Talk:democracy

Reverted definition

I reverted this edit, which added the following definition:

1. belief in freedom and equality between people

The belief in freedom and equality between people may be a reason to implement democracy, but that belief is not the definition of democracy. Rod (A. Smith) 01:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, one definition of the word 'democracy' is indeed a 'social value' belief system. There are many examples of this usage of the definition of the word, see for instance this 1907 William James speech at Radcliff College titled Social Value of the College-Bred: "By the middle of the twentieth century the higher institutions of learning had lost all influence over public opinion in the United States. But the mission of raising the tone of democracy, which they had proved themselves so lamentably unfitted to exert, was assumed with rare enthusiasm and prosecuted with extraordinary skill and success by a new educational power; and for the clarification of their human sympathies and elevation of their human preferences, the people at large acquired the habit of resorting exclusively to the guidance of certain private literary adventures, commonly designated in the market by the affectionate name of ten-cent magazines." William James is clearly using the 'social value' definition of the word democracy.

Other dictionaries also show this as a definition. See citation, definition 5) here: [1] 68.121.174.162 16:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it should instead refer to political equality. 'belief in political freedom and equality'. social equality does not mean the same thing as political equality and 'between people' sounds a little unsophisticated for a dictionary description. The use of the phrase 'the tone of democracy' does not prove anything; 'tone' simply implies the social ideals that compliment democracy, but are different to democracy.

I agree. 'Freedom' and 'equality' are terms that are way too vague.

Why You Guys Are Wrong

Democracy is not 'freedom,' 'equality,' or any similar phrase. It is becoming widely misused in our language by both politicians and average citizens. Democracy is mob rule, the voice of the minority is NOT protected, and "equality" plays no part. Check out Oxford:[2]--Shink X 18:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Unlike the situation with some other languages, there is no central authority for how to use the English language. So, in this dictionary, we report the way people actually use words, not just the way somebody says the words should be used. I restored the definition you removed, added the new definition you provided, and added {{rfv-sense}} for both. The rfv process will hopefully sort out whether one or both of those definitions are correct. Rod (A. Smith) 22:21, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

RFV

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

democracy

There appears to be a soapbox at Talk:democracy#Why You Guys Are Wrong. User:Shink X wants to correct the definition for the primary sense in the entry for “democracy”. The original definition is this:

1. Rule by the people.

The sense prefered by User:Shink X is this:

1. Control of a group by the majority of its members.

RFV seems in order. Rod (A. Smith) 22:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Defer this decision to the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. DAVilla 08:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I would delete the second sense. democracy does not mean "control of a group by the majority of its members", even if that is often the effect. It means "government by the people". Widsith 08:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Widsith, when people want to mean "control of a group by the majority" they don't use the word "democracy" they use a phrase like "tyranny of the majority" or similar. Thryduulf 11:20, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. All the -cracy words refer to a description of a form of government, not the effect that results from using that form. -- Algrif 13:28, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

When democracy began in the Greek city states, it mean rule by the majority of all the citizens (resulting in a sort of tyranny). What we have today is a type of democracy called a representative democracy. Hence, the word democracy may refer to the original, pure form, or to today’s representative form (usually the latter). —Stephen 15:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The term doesn't have to refer to a specific form of government; one of my high-school teachers used to comment that the classroom wasn't a democracy, but a benevolent dictatorship — as in, it didn't matter what we thought we should do, we would do what she thought was best for us. —Ruakh_TALK 15:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

That is government; it's just not Government. Widsith 18:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. (Well, not really agreed — I don't generally capitalize "government" in any sense — but I agree with what you seem to mean.) My point is that it's not any specific form of government; she wasn't emphasizing the lack of electoral procedure or of representatives, but stating generally that the classroom was not governed by the students (the governed people). —Ruakh_TALK 19:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input, everyone. I've cited the original sense. Should I remove the {{rfv-sense}} tag for that definition now that the sense is cited or just wait for the RFV period to elapse? Rod (A. Smith) 23:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd leave the tag on that sense for about a week to allow anyone who wants to to disagree that the cites do verify the usage. If nobody objects during this time, then go ahead and remove the tag. Thryduulf 23:56, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

rfvfailed for "Control of a group by the majority of its members."

rfvpassed for "Rule by the people." Cynewulf 15:54, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Wiktionary:Requests for verification — kept

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

Third sense. Previously tagged, but not listed. This is a bit confusing because this particular sense was tagged while an rfv conversation was taking place concerning other senses of the same entry, but this particular sense was not covered in the previous conversation. The sense does have a number of cites, but I'm not sure if they really prove its existence, or rather simply apply to the preceding two. Since I really don't have a knack for sorting out definitions, I'll leave this to others to decide. -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 03:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Previous discussion can be seen here [3] Cynewulf 04:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I would say the senses are distinct, though not all the quotations are entirely clear (how long before we need a "Quotations to be checked" header?) Rule by the people does not entail respect for civil liberties; indeed, from ancient Athens to modern times it has often had the opposite effect. -- Visviva 07:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)