A deterioration of democracy has plagued the world since the 2010s and reached a crisis level.

Vigorous discussions were held on how democracy would “die” or “fall apart.”

Although the course of things has started showing signs of change, these signals are less than reassuring, and it remains unknown if democracy will ever regain its strength.

It is time, however, for us to reaffirm and further develop the strong side of freedom-espousing democracy.

AUTHORITARIANISM LOSING ‘SUPERIORITY’

Chinese President Xi Jinping repeatedly praised his country’s zero-COVID policy by saying it “fully demonstrated the advantages of the leadership of the Communist Party of China and the socialist regime.”

He was seeing the comparative merits of different control measures imposed by China and democratic states against the novel coronavirus.

Certainly, China’s heavy-handed containment measures initially appeared to be working.

An authoritarian regime like China does not hesitate to restrict citizens’ freedoms and rights, enabling it to quickly impose extreme measures, such as lockdowns.

By contrast, the democratic form of government is premised, among other things, on the guarantee of freedom, the rule of law and the transparency of information.

This system inevitably calls for being sensitive when it comes to restricting people’s movements, even during a pandemic.

Different democracies continued to seek solutions to COVID-19 in a variety of ways, including taking coercive measures, doing nothing, and waiting for people to exercise voluntary restraint.

As it turned out, China was obliged to shift its zero-COVID policy late last year in response to citizens’ protests across the country. An explosion of infection cases then followed.

Many have contemplated the differences between authoritarianism and democracy as a form of government, and debated which one is better.

While the subject drew renewed attention during the pandemic, there is no doubt that Xi’s self-praise no longer sounds as persuasive as it did before.

‘DEMOCRATIC PEACE’

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has openly shown the dangers of an undemocratic regime, where nobody can stop the leader, no matter how erroneous a decision he may make.

That is because excessive concentration of power in the leader makes his close aides obsequious to him.

With no checks and balances available within the governing system, only flattering reports make their way up the ladder, and information is often glossed over or twisted.

By contrast, it is often said that democratic states never wage war against each other. The underlying idea is called “democratic peace” theory in the field of international political science.

History indeed shows that democracies have seldom fought each other.

The democratic form of government posits, in the first place, that problems should be addressed through talks instead of violence. It features a parliamentary system, adopts a separation of powers, and discloses to the public the political decision-making processes.

Respect for human rights and minority opinions is held as a norm, and those in power are obliged to take account of the popular will.

States that share similar mechanisms and notions would seek to settle any mutual confrontation or dispute through dialogue and negotiations.

The Ukraine war has reconsolidated the camp of Western democracies, which had been strained by Donald Trump’s ascension to the U.S. presidency and Britain’s exit from the European Union.

Russia’s invasion brought home the importance of international cooperation.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said several years ago that the liberal idea had become “obsolete.”

His act of barbarism, however, has ended up highlighting the contemporary significance, strength and advantages of liberal democracy.

The world was shocked late last year by a development in Germany, where many members of a far-right group, including a soldier in active service, were arrested on suspicion of planning a coup against the state. Rifles, ammunition and other weapons were seized.

The case was reminiscent of the U.S. Capitol attack of 2021, another attempt to use violence to gut democracy.

The U.S. midterm elections last year appeared to have put the brakes on the alarming flourish of “things Trumpian.” The next presidential election will serve as a crucial test.

THREAT WITHIN

Democracy cannot afford to relax its guard against threats from within.

Increasing globalization has thinned the middle class and widened disparities. Distrust of the political elite establishment has prompted a spread of populism.

Gone is the stability of postwar profit distribution politics, replaced by narrow-minded divides that deepened over identities.

Japan has also been suffering from protracted ailments: high-handed government administrations and a malfunctioning parliamentary system.

Democracy is one approach to political coexistence. It is a method that allows people to continue living together despite their varying backgrounds, including thoughts, beliefs, values and faiths, as opposed to authoritarianism, which tends to put people in the same color.

In democracy, there is no such thing as an ultimate solution; all the people can do is keep making one provisional decision after another.

One good thing about democracy is that it allows people to do something over again to correct a mistake. They are thus always in a never-ending process.

It may seem like a great bother, or even annoying, but people must be able to use democracy with prowess.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Jan. 3