With a group of 26 students from different nationalities, ethnicity, and socio-economical and cultural backgrounds, it is only natural to anticipate diverse opinions and emphasis on issues with regards to those differences. Even between students from the same university, the Tufts Institute for Leadership and International Perspective (TILIP) class of 2002-2003 has witnessed great discrepancies in terms of ideas and preferences. However, while underlining the diversity within the group, it is equally important to call attention to the fact that it is precisely this diversity that has pushed the group forward and made it possible for any advancement in discussions and achievements.
An after-lunch discussion I had with two Tufts students and a Peking University student on the TILIP program revolved around the meaning of democracy and its application to different situations with special attention to the American, Chinese and Hong Kong context. There were primarily two major perspectives _ one of which held that true democracy only comes with formalized institutions such as elections and accountability systems. In contrast, the other sees that democracy may well be achieved even in the absence of formal institutions and that informal channels can be employed to realize real democracy. It was a very heated discussion that sparked off emotions, which makes the debate even more engaging and provoking. By putting the argumentation into our very own social and cultural contexts, the deliberations were eventually of personal significance.
The ones who believed in the centrality of elections in the realization of democracy would not settle for any "second-best" means such as public scrutiny. They were of the opinion that elections are the best manifestations of the essence of democracy _ rule by people since representation made possible interest aggregation and articulation. The US of course is a handy example in which democracy depends heavily on the proper functioning of election systems in presidential, congressional and local leader selection. This group felt that institutions like media watch or public scrutiny were merely supplementary devices and could not have replaced elections in the proper achievement of democracy.
Some of us believe that democracy can only be manifested in elections while others feel that democracy can also be realized through other means such as media scrutiny and informal representation. This group thought that informal channels aforementioned were equally capable of achieving democracy and therefore, elections, as central and essential as they may seem, are not a necessary element in the assessment. Rather, seeing democratic governments as governing bodies that respond to people's needs and demands, they felt that as long as self-restraint is exercised, self-initiated and non-codified accountability can still make a government democratic even though elections may not even be present. They cited examples from China and Hong Kong, in which election systems are either absent or very far from means of attaining fair-representation.
As you might have noticed by now, the crux of the matter is whether democracy describes a situation in which leaders are chosen through formal means or whether it describes a situation in which the government is genuinely accountable and responsive to its people. During the discussion, I was of the latter opinion. Yet, as I now view the issue from a certain distance; I would say that the final answer probably lies somewhere in between. I am still of the opinion that regardless of what institutional arrangements are in place, the spirit of democracy lies in the eventual accountability and responsiveness of the government. The arrangement in which the leader is chosen may not be as much of an issue here. However, as known to men, elections seem to be one of the best ways of keeping leaders in line with respect to the inherent inadequacies in human nature such as tendency to be selfish instead of self-less. In that sense, elections may well be the best generalized solution available. Of course, with attention to different political cultures and circumstances, I still feel that even though elections ought to be in place, it is vital to adopt different modes and pace of election-related reform. Hence, the truth may lie somewhere out there within this context.
Ivy Chan is a student at Hong Kong University majoring in Government and Laws.
More from The Tufts Daily
