




































 
 

66 
 

DEMOCRACY AS A SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE IN NIGERIA: A CRITICAL 

ANALYSIS 

 

Justus Isaac Ph. D 

Interim Joint Matriculation Board Unit University of Jos 

Plateau, Nigeria 

justusisaac33@gmail.com 

 

ABSTRACT 

The aim of the study is to critically analyze democracy as a system of governance and the 

influence that affects its application in Nigeria. In order to achieve this, a qualitative research 

method was employed. In this research, a philosophical and descriptive approach was adopted 

in analyzing the data gathered through secondary source.  The objectives of the work are 

discussed in the following headings: the meaning and nature of democracy, scope and 

principles of democracy, the doubts and fears regarding democracy, democratic requirements 

for Nigeria system, and challenges of democracy in Nigeria system, and the researcher 

recommended the ways for handling the challenges of democratic governance. 

Key words: Democracy, governance, politics, Nigeria. 

 

INTRODUCTION 

Man by nature seeks to rule over his fellows. He lives in a social web that is hierarchically 

structured. The act of humans governing or ruling their fellows has being in existence from 

origin. The system of governance may be monarchy, oligarchy, military, or democratic system. 

All these forms of governance have its peculiar challenges. However, in considering human 

rights, dignity, worth, freedom and responsibility, democracy stands out among other forms of 

governance, though the human instinct for sensory satisfaction and unguided quest for power 

have often frustrated the principles and practice of the democracy in its ideal form.  

The framers of democracy faced many democratic issues. Democracy is complex, but balanced 

system that needs thought citizens, limits on power, rule of law, and human and civil rights. 

This implies that, not every country that calls itself a democracy is one, and not every country 

is capable of becoming one (Roskin et al, 2010). Moreover, Nigeria is young in democratic 

system of governance when compared with British, America or France. This, of course is not 

to console or excuse Nigerians from embracing the ideal principle and practice of democracy, 

on this light prompted the study:  ‘Philosophical analysis of democracy and the Nigeria system 

governance’. 

THE MEANING AND NATURE OF DEMOCRACY 

The word ‘democracy’ originated from two Greek words ‘demos’ meaning ‘the people’, and 

‘kratein’ means to ‘rule’. Thus, democracy originally mean rule of or by the people. However, 

this simple and soft translation of democracy obscures the fact that rule means rule by some 

over others. As Plato and Aristotle, for example, used the term, the demos were not the whole 

people. Rather they thought that the ‘people’ include at least two groups: the demos and the 

aristoi. Demos mean the many. Aristoi mean the best. Demos came to mean the many who are 

not best; that is, the great majority of men who are poor, perhaps uneducated and thus unfit to 

rule well (Martin, 1998). 

mailto:justusisaac33@gmail.com


                                                                  Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 5 Issue 2, August 2025. 

                          ISSN: 2786-9792                                     

 
 

67 
 

According to Abraham Lincoln conceived democracy as ‘government of the people, by the 

people, and for the people’ (Ishaya & Jirapye, 2023, p. 50). However, the democratic system 

of Nigeria propels Omoregbe (2007, p. 3) to avert that ‘democracy is not really a government 

for the people; rather, it is a government for the rich and powerful who fund the parties and 

control them’. Coming from another angle Hall sees ‘democracy as that form of political 

organization in which public opinion has control’ (Ishaya & Jirapye, 2023, p. 51). For Franklyn 

Roosevelt ‘democracy was not a mere matter of universal suffrage and unhampered expression 

of the popular will. It must be a positive and constructive force in the daily lives of the people 

and provide not merely for political but economic needs also’. The conviction is that, if men 

were forced to choose between liberty and bread, they would choose bread (Ishaya & Jirapye, 

2023, p. 51).   

According to Seymour M. Lipset’s democracy in a complete society may be defined as a 

political system which supplies regular constitutional opportunities for changing the governing 

officials, and a social mechanism which permits the largest possible parts of the population to 

influence major decisions by choosing among contenders for political office (Haralambos & 

Holborn, 2004, p. 526). Moreover, Schumpeter argues that democracy is a method by which 

decision-making is transferred to individuals who have gained power in a competitive struggle 

for the votes of the citizens (Ishaya & Jirapye, 2023, p. 52). Encyclopedia America 

International defined democracy as a form of government in which the major decisions of 

government- or the direction of policy behind these decisions- rest directly or indirectly on the 

freely given consent of a majority of the adults governed. 

Democracy has many characteristics. Dictators misuse the word to convince subjects that they 

live in a just system. The Soviet Union used to claim it was the best democracy, and mainland 

China calls itself the “people’s Republic”. Democracy does not always equal to freedom. 

Elections, even free and fair ones, can produce regimes that ride roughshod over rights and 

freedoms, what is called illiberal democracy. Nevertheless, democracy is a complex and 

carefully balanced system that needs thoughtful citizens, limits on power, rule of law, and 

human and civil rights. Not every country that calls itself democracy is one, and not every 

country is capable of becoming one. 

The term democracy indicates both a set of ideals and a political system, a feature it shares 

with the terms communism and socialism. Democracy is harder to pin down, however, than 

either “socialism” or “communism”. For democracy has never become identified with a 

specific doctrinal source, it is rather a by-product of the entire development of Western 

civilization. Democracy is difficult to define, not every political system claims to be a socialist 

system, but even communist systems claim to be democracies (International encyclopedia of 

social science 1972). The transition to democracy is delicate and happens best slowly and 

gradually, as it did in Britain with a series of Reform Arts during the 19th century. Typically, 

during the first decades of democracy, only the better-off can participate, a pattern called ‘whig 

democracy’.  

Modern democracy is representative or indirect democracy. The people govern through 

representatives periodically elected by them. The ordinary citizen’s part in government is 

limited. Periodically he may vote to choose a member of parliament from his constituency. If 

he has the necessary qualification, he has the right to stand as a candidate for election and to 

apply for executive and judicial posts; but in practice only a very small, proportion of citizens 



   Justus Isaac                                                   Democracy As A System Of Governance In… 

 

68 
 

can ever hope to be elected to the legislature, or chosen for executive or judicial office 

(Appadorai, 2004, p. 187).  

SCOPE AND PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY 

1. Democratic legitimacy: Democracy is to begin with a principle of legitimacy. From 

the democratic view point nobody denies that power is legitimate only when it is derived from 

the authority of the people and based upon their consent. However, for democracy as a 

legitimizing principle lends itself to two diverging interpretation; (1) that the consent of people 

can be a mere presumption, an untested assumption; or (2) that there is no democratic consent 

unless it is verified through ad-hoc procedures. And these opposing views are related to an 

even more fundamental disagreement over the very meaning of the term ‘people’. The ‘people’ 

can be understood as a singular term or as a plural, that is, as a singular entity or as ‘everybody’. 

And, clearly, it is only the latter notion that calls for a legitimacy ascertained by means of 

reliable procedures, for ‘the people’ conceived as an entity, or as an organic whole, easily 

combines with a legitimacy assumed on the sole basis of acclamations and plebiscitary 

approbations. 

2. The normative focus: The normative view democracy is encapsulated in the popular 

definition of democracy as the ‘rule of the people’. We may say that the ‘ought’ of democracy 

amounts to the etymology of the term. Taking off from this, there are, three different normative 

approaches: oppositional, realistic, and perfectionist (or utopian). Used as oppositional 

concept, democracy indicates what ought not to be; realistic normativism points to what could 

be; while utopian normativism presents the image of the perfect society that must be. Moreover, 

since the normative attitude is basically future-oriented, it is easily converted into “futurism” 

in the sense that “democracy” becomes a long-range projection unrelated to current deeds. The 

use of undemocratic means to achieve democratic ends finds it justification precisely in this 

attitude. 

3. The descriptive focus: As Dahl (1956) puts it, in actuality democracies are 

“poliarchies”. And the standard definition that describes democracy as a system based on 

competitive parties, in which the governing majority respects the rights of minorities. 

4. The typological focus: Democracy is also one type of political system among others, 

and from this view point the problem becomes to define the properties that distinguish it from 

nondemocratic politics. Hence, attempt is often made to qualify democracy with ought rather 

than to the ‘is’. Democracy literally means ‘power of the people’. According to Appadorai 

(2004, p. 187) democracy is that form of government in which the ruling power of a state is 

legally vested not in a particular class or classes but in the members of a community as a whole. 

This is known as direct democracy. Nevertheless, in the nineteenth century thinkers accepted 

the ancient Greeks criticism of direct democracy as mob rule. It is difficult to carry out because 

of the size factor. John Seldon as quoted by Roskin et al. (2010, p. 97) that “the room will not 

hold all”.  

A nation government that submitted each decision to millions of voters would be too unwieldy 

to function. However, representative democracy evolved as the only workable system. 

Democracy today is, in Lipset & Joson’s (2004) words, “a political system which supplies 

regular constitutional opportunities for changing the governing officials, and a social 

mechanism which permits the largest possible part of the population to influence major 

decisions by choosing among contenders for political office.’’ Constitutional means that the 

government is limited and can wield its authority only in specific ways.  

 

 



                                                                  Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 5 Issue 2, August 2025. 

                          ISSN: 2786-9792                                     

 
 

69 
 

THE DOUBTS AND FEARS REGARDING DEMOCRACY 

In Nigeria, like in any other country, the long term viability of democratic governance has 

being in doubt since the advent of democratic regime. It is on this ground, the question of 

democratic fundamental nature rests. Moreover, democracy works on the principle of the 

constitution. The constitution may be democratic or undemocratic. For example, if the 

constitution is undemocratic and one believes in democracy, then the most important practical 

task is to alter the constitution or get round it somehow (Martin, 1998).  

However, many other modern political scientists depreciate the significance of the constitution 

as an influence upon behaviour. They believe that, despite the undemocratic constitution, the 

political system gradually became democratized. The political process is thus treated as 

radically distinct form, in conflict with constitutional form. According to this view, for 

example, the extra-constitutional development of mass political parties and presidential 

popular leadership short-circuited the resistance to democracy of the 18th century. On this view, 

history has to repeat itself every day. The constitution is seen as still the archaic undemocratic 

document of 1787 (in America). Thus, the political short circuiting must occur daily to permit 

the modern democratic system to function (Martin, 1998).      

Socrates challenged the idea of democracy. What he asked was the peoples’ claim to rule? 

Governing or ruling, he argued, was an art like the art of navigation. Yet in peril at sea, it made 

no sense to take a poll of all the passengers. The sensible thing, he suggested, was to seek and 

follow expert guidance in such matters. Why then in government, should power be given to the 

inexpert many instead of the expert few? The question is acute. Indeed the history of the 

democratic idea can be seen as a series of responses to the Socratic challenge. Moreover, the 

framers of democracy did not need ancient writers to teach them the dangers. Thus, it is easy 

to find quotations vividly demonstrating their fears regarding democracy. For example, in the 

1787 convention, Martin (1998) asserts that Elbridge Gerry warned that “the evils we 

experience flow from the excess of democracy” and Edmund Randolph complained of “the 

turbulence and follies of democracy” May 31. 

What distinguish the framers from the predecessors was that they agreed on democracy’s 

weakness and dangerous tendencies, but they did not reject democracy. They knew that 

whether they like it or not they had to conform to the “popular genius” of country institutions. 

They accepted democracy and sought to guide against its “turbulence and follies”. James 

Madison stated their view perfectly: They wanted to eliminate or lesson “the inconveniencies 

of democracy”, but in a manner “consistent with the democratic form of government”. Hence, 

the framers wanted to “make democratie safe for the world” (Martin, 1998).     

 

DEMOCRATIC REQUIREMENTS FOR NIGERIA SYSTEM 

There are three basic democratic requirements for Nigeria to adhere judiciously, if democratic 

system of governance must survival. 

1. Democratic tradition: It is obvious from our experience of democracy, that many 

Africa countries, if not all, including Nigeria of course lack democratic traditions. Perhaps, 

democracy is still young in Africa and there are no close advanced democratic countries near 

Africa. Consequently, due to the lack of democratic traditions, some Africa countries that has 

democratically elected leaders were overthrow by military system of governance; for instance 

in Mali, Burkina Faso among others. Therefore, the lack of democratic tradition paves the path 

to dictatorship governance. Democratic tradition helps in preserving democracy (Edward, 



   Justus Isaac                                                   Democracy As A System Of Governance In… 

 

70 
 

1939, p. 241). Democracy system is dynamic but attainable. Eventually, Nigeria can turn 

democratic, but it is a matter of time, for democracy develops in the process of time. However, 

the qualities for building a democratic tradition are enshrined in the constitution. Nevertheless, 

democratic tradition in current Nigeria system of governance would remain a mirage if the 

provisions of the constitution do not reflect in our customs, beliefs or ways of doing something 

with respect to humanity, no matter the diversity of ethnicity, religion or regional affiliations. 

2. Embracing the tradition of Pluralism: The Nigeria democratic systems need to 

embrace or re-embrace the tradition of pluralism in her socio-political context; if a just 

democratic atmosphere must be achieved. Imo (2000, p. 3) describes “pluralism” as the result 

of social transformation which gives rise to people of different beliefs, values, and customs 

being brought together by the forces of history in social relationship. Nigeria is a pluralistic 

society. There is hardly any State within Nigeria you will not find people of diverse tongues, 

beliefs or regions living together. Hence, democracy cannot function without due 

considerations necessary for balancing the compromise between people of diverse classes. 

When electing candidates for public positions, merits should be considered against class, 

ethnicity or religious sentiments. Then, democratic tradition can flourish in the spirit of 

pluralism.   

3. Openness to Religious/Philosophical evolutionary ideas: When democratic tradition 

is establish and practice in the spirit of pluralism, then, evolutionary ideas would no longer be 

attached to psychological disenchantment or as sources of threat. For instance, the word 

“restructuring” used in the 2015 and 2023 presidential political campaigns had a parallel means 

to people of Southern and Northern regions in Nigeria. Religious or philosophical ideas that 

positively shape political landscape should not be subject for democratic battle. For just 

democracy have no room for fight, democracy doesn’t fight. Democracy is process of electing 

the competent and rightful candidate to pilot the affairs for the benefit of the society. 

Historically speaking, religious ideas has not only obstructed the advancement of democracy, 

but have altered the principles of democratic governance and peace in Nigeria. For Nigeria is 

religious by nature, and carries it into the parliaments. It is not all religious ideas that can result 

to democratic backwardness. However, within the framework of modern society, any idea that 

cannot endure and survive sound logical processing, should be discarded. Therefore, objective 

ideas should be evolutionary ideas workable in the socio-political context of a particular 

country.  

 

CHALLENGES OF DEMOCRACY IN NIGERIA SYSTEM 

1. Illiteracy and Poverty: Democracy can actually come too soon in the political life of 

a nation. Stable democracy has historically taken roof in countries with large educated middle 

classes. As Barrington Moore observed in 1996, “No bourgeoisie, no democracy”. People in 

poor countries care more about survival than democracy. In a 2004 UN Survey of Latin 

America, a majority said they preferred a dictator who puts food on the table to an elected 

leader who does not. Middle classes bring with them moderation, tolerance, and the realization 

that not everything can be fixed at once (Roskin et al, 2010). Without that, elections can 

undermine democracy. 

However, the large number of uneducated and poor masses outnumbers the better-off. 

Eventually, when the broad masses of citizens suddenly get the vote, the system can break 

down. Newly enfranchised and unsophisticated voters often fall for the extravagant promises 

of demagogues, who offer simple solutions to get the votes of the gullible. They vow to “share 

the wealth” or advocate aggressive nationalism or religious fundamentalism. Attempting 

democracy too soon can lead to rule by demagogues (Roskin et al, 2010).     



                                                                  Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 5 Issue 2, August 2025. 

                          ISSN: 2786-9792                                     

 
 

71 
 

2. Potentiality of Demagogues: Apart from the large number of illiterates in society, 

another concern is the potential for demagogues to exploit the democratic system. The 

charismatic leaders have the power to manipulate the populace by appealing to their desires 

and prejudices rather through rational argument, leading to decisions that were not in the best 

interest of the community (World history encyclopedia, 2024). 

3. Tyranny of the majority: The tyranny of the majority is a situation in which a group 

of people are treated unfairly because their situation is different from the situation of most of 

the people in a democratic country (Meriamwebster, 2025). It also implies to a situation in 

majority rule where preferences and interests of the majority dominate the political landscape, 

potentially sidelining or repressing minority groups and using majority rule to take non-

democratic actions (Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2025). A tyranny of the majority can ensue when 

democracy is distorted either by an excess of centralization or when the people abandon a wider 

perspective to rule upon numbers, not upon rightness or excellence.  

Tyranny of the majority is when the will of a majority population group exclusively prevails in 

a system of governance it results in the potential for tyranny over minority groups 

(www.masterclass.com, 2022). In social choice, a tyranny of the majority scenario can be 

formally known as a situation where the candidate or decision preferred by a majority is greatly 

inferior to the socially optimal candidate or decision according to some measure of excellence 

such as total utilitarianism. To reduce the risk of majority tyranny, modern democracies 

frequently have counter majoritian institutions that restrict the ability of majorities to repress 

minorities and stymie political competition (Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2025).    

4. War or social crisis: Petrie as quoted by Appadorai (2004, p. 240) that the outbreak 

and the continuance of war or social crisis, and the suffering which followed, helped to shake 

men’s faith in democratic principles. Men had thought that democracy and peace were 

synonymous, but the events of August 1914 (World War II), Russian and Ukraine war, and 

even the pockets of social crisis within Nigeria destroy this illusion. Again, the war left legacy 

of misery and depression in nearly every country. Men looked for a better and happier world 

after the war; the world that did result was not only not better, but worse. It was freely 

contended that parliaments were bankrupt and that democratic civilization had outlived its 

usefulness. 

5. The weakness of democratic governance: The faith in democratic principles was 

undermined by the inability of democracy to solve adequately the problems which it had to 

face. The deficiencies, weaknesses and of course great mistakes of democratic leaders, played 

a specially role in the downfall of European democracies. There were excuses, of the party 

system, its mistakes and exaggerations; the slowness and inefficiency of democratic methods 

of work and leadership, during times of crises and at moments when quick actions and quick 

decisions were nessecery; the partiality, corruption and incapacity of bureaucracy, subjugated 

very often to the exaggerated party spirit; the deficiencies, mediocrity and mistakes of the 

democratic leaders (Edward, 1939, p. 61). 

 

WAYS FOR HANDLING THE CHALLENGES OF DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE 

1 Electing only the competent to power: Man naturally drive for power in order to 

control his fellow. Thus, power and functionary positions are greatly in want by people. 

Perhaps, due to the privileges and recognition it incurs. However, not many understand the 

principle of power and its responsibility. Many are not even sophisticated enough to lead 

themselves let alone to govern others. Socrates used the analogy of a ship to drive home this 

point. He asked whether one would entrust the navigation of a ship to anyone or someone who 

is expert in seafaring (World history encyclopedia, 2024).   

http://www.masterclass.com/


   Justus Isaac                                                   Democracy As A System Of Governance In… 

 

72 
 

2 Restricting pre-election debate on fundamental issues: Aristotle thought that man 

was by nature a political animal. Humans alone possess speech, which enables them to debate 

issues. To be human, one must live in a community, in which one exercises the powers of one’s 

speech, debating the collective choices that a community must take (The concise encyclopedia 

of democracy, 2000). The strategic organization of debate is part of pre-election activities 

especially in advanced countries. Moreover, democracy is still young in Nigeria, even though 

debates are sometimes organized, but there are times that candidates boycott the process. 

However, pre-election debate is crucial aspect, that exposes the degree of logicality of the 

aspirants, this is fundamental in handling complex challenges that the nation must face. 

3 Public and Systematic Scrutiny on candidate’s manifesto: All candidates no matter 

their class, ethnicity, religion, region or political affiliation must have their respective 

manifesto.  The candidates must be responsible and ready to respond to the questions that may 

arise from their manifestos. In addition, all aspirants’ expressions of interests and motive for a 

certain office must have working alignment with their manifestos. The general public equally 

has the right to the plans, motive or strategies each candidate employs in tackling the economic, 

social or political issues bedeviling the nation. Among other things, political debates expose 

each candidate’s degree of criticality and mental soundness, necessary for national 

development. In fact, critical ideas are the driving power for national advancement and political 

stability. 

4 Background check of aspirants: The background check of all aspirants of political 

offices is very paramount, as long as good governance is concerned. The role of checkmating 

all candidates for political functions can never be overemphasized, for democracy have the 

potency to give power to the unfit, for evil doers and fraudsters’ wants power. Thus, Nigeria 

as a young democratic nation should develop her unique and objective machineries for cross- 

checking and examining every candidate that presents him or herself for any political position. 

All aspirants should undergo psychological therapeutic process, to ascertain if they have the 

mental capacity to govern or to lead. Nigeria is so complex that it is difficult or even impossible 

for mentally unstable person to lead. Secondly, all aspirants should undergo the procedures for 

moral check. They must pass the examination that consists of these questions: Do they have 

any criminal record? Are they convicts? Previous record of work? How do they relate to others? 

For the moral state a leader reflects in the way he or she leads. 

5        Examining the Educational status of aspirants: Democratic system of governance 

needs train and skillful individuals so as to effectively diagnose and also treat the complex 

issues. These complex issues can only be properly handled by people with technological know-

how. When issues overwhelm an individual, this may be an evident that such individual is not 

well prepared to face the issues. Moreover, Socrates believed that not everyone had the 

knowledge and wisdom necessary to make informed decisions. According to Socrates, voting 

is a skill that requires education and wisdom, and allowing uneducated individuals to vote could 

lead to poor governance and societal instability (World history encyclopedia, 2024).  

Education has a political face. Among other things, the principle of education is to carefully 

prepare individuals as to be able to govern themselves and even others (dependence or subjects) 

in their respective society. Hence, the place of education in democratic governance is not 

negotiable. Credentials are testimonies that people have undergone such and such institutions 

of learning, in diverse categories. Credentials are the evidence that certifies that one has fully 

justifies the course of study, and he or she is educated in a particular specialization. As such, 

pre-election check on the academic background of aspirants is very crucial. Therefore, the 

educated or enlightened leaders are in the position to govern well than the illiterate ones. 

 



                                                                  Aquino Journal of Philosophy, Vol 5 Issue 2, August 2025. 

                          ISSN: 2786-9792                                     

 
 

73 
 

CONCLUSION 

 

Democracy is dynamic in nature, from its meaning to practice. Thus, any country that is not 

progressing intellectually, materially or socially can never fit into modern democracy and its 

civilization. Intellectual progress is the by-product of education. Democracy need to be practice 

with knowledge and wisdom. Educated people are mostly useful to themselves than to be used 

to violate the principles and practice of democracy. They are also in the position to distinguish 

the right from wrong. This is basic sustaining the principle of distributive justice and respecting 

human rights as engraved in the constitution of Nigeria.  

 

 

  



   Justus Isaac                                                   Democracy As A System Of Governance In… 

 

74 
 

REFERENCES 

 

Appadorai, A. (2004). The substance of politics. Oxford University Press. 

Bloom, L. and Otten, J. G. (1987). Change Africa: an introduction to sociology. Macmillan. 

Dahl, R. (1956). 1963: A  preface  to  democratic theory.  University of  Chicago Press.  

Dahl, R. (2003). The democracy sourcebook. MIT Press. Democracy Encyclopedia Britanica 

http://www.britannica.com/ebchecked/topic/157129/democracy 

Dibie C. C. (2008).  Essential government.  4th Edition. TONAD Publishers. 

Edward, B. (1939). Democracy today and tomorrow. Oxford. 

Encyclopedia Americana International Edition. (1979). No.8 Vol. 2. Macmillan. 

Haralambos, M. and Holborn, M. (2004). Sociology: themes and perspectives. 6th Edition. 

Harper Collins Publishers Ltd. 

Imo, C. (2000). Religion and the pluralistic society. Development studies review, 4 (1&2).  

Sills, D. L. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. (1968-1972). Crowell and 

Macmillan Inc. 

Ishaya, J. and Jirapye M. I. (2023). The ramifications of democracy and the politics of a nation. 

In Moral issues in the practice of modern democracy, human rights and personhood. Edited 

by Onwochei P.  Exodus Publishers, 2023. 

Mill, J. S. (1986). On liberty. Edited by Elizabeth Rapaport. Hackett Publishing Company Inc.  

Lipset, S. M. and Joson M. L. (2004). The democratic century. University of Oklahoma Press.  

Martin, D. (1998). The founding of the democratic Republic. Peacock Publishers, Inc. 

Omoregbe, J. (2007). Socio-political philosophy and international relations: A systematic and 

historical study. Vol. 1. Joja Publishers. 

The Columbia encyclopedia (2000). 6th Edition. Columbia University Press.  

Roskin G. M. (2010). Political science: An Introduction. 11th Edition. Pearson Education Inc. 

World History Encyclopedia (2024). https://www.worldhistory.org/video/1223/why-socrates-

hated-democracy 

 

http://www.britannica.com/ebchecked/topic/157129/democracy
https://www.worldhistory.org/video/1223/why-socrates-hated-democracy
https://www.worldhistory.org/video/1223/why-socrates-hated-democracy

