditions for achieving this third democratic transformation. The free democracies of the world should work with nondemocratic governments, promoting pre-democratic institutions, human rights, education, independent institutions, organizational autonomy, the rule of law, and pluralism. The transition to democracy is a “slow process” that needs the cooperation of democracies around the world. For Dahl, democratization will take multiple years and should not be understand as a change taking weeks or months.

Democracies have been the subject of multiple critiques since the beginning of this political system in Ancient Greece. Among the most common arguments against democracy are that the masses are ignorant and so are incapable of self-rule, some people are more qualified than others to rule, and it leads to the possibility of nondemocratic regimes. In this context, it is very important to analyze the ideas of Aristotle, who was the first critic to highlight the problems of democracies. For Aristotle, aristocracy is necessary because only the people who are already wealthy can govern successfully. Putting less wealthy people into positions of power would contribute to corruption. Even though this argument was first applied more than 2,000 years ago, many citizens and scholars still apply Aristotle’s ideas to describe the problems that democracies face today.

Democracy is based on the notion that the will of the people controls the fate of the state. For many people, this means that democracy relies on the rationality of the majority of voters. Is everyone capable of rationally making the best

* Andres Eskenazi was born in 1998 in Caracas. Growing up in Venezuela, Andres developed interests in law, politics, and policy making. Andres graduated summa cum laude from Florida International University with a B.A. in political science and international relations. He received several awards during his college career, including the Civic Engagement Medallion of Distinction, the Global Learning Medallion, the Fausto B. Gomez Scholarship in Political Science, and the William T. Jerome Gomez Scholarship in Political Science. Currently, Andres is a Dean’s Scholar student at the FIU College of Law and is looking to expand his knowledge of real estate law, corporate law, and business litigation.

decisions for their nation? Many would argue that the election of ineffective leaders by irrational voters is the main threat to society. Historically, many democratic processes have led their nations to massive economic crises, dictatorships, kleptocracies, and war. One of the main examples to support this claim is the emergence of populism in Latin America. Kurt Weyland argues, “The rise of populist leaders gained the quick support of the middle and low classes through social welfare programs. In the majority of cases, the lower classes were highly excluded in the past from the political decisions by the democratically elected governments. These characteristics evolved into the rise of leadership that took advantage of the high resentments and gaps within society to achieve political power” (Weyland 2013). This type of government spread throughout the continent to Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina, Brazil, and Nicaragua. Most of their leaders— Chavez and Maduro in Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia, Correa in Ecuador, and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua—promoted constitutional changes that enabled them to be re-elected indefinitely, hijacked political institutions, increased political oppression, banned political parties, and persecuted opposition leaders, all to establish authoritarian regimes. Another crucial example is the emergence of Nazism in Germany during the twentieth century. The rise of Adolf Hitler as a democratically elected leader also contributes to this debate on the rationality of the democratic system: he gained power through free democratic elections, which brought unimaginable consequences for the world.

In the case of U.S. democracy, many citizens consider the system unfair because of the multiple problems in American society. These include the role of the corporations, the Electoral College as distorting the will of the people, political polarization caused by a twoparty system, polarization fostered by the media, racism, and inequality. Yet, many other people consider the United States as the perfect example of a functioning democracy. Even though it has many flaws, it is the oldest democracy in history. The United States is considered by many as an example of values, freedoms, rule of law, and institutionalism for the world.

The 2019 Freedom House Report concluded that “this is the 13th consecutive year in which democracy around the world has declined. The main causes explained are related to the rise of anti-democratic leaders, authoritarianism, populism, repression, and human rights violations”; yet it found the same conditions in the United States (Freedom House 2019, 1–3). The report mentions “the influence of the Trump administration in developing anti-democratic conducts that might weaken the democratic institutions of the nation. For example, the anti-immigrant sentiments and policies, the constant public attacks to the media, self-dealing, conflict of interests, among many other factors” (17–24). This analysis paints a gloomy picture for the current state of democracy around the world and the expectations of global democratization.

Alexis De Tocqueville’s Democracy in America is one of the most important works in understanding the foundations of American democracy. Although written in 1835, his descriptions of American media, intellectualism, “transitory culture,” racism, capitalism, and the role of women are considered very relevant to today’s democracy. His book is based on his visit to the United States as part of a diplomatic mission by the French government to study aspects of American society. De Tocqueville explains the main differences between America and Europe and shows that they are cause of the success of American democracy. Among those differences are the freedom of association, decentralization, anti-intellectualism, equality of education, that all politics are local, the lack of entrenched wealth, and that American society was born of ideas rather than history. Tocqueville (2000, 407–8) defines American society as equal, based on the “lack of class resentment, equality on the level of education among citizens, no complaints against property, practicality, and the decentralization of intellectual life” , De He emphasizes “the lack of an aristocratic class in power, the fair payment of governmental officers, the genuine freedom of discussion, among many others as the causes for equality and democratic success in America” (194–97). These characteristics reinforce the democratic notion of the United States. Yet Tocqueville also mentions flaws of American democracy such as

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

the promotion of mediocrity and less exceptional leaders, material abundance, and the dangers of a “tyranny of the majority.”

Growing up in an authoritarian regime has completely shaped my perspectives and visions of global democracy. I was born in Venezuela just a few months before the election of Hugo Chavez as president of the nation. For more than eighteen years, I experienced the demise of the nation’s democratic institutions, constant human rights violations, the extreme censorship of local media corporations, the imprisonment of thousands of political prisoners, and massive repression of peaceful protests, among many other atrocities. I believe that living in those circumstances is completely different than reading about them in a textbook or newspaper. Moreover, the appreciation of democratic values and freedoms completely changes under those scenarios. I was never able to participate in free elections. Thus, my perceptions completely changed when I decided to move to the United States, which gave me the opportunity to perceive a democratic election in 2016 for the first time.

Throughout the semester, we discussed undemocratic nations and the required mechanisms for political transitions. The guidance of Professor Palouš helped me analyze patterns of democratic transitions around the world. Coming from the Czech Republic, the professor devoted several class sessions to the development of democracy in his home country and the ability of younger generations to achieve changes to authoritarianism and dictatorship. We also learned from the personal experiences of a former diplomat, ambassador to the United Nations, and an active participant of the Charter 77 movement. We discussed the importance of the Velvet Revolution and the role of former President Vaclav Havel as examples of democratic values. The Velvet Revolution was a nonviolent movement that ended forty-one years of one-party rule in Czechoslovakia: it ended communism and started the transitional path to democracy. Having the opportunity to learn about this process from its protagonists completely affected my way of understanding political transitions. Likewise, the shared experiences of other students and guest speakers served as complementary backgrounds to a very complex discussion of democracy, political transitions, and human rights. I completely identified with the experiences of Professor

Palouš because we were both affected by undemocratic regimes in our youth. My experience helped me understand that I can also be part of a similar change in my country not only in theory but also in practice.

Our class discussions also helped me better understand the case studies of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, which are important elements of American foreign policy today. We had the opportunity to hear from many recognized scholars in the fields of human rights and democracy, such as Rosa Maria Payá and Orlando Gutierrez, who highlighted the critical situation in Cuba. We analyzed the repercussions of Castro’s revolution and communism in the Latin American region. From the personal experiences of the scholars, we compared the peaceful Velvet Revolution with opposition movements in Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. We also contrasted the dictatorships of the twentieth century and those of the twenty-first century to determine the best ways to make transitions from them. These discussions expanded my knowledge of the fight for democracy in these countries. I was particularly influenced by the transatlantic discussion of democracy in Brussels in 2019; I came to realize the deep gaps in international law and organization in undemocratic states. The ideas of Rosa Maria Paya and Professor Palouš made me realize the continuing failures of the international community to look for viable solutions to solve the humanitarian catastrophes in countries like Cuba and Venezuela.

As someone who has experienced both democratic and authoritarian regimes, I strongly believe that democratic values are essential for global stability and progress. The successful implementation of democratic values and freedoms around the world depends on the strengthening of institutions, the balance of power, the rule of law, a fair judiciary, promotion of human rights, and investing in education. These would prevent democratic states from sliding into nondemocratic or authoritarian regimes. These societal institutions were not strengthened in Latin American democracy during the twentieth century, which caused the eruption of a wave of nondemocratic governments throughout the region.

Democratic values have been shown throughout history as being based in strong educational systems. For this reason, many countries that lack strong public education systems

cannot successfully make the transition to democracy; this is the case with states in Africa and the Middle East. For example, the Arab Spring represented a hope for the democratization of many authoritarian states, yet it led to more instability, domestic conflict, and, in many cases, civil wars. Thus, the expansion of new international efforts and mechanisms to implement public educational systems is essential for the transitional democratic process. I agree with the argument of Robert Dahl that democracy as a “longterm process,” especially in countries that lack historical antecedents and democratic values.

In my opinion, democracy should not be described merely as a “political process of elections.” Instead, it goes hand in hand with human rights, minority rights, equality, individual rights, freedom of expression, active cooperation and compromise, citizen rule, and the free ability to participate. Many countries around the world are considered as “democratic” for the simple reason that they hold elections. Yet, multiple countries like Cuba, Russia, China, Venezuela, and Nicaragua promote elections that are not free and do not represent the will of their people. The governments of those countries hide their nondemocratic values behind fake elections. Henceforth, the international community and organizations should penalize those states that diminish the possibility of their citizens to choose their fate. A democracy is more than a political process: it is an essential part of the values, freedoms, and beliefs that every society should have.

The effects of democracy have been historically proven as beneficial for societies around the world. These benefits are shown in measures of increased growth, development, stability, peace, cooperation, trade, foreign direct investment (FDI), individual independence, and happiness of the population. These distinctive and essential characteristics of successful societies tend to grow exponentially in democracies. Even though there exist economic “outliers” to this theory, democratic institutions are more capable of achieving these goals. Economic, social, and political stability are more likely to happen under strong institutions that provide the rule of law, particularly a fair judiciary system that reduces the incidence of corruption, embezzlement, and conflicts of interests.

To conclude, the democratic system has been proven to correct multiple flaws and contradictions throughout history.

Societies that oppose democracy tend to fail not only in the political sphere but also in social, economic, human, religious, ethical, and moral arenas. The political scholars discussed here emphasize the ability of democracy to create better societies. We are living in a world in which democratic values are jeopardized by abuses of power, unfair elections, human rights violations, and poor education, among many other factors. Democracies are not perfect yet are the only international model that can attest for individual rights, separation of powers, transparency, and peace. Thus, it is crucial to take action to prepare future generations to help authoritarian states make the transition to democracy. The best way to do this is to recognize the imperfections of the democratic system, which will guide us in creating better alternatives. Some of the actions that can be taken to strengthen and protect democratic values are “encouraging human rights protection at home, investing in civic education, investing in electoral infrastructure to guard against interfering in the ballots, preventing misinformation through strong and impartial media corporations, and strengthening the laws that guard a nation over foreign influences that compromise transparency” (Freedom House 2019 27–28).

Works Cited Freedom House. 2019, February 6. “Freedom in the World 2019.” Freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/Feb2019_FH_FITW_2019_Report_ ForWeb-compressed.pdf.

Weyland, Kurt. 2013, July 15. “Why Latin America Is Becoming Less Democratic.” The Atlantic.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Marco A. Linares*

What is democracy? This is a question that many have pondered for centuries past and likely for centuries to come. Etymologically, democracy comes from the Greek word demos, meaning “the people,” and kratia, meaning “power or rule.” Some scholars argue that democracy must be understood as it was put into practice by the Greeks in ancient times; that is, as rule by the people. I think that defining democracy that way is too constrictive. Democracy is an ever-evolving concept, one whose basis is the ancient and abstract idea of “rule by the people,” but has grown to mean much more than that. Most scholars agree that modern democracies have developed into a form of government consisting of at least four basic elements: free and fair elections to choose and replace the government, a strong civic life and involvement of the people with government, protection of human rights, and the rule of law that applies to all equally. But even after expanding the definition, the discussion of democracy and its meaning remains theoretical and abstract. That is the reason why this essay delves into my personal encounters with democracy—or lack thereof— and how they changed my interpretation of democracy and its usefulness.

I was born and raised in Cuba, a communist country teeming with suffering and jealousy, but I had a different life from most Cubans. I was raised in the outskirts of Havana in a fairly large house that my mother and father had built with their honest labor, one brick at a time. My mother has always been a hard worker; she used to work as a regional manager for convenience stores devoted exclusively to tend to tourists, but she left that position soon after I was born and moved into a different line of work. Together with her brother who lived in the United States, she delivered remittances to the families of those in exile who were suffering under the regime in Cuba. This operation, which was approved by

the government, started out small but eventually expanded to cover every province in Cuba and to deliver thousands of dollars a day. After studying the Cuban economy, I learned that family remittances are the second-largest source of its revenue, behind tourism. Unfortunately, my mother must have rubbed the wrong person the wrong way one day or someone had grown tired of her business because, when I was five years old, I woke up one morning to find an unusually large number of people in my living room. Some were dressed in military uniforms, others were policemen, and a few were dressed in plainclothes. My mother took me to school after forcing them to wait outside, and when I returned my mother informed me that we had to go live with my grandma for a while. Later I learned that the house where I had spent the first five years of my life in was taken away by the government under dubious charges of “unjust enrichment.” There was a prop trial in which the decision was preordained and could not have changed no matter what: not a single item was entered into evidence but that was it—all the sweat and hard work that went into building that house was gone. This was my first clash with the absence of democracy.

That encounter shaped the meaning of democracy for me. Democracy—a concept I would only later discover—was a utopian ideal that meant that everyone would be treated the same under the law. In a democracy there would be no arbitrary trials with predetermined outcomes, evidence would have to be brought forth to justify claims, and children would not have to wake up to countless strangers rummaging through their toys without cause.

The years passed, and I had another experience that forever shaped how I see democracy. While living with my grandmother I attended primary school nearby. There I was

* Marco A. Linares Cordero is attending the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School where he is expected to obtain his J.D. degree, as well as a Wharton certificate in management, by 2024. He was born and raised in Havana, Cuba, but was forced to flee the country at the age of thirteen because of the political pressures his family faced at the hands of the regime. He attended Florida International University where he earned a double major in political science and international relations, with an emphasis on the Middle East and North Africa region. Someday he hopes to return to his birthplace and work toward creating a functioning democratic government in Cuba.

taught about the elections that we had in Cuba at lower government levels—never for president—and how secret ballots were used so that nobody could know how an individual voted. I must have been six or seven at the time, but this concept inspired me: it seemed to reflect a radical way of thinking in which the people could voice their worries and concerns by choosing their leaders. After that class my teacher asked for volunteers to guard the voting urns, and because I was so inspired, I was among the children who raised their hands. That weekend I had to guard the urns for about two hours, the last hours of the voting day. Every time someone dropped their ballot into the makeshift cardboard urn, another student and I—dressed in our full school uniforms—would give the voter a military salute and say, “Thank you for voting.” The two hours flew by, and since I was excited to learn more about this radical way of government, I stayed a bit later to ask questions and see the process unfold. When I ventured into the designated vote-counting room, I was shocked to see that the urn I had guarded for two hours had not even been opened. Instead, the voting officials were counting the number of voters who had checked off their names from the registration list; then, while looking at a small piece of paper with some numbers scribbled on it, they allocated the votes and sent the election results in a sealed envelope to the central agency in charge of tallying all the votes.

From then on, I would think of democracy differently. Democracy could not be that which I had witnessed but would have fair and free elections that were meaningful, as I had been taught earlier in school. Democracy should allow people to voice their opinions, and these should be able to change the outcomes of elections; votes should not be divvied up at the whim of whoever is in power to maintain and further that power. Democracy allows people to speak and genuinely listens; it allows people to vote and to change things.

Another vivid memory of an encounter with Cuba’s absence of democracy came during my fifth-grade history class. We had been taught about the horrors that Spanish colonization left in our country and about how the semi-successful revolt against the Spanish rule led to an American-backed/controlled government.

In a textbook attempt to vilify the United States, our teacher explained to us in great details how awful things were under Batista’s rule. She explained how there was no rule of law (extrajudicial killings were a daily occurrence), how there were no jobs or opportunities for people to be able to afford basic necessities, how poverty was extremely high, and how the people were unable to voice their concerns or participate in government. This discussion lasted through several classes. I then, with my fifth-grade mentality, raised my hand to pose a question that had been in the back of my head since these lectures began. I asked a very simple yet challenging question: “Teacher, how are things better now than then?” This question made her open her eyes as wide as I had ever seen them, ask to be excused for a minute, and walk out of the classroom, only to return with the principal who promptly took me to his office. I was extremely lucky that the principal was a reasonable man who chose not to report my family and me to the authorities, something that would have likely landed us in trouble. Instead, he explained to me that there were certain things I could only think but not express. He further explained that I was young, and he understood my question but vehemently reiterated that such statements could not be voiced, less so in a public school full of children and government employees. After this encounter I nodded along and pretended to agree with discussions for the rest of time in school. I never thought much of it until I was already living in the United States and read Orwell’s 1984. I had a vivid flashback to that very conversation, and I realized that fifth-grade me had hit it spot on: things were not better; they were simply masked better under Castro.

My reflection on this encounter further solidified my perception that democracy was the best way of government. Democracy meant that students could openly criticize their teachers and readings and could engage in a productive dialogue in which they could have their questions answered. Democracy meant that students could speak without having to think about the ramifications of their words or weigh them against their curiosity or desire to learn. Democracy meant that one was free to express oneself on any occasion, whether people agreed or disagreed with those opinions.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

what, human dignity would be respected.

A few years passed, and I was in secondary school in seventh grade when I faced the strongest antidemocratic challenge of my life. By then we had moved to a nicer house that my mother had jumped through hoops to get for us. My grandmother had come to live with us, and I remember coming home from school to find her pacing by the front gate. She told me that my mother had left about an hour before to buy some olives for something she was cooking and had yet to return. As it was—and still is—usual in Cuba, produce and food were often difficult to find, and one would have to drive all over town to find something. Knowing this, I looked at my grandma and told her not to worry—telling her that my mother was probably running around town as usual—but that did not seem to convince her. I went to my room and began working on my homework. I had finished my homework and put all my books away when my mother knocked on the front gate, accompanied by a number of military soldiers in uniform and two men in plainclothes. I opened the door and looked around in wonder, and she told me not to worry, to simply grab my backpack and go to our friend’s house the next block over until I was told to come home. Our house was being searched once again. I promptly walked to my room, got my backpack, and began heading out. I had walked half a block when I heard shouting behind me—a military officer was chasing me because he had forgotten to search the backpack before I left. Right then and there, in the middle of the street, half a block from home, this man forcefully removed my backpack and began to search it. I vividly remember this scene where he carelessly rummaged through it, pulling my books out of it, briefly leafing through them, and tossing them on the ground. Ironic as it was, one of the books he carelessly threw on the asphalt was my civics book. I remember wanting to cry but refrained from doing so because I did not want to show him weakness.

This forever changed the definition of democracy for me: democracy became a way of government in which citizens had certain rights guaranteed by the government to protect them from the government itself. Democracy was a place where a young boy would not be searched in the street at the whim of a soldier, a place where there was a procedure in place for conducting searches, a place where no matter

That day I was in our friend’s house until around ten that night, and I spent that entire time wondering what was going on. I worried and paced restlessly around their yard the entire time, neither eating nor drinking, just wondering what would happen next. Finally, when I returned home, I was met by my grandmother, who was sitting on the porch trying to control her weeping. I looked around for my mother until my grandmother looked at me and simply said, “They took her,” before crying uncontrollably once again. I aimlessly wandered through all the rooms, gazing on the disorganization and destruction the soldiers left behind: my old toys all spread on the floor, my clothes thrown on the mattress, our bookshelf barren. My mother was detained in the highest security prison in all of Cuba for sixty-three days before being released. She was in prison on Mother’s Day and on my birthday, dealing with gruesome conditions I dare not repeat. She had lost thirty pounds and had a series of parasitic infections that took years to cure. They had found no evidence, filed no charges, and there was no trial or apology—she was returned to us along with everything else they had taken.

This was the climax to my encounters with the lack of democracy, and this experience made our family decide to flee the country as soon as we could by any means necessary. This experience changed yet again my perception of democracy. Democracy was a place where due process was not only seen in the pages of the penal code but also practiced by those in government. Democracy was a place where human rights were inviolable and applied to all. Democracy was a place where humans did not have to live inhumanely because the government wills it so. This experience, compounded with all our other dehumanizing experiences in Cuba, made us come to the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Yet, having heard only vilifying comments about the United States made our adjustment process difficult. I adapted slowly, and as I began to study and learn about my new home, I came to the realization that a vast majority of those criticisms were unfounded and all were incredibly misleading. For the first time ever, I was witnessing democracy in action. It was no longer a crazy idea or an abstract concept: I was seeing the outcome of elections

affect the outcome of policies; I was finally able to question my instructors and their instruction without being reprimanded for it; I was reading about a myriad of cases in which people’s rights and dignities were upheld regardless of their alleged crimes. After a couple of years passed, I became a part of the democratic process when I was able to vote! This was something that made me weary given my prior experience, but eventually gave me unrivaled satisfaction to see that my voice can make a difference.

The United States brought everything into perspective: all my past encounters with the Cuban government served as some sort of negative democracy through which I was able to see what democracies should not be, leaving behind only what they should be. Though it was a difficult and arduous journey, I am glad that I had to experience what I described earlier. Otherwise, democracy would not mean so much to me.

The more I learn about democracy and the more I study the undemocratic practices around the world, the more that fond I grow of it. Democracy has evolved for me into becoming a way for a society to shape its future, to decide what its priorities are, and to use them in determining who represents those priorities best. It is a way to safeguard everyone by affording them a series of rights and freedoms and upholding them. Democracy is simply the best way of government for the people, by the people.

Ultimately, scholars will continue to argue the abstract concept of democracies, but this undoubtedly fails to capture its essence. The original Greek definition has changed greatly: the voters have changed from being landowning males only to encompassing a much larger section of the population, and their power has also grown significantly to encompass a series of rights unheard of before modern times. But democracy is still more than that. Personally, democracy is essential not only because the people have a voice and can choose who speaks for them but also because it guarantees rights I never had growing up, rights necessary to safeguard the people from their government. The meaning of democracy is as unique as fingerprints. Every human will have a different one, but one thing is certain: this meaning never stops evolving and changing how we see and interact with it.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Camila Castillo*

Democracy is a very complex concept, which encompasses the connection between law, governance, and the governed. This connection has a different way of expressing itself in different situations and countries, but it mostly is rooted in freedom and equality. I was born in 1999 and raised in Venezuela with the socialist autocratic Chavez regime already established; for my people, a Venezuelan democracy was a dream of going back to the past or a fantasy of being like those countries we saw far away from our land. In Latin America, democracy was never established to its fullest potential because of the history of colonialism.

In 2014 I came to the United States; living in a democratic country felt very different, but it made me realize that even the most democratic countries had flaws in their practice of democracy. This makes me question whether the concept of democracy is outdated, considering the advances and changes societies have made since the Ancient Greeks invented it. Will democracy only work for countries that simply have fewer resources and advantages? What keeps me hopeful is whether we, members of the next generation, can create a variant governance model that fits our society’s actual challenges and characteristics based on democratic ideals.

None of these questions are easy to answer, but in this essay, I explore them in three sections: democracy as the possibility of change for the greater good, the dichotomy between democracy’s purpose and use, and the human capacities of comprehension and innovation.

Democracy as the Possibility of Change for the Greater Good

The concept of democracy has different connotations for nations and for the people. For nations, democracy and

sovereignty mean the responsibility of enforcing the rule of law under equality and freedom. For citizens, it means the freedom of expression to participate and be part of the political and social processes of their state of citizenship. If people and the nation work together and agree on the principles of democracy, that nation can create the best opportunities for the most people. As the Greek statesman Pericles, stated, “Our constitution is called a democracy because it is in the hands not of a minority but the whole people. Free and tolerant in the private space but keeping public affairs to the law and duty of citizenship.”

Democracy is a freedom-based, action-oriented political ideology based on the principle of representation and active participation of the citizens. Yet Pericles’s idea of a constitution in the hands of the whole people is a fantasy today. As we evolve as a society, there is less participation of the people in the matters of politics. The idea of equality is based on the principle that we are all the same, and this creates a strong sense of relatedness that comes from our shared humanity. One of the elements that Alexis de Tocqueville signaled as a democratic element was the atomism of social classes, in which the barriers among them are gone. However, social status differences are growing, distancing people from each other as they did in the past.

Inequality among classes makes the excluded people feel resentful of democracy, and the differences among the people become too broad to create a joint assembly. Both the classic and the modern models of democracy perceive these excluded people as fragile and incapable of participating in political discourse. Two other democratic elements that Tocqueville describes are (1) a sense of individualism that liberates humans of their duties and responsibilities within their private space and (2) the

* Camila Castillo is a Venezuelan immigrant studying international relations at Florida International University. Growing up, Camila had the opportunity to travel and learn about diverse realities and global citizen values. Her academic focus on human rights and Latin American studies will enable her to contribute to global peacemaking. At FIU she has been a student leader in multiple positions and shown community-building capabilities. She created a project to raise awareness on global issues, The Global Canvas, which explores connections between art, media, and information for the purpose of creating meaningful social media content that both educates and entertains. She is outgoing, analytical, and very inquisitive.

The greatness of what’s has been done prevents us from foreseeing what can still be done.”

—Pavla Niklova

power of association that motivates individuals to act for the greater good. These two elements can end up contradicting each other in practice in the form of positive liberty versus negative liberty, according to Isaiah Berlin (1958). Once we enter the sphere of individual privacy, the interest of the greater good can be compromised. To have the capacity and the right to form assemblies and represent those of our tribe politically does not imply that the people will be willing to do exercise that right. Within the same nation, people’s individualism can and will clash in different ways with the general interest. That is when negative liberty comes into play. Governments that are motivated only by self-actualization incentivize the egocentric negative liberty of “I am sufficient, I can change the world, I am powerful on my own,” and although this may be true of some individuals, humankind’s nature is to be part of a group and to adapt some of their liberties to the collective good. The social contract we are following in the present is so distorted that all members of society feel a different amount of responsibility toward shared interests.

Today, democracy is globally under threat. The new challenges of climate change, globalization, and technological advances have pressured democracies to act in ways that are not very democratic. Freedom House reports for the last fifteen years have documented the downward trend in levels of democracy and freedom. The most recent Freedom House report highlighted the impact of crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic in accelerating this decline, so that fewer than one-fifth of countries now are in a free state (“Freedom under Siege” 2021). Yet, the report claims that “people want more reform-oriented governments” that are willing and able to be flexible in times of crisis, despite states taking antidemocratic actions to face their challenges. Looking at the countries that have lost their “democratic freedom,” most had underdeveloped democracies. They were not able to sustain long-term democracy because it is not a model that fits their political history and economic situations, and even though they may try to conform to democratic rules, in times of crisis, they opt to abandon them.

Dichotomy between Democracy’s Purpose and Use

The spread of democracy-promotion projects globally has led to a significant weakening in the real meaning of democracy. When development creates a link between developed countries (DCs) and less developed countries (LDCs), the focus of the development projects becomes money, politics, and interest; at the same time, local democratic institutions and the role of civil society are often undermined. One of the roles of democracy is to balance and prevent the abuse of power of a government over its people. Nonetheless, the DCs that contribute to LDCs negotiate with those countries’ governments independently of how they distribute their power. In the twentieth century, the United States and European democracies were the leading promoters of development and did it in the name of a more democratic global society. This is not the case anymore; in the twentyfirst century, we see the rise of two powers, China and Russia, which are fostering international development without imposing a democratic government. The impact of this change is visible in the modern autocratic dictatorships of Latin America.

The executive director of the Interamerican Institute for Democracy, Carlos Sanchez Berzain, wrote a book in 2018 titled Dictaduras de Crimen Organizado en Las Américas (Dictatorships of Organized Crimes in America); it explores the dynamic use of our international system by the governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, and Ecuador to free themselves of the legacy of imperialism. He explains the connections of the Cuban dictatorship under the Castros to the dictatorships in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua. They all share one characteristic: they engaged in development using the same tools the West created for democracy promotion. They used international organizations such as the Organization of American States and the United Nations to form a regional bloc of “leftist” parties, the ALBA or the Foro of Sao Paulo. They used the practice of oil diplomacy, entering into oil trade negotiations to gain international votes at the UN or to denounce their violations (personal communication with Ofelia Riquezes). Having gained international recognition, they now are deeply connected to Russia and China because of their common enemy: the United States.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Dictators in Latin and Central America have been violating the Interamerican Democratic Charter openly and gradually weakening the rule of law of their countries to benefit themselves. The case I can talk about is my country’s experience with Chavismo and Castrismo. In 1999 the ruling party changed the Venezuelan constitution to support the dictatorial behaviors of the Chavez regime and increase the power of the state, even though Chavez had been democratically elected as president. The 2002 Venezuelan General Strike, many corrupted elections, expropriation of private property, attempts to divide the different classes of society, and the growth of violence as a standard form of governance and lifestyle by the citizenry should have signaled the dangers of the continuation of this dictatorship. The regime became internationally recognized as an autocratic state in 2014, when Cuban intelligence stopped concealing its infiltration of Venezuela’s government and social movements and were shamelessly open about interfering in Venezuela affairs.

The use of the international system by socialist and autocratic states challenges the idea of a system based on international democracy. An international system cannot impose verdicts or enforcement actions on nations because of the principle of state sovereignty. Is it possible to create an international system to represent the international society that has resulted from globalization? Who can represent the most people? How could the global community choose a candidate or a set of candidates who would represent everyone? Is the principle of representation limiting the capabilities of democracy in the international realm or the use each representative makes of the system? How can we make the international the greater good part of each individual state’s interest?

The multilateral institutional system we have in place has as its goal uniting the world powers under the common goal of global peace and security. However, the great powers continually hold the last word on what actions or crimes end up being judged by international criminal law at the International Criminal Court (ICC). Countries like Russia and China use the ICC and UN Security Council to undermine democracy and human rights (Roth 2021). There are great powers that could create a balance, but the United States simply plays the observer role because it has not ratified

most of the international system covenants it created and monitors. This leaves the international community with a system ruled by strong antidemocratic powers, the democratic great powers that do not use the system, and the rest of the countries. I therefore conclude that such an international democratic system is not in the interest of most states; it just sparks more competition between different ideologies. The principle of equality on which this system should function is corrupted by those who favor the individual advantage over the collective good.

Morris (1996) shows in his essay on the origins of Greek democracy that since then democracies have found it difficult to institute “the strong principle of equality” between the oligarchy and the commoners. He acknowledges that the impulse toward equality that shaped Greek democracy created “new inclusion and possibilities, and new exclusions and oppressions.” It is vital to acknowledge the inequality challenge internationally. Just like some citizens simply cannot afford to be active participants in political life, there are countries in the international sphere that do not have the luxury to spend time and resources in international organizations controlled by the few. As the gap between rich and poor increases, so does the difficulty of making a society based on that shared humanity.

The ideal of democracy is far different from what democracy is in practice, especially in less developed countries. The always changing nature of democracy is what I believe has kept it as a good system for so long, but it is not the most effective method for state-making and international economic competition. Coming from a country that lost its democracy, I understood that democratic processes need to involve the “demos” in their entirety and to keep the government from abusing its power. Democracy must be embodied by the people, as well as the politicians. The education system must be based on democratic values that create the path and pattern of thinking in a democratic and equal way.

Human Capacities of Comprehension and Innovation

Democracy, as with many human-invented concepts, is dynamic and should adapt to the times we live in. At some point in our history, public information changed and

adapted to the rapid-paced world we live in, creating what is called yellow journalism for the masses and keeping deep intellectual conversation for professionals and academics. How can the people and the state be equally involved if they are not equally informed about the reality of our world? Freedom of expression plays an essential role in today’s democratic mindset. Telecommunication advances have driven people to seek the fastest and most exciting information while leaving lengthy and complex sources just for those in professional settings. This has created a more effective channel of communication for the spread of false information to manipulate the masses. Although yellow journalism has the benefit of making complex issues more understandable by the people, it also serves to spread what we now know as “fake news.” The many different interpretations of the news offered by different communication channels give rise to modifying the facts to fit one’s political ideology. This change in the management of information has both benefits and harms for democracy.

I believe in the capacity of humans to solve problems and think critically. Professor Palouš (2002) has written, “The major virtue of a true democracy is open-mindedness and creativity, readiness to take difficult, courageous decisions and actions.” These qualities can help the next generation deal with the unprecedented issues that challenge democracy. They should assist us in understanding that the limitations of democracy are a challenge for us to solve but that we need to continue the dialogue among humankind. We need to have the best of intentions in solving this existential dilemma and use our creativity to move toward progress in a global sense.

Totalitarianism, the form of government that is a counter to democracy, comes about through the growing resentment of the excluded within the demos and the individualistic goals of many powerful people; it is built on the great inequality in our societies. Totalitarianism and authoritarianism use human vulnerability not to build resilience in the people of a nation but to create a controlled culture of fear. To create a system that works democratically and avoids the rise to power of totalitarian dictators, we need to heed the challenge posed by Hannah Arendt: “to examine and bear consciously the burden that our century has placed on us— neither denying its existence nor submitting meekly to its

weight. Comprehension, in short, means the unpremeditated, attentive facing up to, and resisting of, reality—whatever it may be,” in the words of one of our guest lecturers. If we want to keep fighting against these kinds of governments, Arendt teaches us that we must understand them and where they came from. The totalitarianism that gained power in the twentieth century was unprecedented; its leaders worked with their creative power to imagine and revolutionize governance into something they felt could represent their objectives. In today’s world, we need to reframe democracy with just as innovative and comprehensive a practice.

A new model for democracy must be built. An organization called Democracy Earth is already inventing new ways to use technology to create a globally inclusive democracy. In their platform, anyone can suggest policies or essential changes, and anyone can vote on their agreement. For now, this is simply a model of what opportunities our changing world has for us. Countries and peoples that have endured the experiences of authoritarian and totalitarian governments have both resentment and perspectives that make it hard for them to believe in democracy. I think that democracy serves as a fantastic base of the ideal government. Still, we must start to innovate the systems under which all aspects of democracy, and not just a few, become reality.

Works Cited Berlin, Isaiah. 1958. Two Concepts of Liberty. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Berzain, Carlos Sánchez. 2018. Dictaduras de Crimen Organizado en Las Américas (Dictatorships of Organized Crimes in America). CreateSpace. Freedom House. “Freedom in the World 2021: Countries in the Spotlight.” https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2021/democracy-undersiege/countries-and-regions.

Morris, I. 1996. “The Strong Principle of Equality and Archaic Origins of Greek Democracy.” In DEMOKRATIA A Conversation on Democracy, Ancient and Modern, edited by Josiah Ober and Charles Hedrick, 19–48. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Repucci, Sarah, and Amy Sliopowitz. 2021. “Freedom under Siege.” https:// freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2021/democracy-under-siege.

Roth, Kenneth. 2012. “Biden’s Next Step in Human Rights: Multilateral Institutions.” Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/ news/2021/02/17/bidens-next-steps-human-rights-multilateralinstitutions.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Denitsa Raichkova*

The concept of democracy holds profound personal significance because of my background. As a Bulgarian citizen, I have experienced several political structures and economic regimes. Growing up in a country from the Eastern Bloc puts into perspective the importance of democracy and civil liberties. Today, people living in Western cultures take democracy for granted when they should zealously guard it: indifference to the political process can be democracy’s biggest enemy. As an international student in the United States of America, I am deeply concerned with the preservation of democracy, because I am knowledgeable about what is on the other side. In this essay, I examine the importance of democracy in relation to my personal background, my home country’s political history, and my transition to the United States.

The word “democracy” is from the Greek: demos means the people, and kratos means power. In a democratic society, the power belongs to the people. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines democracy as “a political system in which the power is granted to the majority and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.” The ancient Greek city-states, particularly Athens, were the first to put into place a democratic political system. Even though it was strictly homogeneous, citizenship in Athens was acquired by birth; therefore, all native adult males (NAMs) were allowed to participate in the political process (Ober 2005, 98). Each Athenian citizen—excluding women, children, foreigners, and slaves—had equal rights in terms of voting, public speech, and equality before the law (98–101). There was no discrimination on the basis of wealth, which was common in nondemocratic societies at the time, in regard to political engagement. Furthermore, the inclusiveness of Athenian democracy toward day laborers, small-scale traders, and craftsmen led to the establishment of quasi-rights and the expansion of legal immunities

(negative liberties) to noncitizens (113–25). Even those who were not granted citizenship status and did not share the same rights as NAMs were granted protection and legal immunity by the law, known as “quasi-rights” (113–16), including safeguarding from aggression, coercion, and acts of hubris (113–16). This concept of “basic democracy,” although imperfect, laid the foundations for modern liberal democracy; it gave ordinary Athenians the ability to engage in their own governance, advancing the political rights of common citizens. It provided liberal norms that have guided the evolution into the Western liberal democracy system evident today (125–27).

I began my analysis of the meaning of democracy with a brief historical background because I want to emphasize the importance of understanding “basic democracy.” Only after one understands the foundation provided by ancient democracy can one comprehend contemporary democratic thinking. In addition, a study of democracy must consider both theory and practice. The meaning of democracy to me intertwines both the brilliance of “basic democracy” and my encounters with several political regimes. As fascinated as I am by the Athenian system of democracy, the true meaning of democracy comes from my Eastern European background. Democracy is not simply an ancient concept to be studied by academia but entails an analysis of contemporary struggles between Western liberal democracies and authoritarian states. To examine the meaning of democracy, I therefore use my exposure to the Bulgarian communist regime and contrast it with liberal values guiding the state after the democratic transition of 1989.

I was born in Sofia, Bulgaria, in the year 2000, more than a decade after the fall of communism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Yet I grew up with stories about the communist regime and its consequences. As I grew older and became conscious of the political environment,

* Denitsa Raichkova is a student of international relations and political science at Florida International University. Born in the country of Bulgaria, Denitsa has moved to the United States to pursue her educational goals. Her research interests include political philosophy, geopolitical conflict resolution, and policy analysis.

I noticed there were recurring themes in the tales of the socialist/communist past. These included seizures of private property, the inability of citizens to change the government, suppression of opposing voices, food rations, compulsory military training, and social conformity. The common elements were always oppression and social control.

As I matured, I began developing a sense of democratic thinking, influenced by my perception of the past. My earliest encounter with the concept of democracy— actually with its nonexistence under Bulgarian communist rule—occurred in my early school years. The first elements I thought about were the notion of social order and the lack of individualism and of freedom of expression. It was exceptionally strange to me how different my school years were in comparison to my parents’. My mother would describe how her school authorities would check her fingernails to make sure they were neat and short, punish girls wearing certain hairstyles and makeup, enforce a strict school uniform code, and compel children to engage in political marches/events in support of the Bulgarian Communist Party. During the socialist period in Bulgaria, little freedom of expression was allowed, and citizens were expected to portray a conformist image, encouraged by the party in power (“Early Communist Era”): the community was given priority over the individual (Todorova 2009, 623–30). Social order was to be followed, and all citizens were expected to abide by the set norms. Religion, a Western-style lifestyle, and glorification of the West were banned.

My experience in school was entirely different, because I had the privilege of attending after Bulgaria’s democratic transition. I never wore a school uniform, was never policed about my appearance, and was never forced to engage in political demonstrations. From early on, before I knew what the terms “communism” or “authoritarianism” meant, I was already aware that I was growing up in a preferable period. My childhood years were filled with individualism, freedom, and the ability to make choices. My parents had not been as fortunate. Consequently, my first contact with the new Bulgarian democracy was through my freedom of expression and the notion of self-direction. Therefore, one element of the meaning of democracy entails just that: the ability of individuals to express their beliefs, ideas, and thoughts,

free from governmental control.

The second element of democracy is the absence of political oppression. Over the years, I heard numerous stories about the repressive nature of the Bulgarian communist regime, as evidenced by the public beatings, the detainments without trial, the suspicious disappearance of individuals foolish enough to speak against the authorities. The government’s use of tyrannical police and secret services to collect intelligence and monitor compliance with the regime is a textbook example of nondemocratic governance (“The Early Communist Era”). Unfortunately, thirty years after the fall of communism, most public high schools are still constrained by fear; many purposefully dilute and water down the tyranny of the regime, and students remain unaware of the painful past.

Thanks to my wonderful parents, however, I was able to attend a private international high school, unbound by government control. There I was taught the uncensored truth about the communist regime by teachers unafraid to speak sincerely. My international high school shaped my perspective on democracy and authoritarian regimes by teaching me twentieth-century history and its importance. Georgi Markov’s novels about the communist regime were part of the curriculum. Markov was a dissident writer who was famously poisoned via an umbrella by the Bulgarian government for his literary works and political broadcasts about the communist repression (“Georgi Markov”). Even though his novels were somewhat sensationalized and exaggerated, they illustrated the reality of political oppression. Novelists, screenwriters, artists, and musicians were all expected to obey the regime and produce art in line with political propaganda slogans. Moreover, political opposition was outlawed, and opponents of the regime were severely subjugated (“The Early Communist Era”). Given the Bulgarian Communist Party’s control of the instruments of power, the hopes of the noncommunist opposition were crushed. Simply telling jokes could get an individual into trouble with the authorities and result in imprisonment. All these instances of tyranny can be found in Markov’s novels and are supported by my personal encounters with victims of the state.

In contrast, the democratic transition of the 1990s created a multiparty system and allowed for opposition

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

to the government. During summer 2020, Bulgaria was engulfed in large protests against the corruption of the authorities (Barzachka and Yordanova 2020). Being able to raise objections to certain policies, having freedom of association, and living out Locke’s idea that a government works for its people are all instances of democratic developments that were new for Bulgaria (Tuckness 2020). To sum up, democracy encourages resistance and pluralism as part of the growth of a nation-state.

The third element of democracy is the notion of justice and due process. The presumption of innocence, the legal principle that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty, is often nonexistent in authoritarian regimes. I regard justice as a representation of integrity and essentially the truth. A democratic society promotes fairness and justness, instead of using the law in an unfair way to suppress its citizens. Law and justice should be synonymous in a liberal society; however, during the Bulgarian communist rule, they were not. In an authoritarian regime, justice cannot be guaranteed since the laws have been manipulated to suit the party in power. Anyone can be charged with “plotting against the regime.” Before the democratic transition of my home country, anyone believed to be guilty could be imprisoned and sentenced to death without a just trial (“The Early Communist Era”): a whisper by a jealous neighbor could result in a ruined life. In addition, even if a trial were to be held, the judiciary system was subordinate to the Communist Party and certainly would not rule against its interests (Solomon 2007, 122–25). Judges, juries, and other judicial appointees cannot guarantee the protection of justice in a nondemocratic society (123).

Another feature of communist rule in Bulgaria was delegating power to and appointing individuals to positions because of their allegiance to the Communist Party. Appointing an individual with no education in economics to the position of finance minister because he was loyal to the socialist ideology used to be a common occurrence. This nepotism would occur with lower-ranking governmental positions, but the consequences of individuals’ lack of experience would be truly catastrophic on the highest level, resulting in disastrous nationwide policies. Corruption, bribery, and fraud are related attributes of a nondemocratic system that does not wish to guarantee fairness to its citizens.

In contrast, the liberal values that stem from the development of contemporary democracy aim to intertwine law and justice. Democracy entails inalienable rights and provides citizens with certain protections from the government (Tuckness 2020). These include rights to a fair

trial, due process, safeguard from torture, equal protection under the law, and access to lawyers. Today, democratic Bulgaria still struggles with examples of corruption, but the judicial system has been democratized and strives to protect individual rights and provide checks and balances, instead of working for the government (“Bulgaria Corruption Report” 2020). In sum, my understanding of the third element of democracy is that it includes the right to fair treatment and to be granted protections from the government.

The fourth element that I associate with democracy is the conduct of free and fair elections. As in Athenian democracy, open participation in the political process is a long-standing element of “basic democracy.” After the Communist Party openly took power and Bulgaria was declared a People’s Republic, the coalition Fatherland Front was formed (“The Early Communist Era”). Even though elections were held and people could be said to be participating in the political process, those elections’ fairness could not be guaranteed. Intensive voter suppression efforts during the period of power consolidation and the strong control of the Ministry of Interior were the main reasons why the Communist Party and its allies won the election by a substantial majority (“The Early Communist Era”). When the opposition is defeated and there is no fear of repercussions for electoral violations, no election system can be regarded as fair. In a one-party system, the concept of democracy and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s social contract theory are lost (Barker et al. 2013).

In contrast, after the democratic transition of 1989, Bulgaria developed a multiparty system with fair elections in which all citizens above the age of eighteen could vote. This system ensures that a government’s authority derives from the people’s will, and not the other way around (“Functions of Elections”). Fair elections also allow for the change of leadership once it no longer suits the national interests. Lastly, democratic participation in the political process is different from that permitted by authoritarian regimes. In democratic societies, people engage with their government, campaign for specific politicians, and demand action on certain issues because they wish to improve and safeguard their democracy. Thus, the meaning of democracy demands fair elections and is inclusive toward all citizens.

The process of democratization for any state is chaotic and intricate. The current political state of Bulgaria is imperfect and differs greatly from Western liberal democracies; however, Bulgarian democracy is under constant development and improvement. It is addressing corruption, outmoded education standards, and the lack

of modernization. Nevertheless, I believe that democratic states can never achieve perfection because of changing needs and societal issues. That is why democracies need to adapt continuously. Successful democratic states are ever evolving and shape the international sphere by their actions. The greatest example is the United States of America.

Becoming an international student in the United States has increased my understanding and appreciation of democracy. The works of philosophers like John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Thomas Paine have revolutionized the concept of democracy. Studying American history has helped me on my journey in the field of international relations and human rights, and I am particularly fascinated by the American Revolution and its global impact. It was largely fought to gain the human right of freedom—politically, religiously, and socially— from a tyrannical government. The Revolution created the first American government and led to ratification of a new constitution (Hylton 2019). The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights codify specific human rights—freedom of speech/ religion/press; the right to bear arms; privacy in one’s personal affairs; protection against unreasonable search and arrest; court protections; and jury trials. The constitutional amendments then further recognize and protect human rights; for example, by ending slavery, extending the right to vote beyond white males, and allowing the direct election of senators (Martenson 1992). As reported by Alexis de Tocqueville in the nineteenth century, American democracy was tremendously progressive, including various protections against the government and emphasizing private property, religious freedom, freedom of speech, and privacy in one’s personal affairs.

In my opinion, the United States is a leader in the promotion of democracy and human rights, just like ancient Athens was. Today, the United States is on the forefront of securing LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, globalization, and free trade. I am honored to be a student here and to be able to compare the U.S. government system with the communist Bulgarian regime and the current Bulgarian parliamentary representative democracy. Being an international student at FIU has expanded my understanding of democracy and complemented it with a strong sense of personal freedom, libertarian ideas, and the pursuit of freedom and equal opportunities.

In summary, I examine the meaning of democracy through both its theoretical aspect and its implementation. When dissecting the meaning of democracy, I take bits and pieces of ancient democracy, American democracy, and my own

experience with several political regimes. Ancient Athens laid the foundation for “basic democracy” and allowed for the involvement of the majority, the common citizens, in politics. Therefore, democracy entails a government for the people by the people. My personal comparison between communist and then democratic Bulgaria helps me understand the classic elements of democracy—freedom of choice, the ability to change a government, free and fair elections, and protection of rights by the judiciary system. Thus, democracy entails certain characteristics. American democracy sets a progressive tone and evolves with the community while codifying crucial human rights and protections against the government. Consequently, democracy entails constant adaptation and the notion of liberty. Lastly, the transition to democratic rule is bloody, disorderly, and complex. After it has been achieved, democracy is fragile and tyranny can arise from it; therefore, it must be persistently safeguarded. However, despite all the downsides, democracy is worth maintaining as we have not yet found a better alternative.

Works Cited

Barker, Ernest, et al. 2013. Social Contract: Essays by Locke, Hume, and Rousseau. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Barzachka, Nina S., and Stefka P. Yordanova. 2020. December 16. “Analysis | Why Bulgaria’s Government Has Survived Months of AntiCorruption Protests.” Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com/ politics/2020/12/26/why-bulgarias-government-has-survived-monthsanti-corruption-protests/.

“Bulgaria Corruption Report.” 2020, November 5. GAN Integrity. https:// www.ganintegrity.com/portal/country-profiles/bulgaria/.

“The Early Communist Era.” Encyclopædia Britannica. www.britannica.com/ place/Bulgaria/The-early-communist-era.

“Functions of Elections.” Encyclopædia Britannica. www.britannica.com/ topic/election-political-science/Functions-of-elections.

“Georgi Markov.” Forensics Library, aboutforensics.co.uk/georgi-markov/.

Hylton, Raymond Pierre. 2019. “American Revolutionary War.” Salem Press Encyclopedia. search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN= 89158527&site=eds-live.

Martenson, Jan. 1992. “The United Nations and Human Rights and the Contribution of the American Bill of Rights.” William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal 1: 105–14.

“Presumption of Innocence.” Legal Information Institute. www.law.cornell. edu/wex/presumption_of_innocence.

Solomon, Peter H. 2007. “Courts and Judges in Authoritarian Regimes.” World Politics 60, no. 1: 122–45.

Todorova, Velina. 2009. “Children’s Rights in Bulgaria after the End of Communism.” International Journal of Children’s Rights 17, no. 4: 623–46.

Tuckness, Alex. 2020. “Locke’s Political Philosophy.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Emily Mendez Rivas*

Democracy is described in almost every textbook as “a government by the people.” However, democracy is much more than those five words. Democracy for me is attached to the memory of when I left my country, my family, and all I knew in hopes of finding a better home. It is attached to the sacrifices of my parents and the millions of immigrants who left their home searching for it. It is represented by the perseverance to work for prosperity, freedom, and happiness. Yet, even more than my memories of life in Cuba and the textbook definition, democracy to me means true equality. True equality for me means equal rights, representation, and justice for all, regardless of gender, race, or background. In this essay, first I discuss what democracy meant to me as a recent immigrant in the United States and address the idea of all citizens being able to live the “American Dream” versus the reality. Then I show how my idea of democracy changed as I spent more time in this country and discuss some problems of democracy that I encountered. Lastly, I present some ideas about how to address these problems of democracy so that we can have a truly equal democracy.

Coming from a country like Cuba, U.S. democracy seemed like an amazing, almost dreamlike regime to me when I first learned about it. When I was young and would hear about the opportunities in the United States and other democratic countries, I would envision myself being infinitely happy in a place like that: democracy was synonymous with happiness, abundance, and liberty. It meant no more being hungry or standing in lines at the bodega for our rations, no police barging into my home as they saw fit, no more old clothes, and having all the toys I wanted. As a child that was my vision, but my parent’s vision of democracy, like so many other immigrants in the Third World, was the “American Dream.” Democracy meant to them an equal opportunity to achieve success through hard work, regardless of their skin color, background, or class. Unfortunately, the reality

of living under American democracy, even for people born in the United States is not always as opportunity-filled, prosperous, and equal as ideals like the “American Dream” proclaim it is. This reality is even worse for minorities, immigrants, and women, because under the current U.S. democracy, they are still not treated equally or fully represented. The “American Dream” that came to be synonymous with democracy for many immigrants like my family and me is for the most part fully obtainable in our current democracy only by Caucasian men.

Since I immigrated to this democratic country ten years ago and became part of the machinery of the U.S. democratic process, I realized that my childhood conception of democracy was not the same as democracy in practice. Although democracy promises full political representation, equality, and human rights for everyone, that is not always the case. That became even more evident in 2020 when racial and social injustice, sexism, and xenophobia increased. Racism, in particular, is deeply rooted in U.S. democracy, making the government and institutions care less about solving this prevalent issue and continuing to disadvantage communities of color.

Deeply rooted racism and racial/social injustice have also led to minorities being greatly underrepresented in American democracy. In the United States minorities make up nearly 40 percent of the population, yet they fill less than onequarter of congressional and state offices. Asian Americans and Latinos are the two largest immigrant/minority groups in the country, making up about 20 percent of the U.S. population, yet make up less than 6 percent of all state legislators. In 2021, even though only 23 percent of the seats in Congress are held by racial or ethnic minorities, this year’s Congress is the most racially and ethnically diverse in the history of American democracy. This underrepresentation is a serious problem for American democracy because it continues to keep power in the hands of the people who

* Emily Mendez Rivas is an undergraduate student at Florida International University who is double majoring in political science and philosophy and is working toward a pre-law certificate. She is also a member of a preeminent law fraternity. Phi Alpha Delt, and FIU’s Empowering Women in Law Organization: she uses both platforms to provide service to her community, fundraise for women’s education and rights, and much more. Emily was born in Cuba and although she moved to the United States at a young age, the effects and memories of her years there have shaped her passion to be a defender and advocate for democracy and human rights across the globe. As a result, she is not only pursuing a career as a lawyer to defend those in need but has begun initiatives to protest injustice in her country and send aid to Cuban citizens who have been negatively affected by the regime.

have always had it and have done very little to create true equality and justice for all under this democracy. Some of these same legislators and leaders still express xenophobic, racist, and sexist sentiments. Moreover, having such a small percentage of minority members in the political bodies of the country does not give sufficient voice and representation to the groups that are most disadvantaged and disenfranchised in the country.

Democracy in America has also failed to give proportionate representation and justice to women. In 2021 Congress had the highest percentage of women ever: women make up 27 percent of its body. However, women are still restricted access to reproductive health rights, to receiving pay equal to their male coworkers, to having bodily autonomy, and much more. Many women’s issues such as sexual harassment and gendered violence continue to be unaddressed under American democracy and have not received their due justice.

Finally, under American democracy there is also a prevalent issue of economic inequality. Even in a democratic regime, the wealthy can hold more political power, which could be used to promote policies that further cement their economic power. However, the most serious consequence of economic inequality to the health of democracy is that a large segment of the nation (mostly impoverished minorities) do not have the resources to be involved in the political/ electoral process. This then leads to less representation of these groups, which leads to fewer policies that can be implemented to help these groups receive equal justice, rights, and basic human resources.

These current problems undermine the effectiveness of democracy and ultimately can lead to its failure. That failure nearly occurred after the recent president, who was elected democratically, embodied racism, sexism, and xenophobia and governed in accordance. To create a true democracy with equality and representation for all, we should start by dismantling the deep-rooted racism in the American political system and give equal protection to all its citizens regardless of background or race. There must be actions taken to ensure full access for all American citizens to the electoral/ political system through voting or other forms of participation. We need more minority members in Congress and positions of political

power who can truly understand and represent their group, thereby acting toward their interest and toward enabling minority group members to be more active in the democratic process. Other ways to enable more minorities and other disenfranchised groups of societies to participate in the democratic process are to repeal discriminatory voter purge policies, modern poll taxes, and the disenfranchisement of felons who are active members of society. There should also be measures in place to prevent unnecessary poll closures and to help American citizens who are not perfectly proficient in English to participate in elections as well. Democracy’s principles of equality and representation for all are also undermined by the inequality of women in economic and political terms, threats to their reproductive health and other rights, and gendered violence.

Although my childhood idea of democracy differs greatly from my idea today, I am optimistic that American democracy will continue to improve. I believe that, by acting in the true spirit of democracy—to represent all the citizens of the country and give them equal rights regardless of their race, gender, or background—we can fix the current problems of American democracy. In the future, under a democracy that is truly equal and truly for all and that provides all its citizens with justice and human rights, every citizen will have a chance to design and live accordingly to their own “American Dream.”

Works Cited

Blazina, C., & DeSilver, D. (2021, January 15). “A Record Number of Women are Serving in the 117th Congress.” Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/15/a-record-numberof-women-are-serving-in-the-117th-congress.

Bourne, R. B. (2021, January 22). “Has Wealth Inequality Eroded U.S. Democracy?” Cato Institute. https://www.cato.org/blog/has-wealthinequality-eroded-us-democracy.

OpenStax & Lumen Learning. (n.d.). “The Fight for Women’s Rights.” https://courses.lumenlearning.com/amgovernment/chapter/the-fightfor-womens-rights.

Phillips, A. P. (2016, January 26). “The Striking Lack of Diversity in State Legislatures.” Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ the-fix/wp/2016/01/26/the-real-problem-with-diversifying-congressstate-legislatures-are-even-less-diverse.

Schaeffer, K. (2021, January 28). “Racial, Ethnic Diversity Increases yet again with the 117th Congress.” Pew Research Center. https:// www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/28/racial-ethnic-diversityincreases-yet-again-with-the-117th-congress.

Solomon, D. S., Maxwell, C. M., & Castro, A. C. (2019, August 7). “Systematic Inequality and American Democracy.” Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/ reports/2019/08/07/473003/systematic-inequality-american-democracy.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Ernesto Perez Barrera*

Democracy is the desired goal of almost every nation or people on Earth, because autocracy is a much darker alternative. The fight between democracy and autocracy goes back to antiquity and the dawn of humankind. And although democracy might not be perfect, one could argue that there is no other system that would function more fairly and respectably. In this essay, I share what democracy means to me as a Cuban immigrant and a student of economics and political science.

Cuba has never had a fully functional democracy. Even after the Constitution of 1940 and the first real elections ever in Cuban history, the “Republic” of the 1940s and 1950s, as it was known in its time, was morally corrupt and decadent. The administrations of both Grau and Prio, who were elected democratically in 1944 and 1948, respectively, were among the freest Cuba ever had—yet their failure to secure the trust of the population led to the situation we have in Cuba today and have been dealing with for almost seven decades (counting Batista’s dictatorship and coup). With this background, my essay examines rights that are essential to democracy.

Civil Rights

Central to any democratic regime are civil rights and liberties; without them democracy as we know it would not properly exist. Basic rights found in Athenian democracy— citizens have an equal right to vote, an equal right to speak, and equal standing before the court—and in the U.S Constitution, such as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press, are crucial for any democracy to function. Today, we take

these rights as essential to all individuals; however, for most of recorded history and for most of Cuba’s existence as a nation, they have not been present. In Cuba, merely speaking of assembling against the regime is considered illegal and a crime against the regime of the highest level, even worse than actual crimes themselves. Free thinking and information are shunned, because they are not part of the collective known as the “Revolution.”

Critical to any democracy is the fundamental idea of the social contract. This concept was spelled out by early political philosophers and theories such as Burke, Locke, and Rousseau. The social contract is something in which citizens give up some of their liberties (but not all) in exchange for protection and assurances of security from the state. It is a set of binding and accepted rules placed not only on the populace but also on the state. There is no such social contract in Cuba today: instead, it is a one-way street in which only the people are bound by the rules. Even though the Cuban people have a “constitution,” it is rarely consulted or taken seriously. The Cuban government actively oppresses the people, and the people have little means to protest. Any form of protest usually ends violently with the arrest of the protestors. The use of force by the state without cause violates the social contract.

Can a democratic system be functional if the leaders of the system cannot be brought to justice? In Cuba, the vast majority of those associated with acts of repression and spying on its citizens are never tried before the courts. Equality before the law is important in any democratic system; the failure to enforce such a concept introduces favoritism. Another fundamental feature of functioning

* Ernesto Perez Barrera was born in 1999, in Pinar del Rio, Cuba, and came to the United States the next year when his mother won a lottery visa. After obtaining an associate in arts degree in economics from Miami Dade College, he enrolled in Florida International University, where he decided to minor in political science. He graduated from FIU in 2021 with a B.S. degree in economics with cum laude honors and a minor in political science, with a focus on international trade and agricultural economics. He is now a pricing analyst for the Central American /Caribbean region in a very large shipping and logistics company located in Miami. He obtained this position not only because of his studies in international trade but also because he is bilingual, which he owes to his mother’s influence. He hopes to continue his education and, in the future, help Cuba rebuild from the economic destruction that communism has caused to his homeland.

democracies is an independent and unbiased judiciary that is not swayed by politics. Yet in Cuba, the judiciary is never impartial and often does what the regime tells it to do. Nor does it review constitutional law fairly. What is the value of the Cuban constitution if the judiciary cannot review it without political bias?

Political Rights

Political rights are fundamental to every democracy, and although I believe they have a lower priority than civil rights, they are found in every democracy in the world in one form or another. In Cuba today, political rights are nonexistent and have been for many decades. This is despite the Constitution of 1940, which gives all Cuban citizens the right to vote, hold public office, and have as many political parties as they wish, among other political rights. When it was adopted, there were six recognized official parties in the country, and several more were created in the following years, all of which ran candidates for elections.

The right to vote for citizens is fundamental in every democracy, because it ensures that there is at least one way for the population to show how “content” they are with individuals then in government and can choose others to replace them if they so wish. In Cuba today, although there are “elections,” they are one-party elections in which the citizens have no choice. These elections do not represent the dissenting voices of the masses. Citizens should have not only the right to vote but also the right to vote for multiple parties.

All Cuban citizens should be eligible to hold office, regardless of their political views. In Cuba, someone who is considered a dissident would never be allowed to run for political office, because they have views opposing those of the ruling Communist Party. Yet, there are restrictions placed even on those who do not hold opposing views. To even run for local municipal elections, one must first be a proven communist sympathizer and a supporter of the regime over the years. I believe that even after Cuba makes the transition

to democracy, a Communist Party should be allowed, despite its complicated history. Erasing its history and not allowing those people still in favor of communist ideas would be wrong. Everyone should have an equal opportunity to run for office from any party, no matter its principles.

Lastly, the right to criticize and protest the government should be fundamental in any democracy. In Cuba, throughout the 1940s, there were countless protests by labor groups against injustices and social and economic problems. Today, if citizens have any opinions against the government or against certain policies that the government might enforce, they usually keep it to themselves. Their silence is further enforced by a system of fear, in which those who speak out unfavorably against the regime are threatened with political imprisonment. A democratic system, I believe, cannot exist solely on the right to vote but should also include the right to protest and to freely think about problems with the government and its policies. Civil disobedience is something that should be promoted from time to time, and although I do not advocate violent protests against a government, I do think that peaceful protests like the ones in Czechoslovakia against the communist government should be something that all citizens should be allowed to partake in without any political or judicial consequences.

Social Rights

What is a modern democracy without its social rights?

And even though Cuba today arguably has many of these social rights, they are only fully provided to those who show allegiance to the government. For example, the right to have an education paid fully by the state is something that exists in Cuba and many regions of the world. However, not every young person in Cuba will be able to get a higher education. Only those whose families have been supportive of the regime throughout their lives will be eligible for college. Students whose parents are considered dissidents by the state cannot move on to university.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Likewise, access to essential services such as water, electricity, and health services/care should be something to which every citizen is entitled, regardless of gender, race, or political views. This does not happen in Cuba. Today, many regions still have no running water available to their citizens and must depend on potable water trucks or other means. In a functional democracy, citizens should not have to worry about how they will bring water to their homes daily.

Cuba’s health services have been actively promoted by the regime as one of the world’s best health care systems. Yet they are shrouded in propaganda. Hospitals for average Cuban tend to have abysmal conditions: they are unsanitary, often employ students to do the work of medical professionals, and lack modern equipment. They also have a bias against dissidents, often barring them from receiving any form of health care. In any democracy, citizens should be entitled to adequate public health services for free and funded by taxes, in which there is no discrimination against those who either cannot afford it or hold political views that go against the government.

The right to have adequate food has never been realized under the communist regime in Cuba: it has been rationing food for the past six decades, and these rations are very limited, failing to meet the average’s Cuban daily nutritional requirements. This is partly due to the failure of agricultural policy, which leads to the underproduction of food for the general population. Before the revolution, Cuba was known for being one of Latin America’s leading agricultural producers. Today this is far from the case due to the nationalization of agricultural properties and businesses in the 1950s, in which even selling corn at a street corner was deemed an illegal activity. This has led many Cubans to have severe nutritional deficiencies because most do not have either the means to buy or have access to adequate food for themselves and their families. The right to have sufficient food is something that all democracies should always be striving for, regardless of who is in power. Doing so ensures that no child or person will go hungry and that everyone can look forward to their next meal confidently without having to worry if they will be able to afford it

Lastly, the right to housing is of fundamental importance. Cuba historically has always had a housing problem, but it only worsened with the triumph of the Revolution. Early in the communist regime’s history, the government made many

attempts to provide housing for the rural and urban poor in the form of large communist housing blocks inspired by the Soviets. Although these blocks might have provided housing, they were poorly built and rarely maintained. For example, many of these houses lack running water. Today, the government is no longer constructing these blocks because of a lack of resources and funds, and most Cubans live in below-average housing conditions. Housing is something that every democracy should be able to provide for its citizens so they can live in adequate, safe, and secure conditions.

Economic Rights

Economic rights are often overlooked when considering what it means to be a democracy. Free-market systems can exist in both autocratic and democratic regimes; for example, China is a free-market society with autocratic elements. While I believe that these economic and political systems can coexist, both the free market and economic rights in general function best in a democratic society. Cuba today has had an expansion of “economic rights” in theory, but they have never been enforced in practice. Before the Revolution, Cubans enjoyed several economic rights that were not found in many countries of the world at the time. Today, these rights are all but gone, but they are very important and must be realized in a new Cuban republic.

One economic right that is crucial in any nation is the right to private property— to own something in one’s name. This right was surprisingly granted in the new Cuban Constitution of 2019: it formally “recognized” the idea that private property was something real. However, that does not mean this right is being enforced. While the Cuban constitution recognizes the idea of “private property” in terms of housing, no such recognition is given to small business owners who are now “legally” allowed to operate after economic reforms made in the 1990s. Private business owners are subject to having the state confiscate their property at any time, and dissidents’ homes are regularly sacked by the police without any notice or proper judicial investigation. Business owners should have the right to own their businesses, considering that they contribute to the economy of the nation and pay taxes.

The right to free enterprise (or the idea that anyone can establish a business) should be allowed in every

democratic country. Before the Revolution, this principle was well understood in Cuban society. The right to own a business was perfectly legal and encouraged, because the government knew that businesses could help many poor rural and urban workers by giving them employment. Cubans today do not formally have the right to free enterprise. Although we have seen an expansion of the private sector over the past few years, that has usually not occurred in enterprises that could help Cuba’s socioeconomic problems. For one, farmers are still not allowed to sell their crops directly at market to the Cuban people. Rather, they are contracted by the state and must give all their crops to the government in exchange for a small amount of cash. Industries that are allowed to operate are usually those in the tourism sector. Small restaurants, taxi drivers, and people who offer services to tourists are the only real “private” industry that is allowed on the island. Even with that, they are often under the scrutiny and supervision of the regime. The regime has set up strict guidelines for what is and what is not allowed.

Lastly, an economic right that I also consider to be on par with free enterprise and private property is that of the right to form and join a union. Interestingly, Cuban society before the Revolution had the largest number of labor unions in any country in Latin America, and these labor unions held immense political and economic power. Today Cuba still has “labor unions,” though not in the sense of what they used to mean. The unions are all controlled by the state; what they can say and do are regulated. Many workers are forced to join the regime-led unions in which they have no say over working conditions or wages. I believe that the right of unions in a democratic society should be highly encouraged, because they allow laborers to show their disapproval or approval of certain economic policies. How would we truly know how a group of workers might feel if they have no political representation? Laborers should have the right to formally organize themselves in any industry they work in and have independent ideas.

Most of the fundamental rights that every democracy should have are missing in the current Cuban context. If we do not fully acknowledge the importance of these rights for any future democracy in Cuba, then we will fail to provide the needed conditions to formally establish a democracy that embodies them.

Works Cited

The Blessings and Curses of the Revolution. n.d. https://www.anywhere.com/cuba/travel-guide/blessing-and-curse-ofrevolution.

Chao Eduardo, Raul. 2014. Three Days in March: The Events in 1952 that Marked the Beginning of the End of the Republic of Cuba. Miami: Ediciones Universal.

Monnrey, Neil. 2020, February 13. “Cuba: A Story of Socialist Failure.” https://iea.org.uk/cuba-a-story-of-socialist-failure/.

Sanguinetty A. Jorge. 2019, June 10. The Cuban Economy 60 Years Later https://www.ascecuba.org/cuban-economy-60-years-later/.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Melissa Hernandez*

Democracy has always been a widely discussed topic. However, especially after the events of January 6, 2021, in which a mob stormed the Capitol of what has been considered the greatest democracy of the world, this debate has grown heated. Many students, especially political science or international relations majors like me, have been pushed to reflect on current events, as well as to think about what role we will play in the future national and international stage. The answer to the question, “What does democracy mean for me today?” will without a doubt be very different for everyone and will greatly depend on where each of us has experienced democracy or the lack thereof.

My experience growing up in Colombia has greatly shaped my view on democracy. For me democracy is the ideal form of government that most if not all countries wish to achieve. However, I agree with Robert Dahl’s claim that no country, not even the United States, has fully accomplished it. I also agree with his claim that polyarchy, a set of institutions necessary for a large-scale democracy, is the closest thing we can find to democracy in the real world. I too believe that this is the most desirable form of government because of its expansion of individual rights and its electoral system that guarantees that policies are not objectionable to many citizens. Applying my understanding of democracy to my home country, I suggest that Colombia is currently a polyarchy, where, as it happens in most places, its citizens are aware that the system falls short of achieving a democratic process. Colombia’s recent past has taught me that democracy requires free, fair, and open elections; freedom of speech; and a multiparty electoral system. Furthermore, Colombia’s recent experiences have taught me that a democracy needs freedom from political

assassinations, as well as respect for human rights, wealth and intellectual equality, and freedom from corruption. Finally, looking into the future, recent advances in the representation of women and the increase in demonstrations for more equality and democracy encourage me to think that Colombians are on a positive path to improving the quality of life of its citizens, an essential goal of democracy.

The Republic of Colombia is located in the northern part of South America, bordering both the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean. Just like most South American countries, Colombia was a Spanish colony until 1810. There is a huge Spanish influence from the national language, Spanish, to the powerful Catholic Church. Additionally, Colombia has a presidential system in which elections are held in a tworound system. The legislative branch is characterized by a proportional representation system and two chambers. There are both a Supreme and a Constitutional Court (Grupo Interlatin 2021).

For as long as I can remember, elections in the country have been free, there have been peaceful transitions of power between regimes, and there has been a multiparty system. It is important to note that this was not always the case, and that not too long ago Colombia looked very different from how it does today. A lot of citizens in the country feel that the current democracy is very lacking, and although I am aware of the current flaws of our system, I also think it is important to acknowledge the progress that has been made in the past seventy years.

It is easy to take for granted our electoral multiparty system but in the past, there was neither freedom of expression

* Melissa Hernandez was born in San Diego, California, but raised in Bogota, Colombia. She is currently a senior at Florida International University studying political science in a pre-law track. She was an immigration assistant at the International Rescue Committee and an interpreter for the Community Law Project of California Western School of Law. She is the founder and current president of Empowering Women in Law at FIU and the digital media coordinator of the Bubble City Community Project, a student-led organization to help the chronically homeless population in Miami Dade. She aspires to go to law school to focus on environmental, immigration, and international law. Her goal is to combine the three with her experience growing up in Colombia to help alleviate the immigration crisis through foreign policy.

nor free and fair representation in the country—two characteristics that I consider to be vital for democracy. There are three periods in the history of the country that have taught me the importance of the freedom of speech and free, fair, and multiparty elections for democracy. During the “La Violencia,” which lasted from 1948 to 1958, there was an intense political feud between liberals and conservatives that ultimately ended in systematic political violence; the estimated fatalities for 1948 alone are 43,557 (World Peace Foundation 2016). The breakdown of institutional structures and the state led to a chaotic environment that widely permitted the violation of human rights, a characteristic of democracies today.

No matter how paradoxical it may seem, a coup d’état was mounted by the military led by General Gustavo Rojas Pinilla to stop this violence. This may seem paradoxical because a democratically elected president was thrown out of power by the military in a violent coup that was done to stop the systematic violence the state had permitted under his predecessor’s “democratic” rule. Dictatorships were not uncommon during this time in Latin America: repression, press censorship, and violence toward the opposition characterized places like Argentina under Videla and Chile under Pinochet. Colombia was certainly no exception to these features of authoritarianism. I believe that the short four-year duration of the military regime in the country had both positive and negative consequences for the country’s view on democracy. First, the fact that this authoritarian government ended in four years, the same length as a presidential term, showed the strong desire for democracy held by the majority of the population. Second, because it was such a short-lived dictatorship, the memory of the repression and lack of individual rights that characterize authoritarianism is not very strong in the country, so Colombians do not appreciate their current democratic reality as much as they should.

The third historical period that shows how much Colombia has progressed in terms of democracy was the National Front government that held power between

1953 and 1974. During this period, there was an agreement between the Liberal and Conservative Parties to alternate the presidency between the two parties; however, political participation in electoral processes was limited to only those who were members of those parties. Because of the lack of political opportunity, many leftist groups ended up creating armed guerrillas that would bring chaos to the country (El Frente Nacional 2020). This is a good example of the harmful consequences of the lack of free and fair elections and the right to run for office, two of the institutions of polyarchy according to Robert Dahl.

Thus, until fairly recently, Colombia lacked even the basic free and fair electoral system that citizens take for granted today. I am confident that whoever wins office today will be granted the power of their position; that minorities are able to run for office; that the news media are not afraid to criticize any politician or government officer, even the president; and that many political parties exist and can win positions of power. Nonetheless, growing up in Colombia taught me that democracy requires more than a free and fair electoral system.

The years of violence taught me that democracy requires freedom from political assassinations and from economic and educational inequality. In a democracy, it is not enough for the government to refrain from violently suppressing civil society and the opposition; a democratic government needs to ensure freedom from political assassinations. During the implementation of the peace process agreements signed with the FARC in 2016, there was a steep increase in political assassinations, especially in regions where past guerilla violence was high; this has continued even today. Most of the those who were assassinated had been leading the land restitution process, fighting illegal mining, and supporting other social and political causes; most were victims of criminal and illegally armed groups (Registraduría Nacional del Estado Civil 2019, 58). In 2020 more than 300 social leaders were assassinated, and there has yet to be a strong and effective

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

governmental effort to protect their lives (Chicago Tribune 2020). I see achieving peace and harmony as democracy’s main goals, and political assassinations certainly do not represent either. Colombia needs to achieve these goals to advance its progress toward democracy.

Second, I believe that economic and educational inequality ultimately inhibit citizens from exercising their liberties, rights, and equal influence on their government; therefore, these forms of inequality are detrimental to democracy, at least in the levels that exist in Colombia. According to the World Bank’s GINI coefficient, Colombia was one of the twenty most unequal countries in the world (Registraduría Nacional del Estado Civil 2019, 74). If the government does not provide an adequate network of public education that is accessible to most of its population and a student lacks the resources to pay to attend a higher education institution, then his or her chances of being able to work as a state official or even vote conscientiously decrease significantly. So, even if there is a free and fair electoral system but most, perhaps even the majority, of the population do not have the means necessary to participate, then the government system is not being “completely responsive to all its citizens.”

Economic inequality is often related to corruption, which I consider to be one of the most serious problems in Colombia. Grand corruption is defined by Transparency International (2021) as “the abuse of high-level power that benefits the few at the expense of the many.” It is thus obvious how corruption can be harmful and disruptive for democracy. I have seen the consequences of the high level of corruption in Colombia, and I can state they include but are not limited to underfunded infrastructure, education, and health systems, as well as the deprivation of basic rights and services. I experienced firsthand the effects of the Nule Group corruption scandal of 2011, in which it was discovered that the mayor of Bogota, the city where I was raised, and the Nule Construction Group had embezzled millions of dollars meant for the construction of the public transport system and of roads in the city. Roads had been under construction for seven years while these “businessmen” paid for a private plane to bring them pizza from another city just because they felt like it on a Friday night. I am sure I wasted more than ten hours a week being stuck in traffic caused by “roads closed and under construction.” Furthermore, to

enrich themselves, wrongdoers often committed human right violations such as extortion, kidnappings, forced evictions, torture, illegal detention, and the persecution of perceived dissidents. The lack of care for the majority of the population, the enrichment of a few at the cost of the many, and the possible violation of human rights are all reasons why corruption is so damaging to democracy.

Overall, even though Colombia has made progress in the last seventy years there, there is still a lot of work that needs to be done—from the efficient and effective elimination of political assassinations to the decrease in economic and educational inequality and to major decreases in corruption. Colombia as a polyarchy needs to overcome these problems to move toward democracy, but this can be said about every democratic country in the world. Even the greatest democracy, the United States, has shown recently how much progress and growth still need to be made.

Nevertheless, I am hopeful for the future of Colombia for two reasons. First, the electoral system has improved and grown more representative over the past seventy years, as shown by the recent election of the first female and LGBTQIA+ mayor in Bogota, Claudia Lopez; this was a huge step forward for the country in terms of gender equality. Additionally, Lopez has led the fight against corruption for a long time, and I hope that more politicians like her will follow. Second, there has been a huge increase in civil society organizations and in protests against corruption and the violation of human rights in the country. Not too long ago I spoke with my father about how many of my friends from the best private universities of the country were going out to protest; he found that fascinating because he recalled that when he was in school, students from these prestigious universities were never seen in demonstrations or protests. I believe my generation is tired of the violence, inequality, and corruption that haunt our country, and we are finding ways to reinvent demonstrations and protests that had been accompanied by great violence and replacing them with music, dance, and carnival expressions. A great example was the seventh day of the National Strike of 2019, in which more than 300 artists were accompanied by Bogotá’s symphony and philharmonic orchestras as a sign of unity and protest (“El ‘Cacerolazo Sinfónico,” 2019). This makes me believe that young generations from different

backgrounds and social economic classes are uniting to actively participate in the politics of the country. By asking more from our government, we are demanding a safer and more democratic country, and I am sure that we will strive together to generate the change that we so deeply desire.

Finally, because of my experiences in Colombia, I believe that true democracy requires more than a free and fair electoral system; it needs to provide freedom from political assassinations, as well as full human rights, economic and educational equality, integrity, and full representation and participation of the citizens, no matter their gender or sexual preference. It also needs to have an active civil society that will demand progress from its government. I do believe that these must be in the mix for democracy to attain the wellbeing of each individual citizen.

Works Cited

“El Año 2020 Cierra Con Más de 300 Líderes Sociales Asesinados En Colombia.” 2020, December 31. Chicago Tribune. www.chicagotribune. com/espanol/sns-es-mas-de-300-lideres-sociales-asesinados-en-2020en-colombia-20201231-iq5hzaav7vdonoyechbwqjzozy-story.html.

“El ‘Cacerolazo Sinfónico’ Marcó Un Hito En Las Protestas Durante El Paro Nacional.” 2019, November 28. Cable . www.cablenoticias.tv/ uncategorized/el-cacerolazo-sinfonico-marco-un-hito-en-las-protestasdurante-el-paro-nacional.

“El Frente Nacional.” 2020. Youtube. www.youtube.com/ watch?v=TswsFkSOD5U.

“Grand Corruption.” 2021. Transparency International. www.transparency. org/en/our-priorities/grand-corruption.

Grupo Interlatin. 2021. “Colombia.” Información Sobre Colombia. www. colombia.com/colombia-info. Accessed 15 Apr. 2021.

Registraduría Nacional del Estado Civil. 2019. “Análisis de La Calidad de La Democracia En Colombia.” Centro de Análisis y Asuntos Públicos SAS. www. registraduria.gov.co/IMG/pdf/analisis_calidad_democracia_colombia_-_ caap_sept_26_2019_.pdf.

World Peace Foundation. 2016. “Colombia: La Violencia.” Mass Atrocity Endings. sites.tufts.edu/atrocityendings/2016/12/14/colombia-laviolencia-2.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Bianca Antunez*

Right now, I am sitting at my desk in my home office typing my paper on a computer. I have democracy to thank for this. Had it not been for this term we coin as “democracy,” I would be sitting on a dirt floor under a tin roof in Cuba. I would not have a computer, and if I did, I would not be able to write how I really feel because the government would not allow me to. To me, democracy means having the ability to choose my path. It is having the freedom to choose where I want to go to school or what I want to do for a living. It is the freedom to choose how I want to live my life in general. Democracy is what allows me to have the freedom to make choices that make me who I am.

Tomás Estrada Palma was the first president of Cuba and he happens to be a distant relative. He was elected on May 20, 1902. Throughout his term, Estrada Palma was a strong advocate for relations with the United States. He repealed many laws having to do with segregation and created jobs for the people of Cuba. In 1905 he was reelected as president. Estrada Palma encouraged public and educational projects and boosted Cuba’s economy by implementing powerful trade agreements (“Tomás Estrada Palma”). Among many other things, Tomás Estrada Palma worked toward creating a strong, powerful, and democratic island. Years went by, presidents went in and out of office, there were some interruptions like the U.S. Intervention of 1906, the Machado dictatorship, and the Batista coup of 1952, but the sense of democracy did not fail to persevere among the people of Cuba.

However, in the year 1953, a man by the name of Fidel Castro led an army of men to attack the Moncada barracks in Santiago de Cuba. Castro failed and was sent to prison.

Shortly after, Castro was released and went to Mexico, where he met Che Guevara. (“Fidel Castro” 2009). After being a part of the Cuban revolution for almost six years (1953 to 1959), on January 1, 1959, Fidel Castro took power as a dictator and wiped Cuba clean of its democracy.

The Cuban people were unfortunately misled by Fidel Castro. Gaining a lot of popularity and respect from his promises to restore the Cuban Constitution of 1940, Fidel Castro promised the Cuban people many things that would never end up happening. He misled the Cuban people to think that he was one of them. He sympathized with the farmers and city dwellers and claimed that he could reach a consensus on any issue that was not solved. He promised the best health care system, the world’s best doctors, a great education system, and much more. A lot of these false promises were mentioned in his “History Will Absolve Me” speech in 1953. He did not give people the choice to do any of these things. He did not give them freedom to vote, to speak, to express themselves, or do anything that was not aligned with what he believed to be correct. Fidel Castro managed to turn Cuba into a communist state.

For democracy to work to its intended power and limits, the citizenry must learn how to use it properly. Democracy, by definition, is “a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives” (“Democracy”). To me at least, this means that the people have the power to choose what they want. It is having the right to a free and fair election, having the right to speech, etc. Because my grandparents were forced to pack up their bags and leave their country if they did not want to be killed or put in jail,

* Bianca Antunez is currently a law student and graduated from FIU Honors college with a major in political science and minor in business.

for me democracy has a heavy weight on our fate as American citizens.

Chapter 15 of Democracy and Its Critics by Robert Dahl (1989) is titled “The Expansion of Individual Rights.” In this chapter, Dahl talks about the differences between polyarchal governments and earlier republican and democratic systems when it comes to individual rights. He states that when citizens have the ability to make decisions regarding the effects of their common everyday life, they often lose sight of the importance of other freedoms and liberties that are available to them I agree with Dahl’s statement, but I do not think this is detrimental to society. As a matter of fact, I believe that this strengthens democracy. Society is not perfect, and we cannot force everybody to use every power or right that they have available to them. It is not possible for citizens to be fully active in their communities or their states if they have regular jobs or just do not care too much about what is going on around them. If at the very least, citizens are aware and involved in their own community and can choose what is best for it, that is democracy. Many people get very caught up in the fight between conservatives and Democrats. While this is undoubtedly an aspect of democracy because it allows the citizenry to voice their opinions on countering issues, I do not believe that democracy has to be on such a large scale for it to be counted as democracy.

Democracy can be as small or as large as it needs to be. A great example of what I am trying to explain is when the people of my neighborhood got together to ask the commissioner of our area to insert a speed bump on our street because cars were speeding through. This small action would only benefit a few people, but people had to come together and take action for something they felt strongly about. That is what democracy is. There was no fight about Republican or Democratic ideals—it was just people gathering together trying to fix something that they felt would improve their community.

My experience with democracy in the United States is something I am very grateful for. My grandparents

constantly remind me about how I am so lucky to live in a country with freedom. At first, I took that for granted, but as I have gotten older and have had to deal with the realities of life, I have come to realize how lucky I truly am. When I first started at FIU, I had no desire to major in political science. For our summer reading assignment, they had us read a book titled In Order to Live by Yeonmi Park. The book was a true story about a girl born in North Korea who goes through many struggles. Because she has no freedoms, she decides to escape North Korea through China so she can then leave China to obtain freedom. That story was a contributing factor to my choosing to major in political science. It made the stories that my grandparents told about Cuba resonate with me even more. It made me realize that democracy is the foundation to our lives.

Mahatma Gandhi once said, “I understand democracy as something that gives the weak the same chance as the strong” (“Gandhi”). The weak are never the weak in democracy. Although not everyone gets their way all the time, democracy allows people to have at least the ability to aspire for what they believe in.

People fight on Facebook or social media about their opinions in politics. It may not be the most efficient thing to do, but that is democracy. In places that do not have democracy, they do not even have social media platforms. In Cuba, when emails are sent or received, they go through a screening process to make sure that nothing bad about the government was said.

Democracy gives us our voice, no matter how wrong anyone believes it to be.

Democracy has its limits. The question to ask is whether our nation is truly democratic or not. Or, if democracy in its purest form even exists.

In the Social Contract, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) starts off by saying “Man was born free and everywhere he is in chains.” He elaborates on the principle that almost all regimes are illegitimate in some way or

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

another. The answer is that democracy is never pure. Democracy never delivers all it promises, but what it does hold true is its promise to keep us protected. Nothing is always 100 percent pure, including democracy. Laws need to be put into place and boundaries need to be set. If democracy were to be completely pure, there would be anarchy.

In 1975 the former president of Czechoslovakia and of the Czech Republic Václav Havel said in a letter to the general secretary of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia Gustav Husák, “If every day a man takes orders in silence from an incompetent superior, if every day he solemnly performs ritual acts which he privately finds ridiculous, if he unhesitatingly gives answers to questionnaires which are contrary to his real opinions and is prepared to deny his own self in public, if he sees no difficulty in feigning sympathy or even affection where, in fact, he feels only indifference or aversion, it still does not mean that he has entirely lost the use of one of the basic human senses, namely, the sense of humiliation” (Letter to Dr. Husak).

This letter was written after the Prague Spring when the Czech people fought for their rights to democracy. This goes to show that being repressed from having democracy is a loss of identity and a loss of self-choice. Without democracy, it is hard to find a purpose. Following the orders of an overly powerful being who is incompetent to rule and does so unjustly because there is fear that, if you do not, there will be a consequence is not how we were built to live as humans.

I watched a video made by the “Peace through Democracy” project that included citizens from Italy, Bulgaria, Armenia, Georgia, Croatia, Turkey, Greece, and Moldova (European Cooperative Youth Network, 2017). In the video, the people who were interviewed spoke about what they thought about democracy. Although responses differed and the people in the video are from different countries with different ideals, religions, and morals, many agreed that democracy has to do with some aspect of freedom.

Whether it was freedom of religion, freedom of association, freedom of speech, or many other types of freedom, many people all had a longing for that one word: freedom.

In Cuba, the government is trying to replace the consumption of eggs and meat for ostrich or Hutia bird meat (Marsh, 2019). Communism not only humiliates people but it also makes their lives dull and without purpose. It is so important that people realize how crucial it is to keep up and appreciate democracy in order to not let the United States fall anywhere near a loss of democracy. When people do not vote, they do not practice democracy. When people stay silent on the issues that bother them, they do not practice democracy. I believe that we are born with a natural instinct to be democratic. We want to be involved in what affects our lives. Being involved if one does not understand democracy can also be a detrimental factor.

In his essay, “Socialism and Man in Cuba,” Che Guevara (1965) points out how the masses followed “its leaders, basically Fidel Castro, without hesitation” and how Castro won this trust by “having interpreted the full meaning of the people’s desires and aspirations, and from the sincere struggle to fulfill the promises he made.” Later in the essay, Guevara states, “Some phenomena of this kind can be seen under capitalism, when politicians appear capable of mobilizing popular opinion.”

This goes to show that what happened in a once democratic and free Cuba can happen to any other country where there is struggle, and every country has some sort of struggle. Democracy is a blessing but a curse if the populace does not inform itself and use it rationally and judiciously. People tend to forget that nothing that sounds too good to be true is usually true. If a politician who wants to be in power promises what seems almost next to impossible, democracy should serve as a tool to not let this person take control of the state and not a weapon against its people.

I have mentioned Cuba a lot throughout the paper, but a more recent example of what I mentioned above is Venezuela. Once a very wealthy country because of its access to oil, Venezuela’s economy has significantly decreased. Its democracy is the oldest to collapse into authoritarianism since World War II (Fisher and Taub 2017). A murderous tyrant just like Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez slowly but surely destroyed the economy of Venezuela and created political turmoil. When Chavez died and Nicholas Maduro took over in 2013, he worsened the situation by driving

up inflation to the point where people could not even buy groceries and gave the military an unconstitutional amount of power. Venezuela is now a very dangerous country, and many of its citizens have been killed or have had to flee their homeland as political prisoners.

The lesson? History repeats itself. Democracy, which can be strong and powerful when it is being used correctly, can fall if it is not exercised with intelligence. Being an informed voter and not listening to propaganda is one way to overcome this tragic occurrence. People mistake being equally free with having an equal lifestyle.

We should all be free to make choices, and no one should be starving, but being equal in every aspect is inhuman and unnatural. That is not what democracy calls for. Democracy is focused on the protection of rights and freedoms.

It gives us personal autonomy, personal freedom, and intrinsic moral equality for all. It does not promise that we will all drive the same car, have the same job, or live in the same style of home. That is the opposite of democracy; democracy leaves these factors to its citizens. Democracy gives me a window of opportunity with endless options. Some will say socialism does this, but in fact it does the exact opposite. It promises the world and gives you nothing but misery in return.

Putting my story into a larger historical context, I can say that I believe that democracy should be a right and not a privilege. My family faced death and risked their lives once more to be free in the United States of America. It is a sad yet powerful lesson. Seeing it being repeated in nations such as Venezuela is heartbreaking. Many people do not understand the importance of democracy until they face a scenario that is so extreme. Not having democracy is unethical and unnatural. No one should have to flee their country because bloody tyrants are causing chaos and harm to people’s lives in order to have absolute control over the populace.

If democracy did not exist, we would just exist with no purpose. In Cuba, people have their jobs chosen for them and cannot do anything else out of that. That is not what humans are made to do. We as humans have the desire

to pick what we do depending on what we are passionate about. I have democracy to thank for everything that I have and the life I live each day.

To conclude, democracy means everything to me. It means being able to believe in what I want without being punished. It means that someone on the street can wear a Che Guevara shirt, and as much as I disagree, I cannot call the police and have them arrested for having a contradictory view. It means I can voice my opinion and be heard. It means that I can make a change or at least have the freedom to try. Democracy is the pillar of my individual freedom.

Works Cited Castro, Fidel. (1953). “History Will Absolve Me.” https://www.marxists.org/history/cuba/archive/castro/1953/10/16.htm.

Dahl, R. A. D. (1989). Democracy and Its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.

“Democracy.” (2019). Lexico. https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/ democracy. European Cooperative Youth Network. (2017, December 17). What Does Democracy Mean to You? [Video]. YouTube. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=k-4tfE0ATsU.“Fidel Castro.” (2009, November 9). History.com. https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/fidel-castro.

Fisher, Max, and Taub, A. (2017, May 14). “How Venezuela Stumbled to the Brink of Collapse.” New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/14/ world/americas/venezuela-collapse-analysis- interpreter.html.

“Gandhi: Democracy and Fundamental Rights.” (n.d.). Mkgandhi.Org. https://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/democracy.htm.

Guevara, C. (1965). “Socialism and Man in Cuba.” Marxists.Org. https:// www.marxists.org/archive/guevara/1965/03/man-socialism.htm.

“Letter to Dr. Husak.” (n.d.). Vaclav Havel Library Foundation. https://www. vhlf.org/havel-quotes/letter-to-dr-husak/.

Marsh, S. (2019, April 11). “Ostrich, Rodent on the Menu as Cuba Seeks Food Miracle.” Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cubaostrich/ostrich-rodent-on-the-menu-as-cuba- seeks-food-miracleidUSKCN1RN31T

“Prague Spring.” (n.d.). Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_ Spring#:%7E:text=The%20Prague%20Spring%20r eforms%20were,the%20 media%2C%20speech%20and%20travel.

Rousseau, J. J. R. (1762). The Social Contract. New York: Simon & Schuster

“Tomás Estrada Palma.” (n.d.). Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Tom%C3%A1s_Estrada_Palma.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Nathalie Matas*

First-Generation Democracy

Democracy is primarily defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as a government by the people. Its expanded, secondary definition is that democracy is “a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.” Although these definitions do hold true to what a democracy is in theory, they lack the nuance of what democracy truly means for the world and the citizens of each nation. Democracy, to me, is the foundation of human rights globally and the best way to ensure that all people maintain a decent quality of life free from political persecution and othering.

As a person born in the United States with a Cuban family background, I have experienced democracy in a way that is nothing like my parents or ancestors. Coming from an immigrant family that lived through the repressive Castro regime and the Batista regime before it, my relatives taught me never to take for granted the opportunity to live in a truly democratic nation. I recall the Fourth of July when I was five years old. I wanted to go outside to see the fireworks, but my grandmother refused to let me go outside; she exclaimed, “No! What if those are gunshots?” My mother, to ease my grandmother’s fear, told her, “Mami, we’re not in Cuba anymore. We can go out and see the fireworks show near the door and that way we can still go outside but can easily come back inside if things get out of hand.” At the time, I recall thinking that it was scary or impossible for fireworks to be gunshots or that anyone would want to shoot the people in my family. It was not until later that I understood the context of my family’s concerns. Even if we did not live in the nicest neighborhood, I took the safety of living

in freedom and relative civil peace as a fact of life where my family could not. I lived in the United States—a place known for how often it touts its responsibility as the force for freedom and democracy in the world—and knew I would not experience the same hardships that my family suffered in Cuba. Instead, I would live, learn, and grow under the U.S. democratic system and, in the words of my uncle, could even become president one day if I really wanted to. However, the reminders of my family history loomed before me like the wind before a storm, even when no storm seemed to be coming our way.

To put things into a bit more context, it should be noted that Cuba’s history with regard to democracy was turbulent and was interrupted by breaks of authoritarianism that kept grew longer and longer. Cuba also experienced two wars of independence. The first one in 1868 ended in a truce with Spain, which falsely promised Cubans greater autonomy to rule themselves after ten years of fighting. When it became apparent that nothing had changed except for the abolition of slavery, the second war for Cuban independence started in 1895, but this time the United States also declared war on Spain. After losing the war to the United States, Spain ceded the island of Cuba to U.S. control, despite Cubans’ desire for independence. Even though the United States granted Cuba independence soon thereafter, the 1902 Platt Amendment guaranteed the United States the right to intervene militarily and to be directly involved in Cuba’s affairs until 1934. Cuban elections held during that time were marred by corruption and civil rights abuses, including asking the United States to intervene in 1912 by “putting down” protests by Afro-Cubans seeking to end discrimination against them. With the 1920s came the Machado era, later termed the “failed revolution,” with promises of reforms and an improved quality of life for Cubans through new economic

* Nathalie Matas is a recent graduate of Florida International University. They earned a dual degree, majoring in history, Latin American and Caribbean studies, and women and gender studies, while completing several minors and the human rights and political transitions certificates. Throughout their undergraduate journey, Nat worked closely with on-campus departments and organizations that worked to create more inclusive spaces on campus and promoted human rights efforts, such as the Women’s Center, It’s on Us, the Pride Center, UN Women, and the Registered Student Organizations Council. Nat’s passion for interdisciplinary and intercultural learning was recognized through completion of the FIU Global Learning Medallion and their status as a 2019–2020 FLAS Fellow. Nat has always been passionate about human rights and historical analysis and wishes to work within these fields on a more global scale.

and social policies. Once again, however, a brutal and politically repressive dictatorship was established that was just as corrupt as the ones preceding Machado’s regime.

Then, in 1933, began the saga of Sergeant Fulgencio Batista. He staged a coup against the Machado government and took power for eleven years before retiring and being succeeded by Ramon Grau San Martin, a civilian who reestablished democratic processes on the island. However, just eight years later in 1952, Batista regained power and reinstated another repressive dictatorial regime that resulted in the deaths of thousands of young Cubans, increased social stratification across racial lines, and led to an increase in organized crime, especially in Havana. Those years of repression led to political protests, in which many university students participated, and several attempts to overthrow the government. The first attempted but unsuccessful revolt occurred only a year into the new Batista regime and was led by Fidel Castro. Its failure led to his exile in Mexico, but he continued to be involved with the revolutionary cause from there. From this attempted coup stemmed many protests and armed conflicts on the island until Castro returned in 1956 to lead a major battle in the mountains of Pinar del Rio called the Sierra Maestra, where his followers began employing guerilla warfare. After three years, the revolutionary forces stormed Havana, still retaining their guerilla tactics, and forced Batista, along with many others from his regime, to flee to the United States seeking political asylum.

Cuba then established a temporary government and held elections that Fidel Castro won legitimately, based on his promises to correct the wrongs of the previous regime; at this point, he did not align himself either with the USSR or the United States. After failed talks with the United States, Cuba under Castro turned to the USSR for political support, thereby aligning with the global communist cause under the Soviet sphere of influence. Castro’s regime persecuted members of the old Batista regime, consolidated power by eliminating other strong figures within the original revolutionary movement, and began a wealth redistribution program that stripped many middle- and upper-class Cubans of their properties

and businesses. However, while he did many things that violated the basic human rights of some groups, Castro also instituted policies to help the poor and rural (mostly afro-Cuban) community, such as an effective literacy campaign and expansion of access to education.

The subsequent decades brought with them defining moments for Cubans both on and off the island. Cuba underwent great turmoil during the 1960s through attempted coups such as the U.S.-backed Bay of Pigs operation, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the creation of a “Peter Pan” operation that airlifted Cuban children off the island to be resettled in the United States without their parents. During this period, Castro created a wellorganized whistle-blowing system across the country and many social programs of varying efficiency levels; he also used current events to stoke anti-U.S. sentiment within the island as a form of political control. The 1970s were marked by Cuba’s willingness to spread MarxistLeninist ideologies globally through aiding left-wing revolutions in Africa (especially Angola) and attaining full membership in the Soviet Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. The Cuban Communist Party (the only legal political party on the island) also established a new Constitution in 1976. In 1980, Cuba opened its borders for people to leave the country, using this opportunity to expel most of its convicts and institutionalized mentally ill population on boats to the United States in an operation called the Mariel Boatlift. By this point, propaganda was heavily institutionalized at all levels of education, and party loyalty was incredibly important to gain economic opportunities on the island. However, the conditions in Cuba greatly worsened with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, which brought with it major food and medical equipment shortages, and a general decline in Cuban infrastructure and education; these became much worse than in previous decades. These shortages and declining living conditions jumpstarted another major wave of refugees escaping Cuba to find better opportunities in the United States. Meanwhile, the political repression and imprisonment of dissidents continued throughout all these decades and continue to this day, alongside increased restrictions on travel to prevent members of the university-educated professional population from emigrating.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

I grew up with stories about what life in Cuba was like before and after Castro, and frankly neither time sounded too appealing. My grandmother too was the daughter of immigrants in a new place; she was the eldest daughter of a Christian Lebanese merchant and his wife in the Oriente province of Cuba. She was born three years after Batista overthrew the Machado regime and went through all the subsequent changes in government until she came to the United States in the 1990s. Her life was marked by memories of dictators, civil unrest, and revolution. Though she lived through World War II, her most vivid memory about it involved my great-grandfather. After listening to the foreign news on the radio one day, he told her to wear a black armband to school to mourn President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s death because “he was the greatest president the US will ever see.” My grandmother did not understand why her father loved Roosevelt so much at the time or his fascination with the U.S. political system, but this was the first instance where she felt like the world was changing quickly around her, even if it happened a whole country away. Her shock on seeing the amount of violence associated with political resistance during her university years in Havana left her hyper-aware of what was at stake under the Batista regime. Her friends were dying in their efforts to have a voice and end the corruption and repression of Batista’s government. However, the triumph of the Revolution and the rise of Castro did nothing to assuage their concerns, as still even more people died under his orders. I recall my grandmother recounting the story of a handsome young man from her hometown who tried flirting with her for a few months (much to my grandfather’s dismay) and how he went to a flower shop to buy her carnations, with a romantic note attached to catch her attention. Unfortunately, she never received those flowers and only knew about them because the boy’s brother told her about them. In fact, the next thing she heard was that the boy had been mistaken for a relative of someone from the old Batista regime and killed—another life snuffed out alongside basic human rights and hope for a restored democracy.

My mother passed along her own stories about life under Castro, which to her did not seem so bad at the time because it was all she ever knew. A stubborn young girl from Havana, she did not take “just because” as a valid reason to do anything, even if Castro himself had said it. In fact, her first instance of repression came at the age of six when she refused to become a pionera, a member of the communist youth movement, even though joining was mandatory for all Cuban children. She refused because, when she asked

the school principal why she had to join, he told her, “Just because.” Her refusal brought with it accusations against my grandparents for “spreading counterrevolutionary ideologies,” a grave offense for the communist authoritarian regime, and then they were put on trial. They were able to escape the fate of political prison only because my grandfather had friends in the government who, as university students, had protested alongside him against Batista; these friends claimed that my grandparents were not counterrevolutionaries but just had a daughter who was “difficult.” My mother was the first in her family to come to the United States, and she felt lost and confused and frustrated at times due to not understanding the system or the language. Her civil engineering degree from the University of Havana was not valid in the United States, and so she had to take whatever jobs she could find. However, she knew that no matter how often she managed to evade the dangerous grip of the Castro regime, having a family in Cuba would mean putting it in constant danger and economic uncertainty. Living in freedom from political repression and not depending on, appealing to, or having to remain invisible from a dictatorship to attain a proper quality of life were worth the struggle.

As I mentioned earlier, my own experiences with U.S. democracy have been very different. From the age of six we had mock elections in the classroom and were taught about civil rights. Four years later, when I began learning about political parties and more about how voting works, I suddenly decided at the ripe old age of ten that I would become a member of the Green Party when I grew up, because, as I so eloquently said at the time, “They really want to help the environment and I like that.” The idea of voting and the peaceful transfer of power seemed normal to me, although I was keenly aware of some of the shortcomings within the American system. How could a country founded on freedom, claiming that all men were created equal, have slavery after declaring those things? Learning about the civil rights movement at a young age meant also painfully knowing that people continued to mistreat Black Americans for at least another century after the abolition of slavery. I did not understand why a nation that constantly talks about freedom could back a regime like Batista’s that killed more than 20,000 Cubans in just seven years through his acts of political repression or could support many other dictatorships across the globe. Our Bill of Rights is one of the foundational documents for human rights texts around the world, and yet we had so many instances where these rights were not respected for every

person living within our borders. We constantly say that we want to protect democracy globally, but often our foreign policy does not line up with those principles, as seen in our interventions in Latin America and the Middle East.

Furthermore, I lived through the 2016 election when Donald Trump won over working-class Americans through populist rhetoric that allowed people to ignore his xenophobic, racist, sexist, and homophobic language that was part of many of his speeches. He put people’s fears at the forefront and promised to make a difference for people who felt cheated by the current system. Unfortunately, his personality cult and inflammatory statements directly deriding entire groups of people created a major rift within the nation that we are still trying to reconcile. This was the first election where I could legally vote. I remember feeling terrified when a man who inspired so much hatred toward Latine people—people like me—won the election. As a queer person I was especially scared that, should something happen to the president, the next person in line was a believer in conversion therapy and that he actually understood the way government and lawmaking work. I remember feeling absolutely nauseated, powerless, and hopeless because in my eighteen-year-old mind, this election was the storm my family was anxiously anticipating ever since they came to the United States. The measure of our democracy and its ability to safeguard the rights of its people and humanity as a whole—be they citizens or not—were about to be tested very publicly and very quickly. Policies ranging from immigrant children being put in cages to the ban on trans military men and women to a travel ban on many Muslim-majority countries were the Trump administration’s attempts to curb human rights and freedoms. Fortunately, they were protested and fought within the court system. Even though some issues were not fully addressed, these efforts showed that our democratic system would not back down from protecting minorities’ rights.

After four years of controversies, another presidential election cycle inevitably began. This time, Trump would lose but not before testing the strength of American democracy once again. Allegations of large-scale voter fraud coming from the former president himself shook the nation. These allegations were serious because voter fraud and sham elections are hallmarks of oligarchies and dictatorships masquerading as democracies globally. However, even as these allegations were proven to be false, Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric resulted in the storming of the U.S. Capitol by many of his sympathizers. This attack on U.S. democracy—even when it was rhetorically framed

as something done to protect said democracy—was the culmination of the authoritarian thinking that was permeating the global political consciousness of our current time. However, our democracy survived, and many leaders within Trump’s own political party voted to support the peaceful transfer of power and condemned the events at the Capitol as unacceptable. Our democracy was tested, and yet it endured and protected the voice of voters.

An ex-boyfriend once told me that “democracy is broken,” and at the time I was unsure of what to say. My insecurities made me feel like any response would not be eloquent enough or as well thought out as it could be. But what is democracy if not the societal agreement that we all have valid ideas and a right to voice them? One does not need to be a master debater to understand that democracy is right there when we treat others with respect and elevate their ideas and solutions. If American democracy is “broken,” then it is the responsibility of each citizen to voice their concerns and fix it with empirical evidence and not so eloquently worded ideas. As a queer Latine person, I have seen how quickly the LGBTQ+ rights movement has progressed (even if we have not reached full equity). I have seen how, though slowly, the United States has created avenues to promote and protect human rights domestically. Though our system is definitely flawed, without democracy we would have no way to fix it or even protest its shortcomings. The world has seen many instances of authoritarian regimes that have only served to oppress the people who need the most protection. In fact, there are many places with oligarchies and sham “democracies” that continue to do these things.

Democracy may be fragile, as we saw with Cuba’s history and the American experiment, but that does not make it inherently broken or obsolete. We must continue to give democracy a chance if we truly want to change the world for the better.

Works Cited

“Cuba Profile— Timeline.” 2018, May 1. BBC News. BBC. https://www.bbc. com/news/world-latin-america-19576144.

Kennedy, John F. 1960, October 6. “Speech of Senator John F. Kennedy.” American Presidency Project. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ node/274087.

“United States Profile—Timeline.” 2021, January 20. BBC News. https:// www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-16759233.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Mariaeugenia Gurdian*

There are many definitions, opinions, and perspectives on the subjective concept of democracy, and whomever you ask what it means, you are likely to receive a different answer. Democracy is something that can be easily taken for granted and is valued more by some than by others. My family and I are among those who place more value on democracy and all its promises because my relatives escaped Nicaragua’s communism and its associated repression, censorship, and injustice and were warmly welcomed by America’s open democratic arms. That is why democracy to me, as recited in the Pledge of Allegiance, means liberty and justice for all, for that is what my parents were given when they came to America.

My parents’ families faced sobering hardships in communist Nicaragua in the late 1970s and early 1980s, which sent them fleeing to the United States. The Sandinista revolution, which brought the communists to power, showed the regime’s autocratic tendencies. My mother had to leave with her family for fear of her father being drafted to fight for the Sandinista army. My father’s family left for fear that he or any of his brothers would be drafted as well. In addition, the agrarian reforms unjustly stripped them, and many others, of their hard-earned lands, leaving them feeling as if they had no future there and no reason to stay.

Dr. Luis Callejas, a guest speaker, spoke about this agrarian reform as an attempt by the Sandinistas to exact revenge on the “bourgeoisie class.” During this period in Nicaragua, censorship was widespread, there was no freedom of speech, arbitrary arrests were common, and the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects” was nonexistent.

It is important to note, however, that the Sandinista rule began in a seemingly democratic manner. Following President Daniel Ortega’s first election, a constituent assembly was organized to draft a constitution that provided for the rule of law, checks and balances, human rights protection, and competitive and frequent elections (Booth et al. 2015). But once the agrarian reform was enacted and the Contra War began, the Sandinista party began to show its true colors. Civil rights violations and press censorship began, which in the war became full-on censorship and intolerance of any kind of opposition (Merrill 1994).

The very same issues that plagued Nicaragua are those that molded my family’s and my perspective and love for democracy. When someone experiences such hardships, it is difficult to forget or overcome them; those who escape want to keep as much distance between themselves and their past as possible, and to do that one must make sure that it does not repeat itself. America and its democracy provide us with the assurance that those abuses of rights will not happen here; we need not worry that our government or president will gain too much power and disrupt the structure of our country or lives. Therefore, to me, democracy symbolizes control. We, as people of the United States, are in control over ourselves and over the government.

Democracy—liberal democracy to be exact—also translates into protection. As Josiah Ober (2005) discusses, liberal democracy follows from basic democracy in that it focuses on the legitimate authority of the people while also committing itself to protecting personal autonomy, distributive justice, human rights, and more. In doing so,

* Mariaeugenia Gurdian is from Miami and is of Nicaraguan descent. She is currently a second-year law student and Global Law Scholar at Georgetown University Law Center. Before attending law school, Mariaeugenia graduated summa cum laude from Florida International University in 2020 with a bachelor’s degree in political science and international relations and a focus on Latin American and Caribbean studies. At Georgetown Law, Mariaeugenia is a staff member on The Georgetown Law Journal, president of the Latin American Law Students Association, chief of staff of the Student Bar Association, and student board member for the Early Outreach Initiative. She is also a competitor with Georgetown’s Appellate Advocacy Division and the Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition. She aspires to leverage these experiences to work in the field of international law and eventually as an actor in the international arena. Mariaeugenia takes full advantage of living in Washington, DC, having gained experience throughout congressional, federal, and judicial internships. Most recently, she was a judicial intern at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and a legal extern for the U.S. Department of Justice Office of International Affairs, South America team. She will soon be joining a law firm in New York, where she hopes to work on international and transnational legal matters. In addition to her passion for international law and affairs, Mariaeugenia enjoys mentoring aspiring law students and strengthening the pipeline of diverse legal talent.

democracy protects us on many levels. One of the most significant ways in which it does so is by giving we, the people, control and allowing us to be autonomous. The Bill of Rights assures us of it, something that many other countries, including Nicaragua, do not have. The First Amendment contains several of our inalienable rights: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and the right to peaceably protest and to petition the government. These democratic ideals and moral commitments are what make democracy our shield.

These freedoms that we are granted are not universally recognized, and for that reason, democracy is special and worthy of respect. Freedom of speech allows us to voice our opinions and perspectives about anything, including the government, freely and without fearing repercussions. In many communist and nondemocratic states, such as Cuba or Nicaragua, this is unfortunately not the case; should people criticize their leader, they can be met with violence or arbitrary arrest. Under a liberal democracy like ours, not only are you allowed to verbally criticize your leader—something many Americans have been adamant about doing since President Trump was elected—but you can also physically and peacefully protest your leader, which is again something many Americans have done. In nondemocratic countries such as Nicaragua and Venezuela, these protests are not allowed. For example, in April 2018, when Nicaraguans were peacefully protesting President Ortega’s presidency and decisions, they were met with violence that escalated quickly and killed hundreds. Democracy shields us from attacks like those. It also gives us the ability to use the media freely, without fear of censorship or withholding of information that was experienced in Nicaragua; U.S democracy was created for the people, to protect the people and their interests. As Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black ruled in 1971, “The press was to serve the governed, not the governors.”

Democracy also means inclusion and a focus on the welfare of people that goes deeper than the simple protection of human rights that we just discussed. It is on the legal, policy, and governmental levels that our importance and rule as a people are really felt. It is the very structure of democracy that allows us to exert our

rule as a people, which avoids the authoritarianism of states like Nicaragua. Because the United States has a representative democracy, it is in fact “representative” of us (Dahl). Along with free and fair elections and the political participation of our citizens in civil and political life, this representativeness marks a key difference for democracy that makes it so appealing (“What Is Democracy” 2004). In a democracy, the citizens hold the highest political authority in choosing their leaders and representatives. As mentioned, the effective representation of our wishes, as citizens, through elected officials means that our needs and suggestions are respected and responded to. Though the opinions of the majority are most often heard, it is important to note that the rights of minorities remain protected as well. This is an issue that is often brought up in the argument against democracy. I disagree with Tocqueville’s criticism of democracy that it leads to tyranny, because despite everything, we all have our rights equally protected. Equality grants us the freedom to express ourselves, even if we are members of a minority, and we always remain protected.

In my honest opinion, as supported by all the evidence I have provided, democracy is a great thing. All of its advantages derive from the foundational goals of democracy: establishing justice and securing the blessings of liberty of the people, as highlighted in the Constitution and our Pledge of Allegiance. Moreover, the concept mandated in the Declaration of Independence, “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” shapes the inherent nature of democracy. The idea of equality is one of the aspects of democracy that draws the most followers––it has certainly influenced my love and appreciation for democracy. The egalitarian aspect of democracy makes it very different from other forms of government such as communism, because democracy is based on equal treatment and opportunity and not equal distribution. The idea that all are created equal with unalienable rights ensures progress and the ability for everyone to succeed; so many people from around the world migrate to the United States in pursuit of the opportunities our democracy has to offer.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Certainly, democracy afforded my family and me opportunities that we would otherwise not have had. Nicaragua’s democracy was on the rise after the demise of the Sandinista party and free and fair elections were held. The election of Violetta Chamorro ended the Contra War and indeed helped consolidate liberal democratic rule and make progress toward national reconciliation in Nicaragua (Booth 2015; Williams 1990). Some people returned to Nicaragua during this time, though many people left again. However, in 2006, when President Ortega was reelected, the hard-earned progress toward democracy ended. As president, Ortega undermined constitutional procedures and institutional mechanisms that were meant to check his presidential power, inherently undermining Nicaragua’s progress toward a liberal democracy (Anderson et al. 2017). His antidemocratic actions included eliminating the separation of powers and allowing reelection without term limits.

President Ortega has remained in power in Nicaragua since 2006, further eroding the remaining democratic aspects of Nicaragua. Beginning in April 2018, civil unrest in the form of protests and uprisings began, as the people grew tired of the de-democratization and injustices that had been occurring. With the people believing that they had the democratic right to make peaceful protests, the Nicaraguan uprising became about more than just politics when they were met with violence from the regime; it became about repression and human rights violations, and these protests resulted in more injustice. Democracy is so important to me because it offers us protection from instances like those. When people’s democratic rights are not granted or respected, disasters occur, and too much power often gets bestowed on the wrong people. Nicaragua has recently faced similar issues to those that arose during Sandinista rule, and it makes me feel fortunate to live in a place like the United States where democracy is valued above everything, and our rights are respected.

Ultimately, democracy is freedom, liberty, equality, and justice. It is being able to feel safe without fear of your government turning on you. Democracy is the shield protecting our personal autonomy and the sword that gives us the highest political authority. Democracy is the ability to control our own future and destiny and that of our country.

Works Cited

Anderson, Leslie E., et al. 2017. “Electoral Competition and Democratic Decline in Nicaragua: Uncovering an Electorally Viable Platform for the Right.” Democratization 24, no. 6: 970–86.

Booth, J. A., C. T. Wade, and T. W. Walker. 2015. Understanding Central America: Global Forces, Rebellion, and Change. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.

Merrill, Tim. 1994. Nicaragua: A Country Study. Washington, DC: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress.

“What Is Democracy?” 2004, January. Stanford. web.stanford.edu/~ldiamond/iraq/WhaIsDemocracy012004.htm.

Williams, Philip J. 1990. “Elections and Democratization in Nicaragua: The 1990 Elections in Perspective.” Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 32, no. 4: 13–34.

Václav Havel Program for Human Rights & Diplomacy

Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Ashna Singh*

When I wake up every morning, I start making choices: a low-calorie breakfast or a high-calorie yet healthy breakfast, taking an Uber to school or going through the trouble of parking the car when I am running late, studying in Europe or studying in the United States of America, and working hard to get a job after graduating or studying hard to get into graduate school. Human life is full of alternatives. Every person is blessed with the freedom of choice, freedom of speech, the right to have or enjoy fundamental rights, and the freedom to participate in the political process in order to initiate change. The list is endless. The main question, which raises eyebrows, is this: Are we really privileged with these democratic rights? If you take a second and reread the previous sentence, you will realize that there are certain choices that people do not have access to in every country. Therefore, there is a need to correct the previous sentence. It should now read, “Every human in a democratic country is blessed with freedom of choice, freedom of speech, the right to enjoy fundamental rights, and freedom to participate in the political process in order to initiate change.” But this raises more questions. How should we define democracy? What is a democratic country? Although the history of democracy can be traced back to ancient Greece, it could be defined as justice, liberty, transparency, and so on and so forth. In this paper, I illustrate what democracy means to me and share how Dahl and Huntington felt about democracy.

Democracy is when I do not have to think twice before deciding what kind of clothes I must wear today. I was born and brought up in India, a country where women were treated as an inferior class and did not have the same rights as men. Even though things have changed over time, there are still certain parts of the country, particularly the rural areas, where women are treated as inferior. Despite India

becoming a democratic country in 1947, people’s viewpoints on women in these areas never changed. The way a woman dressed, spoke, and carried herself in society were looked down upon. Until the last decade, society was not ready to welcome women who retaliated against any kind of wrong done to them. To step out of the house, I had to be fully covered from top to bottom, or else I would be shamed in the form of hateful comments and critical remarks that would cast scorn on my upbringing. I believe that no one has the right to paint that picture of me. Democracy cannot exist if a woman is criticized for her way of dressing. It does not exist if she is forced to make a choice and then asked to pretend as though it were her choice.

Democracy is when a woman does not have to be afraid to speak up. In India, women are not allowed to state their opinions on any issue because it has a male chauvinistic society. We are told to comply with our father’s decisions or our spouse’s decisions. In other words, whatever the man says is right and needs to be adhered to without any hesitance. Their decisions are what we must act on. Democracy does not exist in a society where women cannot speak or stand up for themselves.

A country can be called democratic when its citizens, regardless of gender, are allowed to bring about change. The term “democracy” loses meaning when people are treated unequally. On December 11, 2019, the upper house (Rajya Sabha) of the Indian Parliament India passed the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA); it became law after the president gave it his assent. Under the law, those who sought refuge in India because of persecution on religious grounds were no longer considered illegal immigrants. However, it did not apply to Jews and Muslims; there were protests all over

* Ashna Singh was born in India and came to the United States for higher education. She graduated from Florida International University with a degree in political science and international relations, and with certificates in public policy and global cybersecurity policy. She is extremely passionate about foreign and public policy and is currently pursuing her master’s degree in public policy at Georgetown University.

the country because this law seemed to violate Muslim rights to stay in India, despite experiencing persecution by Hindus in their home countries (Shivaji and Malik 2019).

Democracy is not just a form of government. Freedom of choice and freedom of speech are what make us human: we humans should be able to secure what we want for ourselves of our own free will and not be trapped in situations where we are allowed only certain rights that are wrongly termed as democratic rights.

Samuel P. Huntington (1991) wrote about three waves of democracy in the modern world. The first “long” wave of democratization began in the 1820s, with the expansion of suffrage to a large portion of the male population in the United States, and continued for almost a century until 1926, bringing into being around twenty-nine democracies. The first “reverse wave” began when Mussolini came into power in Italy in 1942, reducing the number of democratic states in the world to twelve. The second wave of democratization was initiated by the triumph of the Allies in World War II. The second reverse wave brought the number of democracies back down to thirty. The third wave was between 1974 and 1990 when “at least thirty countries made transitions to democracy, just doubling the number of democratic governments in the world” (12). Huntington then raised these questions: “At what stage are we within the third wave? Will it be followed by a significant third reverse wave eliminating many of democracy’s gains in the 1970s and 1980s?” According to Huntington, the major reason for the increase in the number of democracies was “the unprecedented global economic growth of the 1960’s, which raised living standards, increased education, and greatly expanded the urban middle class in many countries” (13). I believe that, as the standard of living and the level of education increased, people understood that democratic rights were a must for every human being. These factors are correlated with the third wave of democracy.

In his book, Democracy and Its Critics, Robert A. Dahl (1989, 16) offers a description of democracy as practiced in ancient Greece: “A democracy must also

be of modest size, not only so that all citizens can meet together in the assembly and thus act as rulers of the city, but also in order that all citizens may know one another. To seek the good of all, citizens must be able to apprehend the good of each and thus be capable of understanding the common good that each shares with the others.” This political vision is so lofty and charming that a modern democrat can hardly fail to be attracted by it. I agree with the Greek vision of democracy in which “the citizen is a whole person for whom politics is a natural social activity not sharply separated from the rest of life, and for whom the government and the state—or rather, the polis—are not remote and alien entities distant from oneself. Rather, political life is only an extension of, and harmonious with, oneself. Values are not fragmented but coherent: for happiness is united with virtue, virtue with justice, and justice with happiness” (18). Every human deserves to be heard and to have the basic human rights to which he or she is entitled.

The classic definition of democracy is that it is a form of government in which the people rule, in contrast to a monarchy, which is the rule by one, or an oligarchy, which is the rule by a few. Democracy, just as any other form of government, requires a system of offices and institutions designed to administer its necessary functions and to defend its vital interests in the external environment. For many of us, democracy is something buried under a series of textbook definitions, explained to us by teachers from elementary school forward. For the rest of us Americans, democracy means something that comes along every four years when we elect the president in the United States. What we as citizens of this democratic government often forget is that we have the power to bring a change in the current state of affairs. For me, democracy is something that I can define for myself.

But does democracy actually exist in the United States?

Throughout U.S. history, war has always been the engine of increased freedom. New rights were created after the nation’s largest wars, such as the Civil War and World War II, which brought about a change in what citizenship actually meant. The Civil War ended slavery, expanding

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

the meaning of citizenship, and World War II provided a safety net of decent employment and higher education, among other benefits—what Franklin D. Roosevelt famously called “freedom from want.”

The 9/11 attacks brought pain and suffering for many Muslims living in this country. Those who had lived here for years were randomly targeted because of their religion; the hate game against Muslims was very strong after 9/11. Any person of brown color might be stopped randomly for questioning, pulled away from airport lines for extra screenings, or thrown inside a cell for being a Muslim. One young woman was detained by the FBI after another Muslim suspect was compelled to say she was a suicide bomber; she later said that the FBI agents told that she did not have any rights anymore (Suri 2017). Where were democratic rights at that point in time? Many Muslims experienced basic violations of their human and constitutional rights and their right to privacy.

Freedom is continually under threat. The governments of the United States or India, before elections are held, try to make us believe that the government is for the people, of the people, and by the people, but they often turn back on this statement when it comes to rights of every citizen, whether an Indian, a Muslim, or an American. Democracy never lasts long and never will until people and the government understand the difference between democracy and monarchy. Some people fail to notice anything wrong even if it is in front of their eyes; for me, even if I know something is wrong, my hands are chained, and I am bound by societal norms and what is right and wrong.

For me and others like me who want to create change in the world, democracy is still just a bunch of unanswered questions, keeping us mired in everyday politics.

Works Cited

“After 9/11: ‘You No Longer Have Rights’ – Extract.” 2011, September 2. The Guardian. www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/02/after-9-11muslim-arab-american-stories.

Mukherjee, Shivaji, and Aditi Malik. 2019, December 31. “Analysis | In India, Thousands Are Protesting the New Citizenship Law: Here Are 4 Things to Know.” Washington Post.www.washingtonpost.com/ politics/2019/12/31/india-thousands-are-protesting-new-citizenshiplaw-here-are-things-know/.

Suri, Jeremi. 2017, September 11. “Perspective | How 9/11 Triggered Democracy’s Decline.” Washington Post. www.washingtonpost. com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/09/11/how-911-triggereddemocracys-decline/.

Václav Havel Program for Human Rights & Diplomacy

Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Christopher Byron*

I rarely question the meaning of democracy in my daily life. As an individual who has lived in the United States for nearly my whole life, I have not often questioned the state of affairs in U.S. society, almost in the way that a fish does not notice the water in which it swims. In the past few years, I have taken on a goal that would be anathema to that metaphorical fish: venturing out of the “water” and seeking to understand the “air” of autocracy that so many around the world have been forced to breathe for millennia and that some still do today. I am so thankful that I could make these physical and intellectual ventures: they have allowed me to understand that democracy is a rarity in the shared human experience. It is an idea that many have taken great risks and made huge sacrifices to see fulfilled in their societies. It is also fragile, as the waves of democratization proposed by Samuel Huntington (1991) allow for retreat. In this essay, I share the ventures that have shown me the meaning of democracy through its absence, as well as the values I have come to appreciate through other means.

Nobody in my immediate family has had the opportunity to travel outside the United States. When I was contacted by a friend in Sudan regarding an opportunity to volunteer as a high school teaching assistant in Khartoum, I immediately accepted the opportunity to practice my Arabic skills, assist in valuable work, and try to learn something more about this vastly different country. And I became the first in my family to go abroad.

I had no illusions about the situation in Sudan. I was already familiar with the 1989 coup that propelled Omar al-Bashir and his regime into power. I had followed the conflicts in the south of the country and the genocide inflicted on the people of Darfur. There are certainly limits to my imagination,

however, because I found it difficult to imagine how it must feel to live under a state such as Sudan.

My arrival in Khartoum in the early morning hours was uneventful, with few reminders of state authority apart from the customs office. That first day, however, brought much more explicit symbols of the ruling regime. The streets were monitored by scores of paramilitary agents in pick-up trucks, whom I later learned are given broad authority in conducting warrantless searches and detentions. As I took a taxi to the school where I would teach, I witnessed a sight that I imagine is familiar across many nations who have lived under similarly oppressive regimes. Soviet armored vehicles were stationed in front of several major buildings and driving along the streets. Often their crews would be crouched on top of the vehicles or in the shade of their chassis, quietly sipping cups of coffee. Their weapons were visibly loaded, always ready for use against those opposing the state. In earlier times, the same scene might have been commonplace in the cities of Prague and Budapest, preventing any witnesses from forgetting the presence of communist power. As I walked the streets, I could see soldiers manning roadblocks with heavy Soviet machine guns. One of these soldiers was wearing a starched blue uniform but evidently had not been issued boots, as he wore dusty athletic sneakers. As I approached, he looked at me with a somewhat bored expression that turned into surprise when I asked him for directions.

I, of course, had less positive experiences. In one case I started to cross a bridge that was in a sensitive area due to its position overlooking the presidential estate. Halfway across, an officer from the special police materialized with a raised Kalashnikov and a stern order to turn around,

* Christopher Byron is a current graduate student at George Mason University’s Schar School, pursuing a master’s degree in international security; he is also interning at the Hudson Institute. He graduated in 2019 from Florida International University with a B.A. in international relations. His research focuses on the United States’ critical supply chain dependencies, grand strategy, and South Asian affairs. On completion of his master’s program, Christopher intends to pursue a career in public service.

which I quickly complied with. On another occasion, my bus was stopped in the desert while traveling to a northern village. After disembarking, I was met with two intelligence officers in formal suits. They appeared alarmed to see a foreigner traveling through the country and started asking me a barrage of questions: Are you an Israeli spy? If not, are you an Egyptian spy? I boarded the bus again after some polite “no’s” and a smile. Later, when I went downstairs from my hotel room in search of breakfast, I saw another suited agent conversing with the British proprietor, who was responding very amicably. After he left, the proprietor told me that he was there to investigate claims that the hotel was harboring homosexuals. Finally, as I was walking with a female friend who was committing the crime of wearing trousers in public, I noticed a black car with government plates slowly matching our pace on the empty streets. I made eye contact with the occupants, dressed in suits and wearing sunglasses, and they quickly drove on. Interestingly, my most disturbing experience with the Sudanese intelligence services came just recently, long after I had left the country. I was watching a BBC documentary on the arbitrary detention of political opponents. It revealed the location of “ghost houses,” prisons and torture chambers concealed in plainlooking urban houses. They are named after the ghostly cries of dissidents that can be heard during the night. It identified an average house, adjacent to a hospital, as a ghost house. I immediately recognized it, as I had enjoyed a cup of coffee at a restaurant scarcely fifty meters away. It reinforced that, in addition to the “show of force” provided by Soviet armored vehicles and military checkpoints, locals are painfully aware of the abuses that occur just out of view.

I learned a lot about the state of society through conversations with the young Sudanese with whom I became friends. In private, everyone was happy to discuss politics. They complained primarily of corruption. They would see security and government officials in expensive cars, using their legal immunity to engage in weapons trafficking and other unscrupulous enterprises. They were upset by the arbitrary application of laws, where women are targeted for their dress and people are arrested for activities as innocent as playing music

in public. Regarding the political system itself, people were generally apathetic. The most frequent comment I heard was that although they may have no rights, order is preferable to the violence that might occur in another system. Even though everyone was at risk of political violence, there was little violent crime or terrorism, at least in the heartland of the country. Those in the periphery, who witness state-sanctioned violence on a massive level, might have had a different account. Later, when I carefully inquired about reports of forced disappearances, summary executions, and torture, I found the line of questioning that people would not dare cross. To these questions I would always be told that “anyone can be a NISS agent” in reference to the National Intelligence and Security Service. This agency has been compared to secret police organizations such as the Stasi and Gestapo and was known for operating undercover using young informers.

Apart from the apathy people expressed about political topics, I had very different takeaways from my overall interactions with other young Sudanese. People followed American and European politics and news, watched English media, and listened to American music. Some of the most popular local attractions were the Goethe Institute and the British Council. In the former I attended a book fair and saw a local production of Les Misérables People of all ages commonly had interactions with the UN system either by participating in UN events or receiving services. Young people were very familiar with and had a positive view of the concept of international human rights and liberal values through these interactions.

The class that I helped teach was an intermediate English course for young adults who sought to gain skills needed for jobs in the global market. The many college students I became friends with were particularly focused on traveling outside the country for education and professional work. Two young women I met studied psychology and public health. They later were sponsored by the Dutch government to participate in a conference in Amsterdam on combating infectious disease in Africa. Just recently, the Goethe Institute supported them in pursuing graduate studies in Berlin. Another followed

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

the example of her cousin, who is a well-known activist on the Darfur genocide and worked in the World Food Program office in Darfur before traveling to Austria to study human rights law.

When I left the country after several weeks, I was left with several conflicting impressions. The materiality of the state was everywhere. It was in the army, the police, and the paramilitary forces. It was evident in the imposing ministry buildings and the expensive cars driven by the small class of elites. It was even in the expensive Corinthia Hotel, known as “Gaddafi’s Egg” because of its benefactor, as well as the Chinese-funded infrastructure. Conversely, I saw the values implicitly expressed through young adults seeking education and opportunity in the UN offices and the European cultural institutes. What I did not see was any measurable support for the regime and its abuses from the youth and the middle-class. The apathy I noted was rooted in the power of the state, in “what can they do to me” and “what would happen if it was gone?” It was not due to a lack of desire for freedom, equality, and political participation. Since then, I concluded that when the economic power backing the regime fails, there will be no shortage of people willing to take the risks necessary to secure the foundations of democracy.

My conclusion turned out to be correct, at least initially. In 2017 the United States lifted comprehensive sanctions on the country that had been in place for twenty years. The people and the regime both expected that the change signaled a brighter economic future for the country. What occurred was quite the opposite, as a complete lack of foreign reserves or any meaningful connections with the international financial environment led to crippling shortages of currency and inflation sometimes exceeding 70 percent. This forced the government to end subsidies on bread and fuel, which soon rapidly increased in price. For a people who had faced severe economic hardship for decades, this turned out to be the tipping point. Protests erupted in a single northern town before spreading to cities across the country. Their first objective was a restoration of subsidies, but this quickly changed to a removal of Omar al-Bashir and a democratic transition. Massive protests reached the capital, and shortly thereafter there were sit-ins at the same ministry building where I had seen the armored vehicles. In news footage I saw those vehicles damaged, with their

crews loitering among the crowd. Reports came out that officers and enlisted men had defected, and a few had been killed in attempts to protect the demonstrators. Young men like the bootless soldier I briefly spoke to saw little reason to kill their fellow countrymen for an authoritarian regime. Still NISS and paramilitary forces targeted doctors and hospitals with live weapons and beat protestors before disappearing them into the “ghost houses.” Nonetheless, on April 11, 2019, the army announced that it had removed and arrested President al-Bashir.

The demonstrators represent a broad segment of society. In a country with an average age just under eighteen, young people filled the streets. The most prominent umbrella organization is the Sudanese Professionals Association, representing doctors, lawyers, engineers, and educators. On January 1, it submitted the “Declaration of Change,” signed by twenty-one other civil society groups. The declaration advocated for a democratic transition in the country, including ending the civil wars, protecting the voluntary right of return for refugees, convening a constitutional conference, establishing democratic elections, forming an independent judicial system, ending violence and discrimination against women, and seeking accountability for perpetrators of human rights violations.

The movement confirmed what I saw in the people whom I had met during my time in Sudan. They had internalized a concept of their fundamental human rights, chanting slogans such as “freedom, peace, and justice” and “revolution is the people’s choice.” Most surprisingly, the chant “We are all Darfur” was prominent throughout the protests, reflecting an idea that their demos includes the minorities that were so violently oppressed and marginalized in Sudan’s modern history.

Still, they have so far only succeeded in removing Bashir, the personification of the regime. Power rests firmly in a Transitional Military Council. The scale of the demonstrations has not relented, and outrage at the idea of a two-year military government has inspired protestors to continue until a democratic government is fully seated. There are other equally significant challenges to the democratization in Sudan, including the externalities of international support for the military government by the UAE, Qatar, Russia, and Turkey, compared with the slow response of liberal

democracies to support the movement. Further, there are few if any, preexisting institutions that can support an eventual transformation into a polyarchic society: civil society and political associations have been suppressed for decades, education and media are highly censored and restricted, there is no independent judiciary, and there exists little concept of a national identity in the periphery. Further, the democratic values expressed by the demonstrators are not likely to be representative of those held by the traditional elite. Economic power is extremely fragmented, and the general state of the country is not conducive to a free market.

My experiences in Sudan, their recent democratic revolution, and this course have encouraged me to examine my own relationship with democracy. I have moved beyond the complacency that is associated with being raised in a free society. I also have bridged the gap between a historical knowledge of democratic revolutions or distant observation of contemporary ones through my experience witnessing authoritarianism firsthand. My main takeaways are that a democratic society is not self-sustaining and that establishing it in the first place is a grand undertaking that can take centuries to be successful.

The future of my own democracy in the United States is no exception and faces its own risks in the twenty-first century. Our strident public discourse has revealed a variety of challenges and tensions. Foremost among these is the appearance that there is no longer a shared conception of what it means to be an American, of who is really included in the demos. There is also an erosion both in the operation of our institutions and of society’s trust in them. Many are no longer confident that the election system is representative or free from external interference. The institution of a free press has been condemned as “the enemy of the people,” a common expression throughout history.

It is the responsibility and obligation of all Americans to preserve and reinforce our commitment to democratic and pluralistic values and to take a critical examination of the challenges facing our society.

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

Laura Rocio Vega*

Growing up in Cuba, my government did not use the word “democracy” to describe itself or the institutions that formed it. Instead, the commanders used “revolutionary” and “socialist” as the default adjectives to describe it. Yet there was an incredible emphasis placed on equality and social cooperation. It was only recently when I emigrated to the United States that I formed my understanding of what democracy means to me. First, I needed to understand the conditions from which democracy emerged through Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. Then I looked at the intellectual legacy of the Enlightenment through social theorists like Hannah Arendt and John Rawls. Lastly, I evaluated the democracy I am experiencing in the United States, focusing on its bureaucracy while considering Alexis de Tocqueville’s critiques of its egalitarian society in the 1800s. I found that democracy, for me, means a form of government that supports a balanced civil society in terms of individualism, freedom, and equality.

The Athenian case also shows the social conflict between those who want power for its own sake or those who want it for the public good. In Plato’s Republic, Socrates creates the ideal republic, which was a representation of what Athenian democracy could be (Plato 2012, 50). He explains that the rulers should be philosophers since they were wise and disciplined but that many others, who were not fit to rule, would try to deceive the public into believing that they could be righteous leaders. Socrates exhibits this conflict through the analogy of the ship. He explains that the shipowner is surrounded by sailors who think they should be ship captains (205). These sailors represent unfit rulers who persuade the citizens or, in this case, the shipowners to support them by using faulty reasoning or promises that are impossible to fulfill (205). Conversely, those who are fit

to rule are disregarded by the public because they do not manipulate the citizens with empty promises (191).

This is a problematic part of democracy since everyone should have the right to be both the ruler and the ruled, but not everyone makes an acceptable ruler. The ability that people have to choose their leaders is a significant part of democracy; even more important is the power of the people to change their minds if unfit rulers deceive them and remove them from office.

It is essential to understand the Greek experience as it is the prototype for democracies today. The version of democracy that Athenians enjoyed differs from our notions of democracy today because not all Greek people were Greek citizens: only males legitimately born of Athenian parents could be citizens. Ober (2005, 98) explains that participation in the polis was a crucial part of their life, but it was a right that could only be enjoyed if one was deserving of it. Athenians relied greatly on each other’s activism in political life to make, enforce, and rectify their laws because they practiced direct democracy. Together, the citizens formed a single popular assembly, thus making their politics performative in nature. “Quasi”-negative rights, including freedoms of speech and association and personal security from degradation, were given to noncitizens. Ober (93) sees the protection of the citizen body as a whole through these negative rights as a series of preconditions for democracy to flourish.

The Athenian democracy was more than a vehicle for citizens to form a consensus. Participation in the polis contributed to the development of the citizens’ virtues. Athenian democracy was able to survive due to the social nature of humans. The

* Laura Vega is pursuing a B.A. degree in political science at Florida International University with certificates in human rights and political transitions, Latin America and Caribbean studies, and national security studies. Driven by her passion for public service, she currently interns at the American Foreign Policy Council as a researcher for their Future of Public Diplomacy Project. As a human rights advocate, her goals include attending graduate school and becoming a research analyst. Laura has been recognized by the Office of Global Learning with a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Fellowship for her commitment to researching Brazil’s criminal justice system.

philosopher Aristotle articulates our condition as social animals in his book The Politics and the Constitution of Athens (2013, 77). He explains that sociability is a prerequisite to the ability to reason. When individuals are isolated, they cannot be self-sufficient. This leads all people to have a social instinct by nature (14). As individuals in a private setting, we are able to reason, but we must communicate our reasoning through social cooperation to create a consensus on what is fair (13). The consensus is expressed in laws grounded in reason that are able to produce and preserve happiness (14). Thus, communication is effective when citizens can equally contribute to the development of virtues. This capacity to communicate our reasoning makes us superior to other animals. Aristotle explains that both proportionate equality and justice are desired in this social setting. In his book Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle emphasizes sociability as a way to create good habits by imitating others and leading men to a common good.

In addition to seeing democracy as a form of government by the people that can improve their virtues, I looked at the intellectual legacy of the Enlightenment to better understand individual human nature. I focused on the work of John Rawls, a liberal political philosopher. In his book Political Liberalism, Rawls (2005, 4) proposes a democracy in which people are differentiated by their reasoning capabilities but can coexist by following a public good. Democracy is to be constructed by individuals who are free, equal, and different. Citizens are diverse because they believe in different comprehensive moral, philosophical, and religious doctrines, and they are of different races, ethnicities, sexes, genders, intellectual capacity, and social classes. Yet, society can only be just if all individuals have rights to life, liberty, and property (5).

Believing that plurality is a condition for political life, Hannah Arendt’s analysis of behavior in her book, The Human Condition (1998) showed that humans behave differently according to their inherently unique qualities. She explains that each individual is unique from birth (176): no one exactly like us has existed, exists, or will exist (8). Our introduction to the world signals a fresh start and the potential for the accomplishment

of something new. She explains that this uniqueness defines our behavior because it gives us an authentic self (178).

As a function of this plurality, Rawls’s concept of fairness is only realized through social cooperation. Society achieves order by creating publicly recognized procedures and laws that are accepted by those who cooperate with each other (Rawls, 2005, 16). For a democracy to be fair, each participant must agree in the value of cooperation, and each should be given a rational advantage to cooperate by the government making participating in the polis worthwhile for every citizen (16). Thus, democracies play a role in furthering good morals and political activism by being adapted to the uniqueness of each individual.

I still wanted to understand modern American democracy and how it deals with the long-standing conflict posed by the social contract of equality. For this, I drew on Alexis de Tocqueville’s reflection of the American democracy of the 1830s and my observations. In modernity, there is the concept of universal human rights, and in the United States, the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are central to the organization of the government. It is important to note that while Americans are all equal in their freedom, equality does not extend to natural endowments and the distribution of wealth. Tocqueville (141) claims that materialism in a democracy drives action, which leads to intense competition that pulls citizens apart. Like Rawls, he saw people as self-interested; democracy highlights this quality because of the scarcity of resources and its equal opportunity for wealth (82). In this sense, it only complicates the problem of who is fit to rule because the pursuit of material things that are of a limited quality keeps people from political and intellectual engagement, because they use their time to earn money.

American democracy solves these problems by having local self-government, freedom of association, the separation of church and state, indirect elections, a free press, and an independent judiciary (Strauss 1965, 773). The United States practices a representative form of democracy. This is where the citizens pick a

What does democracy mean to me?

A collection of essays by Florida International University students

representative who shares their interests, centralizing power at the national level. To counteract these effects, Americans have local self-government, which addresses problems that the national government could not know about and enables citizens to realize their public responsibility through political activism.

Another key element of democracy is having freedom of association. Associations allow minorities to have a voice and to overcome mediocrity (Strauss 775). Becoming involved in associations makes it less costly in terms of time for citizens to learn about the issues so, when they vote, they can make more informed decisions. The separation of church and state also allows minorities and people with different religions to participate in the polis. Having indirect elections and an Electoral College helps mitigate the problem of choosing a fit ruler. Americans also have elections every four years, which allows citizens to rectify mistakes if they have been deceived by unfit rulers. A free press representing many ideological viewpoints, which can question current and future leaders’ actions, make it less likely that citizens will be deceived by dishonest politicians.

As long as there have been democracies, there have been conflicts: between those who want power and those who want the public good; although every citizen can be both the ruler and the ruled, not everyone makes an acceptable leader; democracies do not always guarantee negative rights; and citizens are self-interested individuals who must cooperate to reach agreements beneficial to all. The solutions to these conflicts rely on our accepting each individual’s freedom and equality. This is why democracy, for me, means a form of government that offers solutions to these difficulties by accepting the human condition and creating institutions that provide a balance between them.

Works Cited Aristotle. 2013. Nicomachean Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Plato. 2018. The Republic. Edited by G.R.F. Ferrari and translated by Tom Griffith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rawls, John. 2005. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.

Strauss, Leo. 1963. History of Political Philosophy. Edited by Joseph Cropsey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

EDITOR’S NOTE

I am an international student from Venezuela studying international relations with a minor in political science and certificates in Latin American and Caribbean studies, European and Eurasian studies, Peace Corp prep and human rights, and political transitions.

For the past few months, I have been working with Professor Palouš to compile a volume of essays in which students from around the world answer one of the most difficult questions in the world: What is democracy? The process of reading, choosing, and analyzing these essays made me realize that every single person has an amazing story to share and that all of them are connected.

I have always dreamed of making the world a better place and helping society grow to reflect our truth and hard work. For the past four years, my academic goal has been to find the meaning of democracy. I have always believed democracy has a deeper meaning than just “the rule of the people.”

Democracy means to walk with freedom without being afraid that my life will be taken from me for having moral and political values that are different from others.

Democracy means fighting for my dreams without losing the opportunity to express myself freely and openly.

Democracy means the ability to eat, talk, play, and enjoy my life at God’s will and its biggest expression.

When looking at the state of the world today, it is very easy to become discouraged, sad, and even pessimistic. Yet I always take the optimist’s approach, even within the context of international relations. Although things and situations may seem intractable today, this does not mean that they are bound to be as such forever. Especially in the social sciences, situations are constantly evolving, and no one can say for sure what the future will bring. I will keep on being an optimist.

This book is about giving students the voice to share their experiences and life’s story, so the world knows that there is a generation eager to make an impact and be the change they want to see. Working on this project gave me the insight and perspective that the world is made by those who are willing to speak out without fear and bravery.

I feel so honored to be able to be a part of this project, and I hope it inspires you as well.

—Prachi Lalwani

Funded in part by the AKO Foundation and Mr. Carlos Saladrigas

2173291804_02/2023