The adherents of Kant saw individual freedom in the perspective of equal sovereignty for all (Bobbio, 2005). It is generally debated that the relationship between liberty and equality is crucial to the adequate apprehension of democracy.
An ambivalent relationship exists between democracy and liberalism. In some instances, they seem to be used similarly and seem to overlap heavily while in others they have been regarded as opposites. Both liberalism and democracy protect individual freedom (Bobbio, 2005). In essence, liberalism supports democracy where personal development is fostered through political participation, which assists in balancing rival interests in society. As supported by Bobbio (2005), democracy establishes a system of public accountability, which protects people against over-powerful government.
There exists a relationship between positive freedom and democracy. Positive freedom refers to self-mastery or self realization, the development of human capacities and the achievement of autonomy. In essence, positive freedom is associated with democracy. Positive freedom is frequently considered to have pro-state propositions, while it can possess anti-state propositions (Bobbio, 2005). The former are most apparent in the contemporary liberal and social democratic customs. Such customs have vindicated state intervention on the basis that the nation is liable for instituting social and economic conditions that assist in promoting personal development and self-realization and safeguard people from social ills such as diseases, ignorance and poverty, which may stultify their lives.
Under positive freedom and democracy, the individual is not left6 alone and is in a position to develop talents and skills, widen his or her understanding, and achieve accomplishment. Therefore, positive freedom and democracy are often depicted as freedom from the social evils that may hinder individual being (Bobbio, 2005).
However, democracy may involve the rolling