Democracy, though it does not have a certain definition, is a regime functioning within a country, which is defined as a sovereignty of people. There are several understandings of democracy, but the most common is that all people can participate in the decisions made within the country, they live, and that anyone can become a representative of authorities. Talking about Democracy as Ideology it is impossible to fail mentioning a more vast concept or political philosophy as Liberalism. Within this philosophy one can find more subdivisions, which rest upon the doctrine of Liberalism. The word “liberty” stems from the Latin word “liber”, meaning free or not slave. Consequently, the doctrine of liberalism is understood by people as the one, which is founded on a freedom, for example the freedom of speech, or any other freedom. Moreover, the doctrine emphasized the essence of human rights, such as treatment of every citizen equally notwithstanding gender, race or class, the essence of the rule of law and the essence of having a government, which rules according to form of the statute for the people to be sure in maintenance of their rights and freedoms. The time period of time starting with 1871and ending with 1914 in the United Kingdom, is being marked by a policy of expanding the country at the cost of other countries, in other words, colonizing them. Thus, the regime of the government performed in the United Kingdom, as well as in some other countries in the world can not be called Democratic ones at any cause.
The political claims of the famous ruler of that time, and besides a member of a Liberal Party Union, Joseph Chamberlain, were both firstly close and then far from being politically liberal. When he settled down in the Parliament , as a member of a Liberal Party his claims to be the Prime Minister were obvious at once. He was driven by a desire of leadership. He failed to be the Prime Minister but still, his strive for influence was satisfied. When he managed to become an influential politic, he began to somehow change his political orientation and direction, later becoming a Liberal Unionist supporting Conservative ideas. Besides, he disputed the Ireland to be authoritarian, basing his statement on the fact that 5 million Irish people can not decide to govern themselves at ones due to the fact that the equal number of the citizens of megapolis do not want them to do it. The abovementioned statement rests on one of the principals of democracy, that is on the rule of the majority. But having a closer look at the aims of Chamberlain, one is able to see rather a nationalist who is after his own domain and the domain of the country he comes from. Though being in the Liberal Party first, later he promotes the ideas, which boil down to the other political philosophy. That is why Joseph Chamberlain is called a politician, whose views varied from being liberal and democratic to totally opposite to those.
The regime, used throughout that period of time, namely 1871-1914, can be defined as a “constructive Imperialism” (Louis, p. 347). The term “constructive imperialism” stands for the evolutionary states, which controls its colonies for their sake. Since 1887, the special forums, which brought up an important question, whether the Empire is to be reshaped somehow in a political sense or not. As for The United Kingdom, “The Oxford History of the British Empire” states that “by the late nine-v teenth century come to hold vast territorial possessions” (Louis, p. 346) The reason why Britain maintained its colonies was that going through 1870-s, it started to lose its global power with the increasing strengths of other countries like German, Russia, United States, France. So the aim of the constructive imperialism was to defend the policy of the country. Aiming to reach several countries like the United States, Germany, Italy, Britain looked for a union or the Empire. The claim that the Empires are necessary to be in existence for that time was rather exaggerated but that was a defense, used to stand up for this point. The definition of the “constructive imperialism” seemed to contradict itself. As if it was the evolutionary predominant form of governing the country, then the Empire would have come to existence without any forth or enthusiasm, put to let it go ahead. Nevertheless, the answer to this controversy was invented. That was the idea, that the Empire is a great form of a government, but might be rather forced, than formed naturally. Of course, it was rather an excuse for creating this empire. Ones Chamberlain confessed that he thought the British Nation to be the greatest one in the World. He claimed British were so great, that the borders of Britain should go overseas and even the space area is not enough to hold the its power. (Louis, p. 456) This claim evidently shows that the principles, promoted by Chamberlain were far from being democratic. At least his inner intentions were not democratically directed. Then, stating his idea of an empire creation he uses specific arguments for that, for example: “States which are on the old scale of magnitude unsafe, insignificant, second rate”. (Louis, p. 348) This phrase again shows an undemocratic position hidden under the mask of a good cause. The special concern was put on the elections of that time. In general elections of 1893, the campaign, organized by Joseph Chamberlain failed. Notwithstanding the possibility of reduction of the market share overseas, the democratic view managed to win the elections.
“No misconception of modern German history is more common or less justifiable than the assumption that the German colonial movement dates only from the year 1884” (Dawson, p. 173) It is true to say, that Germany always had claims of creating an Empire where one race would domain over another ones. The described period of time is closely connected with Prussia. The electoral system, used there was a highly biased, oriented on the rich class, which was able to vote for approximately 85 per cent of legislature. Otto von Bismark wanted to conceal the cruel truth about rather authoritarian regime, performed in the country, creating a special “constitutional façade”. (Dawson, p. 165) The number of citizens in the empire calculated around 68 million people by the year of 1914, making this empire the most powerful in the world. The strive for world domain leads to invasions and people oppressing. It can not be called a democracy.
Making a conclusion, it might be inferred that the democracy, which rests on the principles of a more vast political philosophy as liberalism can not be defined as one certain notion. Democracy and its displays may be so various, that sometimes its displays are hard to be defined as a democracy. A matter of the perception of the definition by the people gives certain grounds to further act. Analyzing the period of time of 1871 through 1914 in the British Empire and German Empire,, it can be definitely said, that the tendencies, provided by the leaders of the political movement of that time are neither democratic nor liberal as they seek world domain, expand nationalistic ideas and inequality between races while, democracy proclaims the opposite to this, equality.
Works Cited
- Louis, William Roger, Andrew Porter, and Alaine M. Low, eds. The Oxford History of the British Empire. Vol. 3. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1998.
- Dawson, William Harbutt. The German Empire, 1867-1914, and the Unity Movement. Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan, 1919.