Is direct democracy a source of happiness?

Various sociological studies clearly show that people in more democratized countries are more satisfied with their lives than people living in semi-democratic societies or in those that are completely devoid of democracy.

Democracy does not automatically make people happy, but the rights to participate guaranteed by the constitution increase the satisfaction of citizens in their everyday lives. On the one hand, the idea of democracy enables (or should enable) political decisions that are in the interest of society, and on the other hand, the right of citizens to participate in political life also has value in itself.

These two aspects have a positive impact on the "happiness effect" of citizens in a given community.

Can happiness be defined? According to the Polish dictionary, "happiness is a feeling of great satisfaction, joy, good fortune, success, or a combination of favorable circumstances." However, happiness can be short-lived or long-lasting. The transience of happiness is a momentary state determined by current events in our environment. In this sense, a person is happy because, for example, the weather is nice, they are with friendly people, or they have simply been praised or recognized by someone, etc. Of course, this type of happiness generally has nothing to do with a democratic system. However, happiness in the long-term sense refers to our entire lives. This type of happiness is linked to the question people often ask themselves at the end of their lives: was life worth living? Were our skills wasted or well-used? But this type of happiness, too, has little to do with democracy.

Between these two extreme concepts of happiness lies contentment and life satisfaction. To define this state of mind with some clarity, we should answer some seemingly mundane questions: Are we satisfied with our lives? To what extent do we have control over our lives?

Interestingly, life satisfaction measured by various surveys can be compared to the level of citizen participation in the political and decision-making process. Advanced statistical methods are used to determine the impact of political participation on self-reported life satisfaction. In addition to the determinant of "democracy," a large number of socio-demographic, economic, and cultural factors that influence life satisfaction are considered, such as age, gender, education, family, professional, and financial situation.

Studies of the "happiness effect" in society show that people who live in countries with functional democratic institutions are, all else equal, significantly more satisfied with their lives compared to societies in non-democratic or semi-democratic systems.

The considerations so far have not taken into account the difference between representative democracy and direct democracy.

Switzerland is particularly well-suited to examining the impact of direct political participation on happiness in the sense of life satisfaction. Although many countries have provisions for directly democratic instruments in their constitutions, they are often used merely to validate government policies. In many cases, these instruments are merely ersatz, serving to create the illusion of allowing citizens to participate in the decision-making process. Decisions on truly important matters are usually reserved for parliament, the government, or local politicians. Switzerland, on the other hand, is the only country where citizens have comprehensive, direct, and democratic rights to participate in decision-making—and they frequently exercise them.

In this country, citizens are the true sovereign and have the final say in matters of vital importance to them. At the federal level in Switzerland, the people always have the final say on constitutional amendments; laws are subject to an optional referendum, and 100,000 citizens can use a citizens' initiative to force a referendum on a new constitutional provision. However, cantons and municipalities enjoy additional public rights that go beyond those at the federal level.

Based on research conducted in Switzerland, we observe that the greater the opportunities for direct participation in democracy, the higher citizens' life satisfaction. The increase in life satisfaction in a directly democratic state, compared to a parliamentary-elite democracy, is generally attributed to two significant factors.

The first reason relates to the very right of citizens to participate in the political decision-making process. Citizens benefit from the opportunity to express their will and thus gain a sense of being truly co-decision-makers on matters that affect them. This satisfies a fundamental human need: actively shaping one's own life. Furthermore, a crucial element of direct democracy is the process of discussion that takes place within society and between politicians and citizens. Before a referendum, information is disseminated and arguments are exchanged, leading citizens to form their own independent opinions on the matter before the vote. The opportunity to directly influence actual decisions encourages voters to become more comprehensive and better informed. It is precisely this acquired knowledge, combined with the opportunity to directly participate in political life, that gives citizens satisfaction and contentment.

The second reason concerns satisfaction with the voting results. While every referendum always involves a winning majority and a losing minority, the voting results are the result of civic engagement, not the manipulation of party-state or local politicians. Politicians and state administration are forced to "obey" the public in this situation. Furthermore, the losing minority is fully aware that in subsequent referenda, it could become the winning majority. Referendum issues are diverse, so sometimes we belong to the winning majority, and other times to the losing minority.

To sum up, it should be stated that satisfaction in the system of direct democracy is, in a way, double: on the one hand, joy with the results of the vote of those who "won", and on the other hand, satisfaction of all with the benefits resulting from the very right to self-determination in the referendum.

For years, democracy was perceived as a socio-political system ensuring that state and local authorities met the wishes of society and implemented them to the best of their ability. Over time, the democratic ideal was re-evaluated and discredited, and representative democracy has long since become less and less representative of the interests of voters and citizens. Consequently, public satisfaction with this form of democracy is also declining.

Meanwhile, democracy should contribute to increasing people's satisfaction with their lives in a given environment by enabling them to exercise self-determination and participate in the decision-making process. This is the fundamental reason for advocating for a form of government that is thoroughly social—in the sense of direct democracy.

To answer the question in the title, it should be stated that direct democracy does not necessarily make us happy, but it gives us satisfaction and contentment resulting from the right to co-decide about our fate.