The Invisible Power of Liberal Democracy and Its Paradoxes

Abstract

Liberal democracy ought to be a polycracy that safeguards the civil liberty of the people from states’ mastery. In a free democratic, judgements of the majority imparts on predominant regions of states’ assertive theme to the restrictions that the state's policies and decisions do not violate freedoms and rights as set out in the constitution. As a result of the antagonism, to many theorists and policy makers it appeared that liberal democracy as stipulated above is the best form of governance. Theoreticians supported their positions in various ways. It is the presumption in this study that it is indeed the best socio-political regime. Many developing countries including Kenya opted for this socio-political regime however, it is not clear whether the essentials of the regime have been established together with its paradoxes. There is moreover a challenge that the paradoxes pose. The research is library based and has greatly relied on texts, books and scholarly articles. In the research we found out that paradoxes arises out of conditions that key antiauthoritarian pledges are accomplished nonetheless, jeopardized by self-internal contradictions or by other social and economic proclivities. Democracy as a political order has a number of its principles such as liberty that are paradoxical. In chapter one, the study centers on chronicles of liberal democracy within Kenya and particular constitutional and institutional changes that have been done. Chapter two of the research focuses on how some underlying democratic principles turn out to be paradoxical. These paradoxes impact negatively on the quality of a democracy in any given state. The research therefore acknowledges the insufficiency that lie within the democratic principles. In chapter three, the focus is on three social factors of class, ethnicity and patronage and how they are potential threats to the functionality of a true democracy without incorporation of the human positive factors. Chapter four outlines the human positive factors and how they impact on the human development which then plays out at establishing the quality of a democracy in a country. This is because, the research found out that for the success of a democracy, organizational and institutional changes alone are not sufficient. Organizations and institutions comprises human and material resources. The human resources of an agency is responsible for the transforming or conversion of the material resources of an institution in complete or fusible outputs and it is the human resources that can see the failure of an institution role so that it is not about the resources available but the moral ability that uttermost defines the human character. The research therefore recommends that a "true democracy” demands a modicum model of existing, that in return demands a modicum degree of growth. This development that is required is not only economic and social but human development as well. Human development and growth forms the basic foundation on which all the four principles rests. So that without proper human development, then the basic principles could not be essential because it will be impossible to achieve any democratic state.