Since the Cold War, America has, and rightfully so, advertised the superiority of democracy. But what exactly does that mean?
Is it simply a matter of voting? Is democracy one of those things difficult to define, we just know it when we see it?
Nowhere is "democracy" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. If one examines the democracy that America has sought to export around the world, such definition has been truncated to voting.
From purple fingers in Iraq and Afghanistan to the Arab Spring, many sought to make these the symbols of democracy that was gaining a foothold globally. But history has unfortunately proven such was not the case, at least not yet.
The classical definition of democracy in the 21st century would include:
•A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections.
•The active participation of people, as citizens.
•Protection of human rights of all citizens
•A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens.
By this criteria America's ability to achieve the basic democratic goals has been less than 50 years. President John F. Kennedy spoke to the nation in support of civil rights legislation based on the events in Birmingham 1963.
The image of police dogs and water hoses provided the embarrassing contradiction of Jim Crow segregation that was shown around the world.
This inconsistency, however, did not serve as a deterrent from rhetorically touting democracy to the world, demonstrating that one's ideals are invariably more moral than one's actions.
Democracies come in many forms; it can become overly simplistic to speak in terms of a one-size-fits-all definition. Perhaps the best that could be said of democracy is the famous Winston Churchill quote: "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Yet, the aforementioned criteria that defines democracy matters little, if that system is unable to meet the needs of its citizens.
Antonio Pedro Ramos, professor at UCLA and the California Center for Population Research, has examined infant mortality over the world for the past 50 years.
Studying infant mortality has long been a useful tool to measure not only the health of a society, but also a host of additional metrics including the quality of governance.
It is hardly newsworthy to report that such well-known data as black infant morality in America is higher than whites, or that the same hold true for low-income versus high-income individuals.
Surprisingly, Ramos analyzed 5 million births from 50 developing countries since 1970. He found that democracies do not consistently make things better for the poor.
How can this be? How is it there is not a wider gap in infant mortality rates between democracies and countries governed by dictators?
The common belief among those living in democratic societies has been democracy improves the quality of life, especially for those on the economic margin. The assumption being as more people vote, government will be unable to ignore those in need.
The democracies in the report were in varying stages. Moreover, Ramos' findings do not to suggest that we exchange the stars and stripes for the antiquated hammer and sickle.
The obvious strength of democracy is that it allows all of its citizens to participate, but it is only as effective as the level of that participation.
When democracies function as they should, there is no question they outperform dictator-ruled societies.
But when democratic rule is unable see those on the margin, enacting policies that fail to improve the social well being of all then the debate between democracy and dictatorships is one more dependent on rhetoric than deed.
Ramos' findings are not reflective of the weakness of democracy but rather the weakness in humans to achieve its lofty goals.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.