The Oligo of Democracy

(Jurgen Habermas’ Image of Democracy)

Government is essential to ensure the proper use of force. For this reason, it must specify
objective laws to clarify the use of force, and it must have the ability to enforce these laws. The
fundamental purpose of government is to benefit and protect the individual rights of its citizens.
The need for government is so apparent that even the most primitive societies, history shows,
had some form of it. There are different principal forms of government in every state in the
world. As to number of persons exercising sovereign powers, Monarchy or one in which the
supreme and final authority is in the hands of a single person. Second, Aristocracy or one in
which political power is exercised by a few privileged class which as an aristocracy or oligarchy;
and Democracy or one in which political power is exercised by a majority of the people.
To ensure that rights are upheld properly, the judgment of the government about the use of force
must be objective. Since individuals involved in an incident are not likely to be objective, it is
the government's job to judge the individual use of force by its citizens. Importantly, democracy
supposedly serves to check unaccountable power and manipulation by the few at the expense of
the many, because fundamentally democracy is seen as a form of governance by the people, for
the people. This is often implemented through elected representatives, which therefore requires
free, transparent, and fair elections, in order to achieve legitimacy. But, all government types
have a negative form. Government, according to Aristotle should be by those people with enough
time on their hands to pursue virtue. But in reality, the paradox of having a democratic form of
government or one which political power is exercised by the majority of the people is powered
only by the few privileged people in the society.
 Oligarchy or simply ruled of the best is a small group or minority, consists of members of
the economic elite and policy-planning networks, have the most power and that this power is
independent of a state's democratic elections process. The elites and not the masses govern in all
the societies. Major political, economic and social decisions are made by the elite group, and not
by the masses of people. In the field of social science and politics, power is defines as the ability
to influence the behavior of people. It also defines in deciding who gets what, when, and how.
The term power involves the participation in the decisions that shape the lives of the people in
the society. The masses are the many whose lives are shaped by institutions, actions, and the best
over which they have little direct control. According to Harold Lasswell (1950), “The division of
society into elite and mass is universal,” and even in a democracy “a few exercise a relatively
great weight of power, and the many exercise comparatively little.”
We can easily say that in a democracy of the majority of the people rule themselves, that
the people are sovereign. The concepts ‘rule’ and ‘sovereign’ are relational: there is no ruler
without ruled, no sovereign without subject. Part of what is involved is ruling is the power of
over-ruling of compelling the ruled against their will. In this important sense the people cannot
rule themselves, although one part of the people may rule another part.

In the world of practical politics it is evident that the people cannot, in the sense
indicated, rule themselves. The government obeyed may be of the people’s own selection, but
the people do not enact or execute the laws. This distinction between the rulers and ruled, at least
in large communities, is not difficult to draw. Most men are governed bit not governors.
The Philippine democracy is absurdity. It was the first country in the region to topple
authoritarian rule. The signs of a vibrant democracy are extensive: high voter turnout, civic
engagement, institutional arrangements that theoretically promote accountability and safeguard
rights and liberties of the citizens. Yet the flaws in the democratic process are also extensive:
elite dominance, institutional weakness, and widespread abuse of public office, which suggest
true representation is largely illusory. Democracy requires popular participation in government.
To our nation’s Founders, whose classical educations included an ambivalence about the wisdom
of democracy, it meant the people would be given representation in government. The Founders
believed government rests ultimately on the consent of the governed. But according to Jurgen
Habermas, the commitment to protect democratic value from “tyranny of the majority” leads
inevitably to elitism by giving the representation to the minority who they believed more
knowledgeable than the majority who can give the needs of the people. Habermas also implied
that elitism implies that public policy does not reflect demands of “the people” so much as it
reflects the interests and values of elites. Changes and innovations in public policy come as elite
values slowly evolve to adapt to new challenges to system stability, often caused by new
technologies or external events. However, elite interest in preserving the system means that
changes in public policy normally will be incremental rather than revolutionary. Public policies
are often modified but seldom replaced. Elites may act out of narrow self-serving interests or
enlightened, “public regarding” motives. Occasionally elites abuse their powers and position and
undermine mass confidence in their leadership. This threatens the system and requires a punitive
response by other members of the elite who are more focused on preserving the system.
To sum it all up, we can get away of the idea that all societies are governed by elites,
even in all other democratic societies. The elitist theory of democracy is not an attack on
democracy but rather an aid in understanding the realities of democratic politics. Elite theory is
not an apology for elite rule and not a defense of official misdeeds or repression. These in fact,
threaten elite governance in a democracy and need to be prevented. Rather, elite theory is a
realistic explanation of how democracy works, how democratic values are both preserved and
threatened, how elites and masses interact, how public policy is actually determined, and whose
interests generally prevail.