With reference to core readings and material from the group workshop in week 3, reflect on the nature of inclusion

and exclusion in ancient and modern democracies. REG. N: 110219789 WORD COUNT: 600

In next paragraphs I deal with citizen composition of ancient and modern democracies. I had considered two examples: Athens, as an ancient one, and Spanish parliamentary (because is my best known) as the modern one. In the development of this work, in first place, I give the definition I used in this work for the complex term democracy. Lately, I quote the citizens composition of those political systems with their main features and after that I compare them and I explain why I think it is like that. Democracy is not only the power of the people, but kratos is the force itself (Aesch. PB 185), the imposition. In its original meaning in Greece it could be understood as a force act of those majority against minorities, not only the aristocrats. Democracy is developed, in that sense, because demos was able to have the military power to coerce the whole community (Ste. Croix, 1981: 280). In modern societies, the people has no military power and only the power that they have is like economic producers. In ancient democracies, the political struggle for democracy had a clear military factor, while in modern times that factor was not so important in favour of masses strategy: of course, that deals directly with citizens composition. In Athens, citizens were a few if we compare with the whole population. Citizens only were male, so that automatically excluded about a 50% of the population. Citizens were defined by birth (Martin, 1996). Automatically excluded were the slaves and the metokoi, foreigners, even if those ones could reach a position close to citizenship (Ste. Croix, 1981: 95). If we accept a minimum quantity about 33% of slaves in Athens, and about a 5% of foreigners. That would suppose 24% of citizens that had all political power. In Spain democracy, citizenship is defined by blood-line and place of birth (Sp. Const. I.11), even for the foreigners it is possible to achieve citizenship after some years working in Spain (Sp. Const I.11.3). That actually means that the most of the population that lives there, as well as some that do not, had citizenship rights. Nearly 100% of population have citizenship rights. It seems evident that modern societies allow to the most of the citizens to participate in politics. In the same time, Athenian rights of citizenship allow to them a deeper implication in their politics: in the so-called radial democracy the main organ is the Boul, that is, the main assembly. It has been understood that radical democracy was only possible because it was based in a really small citizenship. But, on the other hand, during the Spanish Revolution in 1936-37 assemblies became the main institution in economic and military activity (see Orwell, 1989): in that sense, I think that the difference between ancient and modern democracy is not as much linked with logistics but with deep social structure and productions relations. Here it is also the root of citizenship composition. Athens was organized as a slave mode of production; in that, an important portion of the production has no rights of any kind (Ste. Croix, 1981: 207). They are not even human beings (Aristot. Pol.1317b1). The demos has not the same meaning than modern people, but it was understood as some kind of ethnic identity, elite that must role over others (5.89). Modern Europe is organized as a capitalist mode of production, where control of production is not theoretically limited to an ethnic or gender, but the inheritance allows accumulation of wealth and inequality (Marx, 1969). Modern societies are more democratized in the sense that masses have more rights.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AESCHYLUS. Aeschylus, with an English translation by Herbert Weir Smyth, Ph. D. in two volumes. 1. Prometheus Bound. Herbert Weir Smyth, Ph. D. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press. 1926. in http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3atext%3a1999.01.0010 (Last access 6th May 2012) ARISTOTLE. Aristotle in 23 Volumes, Vol. 21, translated by H. Rackham. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1944. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0058%3Abook %3D6%3Asection%3D1317b (last accesed 1st March 2012) DE STE. CROIX, G.E.M. (1981) The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World: From the Archaic Age to the Arab Conquests. London, Duckworth. MARTIN, T.R. (1996) Ancient Greece: From Prehistoric to Hellenistic Times. Yale University Press. MARX, K. and ENGELS, F. (1969) Selected Works, Vol. 1, Progress Publishers. Moscow. SPANISH CONSTITUTION (1978) in http://www.senado.es/constitu_i/indices/consti_ing.pdf (Last access 6th May 2012) THUCYDIDES. The Peloponnesian War. London, J. M. Dent; New York, E. P. Dutton. 1910. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0200%3Abook %3D2%3Achapter%3D1%3Asection%3D1 (last accesed 1st March 2012) ORWELL, G. (1989) Homage to Catalonia. Penguin. London.