Comparación Entre Democracia Liberal Y Democracia No Liberal, Con Estados Unidos Y Rusia Como Respectivos Ejemplos

Comparison between a Liberal Democracy and an Illiberal Democracy
(United States and Russia)



In this work I will compare between United States of America (USA) as a liberal democracy and Russia as an illiberal democracy, with the aim of answering the question of whether an illiberal democracy is truly democratical.
Nowadays, all democracies are representative, either liberalor illiberal, meaning that citizens choose their representatives in the political field. Liberal democracy integrates the authority of democratic governments with limits on their scope: it is a settlement between individual liberty and collective politics. Government is limited in order to secure individual liberty, protect the population against its rulers, and defend minorities from thetyranny of the majority . 'Liberal' refers to liberalism, a doctrine which regards individual autonomy as the cardinal value.
On the other hand, illiberal democracies are described by Huntington (1991, p. 306) as 'democracy without turnover and competition without alteration'. They are based on a powerful leader rather than strong institutions and they authorize power without limiting it. Illiberaldemocracies are commonly found in recent democracies and, so far, they seem to provide a stable method of governing poor and unequal societies.

I will start the comparison looking at the democratic elections, a device through which voters elect a representative to carry out their will, in both liberal and illiberal democracies.
In liberal democracies, elections, based on universalsuffrage, are regular, free and fear. In elections in illiberal democracies, based also in universal suffrage, rulers lead non-fraudulent but still controlled elections and exploit their position to prevent a level playing field.
In liberal democracies, all citizens are entitled to vote and, to permit effective choice, electors can join and form parties. Further, independent media allows electors tounderstand election campaigns. But in illiberal democracies, to keep potential opponents off-balance, rulers interfere with the rule of law, the media and the market. Democracy does not extend far beyond the election itself.
USA has a two-party political system, whose main characters are Democratic and Republican Party. There is the option of third parties to exist, but it has proved difficult forthem to survive. They are sometimes seen as the ones who took crucial votes for the losing candidate, remaining as protest voices more than real opponents to the two main parties.
On the other side, Russia has multiple parties. The Duma has representation of different parties, as part of the democratic plurality. But the largest segment of parties in the Duma is represented by the parties ofpower that, like United Russia, Putin's party, were created by political elite to support their political aspirations.
Though the wide offer of parties, the government, represented now by Putin and United Russia, has in his hands all the tools to maintain power, and he uses them.
In the USA, lately, voters seem to be less interested in voting, and so, party leaders run high-cost campaigns tomobilize voters
On the contrary, in Russia, Putin's reelection victory in 2004 reflected authentic popular support for a strong leader: Russia was an electoral democracy. And Putin showed a fine appreciation of the mechanics of power, dominating the broadcasting media, rewarding his friends and ruthlessly punishing his enemies.
Regarding citizens, in both liberal and illiberal democracies,elections are equal. Every citizen (over 18) is allowed to vote without any discrimination. Another topic is whether the potential voters actually exercise this right. As said, USA voters they seem to be tired of exercising it. In Russia, that tiring is yet unknown.

Following, we will compare about individual rights. In liberal democracies, individual rights are respected, effectively...