THE current conception of democracy, derived from the philosophy of Emmanuel Kant, had flourished in the 19th century

where each country was homogenous in terms of ethnicity, language and religion. Around a hundred countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America that have embraced democracy after World War II confront vastly heterogeneous social, economic and political landscapes. For them it is quite a challenge to transit from the age-old tribal-feudal traditions to the regime of modern democracy. Kant s theory seems incoherent today. Aware of the intellectual limitations of Kantian metaphysics, the author proposes to establish the concept of democracy based on human rights and determined by empirical data. He seeks to answer questions like is democracy for all? Is it an inexorable and inevitable law of nature? Is it a panacea or the driving force of history?The Foundation Of Democracy In India builds on the author s earlier works. The analysis is structured around the three pillars of democracy: liberty, equality and fraternity as upheld in the banner of the French Revolution, as well as the foundation of democracy human dignity in the spirit of the Renaissance. Equality and fraternity do no harm to democracy, but the exercise of liberty has occasionally been shown to be exploitative, and hence a potential drawback to society, economy and polity. The author advances an approach that strives to balance the three and synthesise democratic theory to make it more egalitarian and meaningful.

By the 1700s, France had become the most powerful nation on the European mainland. French kings took advantage of their nation s economic strength by imposing steep taxes and borrowing heavily in order to spend lavishly on extravagances and military adventures. One king, Louis XIV, built a luxurious new palace while his armies battled for control of Europe and North America. His successor, Louis XV, plunged the monarchy even deeper into debt while scandalizing the nation with an endless series of tawdry love affairs. Around the same time, French philosophers were writing that all men were equal and had a right to be free. They championed rights like freedom of speech, and they condemned the hereditary aristocracy and the oppressive behavior of the church. Revolutionary ideas were beginning to ferment in the minds of the French people. By 1788, the next king, Louis XVI, was so burdened by debt that he needed to raise new taxes in order to avoid economic collapse. But the common people of France, the farmers, merchants, and laborers were already overtaxed and could afford no more. On the other hand, the aristocrats and church officials paid no tax. They maintained their power by controlling the law courts, and the king failed in every attempt to tax them. The king summoned a meeting of the French parliament (then known as the Estates General) to discuss the problem. It was the first such meeting in more than 170 years. The meeting consisted of representatives from the church (the first estate), the aristocracy (the second estate), and the common people (the third estate). The three groups argued about what to do. The third estate was excluded from much of the debate, and so instead of discussing taxes, they began to discuss how they might gain a greater share of power. After their demands were rejected, they declared themselves to be the National Assembly, the true representatives of the French people, and the population of Paris soon rose up in open rebellion. As the revolution gained momentum, the aristocracy was abolished and the king was forced to sign a new democratic constitution based on liberty and equality. Many of the ancient customs were thrown out by the revolution. Archaic systems of measurement were replaced with a new metric system based on multiples of ten. A new French calendar was declared with ten months in a year and ten days in a week. Even the numbering of the years was changed so that 1792 became the year 1. The new revolutionary government raised funds by

confiscating church property. All priests became employees of the state. Several attempts were made over the following years to replace Christianity with a new state religion based on the principles of natural religion as taught by the enlightenment philosophers. Fearing the spread of the revolution, the kings of Europe joined forces to invade France and restore the monarchy. Meanwhile, driven by their newfound passion for freedom, the French army marched into Europe to liberate the oppressed masses from the tyranny of kings and aristocrats. Every available man and horse was drafted into the war effort and France soon had the largest army in Europe. Amid growing hostility at home and abroad, the king was executed for treason. Faced with increasing civil unrest, the assembly was overtaken by revolutionary extremists who imposed harsh laws and instigated a reign of terror. They executed aristocrats, opposition groups, atheists, the royal family, and anyone else they did not like. Thousands were publicly beheaded until eventually the extremists themselves were beheaded by the bloodthirsty mob. A second democratic constitution was drafted in the hope of consolidating the achievements of the revolution while avoiding its excesses. But the old revolutionaries, who made up the bulk of the new government, overturned the results of elections, fearing what might happen to them if they lost power. The government descended into the depths of corruption as politicians and army generals schemed to entrench their power and increase their wealth. Meanwhile, the war of liberation in Europe had degenerated into a rampage of looting. As the French economy disintegrated, the government came to depend more and more on the income from foreign plunder.In 1799, after conquering Italy and invading Egypt, an ambitious army general named Napoleon Bonaparte returned to Paris to a hero s welcome. He quickly seized control of the government and embarked on a campaign to conquer all of Europe, eventually forcing the pope to crown him emperor. For the next ten years, Napoleon reigned supreme over the European mainland. But his attempt to conquer Russia was a disaster. After a series of defeats, France was forced into unconditional surrender and Napoleon was sent into exile. The royalty and aristocracy soon came creeping back into power throughout Europe, but the expectations of the people had forever changed, and many nations now adopted constitutions limiting the power of aristocrats and guaranteeing some rights for the people.
Both the American Revolution and the French Revolution were kindled by the violation by a monarchy of human rights. However, the American colonists reckoned that their rights came from natural law. They were outraged by the arbitrary powers of the king and parliament. Natural law rights are placed in peril when the state gains arbitrary power. The French rebels mainly appealed to social justice. The agony of the peasants during a depression and famine was contrasted with the conspicuous waste of the court and the luxurious whimsey of Marie Antoinette. The American Revolution was "conservative" in that it was founded upon natural law. The French Revolution was "liberal" in that it was founded upon social justice. If the American Revolution is the true revolution of history, then the French Revolution must be a disreputable anti-revolution. The opposite is also true. If the French Revolution is true, the American Revolution is false. The French Revolution was followed by four revolutions during the following century, each involving the overthrow of the established government. America had a civil war based upon the proposition that natural law rights belong to slaves. The overthrow of the government was avoided.The federal union has endured in freedom, stability, and prosperity for over two centuries, making it the oldest democracy on earth. History demonstrates that a natural law system promotes stability, continuity, and prosperity better than a social justice system. But which system is better at making men free? The nature of freedom

Michael Polanyi (1891 1976) is most famous for his thesis that all knowledge is personal and that the idea of scientific neutrality and objectivity is a myth. However, Polanyi was a polymath who studied and wrote about many fields, and the theme that ties the collected works of his life together was his search for a philosophical basis for freedom. Polanyi was, in his heart of hearts, more of a political philosopher than a scientist. Polanyi realized that in order for human freedom to prevail: 1) Men must be respected as individual personal beings, and 2) There must be a transcendent realm of universal truth and universal justice that constrains the individual and can curb the tendency of ruling groups towards the arbitrary use of power. Human freedom can only exist in political and social communities that value the individual. Democracy cannot secure individual freedom unless large majorities of people care about the individual. Socialistic states, caste systems, and closed societies like the Arab community in the Middle East value people only in their tribal, sectarian, community, and family relationships. Such societies despise the free individual, persecute their mavericks, and suppress human The revolutions of the 17th and 18th centuries played an important role in the development of democracy, however the Glorius Revolution of 1688 was the integral event that has shaped modern-day mass democracy. The Glorious, American and French Revolutions of 1688, 1776 and 1789 respectively, all played an essential role in the development of democracy. These events and the interdependent thinkers and philosophes, inspired the bourgeoisie to pursue and advocate a liberal political system that would initially provide for their own interests, but eventually the challenge to the autonomy of the aristocracy. This created a relentless pursuit by the masses for a liberal mass democracy and individual rights. In comparison to other events, the Glorious Revolution was integral in paving the way toward a working democracy. The Glorious Revolution was integral in the development of democracy as it laid the foundations and set a precedent for subsequent revolutionary movements for a democratic system of government. This revolution was particularly successful, its effects compounded to inspire revolutions in the Americas and France. The Glorious Revolution lays claim to being the only political revolution that has not seen bloodshed, this is due to the fact that James II could not revolt to an invitation from the parliament to William of Orange (King of Holland) to assist in its administration. The importance of this revolution is highlighted by the commissioners' success in overturning the powers of the monarchy and establishing an elected parliament and a movement toward a constitutional monarchy. The first 'Bill of Rights', ensured this and indirectly invested in the rights of the individual to freedom from absolute power. As a precedent, the Glorious Revolution was an integral part of democratic development and the foundations for political revolution in France and America. The French and American Revolutions were essential but not integral in the development of democracy. These revolutions were based upon the ideals of the Glorious Revolution, but could not be achieved without bloodshed; the powers of the autocracy were too great or reluctant to relinquish the largest and strongest bastion of English colonialism.