Skip to main content

Democracy Tables

An interesting idea has been to pool the results of surveys of different aspects of democracy- transparency, press freedom, corruption etc. to create a table ranking the level of democracy in different states.

Some very interesting results: Finland is number one, Myanmar (Burma) is bottom.

Inside the European Union Greece does not even make it into the first division and Italy only just makes it. Perhaps even more worryingly - Bulgaria is also in the second division, whereas Romania ranks in the third division even below Serbia.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The UK is still in the top ten despite our current government - is this because the system and culture has been strong enough to resist their repressive tendencies, they aren't actually that repressive after all, or that everyone else is getting more authoritarian as well?
Anonymous said…
I'm a bit dubious. The UK is so high in terms of "democracy" yet we have an unelected upper chamber and a lower chamber elected by a bizarre First Past The Post that seriously distorts the relationship between votes and seats.
Anonymous said…
I'm surprised rjbham that you consider the House of Lords and FPTP as compromising our democratic credentials when elsewhere on this blog you appear to argue that the quite good health service and alleged openness of the public in criticising their government are reasons to overlook Cuba’s appalling record on democracy.
Cicero said…
Notwithstanding the problems of our constitution, I think it is clear that there is still a basic fair play, but "the price of freedom is eternal vigilance".

However what bothers me is that we are *always* behind Scandinavia and New Zealand- I would hope we had a bit more ambition for our freedom.
Anonymous said…
>>you appear to argue that the quite good health service and alleged openness of the public in criticising their government are reasons to overlook Cuba’s appalling record on democracy<<

I appear to you, RK, as doing that. My argument was, in fact, rather different to that.

I'd like PR in both the UK and Cuba.
Anonymous said…
Maybe I can use this as an opportunity to plug some content on the Make Votes Count website. They have posted material from their fringe meetings at the party conferences.

Lib Dem: www.makemyvotecount.org.uk/opus25257.html
Labour: www.makemyvotecount.org.uk/opus25259.html
+ full audio (mp3) and transcript www.makemyvotecount.org.uk/opus25246.html
Conservative: www.makemyvotecount.org.uk/opus25277.html - including full
audio and transcript
Anonymous said…
All I ask rjbham is that you retain a sense of perspective. Your support for the USSR and your refusal to label Cuba as a dictatorship are not entirely without logic in themselves but they sit uneasily with your purist attitude to democracy in the UK. To hold both views simultaneously requires you to overlook the enormous failings and democratic deficits of both communist systems, either that or a pathological bias against the British system.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and ...

The Will of the People

Many of the most criminal political minds of the past generations have claimed to be an expression of the "will of the people"... The will of the people, that is, as interpreted by themselves. Most authoritarian rulers: Napoleon III, Mussolini, Hitler, have called referendums in order to claim some spurious popular support for the actions they had already determined upon. The problem with the June 2016 European Union was that the question was actually insufficiently clear. To leave the EU was actually a vast set of choices, not one specific choice. Danial Hannan, once of faces of Vote Leave was quite clear that leaving the EU did NOT mean leaving the Single Market:    “There is a free trade zone stretching all the way from Iceland to the Russian border. We will still be part of it after we Vote Leave.” He declared: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market.” The problem was that this relatively moderate position was almost immediately ...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...