In light of recent events that took place on January 6 in the Capitol, the citadel of US democracy, it is a good time to look back and reflect on the history and principles of democracy and see what insight we may gain as to how to improve our own democracy.

One of the earliest democracies sprung in ancient Athens, in the age of the statesman Cleisthenes, which continued to blossom in the age of Pericles, Aspasia, the Presocratics, Socrates, Sophocles, and other giants of the Greek Golden Age. In the year 507 BCE, Cleisthenes introduced a new form of government called demokratia¹. It means “power of the people” or the rule of the majority. “Our constitution,” Pericles asserts in 440 BCE, “does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration favours the many instead of the few….If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences; if [you have] no social standing, advancement in public life falls to reputation [based on your ability], class considerations not being allowed to interfere with merit.”² In other words, it didn’t matter whether you’re from the lower or upper class; the people enjoyed political and legal equality.

This was revolutionary at the time! It was a great improvement from the monarchic and oligarchic governments that dominated ancient times. Athenian democracy established the virtues of free speech, equal rights, and the opportunity for citizens to participate in the construction and function of the government. Furthermore, they had a system called ostracism by which the people could vote to exile (for ten years) a dangerous, demagogic individual gaining too much negative influence or power³. This system was the inspiration for the impeachment-conviction system in the US Constitution to remove wayward presidents.

Moreover, the Athenian people were actually required to participate in the governing process. It was a civic duty. Indeed, the more people participate, the more democratic a society will be. In comparison, democratic participation in the U.S. could be much better. In the 2016 presidential election, only 54.8%⁴ of the voting age population voted; in 2020, it was 62%⁵---a sizable improvement, indeed, but still 38% shy of total democracy. Returning to the Athenians, commoners and aristocrats alike participated in parliamentary assemblies, making and debating laws, electing officials, deciding on war policies, and shaping the terms of foreign affairs⁶. This is why theirs is called a direct democracy: the people themselves got to vote directly for laws and policies without the filter of representative politicians.

Here in the U.S. we have a representative democracy. That is, the people vote for local officials, congressmen, congresswomen, senators, presidents; and in turn these elected officials make and vote on laws on behalf of the people. Ideally, elected officials represent the interests of the population that voted them in. In practice, this isn’t always the case. Competing for votes, politicians running for office make promises to represent the people’s interest; once elected, however, the representative is free to abandon these promises, free to ignore the people’s interests, and free to accept large donations from megacorporations and pass laws at their behest. There are no laws against this. There are not legal penalties for elected officials who advance laws contrary to the people’s interests. Thus, on this score, the Athenian example is more democratic (since it’s ultimately the people who decide what’s law and what isn’t).

But let’s not overly romanticize the classic Athenians. Their definition of The People would strike us as scandalous today. In ancient Athens, “people” meant adult males, 18 and older. Conversely, women, slaves, and non-citizens were not allowed to participate in democratic governance⁷. If you're a stickler for definitions, you might protest calling old Athens a democracy in the first place. In this sense, the U.S today is more democratic today since women, for instance, can vote; at the same time, it’s well to keep in mind that when our country’s Constitution was written in 1787, “people” meant “free white males with property,”⁸ not unlike the Athenians’ definition. We’ve come a long way since.

In general, the definition of The People tends to be a matter of controversy in democratic societies. Coming up with legal definitions for The People leads to debates about who gets to vote. Questions around this topic yield contentious politics. What should the voting age be? Should there be gender, racial, religious, or intelligence qualifications? Should noncitizens be allowed to vote? What are the grounds for losing one’s right to vote?

But another thing about democracy is that even if you’re not old enough or qualified to cast a ballot, there are other ways to vote and influence elections and lawmaking. Let’s call it unofficial voting rights. Such rights are commonly exercised on the web. The internet is the medium of worldwide democracy, where people vote---through likes, views, following, and comments---on trends, products, movements, political causes, their favorite websites, videos, articles, personalities, public intellectuals, and many more things. Purchasing content on a website? That’s a vote. Deciding where your money goes is a vote for that company, its labor practices, and whatever else they stand for. Thus, you can vote for companies that take climate and social justice seriously. Or not. And if you persuade enough people to boycott-vote with you, you can vote careless corporations out of business. Liking a video on YouTube? That’s a vote. Reposting a meme you saw on social media? That’s a vote. Donating to a good cause? That’s a vote. Where you decide what you pay attention to is also a vote. Every such vote counts. Literally. They are voting powers that democratic citizens can exercise to make meaningful societal changes, provided that the People are aware of their own powers. One problem with U.S. democracy is that many feel as if their ideas, voices, and votes won’t make a difference. This is a false belief---as demonstrated above---generated by propaganda campaigns to suppress voter turnout.

Returning to the question of voting rights, a stickler for definitions may argue that the more inclusive voting access is, the more democratic a society. On the other hand, others may argue that those native to the country are the only ones entitled to vote. For over 200 years, the US has, and continues to, debate the question of voting; and the general trend seems to be towards more democracy, expanding the Constitutional definition of The People to include women, black Americans, minorities, and naturalized citizens---with or without property.

On this score, the ancient Athenians could learn from the United States of America.