Criticism of democracy

Democracy as a concept and as a practical form of government has been the subject of critique throughout history. Some critics consider that democratic regimes often fail to be true to the highest principles expected of them, while others reject the values promoted by constitutional democracy in whole or part.

Opposition to democracy goes as far back as Plato, who argued for a 'government of the best qualified'. More recently, James Madison extensively studied historic attempts at and arguments on democracy in his preparation for the Constitutional Convention, and Winston Churchill remarked that, "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

Critics argue that modern democracies may fail to be sufficiently democratic and instead function in practice as oligarchies, insofar as governments are more responsive to the preferences of economic elites than to those of ordinary citizens. Numerous empirical studies across various western democracies including the United States, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, Norway and Germany have consistently found that elected representatives tend to respond more to the preferences of very affluent citizens for policy outcomes than those of the average voter.

Some critics of democracy have highlighted the concept's inconsistencies, paradoxes, and limits: drawing contrasts with other forms of government, such as epistocracy or lottocracy. Others have characterized most modern democracies as democratic polyarchies and democratic aristocracies. Yet others have identified fascist moments in modern democracies. They have termed the societies produced by modern democracies as neo-feudal and have contrasted democracy with fascism, anarcho-capitalism, theocracy, and absolute monarchy.