About Democracy: Power of Majority

The King is dead. The King is dead. And we kill him. People cheered. The Kingwho
represent the God in this worldwas dead. Not only die as a figure, but also principle. Now,
the power that previously central to the king, spread to all the people. Everyone, every group,
or, the people themselves have and/or realize: they have power. Power to determine his own
life. Is not determined by someone who ruled arbitrarily. That claim his self as a messenger of
God. The King and his monarchy system have collapsed. A new power relation system has
undermined it. Slowly people whispering into the ear of the King: Democracy. That made the
shift of power from the King into the hands of the people.

In this century, democracy grows ubiquitous. There are at least three waves of
democratization. In The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (1991),
Huntington calls the first wave occured in the 17-20 century. Rooted from the French and
American revolutions. In the first wave can be observed with the growth of democratic
institutions. The second wave came after World War II. Occupation superpower nations to
promote democracy, as happened in Italy, Austria, Japan, and Korea (Allied). It also inhibits
democracy, as happened in Czechoslovakia and Hungary (Soviet Union). The third wave, the
case began in 1974 in PortugalCarnation Revolution. The collapse of authoritarian regimes
followed by the presence of democratization.

Democracy, which was born from the womb of liberalism, perhaps considered to be able to
overcome the problems that exist in society. Democracy is considered to accommodate every
interest of every society. Unlike a monarchy that can only accommodate the interest of the
King. In democracy, everyone is considered to be able to channel their interests.

On the one hand, as with other systems, there is little criticism of democracy. For example,
democracy that is criticized is only a majority-minority issue. Indeed, every interest can be
channeled, however, the interest of the majority often are realized. Easily, majority interests
always win. And minority interests are marginalized. In practice, we can see this phenomenon
in the election.

On the other hand, unlike other systems, democracy allows the people to determine their
leaders. And the election became the media. Everyone can channel his choice through
elections, but the candidates wtih the most votes are leaders. What I want to say is that in
democracy, the majority have more power than the minority. Such power, in elections, is
tangible to vote. Democracy does not care if someone is handicapped, poor, graduate from
University of Gadjah Mada, homosexual or lesbian, and even unemployment. Democracy
sees everyone as a voice. And in a democracy, the majority vote in power.

Democracy is majority rule. In any existing democracy, leaders are in power over the
mandate or majority agreement. The leader may be able to do what he idealizes as a leader.
However, when the people (read: the majority) voice, he can not do anything. At this point,
we can call democracy as a relationship of responbility between the leader and the led.