Democracy Depends upon the Acceptance of Defeat

It is never automatic

In a democracy the party that loses waits their turn.  They plan to fight another day.  Democracy rewards the winner, but guarantees the looser another chance, and another chance ….

After an election the losers become the opposition and immediately highlight the failures of the new government and begin to campaign for the next election to “get it right.”

All this depends of course on the “losers” admitting they have lost.  That is the keystone of the democratic arch.  It goes along with winners holding fair elections in the future.

And like all noble ideals, these “conventions” are often rejected in the heat of battle.  In many countries coalitions enter elections because they might win. If they lose, they reassess.

If they have the power to overthrow the results of an election, and their ambition is great enough or their belief in the absolute necessity of their program is strong enough, they consider overthrowing the result and making sure that there will be no more elections in the future, or that those which are scheduled will have rules that ensure that they will win.  That is how democracy, that great and fragile experiment that lies at the center of our history, fails.  

For democracy to “work,” elections need to produce winners, and the losers have to accept their defeat. There will always be “questions” about the fairness of the process. Maybe the count was off? Maybe the ballot boxes were “stuffed?” Maybe ineligibles voter? Even in the best run election there will be anomalies.

None of that matters. If you want to continue living in a democracy, you have to accept that you lost.

Fight harder the next time. Persuade more people. Reach the nonvoter. Fix any flaws in the process. But now you lost. Democracy depends upon you accepting this, as it also depends upon the next election being as fair and accurate as possible.