The Challenge of Sustaining Emergent Democracies: Insights for Religious Intellectuals & Leaders of Civil Society

By Joseph Osei

The recent political crises in Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Georgia should alert all to the fact that the emergent democracies that mushroomed all over Africa and Eastern Europe at the end of the last century cannot be taken for granted. They face multiple obstacles including political manipulation, poverty, dependency, racism, ethnicism, religious extremism, short-sighted nationalism, fraud, and corruption of all types. Are these democracies sustainable? Were the skeptics right? Are the obstacles due to internal or external factors or both? Could democracy itself with its emphasis on freedom and self-determination cause ethnic conflicts?
This book does not only identify and analyze the main obstacles but also argues that they can be overcome with thoughtful strategies. These include identifying the inherent strengths and weaknesses of democracy, contextualizing some democratic ideals and practices for developing economies, minimizing dependences, making religion an ally for fighting fraud, corruption, and for promoting peace and social transformation, and adopting a pro-democracy and pro-development philosophy of education.

Rev Dr. Joseph Osei is Professor of Philosophy at Fayetteville State University, NC. His PHD in Philosophy is from The Ohio State University (1991), the M.A is from Ohio University (1986) and the B.A. in Philosophy & Religion is from The University of Ghana (1981). Osei is also a graduate of Trinity Theological Seminary (Legon) and an ordained minister of The Methodist Church, Ghana. He was born at Kokofu, Ashanti, Ghana in 1951 and is married to Victoria Osei. They have five kids: Lucy, Gina, Suzie, Miriam, and Emmanuel.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: Jul 24, 2009
• ISBN: 9781469101019

Book preview

Copyright © 2009 by Joseph Osei.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

This book was printed in the United States of America.

To order additional copies of this book, contact:

Xlibris Corporation

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

[e-mail]

49798

Contents

PREFACE  

CHAPTER ONE  

CHAPTER TWO  

CHAPTER THREE  

CHAPTER FOUR  

CHAPTER FIVE  

CHAPTER SIX  

CHAPTER SEVEN  

CHAPTER EIGHT  

CHAPTER NINE  

CHAPTER TEN  

CHAPTER ELEVEN  

CHAPTER TWELVE  

CHAPTER THIRTEEN  

CHAPTER FOURTEEN  

CHAPTER FIFTEEN  

CHAPTER SIXTEEN  

BIBLIOGRAPHY  

FOREWORD

Using his background as a Ghanaian, a philosopher, a theologian, and a political theorist,

Dr. Osei provides an insightful information about emergent democracies and the problems they face. He uses a horticultural comparative analogy to show the similarity between nursing a plant and growing an emergent democracy.

Dr Osei has been able to identify the major problems emergent democracies face in Africa and other Third World countries. He provides an expansive view of democracy and a new definition for African development. The work is grounded in a sound theoretical base and a critique of the major theories in the field. A major advantage of the book is that it is not only descriptive, it is also prescriptive and theoretical.

The Challenge of Sustaining Emergent Democracies will no doubt be a good source of information for both introductory and graduate courses in African politics and development.

Professor Kwame Boakye-Sarpong

Former Chair and Professor of Political Science

Dept of Government and History

Fayetteville State University/UNC

DEDICATION

I dedicate this book to the memories of Rt. Rev Professor Kwasi Dickson (my mentor) Dr Ahmed Abdulai (my friend and colleague) of the University of Ghana and to all other religious intellectuals sacrificing their time and effort, and risking their lives in trying to improve the African condition.

PREFACE

  

PRESIDENT BARRACK OBAMA cited good governance as the main reason for choosing Ghana as his first destination in Sub-Sahara Africa during his recent visit in July 2009. Addressing Members of Parliament and other political party leaders in Accra, he commended Ghana for the peaceful election and transfer of power in January 2009 that has made it a mature democracy and a role model for the rest of Africa. The President proceeded to address obstacles to sustaining democracy in emergent democracies such as military coups, bribery, and corruption.

The ultimate aim of this book is to contribute to the growing literature aimed at ensuring that the young democracies that emerged at the end of the last century can survive and mature as we move further into the 21st century. The need for such literature has been made urgent by the recent political crises in Kenya, Zimbabwe, and in Georgia etc.

Unlike most of the available books, this book is written from a multidisciplinary or philosophical approach. Thus while focusing on democracy as a political philosophy or ideology, it also incorporates relevant issues and theories within such cognate areas as political science, economics, history, sociology, religion, ethics, and education since all of these are necessary for understanding and sustaining democratic ideals and states. Since most of the fragile democracies are in Africa the focus of the book is on African democracies. The decision to focus on Africa is also consistent with my life-long mission as a religious intellectual from Africa to promote Africa’s socio-economic and political transformation or holistic development.

The burden of caring so much about Africa’s development can be traced back to several defining moments in my formative and recent years. For example, as a reward for being the best student in Christian Ethics during my seminary training in 1979, I was awarded the book by Paulo Gueddo, Why is the Third World Poor? (1973)The book raised my critical consciousness and my decision to pursue further studies not only in religion but also in philosophy was substantially motivated by this critical and existential question. In pursuit of my own answer to this question I investigated the philosophical obstacles to Africa’s development and wrote my M.A. thesis on ‘Philosophy and Africa’s problems.’(Dept of Philosophy, Ohio University, Athens) I carried the investigation further to the PHD level at The Ohio State University where the efforts culminated in my dissertation, Contemporary African Philosophy and Development: An Asset or Liability?’ (UMI, Arbor, 1991), In response to the prevailing skeptical views about the value of philosophy for developing countries, I argued that far from being a bourgeoisie ideology for western imperialism or a luxury that Africa can ill-afford, philosophy is inherently and historically transformative and should be recognized as an asset rather than a liability to Africa’s development.

While lecturing at Northern Illinois University in 1993, I was also challenged by the report I read about the sacrifices being made by some religious intellectuals toward sustaining democracy in Ghana. Their example inspired me to return and to assist in their efforts that same year. Their common goal was ensuring that Ghana does not return to the state of nature or chaos after decades of recurring military coups, Marxist-style revolution, and half-hearted democratic reforms imposed by the IMF as conditionalities for economic aid. They included some of my own former professors of the University of Ghana such as Rev. Professor Kwasi Dickson and Rev Professor John S. Pobee. Others were fellow members of the clergy, colleagues, and friends like Rev. Dr. Asante Antwi, Rev Dr. Emmanuel Asante, Rev Dr. Elom Dovlo, Dr. Elizabeth Amoah, Rev professor Joshua Kudadjie, Dr. Bona Koomson and ‘Alhaji’ Dr Ahmed Abdulai. (The last two were fellow Bobcats I met at Ohio University, Athens, in 1984) My experience working with these and many other religious intellectuals from the Faculty of Law and the Dept of Political Science, and other leaders of civil society has convinced me that they are among the unsung heroes responsible for the progress Ghana has made so far since the 1990’s in avoiding further political instabilities, minimizing corruption and in sustaining both democracy and development through public education.

Most of the chapters in this book are based on the national and religious conferences, public lectures, seminars, radio and T.V. interviews, and editorials I wrote as editor of the Methodist Times, while in Ghana from December, 1993 to February, 2000. Others are journal articles or book chapters published while in Ghana and since my return to the US in 2000. There are also unpublished papers reflecting on my experience in Ghana in the light of more recent global developments such as religious extremism and terrorism since September 11, 2001.

Although many of the chapters are case studies from Ghana, the analyses, arguments, and recommended strategies are with slight modifications applicable to most African and other Third World countries. This is because most of them are multi-ethnic post-colonial countries afflicted by poverty and dependency going through similar transition periods from decades of dictatorships or authoritarian regimes toward liberal democracies and free market or mixed economies.

My hope is that the book will stimulate further discussions about the problems of poverty, dependency, and democratization in these countries and challenge more religious intellectuals and others to contribute their utmost to sustaining democracy and development in these struggling countries. It should be found useful for faculty and students in seminaries, colleges, and universities looking for textbooks or supplementary readers that identify and analyze the obstacles to sustaining democracy as well as well-considered strategies for overcoming them. In particular, it should appeal to those involved with such courses as Africana Philosophy, Social and Political Philosophy, African Studies, International Studies, Religion and Society, Religion and Democracy, African Politics, Development Studies, and Development Ethics. Members of the Non-Governmental Orgnizations, and regular church members or religious people who want to know what their churches or religious organizations are doing or should be doing to promote sustainable democracy and development in Africa and the Third World in general will also find it beneficial.

Finally, I cannot think of a more appropriate way of closing this Preface than to express my profound gratitude to the Supreme Being and all others who have through their teaching, inspiration, guidance, and critique made this book possible. I am particularly indebted to my senior colleague Professor Kwame Boakye Sarpong of Fayetteville State University who reviewed the whole Manuscript. Thanks are also due colleagues who reviewed some of the chapters. They include Professors Andrew Oldenquist, Danold Hubin (The Ohio State University), Abiola Irele (Harvard University) Kwame Gyekye, Mike Oquaye, Helen Lauer (University of Ghana);Emmanuel Martey Asamoah- Gyedu (Trinity Theological Seminary, Ghana) Gail Presbey(UMD) R. Penaskovich (Auburn University); Dr. M. Dukor (Azikiwe University, Nigeria),Professor Scott Davidson (Morehead State University) and Rev Dr. Jackson Yenni-Batah of Interdenominational Theological Center, Atlanta, GA) as well as Xlibris publishers.

image2.jpg

CHAPTER ONE  

THE NATURE OF THE OF THE CHALLENGE

Let anyone who wants to come to power use the right means (elections); but if anyone attempts to throw our restored democratic rule to the dogs, let me assure you that we will not allow it. President J.A. Kuffour of Ghana (Kuffour 2004.p1)

WHAT DOES IT mean to sustain a democracy? This opening chapter is aimed at explaining what it means to sustain democracy by using a horticultural model as a preparation for discussion in subsequent chapters. It will also examine some strategies leaders of the intellectual community and religious bodies – largely responsible for the return to democracy in the Third World – could adopt for sustaining these emergent democracies.

First, we need to analyze the meaning of ‘sustain’ using the horticultural model, in Section I and second, identify the main threats to sustaining democracy in Section II. Third, we will identify the challenges for the leaders of the intellectual community and religious leaders in Section III:

A. Understanding the Meaning and Values of Democracy

B. Promoting the Cultivation of a Democratic Culture.

C. Enhancing Organization and Leadership of Civil Societies.

I. What It Means to Sustain X: The Horticultural Model

Etymologically speaking, ‘horticulture’ is derived from two Latin words, Hortus meaning garden plants, and cultural meaning culture. From these two words we get the classical definition of horticulture which is the culture or growing of garden plants. Such activities include plant propagation, crop production, plant breeding, and generic engineering, plant biochemistry, plant physiology, and the storage, processing and transportation of fruits, berries, nuts, vegetables, flowers, trees, shrubs, and turf. By analogy, sustaining democracy involves such activities as propagating the meaning and values of democracy, advocating for it, and ensuring that the benefits of democracy are enriched and spread to all citizens, especially the most vulnerable.

Horticulturalists are also involved in improving crop yield, quality, nutritional value, and resistance to insects, disease, and environmental stresses. In political terms, this means working to improve and adapt the values and principles of democracy in theory and practice. This is important since most Third World countries use democratic models imported from Western Europe. Without the necessary trimming, adaptations, and contextualization, imported models such as the pure Westminster model or the White House Model often fail to work or cannot be sustained over time.

Genetics within horticultural practice is also used as a valuable tool in the development of plants that can synthesize chemicals for fighting diseases such as cancers. Similarly, sustaining democracy includes genetic engineering used as a tool in the development of civil societies, educating the masses, cultivating moral virtues, and promoting the passing of laws that can synthesize legal and moral values etc. for fighting the diseases of democracy such as the tyranny of the majority, political manipulation, and political corruption.

A quick reflection on the verb ‘sustain’ used within this context as a horticultural metaphor for ensuring the survival and continuous growth and flourishing of organisms reveals the nature of the challenge facing Africans at the beginning of the 21st century.

Given their familiarity with crop farming such as the cultivation of cocoa, coffee, bananas and peanuts, etc. it should not be too hard for the leaders to explain this process to the ordinary people in the Third World. From their experience with farming throughout Africa they know their challenge would be ensuring that the farm is free of any obstacles to their growth and well-being such as weeds, diseases, insects, parasitic growths, plunders and thieves etc. In addition to removing these obstacles they also have to enhance the continuous flourishing of the plants by providing them with water, sunlight, and fertilizer etc. where the natural access to these needs is lacking or limited.

By analogy, having inherited democracy in this century planted through the blood and sweat of our biological or intellectual forbears it is now imperative for them to ensure its continuous growth and flourishing by removing all the obstacles in its way and by supplying it with its basic needs. What are the obstacles to sustaining democracy? Like the obstacles that could impede the growth and flourishing of cocoa or coffee trees etc, the obstacles against sustaining democracy are many and varied. In broad terms, they include political ignorance, political corruption, unwarranted military interference, political manipulation, and the threat of ethnocentric violence or civil wars.

Extending the analogy further, farmers of the emerging democracies could not achieve much in overcoming the obstacles to their agricultural plants without the assistance of the less known and hardly-appreciated agricultural extension officers and their trainers. These officers, seldom recognized at the national level for their tremendous contributions, are the secret behind the success of most of the well-known chief farmers who win national agricultural awards. Riding on motor bikes, bicycles, and sometimes going by foot they reach the farmers in the remotest parts of their respective countries with knowledge of modern methods of farming and experimental seeds etc. They teach these mostly illiterate, conservative and skeptical farmers not only the proper methods for land-clearing, planting, watering, inter-cropping, plant cover, and the use of insecticides and fertilizers etc. but also appropriate methods for preserving and packaging their products for the market. If democracy is to be sustained, a similar role should now be played by another breed of extension officers and their trainers: political extension officers and their trainers. Among them are Africa’s intellectuals such as social and political philosophers, social and political scientists, theologians, law school professors etc. as well as university and college students.

Notwithstanding the best wishes of freedom lovers and the international community, there are visible signs that the euphoria for democracy is giving way to skepticism and worries about its sustainability. The reasons range from political corruption, economic mismanagement, moral, and cultural concerns to the potential for military coups and ethnic conflicts. Conservative political scientists and journalists such as Robut Pockerman and Irvin Kristol argue that Africa lacks such traditions as respect for individual rights to free speech, free press, that are necessary conditions or ingredients for sustaining the democratic culture and consequently, they conclude, democracy cannot survive for long in Africa and similar non-western cultures. (Kristol 199, pp.145-155)

II. Threats to Emergent Democracies

The threats to emergent democracies are many and varied. They include military threats from political opponents, economic threats from internal or external sources, and threats from Islamic, Christian or African Traditional Religious fundamentalists or extremists. All of these threats, as illustrated in the ongoing Iraqi disaster, are causally inter-connected in the sense that a military threat can trigger off economic crises which in turn can cause or escalate inter-ethnic or inter-religious conflicts by extremists and vice versa and become a vicious cycle.

A. Violent Threats from Political Opponents

Given the frequency and unpredictability of coups in African politics, military threats, however low-keyed, can only be ignored at the peril of the emergent democracies. By the year 2000 African countries had experienced over 60 coups or so-called revolutions. With few exceptions most African countries had encountered one or more coups while others were close to Bolivia’s unenviable record of over 10 coups. In 2004 for example, while the American President, Mr. George W. Bush was worried about how to prepare for debate with a political opponent who kept changing his position on the most critical issue, Iraqi War, during the electoral campaign, the Ghanaian President, Mr. J.A. Kuffour, was rather worried about how to assure his people that the threat of chaos and military take over by the opposition was only meant to intimidate them. To mitigate their fears President Kuffour found it necessary to issue this warning:

Let me assure the nation, we did not come to power through the barrel of the gun, therefore we are not going to sit idle for anyone to take power through the barrel of the gun. Let anyone who wants to come to power use the right means(elections) but if anyone attempts to throw our restored democratic rule to the dogs let me assure you that we will not allow it. (Kuffour 20004, p.1)

The threat from the opposition National Democratic Party (NDC) party in Ghana could however not be taken lightly since the Party was led by Ex-Flt. Lt. Jerry Rawlings who led the coups in 1979 and 1981 which he later turned into a bloody revolution. President Kuffour’s concern represents the concern of many presidents in emergent democracies around the world, especially in Africa where the political stability and well-being of the people are threatened not only by the AIDS virus but also by a new strain of a political virus: political manipulation though threats of violence etc.

Another recent example is the sudden eruption of political crises in Kenya following a narrow political victory of the incumbent president Kibaki over the opposition leader, Raila Odinga who was widely expected to win in most of the preceding polls. Most observers were skeptical of the results and not surprisingly, the opposition completely rejected the result as manipulated by the incumbent. This sudden turn of fortunes turned one of Africa’s most stable and economically promising democracies into a mayhem as supporters of Odinga (mostly Luo’s) attacked and killed the mostly Kikuyu supporters of Mwai Kibaki. In revenge, they attacked and set several Luo villages near Nairobi on fire. According to Aid Workers, over 250,000 people had been rendered homeless while over 1,000 had been killed by Jan 8, 2008. (www.Reuters.com 01/08/2008)

B. Internal or External Economic Threat

Far from benefiting from the anticipated peace dividend at the end of the Cold War, most Third World countries are experiencing economic recession. Regarding Sub-Sahara Africa, one of the poorest regions in the world, economist Grabowski and et al report that it has lagged far behind the rest of the world in terms of economic development. (Grabowski et al 2007, p.117)

That this condition can lead to internal conflicts is already evident in the blame game from opposing political parties. For example previous opposition parties that have risen to power such as Zambia’s Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD) and Ghana’s New Patriotic Party (NPP) are being blamed for increasing economic hardship through their policies of privatization and retrenchments in the civil service. The criticisms have re-energized the current opposition parties, particularly the NDC founded and stoutly supported by the unpredictable former President, Jerry Rawlings. This is of concern to political observers given Rawlings’ two decades history of political coercion and manipulation in Ghanaian politics and how – judging from recent political history in West Africa – any anti-democratic action from him could set off similar reactions in other countries within the sub-region.

Similarly, it is reported that the government of President Bakili Muluzi and his United Democratic Front (UDF) party are also under criticism for economic hardships while the former president Kamuzu Banda and his Malawi Congress Party (MCP) prepare to return to power as part of a new coalition. Majority of voters in South Africa remain poor, and have been showing signs of frustration about their worsening economic condition. Contrary to the promises of the post-apartheid era the economic gap between the haves and the have-nots, has been increasing instead of decreasing. (Smith, 2007, p.2)

C. Threat from Religious Fundamentalism or Extremism

Since most emergent democracies are multi-ethnic, multi-racial or multicultural, the need for tolerance, especially religious tolerance cannot be over-emphasized. Yet many extremist Christians, practitioners of African Traditional Religion (ATR), and Moslems have adopted exclusivist and intolerant views and practices. In Ghana for example, some Christians are no longer satisfied with the pluralistic approach adopted by the First President, Dr. Nkrumah that allows representatives from the three dominant religious traditions (of Christianity, Islam, and ATR) to offer their own form of prayers during national celebrations such as The Independence Day and Republic Day. These Christians want Christian representatives to be given the exclusive right to offer prayers on these occasions on the grounds that since most Ghanaians are Christians, Ghana is a Christian country. Additionally, Churches that beat drums for worship on certain days considered by the traditionalists as sacred have been physically attacked and chased out of their sanctuaries. Each side of this ongoing controversy has sought to use their military or political connections not to seek a mutually acceptable resolution, but to silence their opponents. Attempts to settle this in court over the years have so far proved futile.

The most serious threat however is from Islamic fundamentalism. The resurgence of international Islamic fundamentalism especially after the tragic events of September 11 and the response by US in Afghanistan and Iraq represent another formidable source of threat to the new democracies in Africa. (CBN.com, 07/19/2007) Since the radical Moslems or Islamists behind the terrorist movements and attacks define themselves by their uncompromising opposition to democratic values, it must be expected that the institutionalization and consolidation of democratic governments and the concomitant spread of democratic culture in terms of respect for human rights (including women’s rights), freedom of religion, free speech and rights to education and equality etc. will be countered by more violent resistance. Their destabilizing influence has been felt not only in Sudan, Somalia and other parts of East Africa, but also in some parts of West Africa such as Northern Nigeria and Liberia. Their tentacles were felt in Honduras and Panama long before September 11, 2001 and have been spreading through Central America since then. (News Max.com Wires, Oct 21, 2004)

III. Responding to the Multiple Threats

This section discusses three counter-strategies for countering the threats on emerging democracies by members of the intellectual community and religious leaders. First is the need to ensure that most people have a clear understanding of democracy in terms of its basic meaning and values, its strengths in satisfying the needs of the people as well as its weaknesses, and how they could be eliminated or minimized. That leads to the second strategy, the cultivation of a democratic culture or social democracy so critical for the survival and thriving of political democracy. The third strategy which will create checks and balances and enhance the effectives of the other two is enhancing the organization and leadership of civil society.

A. Understanding the Meaning and Values of Democracy

Just as a teacher cannot effectively teach algebra to students unless the teacher understands algebra, members of the intellectual community and religious leaders cannot effectively promote and consolidate democratic governance without first knowing the meaning of democracy. So they should ask and seek to know for their own preparation and for the benefit of their potential students: What is democracy?

For the social and political philosopher, Carl Cohen, democracy, properly understood, is more than a political ideology or theory it is a method for doing the public’s business

It is not just majority rule, or competition for leadership, or protection of minority rights, or any of those things normally associated with it. Democracy is the general name for the way of conducting our common business. It is that way in which the business is conducted according to the people’s wishes. (Minton and Shipka, 1990, 474)

Cohen is right in pointing out that democracy is a method, however it should be stressed that it is more than a method. Politically speaking it represents a total way of life or a world view that permeates or should permeate and improve both our political and civic institutions.

Most political scientists and political philosophers will agree, the best description of democracy as a worldview was articulated by the quintessential American President, Abraham Lincoln in the Gettysburg address: Democracy is government of the people, by the people and for the people. What Lincoln meant by these rhetorical locutions however require philosophical analysis and interpretation. In particular we need to determine whether they represent necessary, sufficient, or probable conditions for democracy.

1. Democracy as Government of the people. Following Anthony Flew’s analysis, government of the people may best be understood as reference to social equality so critical for ensuring not only justice between the sexes but also justice within multiethnic societies flew 1984 p.87. With this as a necessary condition for democracy, we could ask as a test for a country C claiming to be democratic: To what extent is the government or political power available to persons of diverse social, economic, political or sexual orientations? Going strictly by this yardstick no country can claim to be democratic if it systematically deprives some segments of its citizens the right to participate in government on any of these irrelevant criteria in principle or in practice. It is therefore a check on social injustices in the form of discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, economic status, sexual or religious orientation. John Rawls underscores the importance of this criterion for democracy when he states, : justice is the first virtue of every social institution (including democracy) just as truth is of systems of thought. p. (Rawls, 1999: p.3)

Democracy as a social institution founded on the principles of freedom and justice for all cannot therefore systematically deny any of its citizens the right to equal participation in government without self-contradiction. This however does not mean all existing democracies meet this criterion. It is the ideal toward which all democracies strive or should strive and evolve. Historically, some democracies have performed better than others in this endeavor while others have lagged behind in some respects.

In the United States for example, female citizens were not allowed to vote until the 1940’s and her Black citizens had to wait until 1968 for the right to vote. Without the powerful but non-violent spiritual and moral leadership of Rev Dr. Martin Luther King, and the Civil Rights Movement he energized, Black Americans would probably have remained second class citizens two centuries after their emancipation. In view of this requirement of democracy, South Africa could not be legitimately considered democratic until the dismantling of its evil and unjust apartheid system. The role of Black intellectuals like Nelson Mandela and Christian leaders like Bishop Tutu and Allan Boserk cannot be underestimated, and represents a model for all other religious leaders and the intellectual communities in emerging democracies, especially Islamic countries that deny women the right to vote.

Some political conservatives would point to Plato’s republic for a justification in excluding some citizens such as women, ordinary workers, slaves and the less educated. The Nigerian statesman and political philosopher, Obafame Awolowo for example, proposed the exclusion of the less educated from voting and holding political offices. This exclusionary principle was derived from his political philosophy nicknamed ‘AWOISM." (Vangard,Oct,2007) The problem with AWOISM is however not with the name but its failure to realize that Plato’s Republic was the logical antithesis of a democracy. Apart from being an outmoded caste system that tolerated slavery, and prohibited interracial or inter-social class marriages, Plato’s Republic had no room for equal rights or human rights.

It should be of concern to the religious leaders and intellectual community that throughout the emerging democracies of the Third World, political exclusionist tendencies continue to exit. Such tendencies have resulted in past or ongoing inter-ethnic conflicts, and civil wars (in South Africa, Nigeria, the Congo, Somalia, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast) and even genocides in Burundi and the Sudan.

2. Democracy as government by the people Government by the people from Flew’s analysis refers to justice regarding the institutions and procedures of government. So to determine whether a state S is democratic we could ask: Do the citizens of State S have the power or right to vote their leaders both into office and out of office in accordance with the provisions of a pre-approved constitution? For emerging democracies the power to replace leaders is paramount in view of their experiences with incumbent governments that tend to perpetuate their power by political manipulation and outright violence. With respect to African leaders, some political scientists explain this behavior in terms of the tendency of Africans to adapt into modern politics traditional political beliefs such principles as: Once a chief, always a chief.

While such empirical references may explain the behavior, it does not however justify it. For as the British philosopher Karl Popper held, the true test of a democracy is whether the people have the power to replace through the ballot box and without violence rulers whose attempted solutions to society’s problems no longer appear promising. (Dictionary of Philosophy ed. Flew). Recent political experience in many Third World countries show that incumbent governments forced by the IMF conditionalities and the popular uprising of their people tired of dictatorships manage to hold on to power by manipulating elections. (Osei, 2005 p.34*) So just because a Sate S holds periodic elections does not necessarily mean that it is democratic. The method should also be democratic in the sense that they are transparent as well as free, fair, and peaceful.

If democracy is government by the people, then the participation of the people in government cannot be overemphasized and neither can that right be limited to mere participation in the electoral process. Contrary to what the cynics of democracy would like us to believe, citizens can and do participate in their own government by contributing to political discussions. This is done through the media, letter writing, and e-mail campaigns for communicating their approvals and disapprovals as well as their alternative solutions to national problems through their MP’s and ministers or secretaries of state and other government representatives. Other avenues open to citizens include serving as jurors, members of focus groups, participating in electoral campaigns and serving as think tanks, peace and goodwill ambassadors, democracy advocates or watch-dogs.

Cynics and other critics of democracy consider parliamentary debates and public discussions as idle talk or sheer waste of time. However as Pericles maintained over 2,000 years ago in defense of democracy such discussions are essential to democracy: Instead of looking on discussion as stumbling block in the way of action, we think it indispensable preliminary to any wise action at all. (Popper, 1966 p.186) Consequently, Athenian citizens who fail to participate in such discussions are, according to Pericles, regarded not just as people lacking ambition,’ but also as useless." (ibid) Reflecting on the deliberative aspect of their democracy, Pericles boasted that Athenians are able to judge all events or ideas originated by any of them despite their busy schedules for their private industries and private matters. Besides participation in elections and discussions, citizens outside the government can also volunteer their time and talent to grooming future politicians and helping to organize free, fair and peaceful elections as supervisors and evaluators.

In view of the importance and scope of such political activities by citizens, Carl Cohen rightly observes, General participation is the essence of democratic government. Cohen, ibid) It is the essence because participation ensures that citizens make the rules for choosing and/ choose their own rules and rulers directly or indirectly. Consequently, in obeying the laws that our representatives or legislators make we are obeying directly or indirectly our own rules which is what morally justifies democracy as self-rule.

Critics of the representative system of government such as Rousseau and Anarchists such as Paul Wolff, argue that citizens forfeit their right to government through their votes. Wolf quotes Rousseau as stating:

The people of England (for example) deceive themselves when they fancy they are free; they are so, in fact, only during the election of members of parliament; for as soon as a new one is elected, they are again in chains, and are nothing. (Wolff: 1998, p.34)

From a Kantian perspective, humans are (morally) autonomous to the extent that we make or choose what rules to follow or disobey as well as what leaders to vote both into office and out of office. This observation is important for it shows that citizens in a democracy do not forfeit their individual or collective autonomy by voting for others as Rousseau, Wolf, and other critics of representative democracy claim. (Wolf, 19. Pp34) Since thorough democratic elections are unique to democracies, democracy more than any other forms of government, guarantees self-rule. Consequently, Lincoln is justified in saying democracy is government by the people, in the sense that it is the only form of government that permits and facilitates self-rule.

3. Government for the People: The locution ‘government for the people’ also presents us with a yardstick for determining the status of any government claiming to be democratic. For we can ask: In whose interest are those in power exercising the power given to them by the people? That this question goes to the core of the democratic system of government is borne out by Pericles, who first articulated a sustained defense of the system. Our constitution… favors the many instead of the few ; this is why it is called democracy. (Pericles, ibid) The implication is that if the rulers are primarily benefiting themselves instead of the people, then they fail to be democratic and deserve to be voted out of power.

Benefiting the people however should not be construed as a sufficient condition for defining democracy, otherwise we would have to conclude that benevolent dictatorships are democratic. The condition should also not be interpreted in absolute terms since no state or government can absolutely satisfy all the (material and non-material) interests of its people. A more realistic interpretation then should be that the state or government should be seen as making serious efforts at meeting the basic needs of its people, especially protecting their fundamental rights to life, and liberty, with all the legal, human and material resources available to them. Without such a protection for citizens, powerful individuals and dominant groups may take advantage of the vulnerable ones and minorities and exploit them economically or even enslave them. Pericles was therefore justified in bragging about Athenian democracy because it was the first society with a constitution for ensuring that the laws afford equal justice to all in their private differences. (Pericles, p.66)

Presumably, it was for this same reason that John Rawls made the protection of basic rights the first principle in his Theory of Justice: Each one should have the same basic rights or liberties compatible with the most extensive liberty for all. (Rawls, 1971,p.*)

Although providing the material needs of the people should not be considered a sufficient condition for being democratic, a democracy should not fail to create the conditions for ensuring that the people can feed themselves. For as the former President, Jerry Rawlings of Ghana rightly argued in his revolutionary years, "Democracy does not just mean the mere paper guarantee of abstract liberties; but above all food, clothing, and shelter, the absence of which life is not worth living. (Rawlings,1982,p.1) It might be tempting for libertarian democrats or conservatives to reject this condition as nonessential for democracy and insist that it is not the business of the government to feed, clothe or house the people. This temptation should however be resisted because a government that neglects the material interests of its people cannot be said to be genuinely committed to be government for the people.

To give outsiders the impression that they are government for the people in the sense that they are meeting the interest of their people, many Third World countries including Zimbabwe and North Korea deny the existence of poverty or famine in their countries until many lives are needlessly lost. However as Pericles observed in this connection, The real disgrace of poverty is not in owning to the fact but in declining the struggle against it.’ (Pericles, ibid) Being a government for the people" therefore means democracy is expected to create the conditions for meeting the material and non-material needs and raise the standard of living of the people directly or indirectly.

While none of these conditions is by itself sufficient to constitute a democracy, including each of them as goals for a democracy should be considered necessary conditions for a democracy. The more difficult question unearthed in recent years by the political conflicts in the Middle East is whether we should consider a country in which a